I would rather thinke as the learned sorte doe also iudge, that whatsoeuer thinges are conteyned in the holy Scriptures should be referred vnto two principall heades, the lawe I meane and the gospell.
There be two principal pointes whereunto al the whole scriptures are referred. For euery where are declared vnto vs either the precepts of god of vpright liuing, or whē we are reproued to haue strayed frō thē by reasō of weakenes or els of malice, y
e gospel is layd forth before vs, wherin by Christ that thing wherein we haue offended is pardoned, and the strength and power of the holy ghost promised vs, to reforme vs againe to the image of god, whiche we had loste. These two thinges maye we beholde in all the bookes of Moyses, in the histories, Prophetes, and bookes appointed to wisdome, and that not onely in the olde Testamente, but also in the newe, and they are not separated one from an other by bookes and leaues, but by that maner which is now declared.
What thinges are entreated of in thys boke of Iudges. And this is sufficient as touching the generall matter of the holy scriptures. But nowe we must peculiarly speake of this booke, that we may vnderstand what things they be which are entreated of in the same. And to the ende we may the more plainly vnderstande this, it is nedefull to call to memory those thinges which were spoken of in the former bookes.
Neyther is thys to bee passed ouer, that the Iudges whiche were ordayned of god dyd alwayes deliuer Israell from the miserye wherwith they were oppressed: but the kinges, into whom y
e common wealth did afterwards as it were degenerate, did not alwaies deliuer the people out of bondage, which was cōmitted vnto them,
The estate of the Hebrues was better vnder the Iudges than vnder the kings. yea they oftentimes destroyed them and compelled them at the length to slauery. Wherfore it is to be iudged y
t the estate of the Hebrues was farre better vnder the iudges than vnder the Kynges: not y
e God gouerned not that people in tyme of the kyngs, but bycause hys administration shewed forth it self more in y
e time of y
e iudges. And in dede y
e people was neuer led away into captiuity vnder y
e iudges, although they were oftē times oppressed by outward
[Page] tyrantes which they deserued by their wickednes.
Almost al the iudges were good and holy men. That age therfore might be called as it were a golden age. Let vs marke also that there wer very few good and godly kings, but almost al the Iudges were good and godly. For although as they were men so sometymes they fel, yet we must beleue that they returned againe into the right way and repented, for they are not condemned at any time by any testimony or Iudgement of the scripture as far as I can perceiue. How notably
Syrach iudged of them he playnly declareth in hys booke of wisdom the 46. chap. But we leauyng his testimony aside, let vs see what the Epistle to the Hebrues in the xi. chap. doth ascribe vnto them, where as it is thus sayd. The tyme wil be to short for me to tel of
Gedeon, of
Barach, Sampson, and of
Iephthe &c. All these certeinly were iudges, and they are mencioned of there together w
t other holy men, which were notable and of an excellent and wonderful faith.
Thou wilt aske peraduenture, If god loked so wel to hys people as long as the iudges were ouer them,
Why the Israelites were so oftentimes oppressed of their enemies in the time of the iudges. how came it to passe then, that they were so often brought into bondage by their enemies? For bicause God handled with them faithfully and by a couenaunt.
The league that was made is written in the 30. and 31. chap. of Deut: where god promised the Hebrues that all things should prosper with them so long as they kept his lawes and worshipping of him. But if they should fall from hym to Idols, and cast away the lawes of their god, then should they be deliuered into the handes of their enemies, but in such sort, that if they repented and would desire ayde of their god, he would streightwaies be present with them, to deliuer them from al the euils wherwith they should be oppressed. But we shal not nede to stand long now about this matter, bicause it he proceding forward of the history, we shal manifestly perceaue, that the Israelits did oftentimes offend. And god chastened them as his children with iust punishments. But when they turned and cried vnto him, he had compassion of them, and deliuered them by iudges out of their miseries. This remayneth also for vs to declare, y
t for as much as Christ is called the end and perfection of all the holy bokes, how these actes also of the iudges may and ought to be referred vnto him, and how they prophecie him vnto vs, as the other holy bookes do. To answer to this I will take that which Origen writeth in his first Homely vpon thys boke. Al the workes of god by themselues are great:
After what sort the holy histories do cōteine & teach Christ but when they are conferred together, some of them may be called small, and other some greate. If god his leadyng of the children of Israel out of Egipte and throughe the wildernesse should be beholden by themselues, they are surely great woorkes: but if they be afterward conferred with this, that God loued the world so, that he gaue his onely begotten sonne for it, then shall this be a great worke, and the others small. But bicause in the greater things the lesse are comprehended (for that they are partes of thē) as the number of two is contayned in thre, and thre in foure. So these pryuate deliueries of the people which happened vnder the Iudges, for as much as they are comprehended in that principall redemption, which is geuen vnto mākynd by Christ, it must nedes be that they shuld expresse vnto vs y
e same, for that they were certain assured partes and figuratiue shadowes, and had the same authour namely Christ him selfe. For he which before deliuered the Hebrues by iudges, did afterward redeme al men by him self. And euen as the miseries of thys lyfe, the spoyling I say of goods, banishments, woūdes & torments are very greuous to the flesh whē they are pondred by themselues: so when they are conferred w
t the anger of god & euerlasting death, into y
t which we incurre by reason of our sinnes, they may most rightly be estemed small thinges, for that these are most greuous. Wherfore when we consider how the Iewes were deliuered frō outward
[Page 3] miseries: Let vs call to remembraunce, those most great euils, frō which Christ of his singular goodnes hath deliuered vs. And when as the children of Israell do oftentimes escape by iudges out of their afflictiōs, they do as it were point with their finger Christ vnto vs, raised vp from the dead, they shew vnto vs also y
e last resurrectiō of the saints, wherin they shal be altogether deliuered from al afflictiōs & infirmities. Wherfore as wel this booke as also other holy histories, do w
t much profit admonish the readers of Christ and his members.
And bicause I think I haue spoken enough already of the matter and subiect of this boke. I wil now go to declare the forme of the writing therof.
What kind of writing is obserued in this boke.
The definition of an history. It consisteth altogether of an historical kind of writing, as may easily appeare to al the readers. An historye is (as
Quintilianus writeth in the second boke, & 4. chap: of hys Institutions) a setting forth of a thing done. From which Augustine differeth not much, who writeth on the second chap: of Gen: vpon the letter. An history is whē a thing done either by god or by mā is set forth, & in this diffinitiō he cōprehēdeth as wel prophane histories as holy. But our boke doth chiefly for the most part set forth those things which wer done by god. But bicause al setting forth of thīgs done are not of one kind, whē as som ar called chronicles, & other some named histories, we must se in which of these two, this our declaration must be placed, & that can we not wel do except we seperate these y
e one from y
e other.
Cicero in his 2. boke
de Oratore, touching these, writeth after this sort.
The difference betwene an history and a chronicle. The gretians at y
e first wrote euē as our
Cato, Pictor &
Piso did: for an history was nothīg els but a collecting together of things done yerely, which thīgs that thei might y
e better be kept in memory y
e chief bishop frō the beginning of matters of Rome euen to
Publius Mutius y
e chief bishop wrote al things that wer done euery yere & brought thē into a commō place, & set thē out on a table in his house y
t the people also might frely haue knowledge of thē, & they be they which are now called the great yerely Chronicles. This forme of writing many haue followed, which haue without any deckings or ornamēts left behind them onely the monumēts of tymes, men, places and of things done. Therfore as
Pherceydes, Hellanicus, Acusilaus & very many other we amōgst y
e greciās, so is our
Cato, Pictor, &
Piso, who cared not for the eloquēt kind of writing, & while that mē might vnderstād what they spake, they counted shortnesse to be the onely prayse of speaking &c.
He addeth afterward, The nature of things desireth the order of tymes, it requyreth also the description of countreyes, bicause in weighty matters and worthy of memory, first counsels are loked for, then the acts, & afterward the endes. And as touching counsels is signified what the author alloweth. And in things done is declared not only what is done or spokē, but also how &c. By these things we may gather what is the nature of yerely chronicles, and also what of an history: and me thinketh that these our narrations are rather to be counted histories thā yerely chronicles, for bicause not only things done are set forth,
The narratiōs of this booke are histories & not yerely chronicles.
The opinion of
Aulus Geilius as touching yerely chronicles and an History. but also y
e causes, counsels and maners are declared. Also orations, admonitions, and reprouings, are sometimes added not without some ornamentes: All which thinges pertayn rather to an history thā to bare yerely chronicles. But now y
t we haue heard Cicero his opiniō, let vs also heare what
Aulꝰ Gelliꝰ writeth in y
e .5. chap. of his 5. boke, which writeth this: Some do thinke that an history differeth frō a chronicle in this, y
t whē both of thē are a declaratiō of things done, yet an history is properly of those things at y
e doings wherof he y
t wrote thē hath bene presēt. &c. He folowed not this distinctiō, & not w
tout cause, which neuerthelesse
Seruiꝰ Grāmaticꝰ embrased, &
Isidorus in his first boke of
Etymologies folowed hī, which is maruel bicause he is not only against
Cicero, which saith y
t an history is a gathering together of thinges done yerely, but also against
Vergil whose verse in y
e first of the
Eneydos is.
And now haue we laysure to heare the yerely chronicles of our labours. Where he declareth, that yerely Chronicles pertayne
[Page] also vnto things at the doyngs wherof we our selues were present. But nowe agayne to
Gellius. He sheweth that there were other which thought histories to be either an exposition, or els a demonstration of thinges done. But yerely chronicles were, when things done in many yeres were compiled together, obseruing the order of euery yeare. &c. According to which sentence, this our booke cannot be called a yerely chronicle, for that in the narrations thereof, it oftentimes noteth not the yeres wherin things were done. Moreouer the same author I meane
Gellius addeth
Sempronius Asellios mynde therin, but this was the differēce betwene those whiche woulde leaue behinde them yearely chronicles, and those which enterprised to write of thinges done by the Romaynes. The yerely chronicles did declare that onely whiche was done and in what yeare it was done, but that was not sufficient for an history to declare what was done, but it must also shew, by what counsell, and after what sort they were done. And a little after the same
Aselio writeth in the same booke: for neither can the bookes of the yerely chronicles any thing stirre vp the readers to be more quicke to defend the common wealth, nor yet more slow to cōmit thinges vnaduisedly. Furthermore bicause that by the knowledge of this booke men are admonished and stirred vp to the true worshippyng of god to repent, to put their trust in god, and to practise all dueties of lyfe cherefully. It conteyneth an history and not yerely Chronicles. Peraduenture I haue expounded these thinges with to many woordes, but yet as I suppose with some fruicte.
Which order although the Latin Historiographers haue more faithfully accō plished than the Grecians (for
Quintilianus saith in his iiii. chap. of his secōd boke that the greke Historiographers vsed as much licence in writing almoste as the Poets did) yet Augustine in his .131. epistle to
Memorius the Bishop, when he amōg other liberall disciplines attributeth much to histories writing of the truth
[Page 4] therof, saieth, that he cannot see, how those histories whiche are written of men, can wel follow the truth: for that the writers are compelled to geue credite vnto men, and oftentimes to gather together the brute of the vulgare people,
The holy histories are most true. whiche writers neuerthelesse are yet excused, if they kepe liberty and write nothing disceitfull, but there can be nothing at al more true than the histories reuealed and written by the inspiration of god as our histories are.
By the history of the Sodomites we note how greuously, god punished most horrible fleshly filthines, and that the tribe of Beniamin for the same cause was almost cleane put out, and Ruben the first begotten son of Iacob for incest was put besides his place and dignity,
Dauid for committing aduoutry, incurred horrible punishmentes, and
Ammon and
Absolon for committing incest came to a most wycked end, and
Troy (as the heathen testifye) was vtterly ouerthrowen for aduoutry sake. Of these things therfore in such sort considered which happened perticularly, we plainly say that all these wandring and vnlawfull lustes of men are most greuously punished of god. To which propositiō if we shal adde this sentence that now also throughout all Christendom such free and wādring filthy lust raigne euery where, we may strongly conclude, that for this horrible wickednesse there hangeth vpon this our world most sharpe punishments.
The moste daungerous error of the Antichristes must diligently be taken hede of, whiche dare affirme,
It is not the Church which geueth authoritie to the Scriptures. that it is the Churche which bringeth authoritie to the holy Scriptures, when as it is cleane contrary. For what soeuer authoritie or estimation cōmeth vnto the Churche, that all whole cōmeth of the worde of God. It is horrible to be heard, that the holy oracles and wordes of god should get their credite by men which are otherwise lyers. But these things they faine to the entēt that seyng they are manifestlye founde often tymes to haue decreed and ratified in the Sacraments & doctrines farre otherwise than the holy scriptures will beare. Whiche thing they would defend y
t they may do it, bycause the Churche whiche doth bring authoritie and credite to the worde of God, may alter things in the holy Scriptures, as pleased it. Wherfore we must resiste them by all meanes possible in this thyng which they take vpon them to do. We may not suffre our selues to be brought to thys poynte, to thincke that the Scriptures haue had their credite and authority by the Churche. And yet do I not write these thynges as thoughe I woulde despise or contemne the dignitie of the Churche, vnto the whiche,
There be three offices of the Churche touching the word of God.
The Churche as a witnesse kepeth the holy Bookes. I do attribute thre offices and them moste excellent as touchyng the worde of GOD. The firste of them is, that I do confesse that the Church as a witnesse hath kept the holy bokes. But thereby it can not be proued, y
t it is lawful for it to peruert or alter any thing in the holy bookes. Experience teacheth vs that publique and priuate wrytinges are committed to scriueners (whiche are commonly called notaryes) to be layd vp and diligently kept of thē. And yet there is none that is in his right wittes which wil say that he may alter any thing in them, or wil beleue that their authoritie is of greater force, than their willes were whiche desired to haue the same written.
The worde of God reuealed and written. Neither shall it be here vnprofitable to obserue the difference betwene the worde of god as it was reuealed at the beginning to the Prophetes & sainctes & as it was afterwardes preached or written. For we do easely acknowledge betwene these, that there is onely difference of tyme, and not of the authoritie or efficacie.
For we confesse that the worde vnwritten was more auncient, than that which was afterward appointed to letters, and we graunt that either cōferred together was geuen to the Churche, but in suche sorte, that the Churche (as we haue sayd) can not by any meanes wrest or chaunge it.
The office of the Churche is to publishe and preache the worde of God. And this vndoubtedly is the second office of the Church, to preach & publish the wordes committed vnto it by God. In which thing it is lyke a common crier, who althoughe he do publishe the decrees of princes and magistrates, yet he is not aboue the decrees or equal vnto them in authoritie. But his whole office is faithfully to pronounce all thynges as he hath receaued them of the princes and magistrates. And if he should otherwise do, he should be counted altogether for a traytour. Wherfore the ministers of the Churche ought to care and study for nothing so much as to be founde faithfull. We acknowledge also the last office of the Churche to be,
The Churche discerneth the holy bokes frō counterfaite & such as are Apochriphas. y
t seyng it is endued with the spirite of God, it must therfore discerne the sincere & vncorrupted bookes of holy Scriptures from the counterfaite and
Apocriphas, whiche is not yet to be in authoritie aboue the worde as many do foolishely dreame. For there are very many which can discerne the true & propre writings of
Plato and
Aristotle from other falsely put to them, & yet in comparison of iudgement
[Page] they are neither of greater lernyng nor yet of equall, with
Plato or
Aristotle. And euery one of vs cā easely know God from the deuill, & yet are we not to be coūted equal with God, & much lesse can we thinck that we do excel him. So the Churche ought not bycause of this to preferre faith or authoritie thereof before the Scriptures.
For we learne by the examples of holy men, when we are afflicted with sundry troubles and miseries, stedfastly to holde our faith, to put our hope in God, to call vpon him only, & therewithall to repent vs of our sinnes whiche thinges if we do, he will no lesse be presente to helpe vs, than we know y
t he oftentimes deliuered the people of the Iewes. And this
Paul declared, when he sayde to the Romaines, whatsoeuer things are written, they are written for our learning, that we thorough patience and consolation of the Scriptures might haue hope. Moreouer we are instructed, in prosperous thinges to kepe the feare of god, lest we fal into grieuous sinnes, by whiche meanes we might be made guiltie both of punishement in this lyfe, and also of euerlastyng damnatiō. Finally we may moste manifestly gather the ende of reading of these bookes out of the Apostles doctrine, whiche he deliuered to
Timothe, writing after this sorte in his second Epistle and third chap. All Scripture geuen by inspiration of God is profitable to doctrine, to reprouing, to correction and to instruction which is in righteousnesse, that the man of God may be perfect and prepared to al good workes.
And now that as I suppose I haue spoken enough of the end and other causes of this booke, I will come nygher to the exposition of the same, & first I wil declare whether this booke according to the sentence of the Hebrewes be the second booke of the firste Prophetes, whose coniunction is so great with the history of
Iosua that a man woulde easely saye that they be both one.
Whether the booke of Iosua ought to be reckened with the booke of Iudges. And peraduenture there be some which suppose that
Iosua should be reckened with the iudges: to whom I will not subscribe. For iudges were raised vp of god, when the people were oppressed with outwarde enemies, but when
Iosua was proclaymed prince, all the affaires of the Israelites were in good prosperitie. For
Sihon and
Og most mightie kinges were ouercome, and that office was cōmitted to
Iosua, wherby
Moyses being dead he might leade the people ouer
Iordane and take possessiō of the lande of
Chanaan, and deuide the promised lande by lottes vnto the children of Israell, and besides that the people did set their handes to a decree whiche they had made of
Iosua, that he whiche obeyed not his voyce should be killed, as we read it written in the first chap. of his booke. But there is no mention made of suche thynges as concernyng the Iudges. And yet both the bookes are so like and of such affinitie, that many thinges are repeated in this our booke especially in the beginning, whiche no doubte were done when
Iosua was yet lyuing.
The first Chapter.
1 IT came to passe after the death of Iosua, that the childrē of Israel asked the Lord, sayeng: Who shall go vp for vs agaynst the Chananites to fight first agaynst them?
2 And the Lorde sayd Iudah shal go vp, beholde I haue deliuered the lande into his handes.
IT semed good vnto the children of Israel to take warre in hande, for as it is writtē in the xiii. chap. of
Iosua, they had not yet at this tyme conquered all the promised land, so that in euery tribes lotte there were enemyes remayning. And when they sawe there was no remedy but that they must dryue them out by force, they doubted not whether they shoulde make warre agaynst them, but their doubte was whiche tribe should fight before all the other.
The Israelites aske counsell of God. The matter seemed to be of such great importaunce, that they asked counsell of god, whiche was the chief gouernour of their publicque weale.
Iosua that worthy captayne was no more a liue at whose becke and pleasure they hanged.
The Israelites affaires had euill successe whē they were done without God hys counsell. Neither yet had they forgotten howe euill successe they had, when not long before they toke weighty affaires in hand, without asking counsell of God. For in their settyng forth to battaill against the citie of
Hai, they sped very vnluckely in the battail, bycause they went to warrefare without oracle, as it is written in the vii. of
Iosua. It is also written in the same boke in the ix. chap. that the
Gabaonites were receaued into league without the oracle of god, and it is also writtē in the boke of
Numbers that the Israelites were slayne by the
Amorrhites, when they fought cōtrary to gods will. This peoples iudgement therfore is worthy to be praysed, for it is excellently well done, in most weighty affaires to aske counsell of God first of all. And that must be done conueniently, and holyly, otherwise it profiteth not. For the Israelites whē they should make warre agaynst the tribe of
Beniamin, although they asked coūsell of God, yet were they twice put to flight & slayne, & cowardly tourned their backes to their enemies, bycause they behaued not them selues well in asking counsell of god.
Wherfore they asked counsell of God. And it is to be beleued that the Hebrues after the death of
Iosua considered this with them selues, that their hong a great matter in those first warres whiche should be enterprised after the death of
Iosua bycause if they happened to be ouercome of those nations in one battaill or two, then would those nations thincke with them selues, that the good lucke of the Israelites were chaunged with the death of their captayne. By whiche opinion they would easely haue ben boldened and their affaires should haue had better successe dayly. But on the contrary if it happened that the Israelites gotte the vpper hand in the first battailles, they sawe that the power and audacitie of the nations woulde euery daye diminishe, and beyng made feable and faynter they should the easelyer be ouercome.
God was also asked counsell of in the tyme of Iosua. They did not therfore without cause aske coū sell of God in so great a matter: which also to do the cōmaundement of the law did vrge them, which is writtē in the boke of
Numbers. Neither must it be now thought, y
t they so required the oracle, as though they did not the same whē
Iosua
[Page 7] was lyuing, for they required also answers of God verye often when he was a lyue, but after his death it is said that they enquired for this thing chiefly & principally, namely which tribe should go vp to battail before all y
e other in al their causes. And thys is the signification of the hebrew word
Lanu that is, for vs. And this woord to go vp is mencioned, bycause they saw that they should fyrst vanquishe the hyly places.
Against Chanaan. This is somtimes a general name,
What y
e people of Canaā were & containeth al these nations, which God had decreed to destroy out of
Palestine, whereby all y
e lande was afterward called
Channan. And sometimes it signifieth particularly some one nation of that people. And that lay chiefly about
Tyre &
Sidon. Which the Euangelical history proueth when it calleth the woman a Chananite which offered her self to the sonne of God, when he was goyng to
Tyre &
Sidon. And of that nation peraduenture, bicause it was mightier than the other, were the rest called
Chananites. And I wyl not ouerskip this by the way, that y
e people which is singularly called
Chanaan, when they wer driuen out of their coastes by the Israelites, they departed to
Aphrica, where they remayned safe, euen to the time of
Augustine.
Augustine. So that y
e father writeth in his booke of the exposition whych hee begon vpon the epistle to the
Romaines thus: Our rusticals beyng demaunded what they wer, they answered in the
Affrick tong,
Chananites. And theyr language is very nye to the Hebrewe tong,
The Africans ar Chananites as the same
Augustine writeth in hys booke of questions vpon the Iudges the .16. question. For by
Baal in the
Affrick tong they seme to say Lord, whereby by
Baal Samen is vnderstoode as thoughe they would say, Lord of heauen: bicause these tonges differ not much one from an other.
Hierome also agreeth therw
t,
Hierome. writing vpon
Esay the prophet, when he enterpreteth these woords:
Behold a virgin shal conceaue, in the
Affrick tong (saith he) which is said to haue had his ofspring of the Hebrues.
Virgil. A virgin is properly called
Almah. Also
Virgil when he called
Dido an
Aphrician & a
Sidonian & the inhabitants of
Carthage Tirianes hath most manifestly confirmed that
Dido & her people came of the
Chananites. Wherfore it is no maruel if they almost kept in remembraunce the Chananishe tong. But these thinges I haue spoken by the way. But now
Chanaan signifieth no one special nation, but is a cōmon word for al those nations which the Israelites should ouerthrow. For the tribe of
Iudah which is said to haue gone vp first of al to the war,
For what thing the Israelites asked councell of God. had in his lot the
Iebusites, & not the
Chananites. Moreouer I admonishe the Reader y
t the Hebrues asked not counsel of God for their Captaine, neither desired they to know what man should be made chief ruler ouer the Israelites going to battail against the
Chananites, but which tribe should begin the battel first.
Othoniel y
e first Iudge should be of the tribe of
Iudah. But we entreate not of him now presently.
And bycause it is said that the children of Israel asked counsell of the Lorde,
Howe many waies y
t elders asked councell of God. some wil aske after what sort the Iewes accustomed to aske anye thing of hym at that time. It may be answered, that ther wer three accustomed & ordinarye waies which are rehersed in the .28. chap. of the first booke of
Samuel namely by dreames, by
Vrim &
Thūmim, & lastly by prophets whē ther wer any to be had, & therfore
Saul complained in y
e booke, that God had answered hym by none of these waies, when he would haue asked counsel of hym of the successe of y
e most daungerous battail. I finde also other waies in the scriptures of asking coūsell of god, but they wer extraordinary waies. One is by reuelacion of angels, or of god him self, expressing him selfe vnder some forme. An other way was, when som holy men by y
e mouing of god did appoint to themselues certayn tokens of thinges to come, which did signify before, whether they happened this waye or that, what should be looked for.
So
Abraham hys seruaunt decreed with hymself that she should be his Lordes wife, which only amongest many maydens comming to the well, offred drinke
[Page] of her owne mynde to hym and to his Camels.
Ionathas also the sonne of
Saule had then the victory promysed him, when the
Philistianes shoulde say, Come vp hither to vs, and contrarilye, if they shoulde byd him tary till they came downe thither. I haue called these extraordinarye wayes bycause they were not commonly vsed, neyther are they often red in the Scriptures. Lottes also are of this kinde. There is mention made of them in the fyrst booke of
Samuel, when
Saule should be declared King, all the tribes standing there before the Lord,
Beniamin was caught, which
R. Selomo expounding ascribeth the same place to Lottes, and sayth that the names of euery tribe were fyrst writen in scrolles, and hurled into a certayne potte, out of the which they were afterwarde drawen by the hand of the Prophet. This is his iudgement. Although.
R.
D. Kimhi thinketh y
e that iudgement was geuen by
Vrim and
Thumim. But howsoeuer it was it skilleth not much, for no man ought to doubte but that there were lots vsed at that tyme. For
Salomon sayth, that lots were caste into a pet and gouerned by god. Yea and the promysed lande of
Chanaan was no otherwise deuided vnto the people thā by lots. But by what meanes, in what places, or after what sort they were had, it is no place here to declare. It were to long to tell what
Vrim and
Thumim properly were.
R.
D. Kimhi speaketh aboundauntly of that matter in the booke, which we now haue in handes, when he expoundeth the history of the concubine reuenged agaynst the
Gabaonites, And I will set forth an other time in a more fytte place what it should seme to be.
The manner to aske counsell of Gods hand was before the lawe geuen. Neyther dyd thys custome for asking councell of God florysh only in the tyme of
Moyses law, but also in the patriarches tyme. For we learne in the booke of
Genesis that
Rebecka desyred an oracle. The heathen also asked councell eyther of theyr Prophetes or els of their southsayers.
The heathen had their oracles and diuinations.
Balak king of the
Moabites called vnto hym
Balaam. They had moreouer
Sibelles and
Delphos, Apollo and
Iupiter Amnō, and were euer to much geuen to diuinations, but such as were corrupted and false. Only amongest the Hebrues wherof we are certayne the maner of oracles was pure: Bycause God was knowen onely in
Iudea, as
Dauid hath song.
Why Iosua deuided the lande not yet possessed.Moreouer it is demaunded why
Iosua deuided y
e land to the .xii. tribes at y
e cō maūdement of God whē as he had not at that time conquered y
e same? I answer he dyd it that he myght leaue a testimoniall, howe certayne they oughte to be of those things which God had promised them, namely that they myght be as certayne of the possession of that lande whiche was promised them, as if they had it already in theyr hands. It would seme to haue bene folyshly done, if the obtayning of that land should haue bene hoped for eyther by chaunce, or by mannes strength,
Cesar. or els by warlyke power. For the which cause
Cesar in his Comment. doth not vnworthily laugh & wonder at the madnesse of the
Pompeians, whiche when they had not yet fought, would yet bargayne among themselues in their tentes concerning the diuision of priesthoodes, dignities, patrimonies &
Cesars goods. But thys distribution of the Hebrues, which was ordayned by the commaundement of god, could not be frustrate. And moreouer the Israelites, when that partitiō was made by
Iosua, had obtained alredy many victories, & had possession of a great deale of y
e land. Besides these things this ordinance was very profitable for this purpose, to take away frō the tribes controuersies for y
e limits of their land. Yea and thei made war in better order, after that euery tribe knew who were their enemies that they should fyght agaynst. And finally when as profite and rewards for labours are set forth, they do not a litle stirre vp men, stoutly to venter vpon any daunger and labour. By the same counsell vndoubtedly hath Christ our sauiour the sonne of god, geuen vs alreadye eternall lyfe, although we haue it presently but only begonne. For we must labor & wrestle very much before we come thither, although the fight be not vncertaine to them which put their trust in God.
There are three causes alledged,
Why God destroyed not by and by all the Chananites. why God would not by and by destroye all the Israelites enemies out of the lande of
Chanaan. The fyrste is, bycause the Iewes at the beginning wer not so many in numbre, as coulde inhabite all the land, So that by that meanes if all the
Chananites should haue bene destroyed, most part of the land should haue lyen waste. Whereby many and sundry wilde beastes (wherewith the regions in the East abound) would maruelouslye haue encreased, destroyed the possessions, and brought no small damage and destruction to the Hebrewes. This reason is alledged of God hym selfe in
Exodus. An other cause was that the Hebrewes myght throughly learne to fyght, and to be expert in warres agaynst their enemyes, and they coulde not doo that neyther in Egipt, nor yet in the wyldernes. The thyrd cause was, that they might therfore feare God more and more, for they vnderstandyng that they obtayned victories and possession of the lande as long as they obserued their religion, and contrarywyse, how they were oppressed with most greuous misfortunes, troubles and miseries, when they forsooke the obedience and woorshipping of God, they myght at the least by thys meanes be styrred vp not to faynt from theyr fathers lawes and most holy ordinaunces of God. I would to God the same causes, especially the two latter whych are described in the thyrde chapter of thys booke myght teache vs, why God wyl haue them whych are hys to be subiect in thys lyfe to so greuous and so many temptacions, namely that by fyghtyng and wrastlyng we myght be exercised wyth fruite and profytte, callyng vpon God continually.
But why God chose the tribe of
Iudah,
The prayse of the tribe of Iudah. to begynne the battayle first against the enemyes, many reasons may be alledged. Fyrst, that tribe was very populous, of great force, valiaunt of courage, warlyke, and verye experte therein. Whych neuertheles I speake not, as thoughe the election of God were moued by these gyftes: yea rather in that poynt the cleane contrarye is to be affirmed, namely that thys trybe was therefore valiaunt and warlyke, bycause God himselfe had destinied it to exercise those offices. Neyther is it to be doubted,
The election of god tarieth not for our gyftes and vertues. but that both valiauntnes and warlyke strength are hys giftes. But that reason whych I haue declared is thus to be vnderstand, that these excellent gyftes which wer freely geuen of God to the tribe of
Iudah, made it apt to begynne the battayle fyrst against the enemies. Neyther had it this kind of office cōmitted vnto it only at this present, but also afterward when they should make war against y
t
Beniamites, God being asked counsel of, decreed that marchyng forwarde to battail should be by the tribe of
Iudah, to geue to it that it might be as it were a chiefe captayne to all the other Israelites. In the booke of
Numbers for pytching the Campes, it had the chiefe place. Also the kinglye power was attributed vnto it by the oracle of
Iacob. And as the Hebrewes write, it was the fyrst of al the rest that passed ouer the red sea. But for thys it is woorthy to beare awaye the garland, bycause of that tribe
Messias should be geuen not onely to the Iewes, but also to al the world. Neither happened these priuileges and dignities to
Iudah by order of birth. For it was reckoned the fourth amōg the sonnes of
Iacob. Ruben in deede was fyrst borne, but bycause of his vile incest, wherby he abstayned not euen from his fathers bed, he was throwne downe from hys proper dignity, and in his steade as concerning the kyngdome
Iudah was substituted. But the dignity of birthright was geuen to
Ioseph.
Wherein Iudah excelled the tribe of Ephraim. Wherefore his first tribe called
Ephraim was not onely valiant & mighty, but also was exalted to the kyngdom of ten trybes: which kingdome neuerthelesse was both vnconstant, and also abode not alwayes in that famyly. But the principallity of
Iudah is euerlasting, bycause it was not taken away from it euen to Christes tyme, and he comming of that family, raygneth and shall raygne for euer. All whych thynges
Iacob
[Page] hym selfe confirmed wyth hys noble prophecye, wherein he fore sayde to hys children what thynges shoulde happen to them in the latter tymes. Wherfore it is not to be maruelled, if his Prophecies be in some parte fulfilled now. For the spirite of god doth euer wel agree with it selfe, as it whiche bringeth those things to passe, which are agreable to his prophecyes.
How farre the oracle geuē to the Israelites pertaineth vnto vs.And that which is sayd here to be answered to the Israelites let vs thinke also to be answered vnto vs, that if we will be sure to obtayne the victory agaynst the enemyes of mans saluatiō, we must haue him to be the captaine of our battayle, which by the holy Prophecye of
Iacob is called y
e Lyon of y
e tribe of
Iudah. If by hys conductyng and name we wil fyght agaynste the deuil, the fleshe, the world, death and hell, our victorye shall not then in any poynte be doubtfull but most certayne. And yet would I not haue the reader to thinke, bycause I haue put thys allegorye in, y
t therfore I will vse many allegoryes in thys historye, for I will vse them rarely and very seldome,
Allegoryes are not alwaies to he discōmēded not y
t I would haue theyr pleasantnes and elegancye be vtterly dispised. (The old fathers certaynly delited very much in them, I will not say to much. Yea and we fynde them sometymes applyed in the holy Scriptures. For Christ in the gospell compared hymselfe allegorically both to
Salomon and to
Ionas, and also to the serpent which Moyses at the commaundemente of God hong vp in the wildernesse. I will not speake of
Paule who writing to the
Galathians,, made
Isaac and
Ismaell the sonnes of
Abraham two peoples, and pronounced
Sara and
Agar to be two Testamentes, applying the Hebrewes to the Mounte
Sina and the Christian Church to the Citye of
Ierusalem) but euen as Allegoryes are not vtterly to be dispised,
Allegories must not be rashly vsed. so are they not to much rashly to be vsed. For although it be free for euery man in thys kynde of interpretation, to deuise what things he lyste, so y
t he straye not from the rules of fayth and holy Scriptures, yet haue we not therby any strong or certaine argumentes for the confyrmation of the doctrine of fayth. Therefore there is smal profyte by the labour taken in them. Neuerthelesse I except those which are put in the holy Scriptures,
Whither firme argumēts may be brought frō Allegories. for they are to be counted the wordes of the holy ghost. Wherfore theyr authoritye is great both in prouing & alledging of testimonyes. But the other, wherin the wits of men haue dalied, although with Godlynes, and in a ryght vnderstanding, bicause they are the inuentions of men, theyr cō clusions and argumentes are very weake. For men being the authors of them myght both be deceaued, and also deceaue. But thys Allegorye by me broughte forth, namely that the aunswere of God for the appoynting of the tribe of
Iudah to be captaine of the warres doth no lesse belong to vs than to the Hebrues, hath no small certaynty and scarcely pertayneth to allegoryes. For whatsoeuer they were that defended the people of God in the olde time, Christ was theyr hed and captayne. Wherfore whatsoeuer they dyd in defendyng of hys members, they did it as his ministers and vicars. Wherby he which religiously reuolueth their actes in his minde, and then putting them asyde, doth behold the hed and chiefe captayne,
Howe those thinges agree with Christ which seme to be spoken of Dauid & Salomon. by whose conducting they obtayned the victoryes. He I saye doth not straye from the marke, which the holy ghost had in the holy bookes. After thys maner those thyngs which are red in the holy Scriptures, both of
Salomon and also of
Dauid and seme to be spoken of them in respecte of the historye, are not allegorically applyed by the Apostles in the new Testamente to Christ seing y
t the holy ghost spake them purposedly of hym. Wherefore I haue not absurdely sayde, that the oracle geuen to the Israelites shoulde be thoughte to bee spoken vnto vs.
Behold I haue geuen the land into his hands. God sheweth forth in this place his liberal & boūtefull goodnes. He doth not only geue answer to y
t which he was demaūded, but also addeth therunto a most notable promise. He first appointeth
[Page 9] the tribe by name, which he wyll haue to make warre first before the other tribes against the
Chananites. Then he promised to geue them the land of the
Chananites whych he dyd to their great commoditye, for he made the Iewes more cherefull to fight, in that he sayde that he woulde helpe them. Moreouer, he wold not haue the possession of those regions ascribed vnto their own strength or power, but vnto him selfe. Ye shall not take it (saith he) but I haue deliuered the land into their handes. And he vseth a verbe of the preterperfect tense, wherby the certainty of hys sayinges shoulde be expressed.
Of this place we may iustlye gather,
We must aske counsel of God when wee take any thinges or affaires in hād. that in busines which we take in hande what so euer they be, God must alwaies be asked counsel of. And thys maye be proued not onely by this example, but also by infinite other whych the treasures of the holye scriptures minister vnto vs, to which cōmeth a most strong reason. What so euer is not of faith (sayth
Paul) is synne, wherby it followeth, that no man should attempt any thing without fayth. And that is no fayth whych leaneth not to the woorde of God. For as the same Apostle hath taught,
From whence the woord of God is to bee sought. faith commeth of hearing, and hearing commeth by the woord of God, which woord we cannot haue by any other accustomed rule and ordinary way, than out of Gods oracles which haue bene set foorth vnto vs in the holy scriptures.
And it wer good to marke the difference which is found betwene the asking counsel of God in the old time and ours at this present.
Howe wee and the elders do diuersly aske coū sel of God. They were very much carefull for the successe of thinges, and they almost desyred alwayes to knowe when they tooke warres in hand, or attempted anye other thyng, whether they should speede wel or il in them. And that was not hard for them to do, for they had an oracle prepared of God for them for that purpose. And God had promysed that he would answer them out of the mercy seate, what soeuer they should demaunde or aske of him. But we, if we should aske counsel of the holye scriptures for the successe and end of our enterprises and purposes, cōcerning earthly infelicities and misfortunes, we should seeme, and that not vnwoorthily, to play the fooles. For there is no place there at all, which answereth anye thyng for our singular and priuate thinges. But that onelye remayneth for vs to enquire for, whether that which we begyn or go about, be allowed to be iust, holy, and acceptable to God by the testimonies of the holy scriptures.
But why the Iewes had proper and certayne oracles geuen them for theyr matters, and we haue nothing answered vs particularly.
Why we haue not oracles as the Iewes had I thynke there be no other cause, but bycause vnto that people a certain assured publique wealth was due by the immutable coūsel of God, which should endure to the time of Christ, and therefore there were prepared for it certaine extraordinarye aydes aboue the power of nature, whereby it should be kept and defended by God. But vnto vs there is no such promise made of any certain seate or publique wealth, seing that our church is dispersed throughout the whole world, whereunto is no certaine seate or place promised, and therefore it needed not, that concernyng humaine thinges our publique wealthes should be particularly gouerned by certaine oracles & answers for temporal thinges. Besides this, the volumes of the holy scriptures are more aboundaunt in our tyme, than they were at that time with the Hebrewes when these thinges were done whych we nowe expounde. They had but the law onelye, we haue receaued nowe the bookes of the Prophetes and of wyse men, vnto which are added also al the writinges of the new Testament. And seing that those writinges are so manye & so excellent, it is no maruayle if we are not euery day enstructed of god by new oracles & answers. Neyther ought we to thinke bicause of that, that God setteth lesse by vs than he dyd by the Hebrewes. I wyl not speake howe hys spirite is geuen to vs thorow Christ more aboundantly and more openly, than it was in the olde tyme
[Page] to the Iewes. Finally, our publique weales, dominions and kingdomes at endewed with many more artes which serue for peace and warre, than the people of the Hebrewes were.
How we ought to behaue our selues in asking counsel of God. Wherefore it is no maruel if we being heaped vp with so many other gyftes, be destitute of singular oracles. It shal be our part therefore aboue al thinges, when we haue any affaires to take in hand, diligently to consider the woord of God, wherein is opened vnto vs hys commaundement or wyl, & afterward to embrace the same with a firme and stedfast fayth, wherby we maye bee vehementlye kyndled to cal vpon our heauenlye father, by the which we may be able to fulfyl that which he hath commaunded, and to obtayn that which he hath promysed.
3. And Iudah said vnto his brother Simeon: Go vp with me into my lot, that we may fight agaynst the Chananites, and I wyl also go with thee into thy lot. And Simeon went with hym.
The tribe of
Iudah doth associate to it selfe the
Simeonites to make warre against the
Chananites, which most euidentlye testifieth that the answer of God dyd not speake of any one singuler man, but of the whole tribe of
Iudah. For neither
Othoniel,
Why Simeon is taken into felowshyp wyth Iudah. nor yet
Caleb had any brother which was called
Simeon, and therefore there is no mencion made of them by Gods oracle, but it comprehendeth the whole tribe of
Iudah. But the cause why
Simeon is called of
Iudah to be as a companion of hys warre, and that they twoo ayded one an other is, bycause the possession of the tribe of
Simeon was mingled and scattered among the fieldes and countries belonging to the tribe of
Iudah. Neighbourhed therefore made them to defende and succour one the other. And this coniunction of these two tribes is most manifestly gathered out of the .xv. chapter of the booke of
Iosua.
It is not agaynst fayth to vse the ayde of men. Let vs learne hereby, that it is not agaynst the true fayth for vs to vse vsual aydes and mans strength, when occasion serueth, to obtayne the easelyer those thinges which God of his goodnes hath liberally promised vnto vs. God had promised vnto the tribe of
Iudah, that he would geue the land of
Chanaan into their handes, which althoughe they of
Iudah faythfullye beleued, yet were they not afeard to cal vnto them the
Symeonites whych were their neighbours, that they myght bee ayded of them in their fight. For by that meanes they thought they should be the stronger to ouercome their enemies. Christ hath no otherwyse confuted the deuyl, which counselled hym to cast him selfe down hed long, vnder the pretence of Gods promise, wherin he sayd, that he had now committed his health to the Angels, whych sentence he put foorth out of the holye scriptures. But the sonne of God answered, that God must not be tempted, but he must rather vse staires which were made for that purpose, to serue to come downe by. Moreouer, al they are counted to tempt God, which trusting to gods promises do neglect humane helpe, which are already or maye be easelye prepared and gotten.
Dauid in the latter booke of
Samuel setteth him selfe foorth vnto vs as an example, who beyng wonderfullye adourned with the promises of God, vsed for al that in the insurrection of
Absalon, not onely to flye away, but also the diligence of
Chusay the
Arachite and of the Priestes. Yea and
Paul the Apostle as it is written in the Actes of the Apostels, althoughe his onelye confidence was in Christ, yet he appealed vnto
Cesar, & made a discension betwene the Pharisies and Saduces, and testified that he was a Citizen of Rome. It is euident therfore by these manyfest examples, that we must vse the helpe of nature and wysdome to obtayne those thinges, which God hath promised to geue vs.
Yong men are to be exhorted to good studies Wherefore the yong men of our tyme are diligently to be admonished to labour to attayne vnto languages, good artes and sciences, and that wyth great study. Which they may (when oportunity serueth) vse in preaching and defending
[Page 10] the Gospell. For although God haue promised that the preaching of hys woord shalbe fruitful through the benefite of his spirite: yet must euerye man instruct him selfe in hys vocation according to his hability. Neyther ought men to bragge out of season (as phanatical men are accustomed to do) God according to hys promyse wyl be with vs when we shal speake. He hath promised in dede, and wyll surely perfourme, when tyme wyl not serue, or that a man can not either thincke or meditate what to speake. But if libertye be geuen, and leasure graunted to fynde, dispose, and wysely to deuise those thinges which we should speake, then can we not be excused, but that we tempt God, when as we neglect to do these thinges. Yea rather let vs plucke all thinges vnto vs, what so euer they be, so farrefoorth as godlynes permitteth, and occasion offereth it selfe, to helpe our labour to obtayne those thinges which are already promised vs.
Furthermore,
Princes & publicke weales may make leagues somtimes this coniunction of
Iudah wyth
Simeon doth admonishe the readers, that it is lawful in those warres which ar taken in hand iustly to make a league, whereby Princes or publique weales maye be ioyned together to defende honest thynges,
The godly ought not to ioyne them selues wyth the vngodly. as
Iudah now ioyned fellowshyp wyth the
Symeonites to fyght against the
Chananites. But thys must be taken heede of, that such coniunction and league be ioyned together wythout fault, neyther ought the godly to ioyne them selues in league wyth the vngodlye. For the scripture reproueth
Iosaphat, who otherwyse was a godly kyng, for making league wyth wycked
Achab, and other kynges are often tymes reprehended by the Prophetes, for ioyning them selues in league eyther wyth the Egiptians, or els wyth the Assirians. But surelye this
Simeon was of the same region that
Iudah was, and both their endeauours tended to thys ende, religiously to fulfyl the wyll of God. I knowe there be some whych by the example of
Asa kyng of
Iudah beyng well praysed, defende suche leagues made wyth Infidels. For he beyng greuouslye oppressed of
Basa kyng of the ten Tribes, as it is wrytten in the fyrst booke of the Kynges, sent vnto
Benadab kyng of
Siria (as appeareth in the .xvi. chapter) a certayne somme of gold and syluer, and he made a couenant wyth hym of that condicion that he shoulde inuade the kyng of
Israel, whereby he myght bee deliuered from hys oppression. But they whych affirme those thynges, should consider wyth them selues two thynges. Fyrst, that the kyngdome of the tenne Tribes had now fallen from God, and from woorshypping of hym. Wherfore if an vngodlye kyng was styrred vp agaynst it, the same is not for all that to be conferred wyth those, whych confessing them selues to be Christians, do incense Tyrannes whych are of a straunge religion agaynst other Christians. Besydes that, thys deede of
Asa kyng of
Iudah is mencioned in the holy scriptures. But we cannot fynde that it was allowed to be well done. Yea if we looke vpon the latter booke of Chronicles the syxtene chapter, we shall see that that kyng was most greuously rebuked of God by the Prophet for suche a wycked deede. For it is thus wrytten:
At that tyme came Hanani the Sear to Asa kyng of Iudah, and sayde vnto hym: bycause thou haste trusted in the kyng of Siria, and not rather put thy trust in the Lorde thy God, therefore is the hoste of the kyng of Siria escaped out of thyne hande. Had not the Ethiopes and they of Ludim an exceadyng strong hoste wyth many Chariotes and horsemen? And yet bycause thou dyddest put thy trust in the Lorde, he delyuered them into thyne hand. For the Lorde and hys eyes beholde al the earth, to strengthen them that are of perfect hart towarde hym. But thou herein hast done foolyshly, and therfore from hence foorth thou shalt haue warres. &c. For I shewed before that we myght without daunger discommende thys example whych they bryng of thys kyng, when as God doth so sharpelye chasten hym by hys Prophet. But we wyll entreate of thys more largely afterward.
4 And Iudah went vp, and the Lorde deliuered the Chananites and Pherezites into their handes and they smote them in Bezek to the number of ten thousand men.
The victorie whiche the two tribes obteyned ouer the
Chananites is described, and accordyng to the manner of the holy Scripture, the same is set forth and comprehended in fewe wordes, afterward the maner howe the thyng was done is more amplye expounded. Now briefly is declared that they of
Iudah obteyned the victorie and slew ten thousand of their enemies.
Why suche as are ouercome are sayde to be deliuered of God into the handes of their ouercommers.
And the Lord deliuered the Chananites. The holy Scripture obserueth his olde order, to say that they whiche are ouercome in battaile are deliuered into their enemies handes by God, and speaketh thus to adminishe vs, that victory is not the worke of our owne strength, but of the goodnesse and counsel of God. Wherfore souldiours and emperours whē they haue the vpper hand in battailes, they must bridle them selues from boasting and gloryeng, which
Ieremy also faithfully geueth counsell to do. For he sayth, let not him that is mightye glory in his owne strength.
Nebuchadnezar kyng of the
Babilonians folishely despising this, was so vexed & tossed with madnesse, that he was almost chaū ged into a dumbe beaste. Wherefore the administration of the kyngdome was taken away from him, & he liued in great misery of long time, who out of doubt had not fallen into so great misfortune, if (as it was mete) he had confessed that what soeuer he had gotten was geuen him by the prouidence and coūsel of God. But as
Daniel mencioneth, he being puffed vp with the noblenesse and dignitie of his actes, most presumptuously and proudly bragged of them: for he sayd, that in the strength and might of hys owne arme, he had established the kyngdome of
Babilon.
In the bookes of the Ethnikes thou shalte very seldome or peraduēture neuer fynde any suche kynde of speache. For men whiche are destitute of faith, do not ascribe those good thinges vnto god, which they thinke they haue attayned vnto by any labour or industrie. Yea and they ascribed the chaunces of warre not to come by the fauour of God, but by strength and pollicye, and sometymes by fortune. Wherfore
Cicero in his boke of diuination affirmeth that the victory of the
Decianes whiche they gotte by vowing of them selues to the people of Rome,
Cicero. Howe Cicero interpreteth the vowing of the Decianes. was an excellent and polliticque deuise of warre. So farre is he from attributing it to the prouidence of the gods. They knew (sayth he) that y
e strength & force of the Romayne people was such that if they sawe their captaynes either to be in extreme daungers, or els to be slayne, or to be taken of their enemyes, that they would by no meanes suffre such dishonor, and thincking with thē selues by that meanes to stay the flight, they thrust them selues into the thickest of their enemies, setting before them the shewe of their vowe and religion. So that by that meanes the harts of the soldiours in maner discouraged might be called agayne more fiersly to fight with their enemyes.
But we are taught by the holy Scriptures, that when we either see or heare of any that are conquerours, or els are slayne in battailes, we must by and by ascribe vnto God al that whiche is, or hath ben done, who (after the most accustomed phrase of the holy Scriptures) is sayd to deliuer them whiche are ouercome into the handes of their enemies.
God without any iniury deliuereth some in to the hādes of their enemies. The Chananites were defiled with moste detestable wicked dedes.
When it is sayd that any are deliuered of God into the handes of their enemyes we must thincke that that is done without any iniurye. And as touchyng this place we know that those nations of the
Chananites were full of most heynous wickednesse, and for that cause, god punished them most iustly. Whiche cause is confirmed by that whiche we read in the booke of
Genesis, where God bringeth a reason, why he held the posteritie of
Abraham so lōg tyme in Egipt,
[Page 11] namely bycause the sinnes of y
e
Chananites were not yet full.
God punisheth the vngodly with two kindes of punishmentes. And this is not to be forgottē, that God vseth according to his iustice to deliuer synners to be punished two manner of wayes, or to two sortes of enemies. For sometymes he doth this in geuing them ouer to be vexed with lustes and filthy affections as to certein furyes of hell.
Augustine. God punisheth synnes with synnes. And that is it which
Augustine oftentimes sayth y
t sinnes are punished with sinnes. So
Pharao hys vnfaythfulnesse and cruelty was punished by hardning & stubbornesse of harte. And Idolaters as
Paul teacheth to the
Romaines: were geuen ouer of god to their owne filthy lust, so that they most vylie contamined thē selues with most horrible sinnes. But bycause this kynde of punishement is not sene nor felte of mad men, as it is mete, god therfore deliuereth the vngodly, into the handes of straunge enemies, to be vexed, and at the length vtterly to be destroyed. And that this order was obserued with the
Chananites, the Scripture manifestly teacheth, for they were not onely addicted to Idoles, but as it is written in the xviii. & xx. chap. of
Leuit: They miserably defiled them selues with incestes & most filthy lustes. They were first therfore deliuered of God into a reprobate sense, and then were they deliuered to theyr enemies the Hebrues, of whō they were spoyled both of their life, and also of their most riche kingdome.
God deliuered them into their handes. That is, into their power. This is not onely an Hebrew phrase, but also a latine: for we say, This is my hande, that is, it lyeth in my power.
And they smote them in Bezek to the number of ten thousand men. To smite is here, to kill. And seing that the hoste of the
Chananites was great & there were nowe slayne of it but onely ten thousand men, we must thincke that the rest fled awaye, in whiche flight as afterwarde shalbe declared
Adonibezek was taken. But where as these two wordes
Chananites and
Pherezites are ioyned together in this place. They are thus to be taken, that if thou vnderstande the
Chananites after the common signification, wherin were cōprehended those 7. or 9. nations, then this name
Pherezites should be added bycause of interpretation, that by it might be expounded that whiche before was not expressed in the word
Chananites. But if by this word
Chananites we shall vnderstand any one especial or peculiar people of those nations, then must we say that that host was gathered of both the peoples, of the
Chananites I say and the
Pherezites.
5 And they founde Adonibezek in Bezek, & they fought agaynste him and slewe the Chananites and Pherezites.
6 And Adonibezek fled, and they followed after him & caught him and cut of the thombes of his handes and of his feete.
7 And Adonibezek sayd: 70 kynges hauing the thombes of theyr handes and feete cut of, gathered their meat vnder my table: As I haue done, so God hath done to me agayne: and they brought hym to Ierusalem, and there he died, &c.
After mencion made of the victorye it is here more expressed by partes, for the place of the battaile is expressed namely
Bezek:
Bezek. but where this
Bezek should lye it is not very certain. For there was a certaine
Bezek whiche was a city belonging to the tribe of
Manasses whiche was situate 17. myle from
Sichem as ye go to
Bethsan.
Ierome. And
Ierome testifieth that in his tyme there were two Townes which were called by this name. And it is not very likely that
Iuda and
Symeon would passe with their hoste to the tribe of
Manasses, whē their purpose was only to ridde the
Chananites out of their owne lottes. Vnlesse peraduenture, that king whiche was called
Adonibezek althoughe his kyngdome were in the tribe of
Manasse claymed and vsurped by violent tyranny many places in the inheritaunce
[Page] of
Iudah and
Simeon. This kyng had prepared an hoste to go agaynst
Iudah and
Simeon, and to let them from recouering of their own. Which thing being knowen,
Iudah and
Symeon made towarde him, that he should not entre into their borders. Wherfore it chaunced y
t they fought with him not farre frō his kingly citie
Bezek, or els it is to be thought that this
Bezek was a certain citie either in the tribe of
Iudah or els of
Simeon, wherof is no mencion made in any other place.
Malchisedech Adonisedech.This kyng was called
Adoni-bezek whiche is a compounde name, wherin y
e leter
Iod is placed betwene two wordes as
Malchi-sedech, Adoni-sedech, euē as
R. Selomo testifieth. This king semeth to haue fled, for that he sawe his hoste both slayne to the number of ten thousande men, and to turne their backes and flye, he would therfore saue him selfe by flight, but he was brought backe agayn by the
Israelites and suffred most grieuous punishement, as he had iustely deserued.
Bohan. Behonoth. For they cut of the thombes both of his handes and of his feete. This word
Bohan signifieth in the Hebrew a thombe, & it is in the feminine gender, wherfore it is said in the plurall nomber
Behonoth. Although
R. Dauid Kimhi do interprete that worde into fyngers, and the Chaldey paraphrast doth interprete it anckles.
And Adoni-bezek said: 70 kings. This tyranne acknowledgeth the iudgement of God, but whether he spake this of true faith or pure repentaunce, it can not be knowen by the wordes of our history. But it is most lykely, bycause he called not vpon God, implored not his mercy, neither shewed any tokens of true conuersion,
The law of rē dring lyke for lyke. that rather anguish did extorte from him this his true sayeng, than the godly feling of the minde. We gather hereby that the lawe of rendring like for like semeth euen to the wicked by the light of nature, iust & right, which at the length wil they or nill they are compelled to acknowledge the iudgemēts of God. For they haue certein principles of that which is right and honest written in their hartes, although they expresse, not the same in dedes. But euen as
Paul hath written to the
Romaines they holde the truth of God after a certeine sorte captiue in vnrighteousnesse, & when they knew the righteousnesse of God, neither was it hidden from them, that they whiche do such thinges are worthy of death, yet for all that they not onely do them, but also they consent to them whiche do them.
As I haue done, so God hath done to me agayne. Bycause he spake of gods iudgementes, therfore in naming of god he vsed not this worde
Iehouah but
Elohim.
The name Iehouah and the name Elohim. By whiche worde the scripture vseth rather to set forth the myght and iustice of god, than his mercy. This most cruell tyranne confesseth, that he had most cruelly cut of the feete of 70. kinges, and brought them to that poynte, y
e they were faine to gather their meate vnder his table. It is not to be laughed or hissed at as a lye, bycause in that prouince beyng not very large were 70. kinges.
Euery citie in the olde tyme had their king. For it may be that at that tyme that custome was in vse, that euery citie had his king. Neither ought the gouernment of a king to be separated from other formes of gouernmentes by largenesse or bredth of borders, but in what societie or multitude of men soeuer it be,
Definition of a kyng.
Iustine. where as any one mā is lawfully made gouernour, so that he depend not of any other superiour power, the same man may by good right be called king, yea and as
Iustinus writeth, euery king before
Ninus tyme was content with the boundes and limites of his owne citie. And such a custome if I should speake the trouth I can not but greatly commende.
It is not profitable to haue large kyngdomes.
For what shall it profit kinges most amplye to dilate the territory of their empyre, when as afterward they are ouerwhelmed with ouer much weight therof, neither are they able to gouerne it by reason and counsell. But what should man do? The
Monarches in these dayes are so set on fire with such great ambition,
[Page 12] that they haue not a respect how many they are able to gouerne, but onely haue a regarde to this, how many they may reigne ouer. Neither doth this disease (whiche is the more to be lamented) raigne onely in worldly princes,
The Bishops seke to haue large diocesses but it is also most filthyly spred abroade in the Churche where Byshoppes couet by all meanes to haue most large diocesses, of whiche (although they neuer looke to them) they may receaue most plentifull fruites.
But nowe I returne to the matter and aske the cause why the
Israelites did cut of the thombes of the handes and feete of
Adonibezek.
Wherfore Adonibezeb was so maymed of the Hebrues.
R. Leui aunswereth to this interrogation, and sayth that it was therfore done, that the cruell Tirant might be made altogether vnapt to do any thing, and especially to make warre. For they whiche are so inaymed are neither able to drawe sworde, neither to take or ouercome any man in battaille. Moreouer by this so sharpe punishment other princes whiche were yet remayning might easely be made affeard to lifte any weapon agaynst the
Israelites. These thinges are somewhat lykely, but the wordes of the same tyranne teache vs that we must consider some deeper cause, namely that it was so done by the prouidēce of god, that cruell and bloudy princes should not at the length escape the iudgemēt of God, yea rather they should haue experience on them selues of that whiche they had committed agaynst others. And in that thing bycause it is good sometymes to be taught by the example of wicked men, God would now also admonishe vs by this
Adonibezek. He teacheth vs that we should not muche staye in inferiour causes whiche are nexte vnto vs,
We must not staye in the inferior causes but rather cōsider the highest causes. but rather by these examples strayght wayes to lift vp the eyes of the mynde to consider the wonderful and most highe iustice of the decrees of God. The selfe same most cruel tyranne doth not ascribe vnto the
Israelites that they had feabled hym by cutting of his handes and feete, but by and by sayeth.
As I haue done to other, so God hath done to me agayne. Which same thing also Christ hath taught vs, for this also was his sentēce, With what measure ye meate, with the same shall other meate vnto you.
Of this lawe of rendring like for like, let the cruel tyrannes of our tyme be affeard, whiche neuer make an end of killing, tearing, and burning of holy and innocent mē, as thoughe wisedome neuer admonished them: By what soeuer a man sinneth, by the same also is he punished. Neither haue they at any tyme heard
Habakuc the holy prophet cryeng thus.
Why tyrannes do so cruelly rage? Bycause thou hast spoyled many nations, others also shall spoyle thee. Those be bloudy tyrannes, when they do so extremely rage, being altogether vnmindful of humane chaunces, neuer thincking how the same thinges may happen vnto them selues, wherwith they do so cruelly afflicte others. For if they would remember this, they would vse them selues more mekely not only toward innocent men, but also euē to them which are giltie & iustly condemned by them. Let vs learne in all thinges whiche shal happen, what soeuer they be, to consider as well the iudgementes of god as also his goodnesse, and therby we shall get good matter either of repentaunce, or els of thankes geuing.
But there is a doubt, why the Israelites killed not this king by and by,
Why Adonibezek was not by and by slayne of the Iewes. and why they brought him to Ierusalem, there to die miserably? I aunswere, to testifie vnto all men, that he being woūded was not gloriously killed in the battaille, for his horrible tyrāny deserued not so famous an end of this life. Neither is it to be meruealed that when he came to Ierusalē he was not holpen by the diligence and remedies of Phisitians: for the Iewes did it not of cruelty, but bicause they were affeard to violate the commaundement of god, who commaunded that all their enemies the
Chananites should be slayne euery one, amongest whom this
Adonibezek deserued not one death but a thousand: besides that, it was done that his most shameful end might be an exāple to al mē. He worthily
[Page] therfore being maimed and despised, departed this life in a most famous citie. But it semeth to be demaunded, for what cause when he had so vilye maymed 70. kinges he would also haue them vnder his table to gather their meat there? He did it surely to the setting forth of his victories, and also whē he should eate meate, he would not onely refreshe his body with meate and drinke, but he would also reioyce his haulty and proude minde after a certein horrible sort, he thought to him selfe that he had the fruition of no vulgare pleasure, when as in his dayly banckets he renued after a sorte by that terrible sight the victoryes which he had hitherto gotten.
Sapor King of the Persians. We read of the like example of one
Sapor king of the Persians, who when he had taken in warre
Valerian the Emperour of the
Romaines and father of
Galien he bounde him w
t an Iron chayne and drew him with him, & set his feete vpō his backe, as oftē as he would get vp vpō his horse.
Tamerlanes also king of the
Scythians,
Tamerlanes. caried about with him a tyranne of the Turckes taken by him and inclosed in an Iron cage.
Tirannes are infected with boasting and cruelty. By these and such like examples we se that the mindes of cruel tyrannes are wonderfully sicke of the diseases of vayne glory and cruelty.
And hereby we gather that to much cruelty doth greatly displease god: and therof I thincke it came to passe that as wel by gods lawes as by mās (I speake but of those whiche are counted iust & honest) certain punishmētes were prescribed for crimes according to the grieuousnesse of thē, whereby iudges had y
e lesse libertie geuen them to exercise tyranny.
Punishmentes are rather to be diminished thā augmented. Yea & the lawyers added this rule, that punishmentes should rather be diminished by iudges thā augmented: whiche is for all y
t to be vnderstād, as much as the nature of the faulte & cōmoditie of the publicque wealth suffereth, whiche I therfore speake, bycause some times those cōditions which cōmonly they call circūstaunces, make the crime so terrible and horrible, y
t the iudges must nedes there augment the punishments whiche haue ben prescribed by the lawes, & that to the entēt to feare away others frō so grieuous mischieuous dedes, & so
Dauid when
Nathā the prophet declared vnto him an execrable & horrible thing, he decreed a more grieuous punishment against him that was guiltie, than the law had ordeyned for common thieues & stealers of cattel.
Three kyndes of death in the lawe of God. I haue therfore made menciō of these, bycause there were in y
e law thre kindes of death appointed for euil doers, I meane, hanging, stoning, & burning, vnto which some Hebrues adde the fourth, namely the punishment of the sword: but bycause there is no mencion made therof in the lawe (as farre as I know) I haue therfore left it out. We read that
Adonias, Ioab &
Agab king of
Amalech & many other were thrust thorough with swordes, But we finde it not prescribed by any lawe or precept that the guiltie should be put to death by the sword. Seing I say the matter is so,
The Hebrues vsed an extraordinary punyshment in their tentes. we se that the children of
Israel vsed nowe in their tentes a certein extraordinary kinde of punishmēt against the king
Adonibezek. And I beleue they did it not w
tout the instinction of god. For god would punish the cruelty of this tyranne w
t an exquisite punishmēt, which was neuerthelesse of rendring like for like, which kinde of wicked doing to the entent we may the caselyer auoyde, it shall not be grieuous vnto vs to speake somewhat of it.
From whence this word cruelty is deriued.This word cruelty is deriued either of this latin word
Cruor, which signifieth bloud, wherin cruel mē like wild beastes do delite, either of
Crudae earnes which signifieth rawe flesh, which fierce & barbarous people somtimes do eate, & may be defined to be a vicious habite wherby we are inclined to sharpe & hard things aboue reason.
The definition of crueltye. And somtimes it happeneth y
e cruelty is coūted for a pleasure, w
t which wicked affectiō or habite how tyrānes haue sometimes ben infected, it is manifestly to be sene by many exāples. This holy history setteth now before our eyes this
Adonibezek, & the euāgelicall history maketh mēciō of
Herode. The Ethnike poetes haue made report of the cruelty of
Atreus &
Thyestes:
[Page 13] and the most horrible wicked act of
Xerxes king of the
Persians is set forth by
Seneca in his third booke
de ira, & .xvii.
The cruelty of Xerxes. chap. which
Xerxes when a certain man named
Pithius, who had well deserued at hys handes, came vnto him and desyred him to spare him one of his fyue sonnes which he had, and he bad him as though he would graunt him his request, to chose him whom he lysted to abide at home from battaile. And he did as he was bidden. But this most cruell tyranne commaunded that the yong man whom he had chosen should be drawen one syde of him one way, and an other the other waye, so that at the length he was torne a sunder, of the whych one part hee commaunded to be fastened in one corner of the way, by the which the souldiours shoulde go, and the other in an other corner, saying that after this sorte he purged his hoste. But not long after he was with much dishonour ouercome and beaten of the
Grecians, and constrayned to flie through heapes and dead carcases of his own men.
Silla.
Silla banished an infinite nomber of Citizens of
Rome, but at the length he was most horribly eaten vp of Lyfe. Euen after the lyke sort dyed that most cruel
Herode, as it is manifestly declared by
Iosephus. Vnto this most wicked vice, clemēcy is directly cōtrary, which as a wonderful vertue doth maruailously wel agree w
t princes, & is a singuler ornamēt of Christian men.
Augustine in his boke of .83.
Augustine. What clemencye is. Certayn foolish mercy.
Quest. in y
e
Quest. 31. defineth it thus. It is an habite wherby men styrred vp to hatred agaynst any man, are through goodnes kept backe. This vertue is a meane betwene cruelty and foolish mercy. I cal it foolish mercy, by which our mynde is so moued wyth other mens miseries, that it declineth from sound counsell and iust reason. And we are ouercome with this affection for this cause, by reason wee woulde neuer suffer such thinges wherwith we see others afflicted iustly and worthily, and because we our selues abhorre from such thinges, we therfore leaue of from punishing y
e guilty.
Mercy is a profitable affectiō Mercy in dede is an affection profitably planted in our hartes of God, whereby we are styrred vp to helpe and defende others. But we must take heede, that by it we be not made so soft and effeminate, wherby we should commit any thing against the commaundementes and wyl of God.
Preposterous mercy is condemned in holy letters. The holy scriptures reprehend
Achab king of
Samaria, bicause he spared
Benadad king of
Siria. Of whom he said: if he be on lyue, he is my brother. They condemne
Saul also by the voyce of
Samuel the prophet, bicause he saued
Agag kyng of
Amaleck o
[...] lyue. And euen as it was said vnto an other by the messenger of God:
Whether syns are to be pardoned.
Seneca. Thy soule shalbe for his soule, so
Saul being a litle before placed by God in the kyngdome, was depriued therof. What shal we do then? Shall we not forgeue synnes?
Seneca in his second booke of clemency and .6. chap. writeth: Pardon (sayth he) is a remission of punishment due, by which he is forgeuen which ought to haue bene punished. Wherfore he thincketh it is not a wyse mans part to geue pardon, bicause a wyse man wyl neuer commit any thyng whych ought not to be done, or leaue any thyng vndone which ought to be done. This reason of his seemeth to be very good and effectuall enough. But least we should be deceiued therby, we must here set a profitable distinction of persons, that is of God, of princes,
God maye forgeue synnes. and of priuate men. No man ought to doubt, but that god may forgeue whom he wyl, whē as he is not bound to any other mans lawes. Wherfore in forgeuyng he is not sayd to remit that which he ought to haue punished. Besydes this, he hath not so forgeuen men their faultes,
A Magistrate ought not to suffer faultes vnpunished. but that he hath punished them in hys onely begottē sonne Christ. But we must otherwise thinke of the Magistrate, to whō it is not lawful to forgeue the punishmentes of synnes, bicause he is commaunded to geue iudgement by the lawes. To whom neuerthelesse it is graunted eyther to release or to aggrauate the punishmentes according to the wayght and quantity of the crimes. Wherfore when he that is guilty is not wythout hope of amēdement, neither hath geuously offēded, the magistrate is contented w
t an easier punishmēt, & somtimes he addeth som reprofe or som sharper admoniti
[...].
[Page] Wherfore let him neuer leaue synnes vnpunished, & the same mā in punishing is not cruel, yea he rather correcteth, amēdeth, & healeth. Which worke is both iust and also most milde, so far is it that it should be ascribed to fiercenes or cruelty.
Seneca. Many executions ar a dishonour to the magistrate. Howe priuate men should forgeue iniuries. I wyl also adde this by the way which is written of the same
Seneca, that to haue many executions is no lesse dishonor to the Magistrates, than many corpes are to the Phisitions. But now cōcerning priuate men, me thinketh it must be answered thus: It is their duty to forgeue iniuries don to them selues, neyther can
Seneca his saying take place in them, namely that a wise man wil leaue nothing vndone that ought to be done, bycause reuengement is forbidden them by the law of almighty God. And they are commaunded after a sorte to punish such as sinne against them, in admonishing (I meane) and reprouing them. And they are wylled to be content with that punishment when those which haue offended them are amended and made whole. But cōtrarily if they perceiue that they be stubborne, they by the cōmaundement of God ought to complain to the church, by whom at the last they are excluded, vnlesse they wil be obedient to it. And when they are excluded out of the church, they maye also be accused to the Magistrate. In which thing yet is nothing cōmitted against clemency, bycause this is the mynde and purpose of them which accuse, namely vtterlye to take away euyl according to Gods commaundement by al meanes possible. And these thinges are now sufficient concerning cruelty and also clemency.
They whych worke of fayth obtain the promises.Bycause
Iudah and
Simeon obtayned the victory according to the promyses of the oracle, it shalbe our part diligently to consider and marke, that they which worke with faith by the woord of God do without doubt obtaine his promises. For God hath not left those destitute of his ayde, which haue endeuoured them selues to go forward faithfully in their vocation. The promises of God surelye are constant, and although heauen & earth should at any time vary or be chaunged, yet shal they alwaies be firme. And therefore when as man is pronounced to be a lyer, God contrary wise must bee confessed and celebrated as moste true. Neither is there any thing found so hard or difficult, but that by faith it maye be performed. Wherfore it is very well written in the .xi. chap. to the Hebrewes, that the saintes by faith haue ouercome kingdomes, and obteyned the victorye. That sentence certainly hath a principal respect vnto these histories of the Iudges. This ought to be so manifest and playne vnto vs, that for the obtaynyng of the promises of God,
We attayn not to the promises of God by merites. we ought to attribute nothing to our own workes and merites. Yea, let vs rather bee assured, that what so euer happeneth vnto vs, that the same commeth onely of the goodnes of God, which promised the same. Our endeuour also and labour are required therunto by the scriptures, as we see here also to be done, where the victory is geuen to
Iudah and
Simeon when they fought, and not when they ceased. Not bycause God could not haue geuen them the victory ouer their enemyes, although they had done nothing, as sometimes he dyd: but he hath decreed, to bring vs by the crosse and labours after hys accustomed maner, to the rewardes which he freely promised. Neither yet for al that, that our studies and labours are required as causes to obtayne the promyses, when as God doth geue vnto vs frely, and of his own mere liberality those thinges which he hath promised vs. This is principallye true in those promises, which do wholy passe mans capacity, as are eternal life, and regeneration. For they beyng the chiefe and last endes of our vocations, doo farre and muche passe the dignitye and pryce of our woorkes,
Promises of the Gospel and of the law. though they bee most perfect. And there is a certayne profitable and necessary distinction, whych is not to be forgotten, namelye that some promyses are of the lawe, and other some of the Gospell. And this is the nature of promises of y
e Gospel to be offred vtterly frely to men. But to promises of the law some worke is euer anexed. And y
e is required to be
[Page 14] most perfect & absolute in all pointes. Which bicause we can not performe,
[...] altogether fal down vnder our burthen, neyther can we attaine to these pro
[...] ses of the lawe in respecte they are of the law.
Promises of the law are not vayne. Thou wilt say thē that this kin
[...] of promises of the law is vaine? Not so, how is it y
e they be not geuen in va
[...] if none can attaine vnto thē? They are to this end set forth, y
e mē vtterly leau
[...] the confidence of workes, should hope to obtaine thē by fayth in Christ: Whic
[...] when it is done, they are chaunged frō promises of the law into promises of
[...] Gospell. And although they be frely graunted,
In euangelical promises although they be frely geuen yet must we work as though they were legal. yet in atteining vnto thē we
[...] our endeuor & studye no lesse than if they were promises of the law. But yet
[...] touching those good thinges whiche endure but for a time and passe not ma
[...] strength & labour and the rewardes of them are temporall it is not to be deny but y
t our workes are much auayleable. For it is sayd that they are oftentim
[...] gottē by them. Although also in obtayning them y
e fauor of god is nedeful th
[...] unto, which is aboundauntly bestowed on thē which worke by y
e word of God by faith. Which thing is manifestly sene of y
e readers of this history: for it decireth that god graunted y
e victory to a fewe Iewes being straungers and you
[...] souldiers, agaynst strong & warlike men, many more in number than they, of monstrous stature, and inhabiting most strong fenced cities and castles.
8 And the children of Iudah fought against Ierusalem and tooke it & smote it with the edge of the sword and set the citie on fyre.
9 Afterward the children of Iudah descended to fight against the Chananites, that dwelte in the mountaine, and in the south and in the lowe countrey.
10 And Iudah went agaynst the Chananites, that dwelt in Hebrō (and the name of Hebron before was Kiriath Arba) and they smote Sesay Ahimman and Thalmay.
11 And from thence they went to the inhabiters of Debir (and the name of Debir before was Kiriath Sepher.)
The things which are now red vnto the xvii.
A briefe rehearsal of things in the booke of Iosua verse are most part transferred hither out of the booke of
Iosua the .xv. chap, and are now declared by a certain briefe rehearsall of things, and it is done to this end, that we might vnderstand that y
e tribe of
Iudah had obtayned
Ierusalem when
Iosua was yet liuing so that it was the easier for him to lead away
Adonibezek captiue thither. And these be the things which are repeated in thys place out of the booke of
Iosua. The conquering of
Ierusalem, Hebron, and
Debir, the matrimony also betwene
Achsa &
Othoniel and y
e departure of the
Kenites from the citie of Palmes. That al these things (I say) are now declared by a certaine repetition, it is therby manifest, bicause it is written in the booke of
Iosua, that the king of
Ierusalem was taken, & we read in the end of the xv. chap. that the same citie of
Ierusalem came into the handes of the people of God, and that the children of
Iudah dwelt in it with the
Iebusites. Besides that these things which are now rehearsed of
Hebron are contayned in the .x.xi. and about the end of the xiiii. chap. in the booke of
Iosua. And y
e historye of
Achse and
Othoniell is red in the xv. chap. of the same boke.
How farre this parenthesis extendeth. This repetition therfore or parentheses extendeth to these wordes:
And Iudah wet with hys brother Simeon, &c. In which place y
e author returneth to make mention of the actes which the tribes of
Iudah and
Simeon ioyned together dyd at this time performe. Which thīg also by this appeareth the more manifest, bycause strayghtway is declared how
Gasa was taken, which citie is sayd in the xi and xiii. chap. of
Iosua to haue yet remained in y
e hands of the enemies,
The per
[...]erfect tence is expoū ded by the preterplusperfecte tence. & is numbred among those cities which were not conquered vnder
Iosua. Wherfore the wordes of the preterperfect tense which are red in this repetition are to be interpreted in that time past, which we call the preterplus perfecte tense, that the
[Page] order of the historye might be made more playne and manifeste.
They smote them with the mouth of the sword. This is a Metaphor in this maner of speche, very often tymes vsed in y
e holy scriptures, wherin by y
e mouth of the sword we ought to vnderstād the edge therof, bycause it semeth to deuour and consume those thinges whych are smytten, in maner lyke a mouth. And wher it is said that
They set the city of fyre, we must vnderstand it by this figure
Hypallege, when the thing is cleane contrary, for fire is throwne into the city, and not the city into the fyre. Neither ought this to be vnderstand thus, as though they had then burned the whole citye. For it is wrytten in the booke of
Iosua, and afterward it shal be expounded in this booke, that that city was after that inhabited by the tribe of
Iudah and
Beniamin, and also the
Iebusites, yea and the castle therof which was very wel fensed was not deliuered vp to the Israelites,
The city of Ierusalem was taken when Iosua was yet a lyue. tyl in
Dauid his time, as it is declared in the latter booke of
Samuel. Neyther ought that to moue you bycause it appeareth not in the booke of
Iosua that the city of
Ierusalem was taken. For although this be not plainly and manifestly spoken, yet may it be vnderstand by those thinges which are there intreated of, namely that the king of
Ierusalem was taken, and that
Iudah dwelled in that city, neither could he yet cast out the
Iebusites from them. Al these thinges I say are signes that the city was taken at that tyme, although it was not yet possessed fully and in al partes.
It seemeth also somewhat obscure, that it is wrytten that
Iudah descended, when he should go fight against the
Chananites, who dwelled on y
e mountaines. When as we accustome in going to mountaines to ascend, and not to descende. But we must vnderstand that those countries wer ful of mountaines. Wherefore when the host remoued from one mountaine to an other, it must nedes descend first into the valley, from whence it might afterward ascend vpon an other mountaine. Thou wylt peraduenture aske whether
Iudah at that tyme cōquered the plaine or the valley which was betwene? No verely. He assaulted them in dede, but he could not ouercome them. For we shall heare in thys chap. that those which were not ouercome of
Iudah in the valley, had yron Chariotes, so that by that meanes they were not ouercome.
And Iudah went against the Chananites, that dwelt in Hebron. These thnges are now therfore repeated, that we should vnderstande that it was not of necessity that the city
Hebron should be taken of
Iudah then when the Israelites were in this iourney on warfare, which they tooke in hand after the death of
Iosua, namelye at that tyme, wherein the publique wealth was gouerned by elders without any certaine Iudge,
Iosua being yet alyue.
Why Hebron was called the city Arba.
And the name of Hebron before time was called Kiriath-Arba, and they smote Sesay, Ahimman, and Thalmay. The reason of the name of this city is not of euery man taken a like. The cause of the diuersity is this word
Arba whych in his vsuall and proper signification signifeth the number whych the Latines cal
Quatuor,
It is not certain that Adam and his wyfe were buryed in Hebron. & the Grecians
[...] which is foure. Now some suppose the number of foure to be referred to the foure couple of men wyth theyr wiues, which they say wer buried in that city. Yet the holy scriptures make mē cion but of three: for in the booke of
Genesis & .23. chap. we reade that
Abraham and
Sara wer buried there, & also in the .35. & .49. chap. of the same booke we rede of
Isaac and
Rebeckaes burial there. And lastly in the .50. chap. we fynde that
Iacob was caried thither, & he him selfe before that had there buried his wife
Lea. But concerning
Adam &
Eue his wife, whō they haue added vnto these, we can finde nothing thereof in the holye scriptures. For that which they alledge out of the .14. chap. of Iosua maketh nothing to the purpose, for y
t the word
Adam in that place is not the name of the first man. Wherfore they can gather nothyng
[Page 15] out of that place, but that
Arba was a certaine great man among the
Anakims. These are the words there:
Ha Adam Hagadol be Anakim Hui, that is: he was a great man among y
e
Enakims. But our interpretour translateth it thus:
Adā was counted the great among the
Enakims. Wherby it appeareth y
t he thought that
Adam was a proper name. But he was two wayes deceaued: first he dyd not marke that the article
Ha is ioyned to the word
Adam, which is neuer ioyned with proper names. Wherfore it must needes be a common name, whych must be referred to that woord
Arba, for that name was put a litle before. The other errour is bycause we reade no where that the first man was reckoned amongst the
Enakims, that is to say Giauntes.
The opinion of others is that
Hebron was called the City
Arba, bycause it was inhabited of .4. Giauntes, namely
Sesay, Ahimman, and
Thalmay vnto which three brethren they adde
Annak their Parent. But the opinion of these men is easely confuted, bycause that in the .14. chap. of
Iosua toward the end, it is by manifest wordes declared that this word
Arba is the proper name of a Giaunt. Wherfore it is manifest enough that this woord must not be referred to the number of four. And by that meanes not onely this latter sentence, but the first also is confuted, which would haue this name
Arba to haue a respect to the foure couple of men with their wyues, buried in the old tyme in that City. And vndoubtedly for the same cause also, the opinion of others is not to be allowed, which do thinke that the City was so called, bycause although it were but one City, yet it consisted of foure Cities, and that this woord
Arba is all one wyth this greeke woorde
[...] whiche is foure Cities. Wherefore I iudge it best to thyncke that it was so named of the buylder thereof named
Arba,
Arba had three chyldren. who how he came by that surname it is vncertaine. Onely this we maye gather out of the scriptures, that what so euer he was, he had three chyldren which are called in this place and also in the booke of
Iosua, Sehai, Ahimman and
Thalmay. And it is very lykely that they were deade long tyme before
Iosua. And when they were now dead, then was there mencion made of them, bicause their families which seme to haue bene of a wonderful huge stature were destroyed by
Caleb and
Othoniel. And this is the reason why I suppose that these three brethrē liued not in
Caleb and
Othoniels tyme, bycause this Citye as it is written in the booke of
Numbers, was a most auncient city, and was buylt .vii. yeares before
zoham that is,
Thamin the kingly Citye of the Egiptians. And in
zoham dyd
Moyses and
Aaron woorke the wonders before
Pharao. And if so be it was the kingly and noble city then, it must nedes be built long time before. Wherefore if
Hebron were built before it, and had the name thereof of
Arba, how could his children be on lyue at this time? It cannot be so. Besides thys,
Abraham had a lodging in this City, & bought there a double caue. And from that time to
Iosua his time wer almost .400. yeres. It is not therefore very likely, that the sonnes of him which builded so auncient a city should lyue tyl
Iosua his tyme, vnles any man wyl fayne that the same city was built long time before, & called by an other name, & then in processe of tyme casting away the first name, it should be named by this most strong and mighty Giaunt. But whether it be thus or no, neither skilleth it much, neither semeth it curiously to be sought for.
But this might somwhat moue some, bycause
Arba, wherof we now speake, is called in the .15. chap. of
Iosua, the father of
Enak. For if he had .3. sōnes which were named as well here as in the same booke of
Iosua, it wil then he doubtfull who that same
Enak was.
What Hanack signifieth. In which thyng (sauyng the iudgement of a better learned) I would thinke might be answered, that it was not a proper name but a cōmon, wherby at that time men of huge stature, but such as were noble & excellently adourned, wer called. For this word
Enak in hebrewe is to gird or to
[Page] compasse, and is chiefly referred to chaines which are worne about the necke for comelynes sake. And thereof is this name
Enak deriued, & in the plural number hath both the masculine & feminine forme, & it signifieth a chaine, and is transferred to noble & worthy men, whom thou mayst cal chained. Wherfore
Sesay, Ahimman &
Thalmay may be called the sōnes of
Arba, who was not called the father of them onely, but also the father of
Enak, bycause euery one of his sōnes was noble,
Why giauntes were called Enakim & wore a chaine, or was a Giaunt, for Giauntes also were called
Enakim, either bicause they wore chaines, or els bycause they were of a notable stature of body, for it may be that that word was applyed to all kynde of ornaments. Of them is mencion also made in the booke of
Numbers .13. chapter.
By how many names giaūtes are called in the holy scripturesSeing we are now by chaunce in hande with giauntes, and that there is often mention made of them in the holy Scriptures, it shall not be vnprofitable, somewhat to speake of them. Fyrste we muste knowe that they are called by diuerse names in the holy Scriptures as
Enakim, Eimim, Zemasmim, Nefalim, Rephaim. Why they were called
Enakim manifestly appeareth by those things which we haue spoken before. And they were called
Eimim, of the terror which they draue into others by their loke, They were called
Zemasmim, of mischiefe, bicause they trusting to their owne power and might, were dispisers of lawes, iustice, and honesty, and euer went about wicked actes. For
Zemah in Hebrue signifyeth mischiefe. They were also named
Rephaim. Bycause they made men which met them to be after a sorte amased, for that worde signifyeth sometimes the dead. Lastly they were called
Nefalim as oppressors, bycause they assayled al men tyrannously, of this worde
Nafal which is to fall or subuerte. Some thinke that they are sometimes called
Geborim: but bycause we vse to referre y
e worde to power, and properly strong men are called
Geborim, therfore I woulde not put it among these.
When glaūtes began.
Augustine.Furthermore if thou wilte demaunde when giauntes beganne to be, if we may follow
Augustine de ciuitate Dei, the .xvi. boke and xxiii. chapter. We must say that they beganne before the floude. And therfore we beleue him, bycause he hath proued it by the testimonye of the holy Scriptures: for it is written in the vi of
Genesis that giauntes were at that time on the earth: whose kind although it was kept after the floude, yet as he beleueth they were not in so great number.
Whether Giauntes were begotten of mē Besides this it may be doubted concerning their procreation and parents: for there are some whiche thinke that they were not begotten of men, but that Aungels or deuils were their parentes. And this sentence they say is confirmed by that which is written in the booke of
Genesis. The sonnes of God seing the daughters of men that they were fayre, they tooke them to wiues, and of them were borne most mightye men or giauntes. Concerning this fall of the Angels many of the old writers agree that it was bicause they vsed company with women, and among other is
Lactantius in his second booke and xv Chapter. For his opinion was (as it is there written) that God feared least
Sathan to whom he had graunted the gouernement of the worlde shoulde vtterly haue destroyed mankinde,
Lactantius. and therfore he gaue vnto it Angels for tutors by whose industrye & care it mighte be defended. But they being prouoked as well by the wilinesse of
Sathan, as also allured by the beauty of fayre women, committed filthines with them. Wherfore they were throwen downe from their dignitie and made souldiers of the deuill. This was
Lactantius opinion, but yet he sayth not, that Giauntes were borne of those copulations of Angels with women but earthly deuils which abide on the earth to our greate hurte.
Eusebius of Cesaria
Eusebius of
Cesaria in hys .v boke
de preparatione euangelica, doth nothing in a manner disagree from them. For he also sayth that Angels which fell, begat of women whom they filthilye loued those deuils, which afterward troubled the world many wayes, and to thē
[Page 16] he referreth al these which the Poets and historiographers haue writtē to haue bene Gods, & haue eyther in Metre or in Prose made mention of their battailes discordes, lustes, and sundrye and grieuous tumultes,
Augustine. But
Augustine in his xv boke
de ciuitate Dei. xxiii. Chap. thinketh that this opinion of these old men can not be gathered out of that place of
Genesis.
Men of the stocke of Seth were called the sonnes of God. For he sayth that those which are there called y
e sonnes of god, were in very dede men, namely cōming of y
e stock of
Seth. For whē they worshipped god truely and sincerely, and called vpō him holily and purely, being adorned w
t his fauor & grace, they are called by y
e scriptures y
e sonnes of God.
What was the fal of the sonnes of God. But whē at y
e length they began to burne in filthy lust with those women which came of the stocke of Cain, and by that meanes fel into fellowship with the vngodly, taking them to their wiues and cleauing also to superstitions and wicked worshippings, they were chaunged from y
e sonnes of God not only into men, but also into fleshe. And thys will I say by the way,
Aquila.
Aquila translating these words out of Hebrue, They wer not (saith he) y
e sōnes of God, but the sonnes of Gods: for thys cause so called (as I suppose) bycause their progenitors were holy men,
Simmachus. but their children miserably fell from god and godlines by inordinate loue of women. And
Symmachus translateth it, The sonnes of the mightye. But nowe to
Augustine againe, he constantly affirmeth that there can be nothing gathered out of that place of
Genesis concerning the carnall copulation of Angels with women, but thinketh rather, that farre contrary may be proued by the wordes of God written in the same place. For whē the scripture had there sayd, that there were Giaunts on the earth, and that the sonnes of God (as it is sayd) were gone out of the right way, and Giaunts were brought forth, there is added: And god sayd, my spirite shal not abide in man for euer, bicause he is flesh. By this sentence he declareth, that those which so sinned were called men, and not only as they were by nature, but also they were called flesh, wherunto by their filthy luste, they did to much cleaue. But they which be of y
e contrary opinion do thinke that they do bring a strong witnesse of
Enoch which was the vii. from
Adam, of whom
Iudas maketh mention in his canonicall Epistle.
Enochs booke Augustine. For in the booke which is intituled to be
Enochs booke it is writtē that giauntes had their of springs of Angels and not of mē. But
Augustine answereth vnto this, and sayth that that booke is altogether
Apocripha, & therefore such fables as are rehearsed in it, are not to be beleued. It is not to be doubted he sayth but that
Enoch wrote some godly thinges, when as
Iudas the Apostle manifestly testifieth the same: But it is not necessary that we should beleue that all thinges which are written in that
Apocriphal booke shoulde be of hys writing, Forasmuch as they haue no sure authoritie. Neither, although
Iudas brought thence some one certaine sentence, is it supposed that therfore he by his authoritie hath allowed the whole booke: Vnlesse thou wilt saye that
Paule allowed all the things which were written by
Epimenides, Aratus and
Menander bicause he brought one or two verses out of thē.
Ierome. Which thing
Ierome in his exposition vpō the first chap. of the Epistle to
Titus declareth to be a very absurde thing and worthily to be laughed at. And now as concerning
Enoch, it semeth meruelous, how he being but the vii. from
Adam could write of those things of the altercation betwene
Michael and the deuil, for the body of
Moyses, when as if there wer any such thing (as there is no doubt but there wer) they must nedes haue come to passe a thousand and almost .500. yeares after. Vnlesse we wil say y
t those things wer reuealed at that time by some notable strength of prophecy.
Neyther is it to be forgotten, that those whiche do thinke that giauntes had Angels to their parentes & not men, do therfore seme to suppose so,
The reason of them which thought giaūts were not borne of men. bicause they thinke it is not possible, y
e huge giauntes can be borne of mē of vsual bignesse & stature. Wherfore some of thē haue gone so farre, y
t they haue affirmed that the first mā was a giaunt, and y
t
Noah also & his childrē were Giaunts bicause they
[Page] beleued not that y
e kind of mē could be either before or after y
e floud, except their first progenitors had bene such, if it were thought they should be borne of men. But
Augustine proueth that to be false & sayth,
Augustine. A womā giaūt that a litle before the ouerthrow made by y
e
Gothes, there was a womā at Rome of a giauntes stature, whō very many out of diuerse countreyes came to see. Which womans parents neuerthelesse exceded not y
e cōmon accustomed stature of other men.
The naturall cause of y
e great stature of giāts But as touching the cause of this huge bignesse of giaūtes, if we should loke vpō nature thē can we bring no other reason, but a strong naturall heate, & also a moysture which abundauntly & largely ministreth matter, for y
e heate doth extende y
e same not only into length, but also it poureth out & spreadeth it both to breadth & also to thicknesse. Giaunts therfore begā before the floud, they wer also before the accō panieng of the sonnes of god with the daughters of men, & after that also continued their generation. Men therfore begat them, and had a naturall cause such as we haue sayd. There were also some without doubt after the floud, for there is mencion made of them in the booke of
Num. Deut. Iosua,
How huge the giauntes were
Iudges. Samuel, Paralip, and other holy bookes. Concerning their bignesse & stature we may partly gesse and partly we haue it expressedly described. The coniectures are bycause
Goliah had a cote of male weing v.m. sicles, and a speare like a weauers beame, and the Iron or top of his speare weighed
600. sicles. We coniecture also that
Og kyng of
Basan was of a wonderfull bignesse and that by hys bed, whiche being of Iron contayned
9. cubites in length. And the
Israelites compared with
Enachim seemed as grassehopers. These he signes wherby we may iudge howe bigge these men were. But the bignesse of
Goliah is described properly and distinctly in the booke of
Samu. For it is sayd that he was
6. cubites and a hande bredth highe.
A cubite with the Grecians & Latines. And a cubite with the Grecians is two feete, but with the Latines a foote and a halfe. Some alledge the cause of this difference to be, bycause the measure may be extended from the elbow to the hand, being some tymes closed, and sometymes open or stretched forth. And thus much as concerning the stature of giauntes, so farre as may be gathered by the holy Scriptures. But we read among the Ethnickes farre more wonderfull thinges,
The Ethnikes opinion of gianntes.
Philostratus. The common stature of men in our tyme. The measure of a foote. & such which seeme to some incredible.
Philostratus writeth in his booke of noble men, that he sawe the carkase of a certain giaunt which was
30. cubites long, and an other
22. cubites long, and certain other also
12. But the cōmon stature of men in our tyme passeth littell aboue
.5. feete. And the measure of a foote agreeth both with the
Grecians & with the
Latines, for they both geue to euery foote
4. hand breadthes: and euery hand breadth conteineth the breadth of
4. fingers, that is, the length of the litle finger. But if the last fingers, the thombe I saye and the litle finger should be stretched abroade, then euery foote cōtaineth but two hand bredthes. I thincke it not amisse also to declare here what
Augustine writeth in the
.15.
Augustine. booke
de ciuit. Dei. 9. chap. where he reproueth those whiche obstinatly contend that there were neuer any men of so wonderfull huge a stature, and testifieth y
t he him selfe sawe vpon the coaste of
Vtica a tooth so great, that being deuided, it might easely be iudged to be an hundred fold bigger in forme and quantitie thē vsuall teth in our tyme are,
Vergil. he also declareth in the same place, that there were in oldetyme very many such bodyes of men, by the verses of
Vergil whiche are written in the
7. booke of
Aenedos, where he sheweth how
Turnus tooke vp so great a stone from the groūde and threw at
Eneas that
12. such men as the earth bringeth forth now of dayes could scarsely lifte, whiche place he tooke out of the
6. boke of
Iliades of
Homere. We may adde also vnto these, the verses which the same
Vergil hath writtē in y
e first of the
Georgikes, he shall wonder at the great bones digged out of the graues. Moreouer
Augustine bringeth
Pliny the second, who affirmeth in his
7.
Pliny booke, that nature the longer it procedeth in her course,
[Page 17] the lesser bodyes doth it bryng forth dayly.
Cipriane. Whether the bodies of men haue decreased from the floud to our tyme. And he maketh mencion also of
Homere whiche made complainte sometymes in his verses. To whom I might adde the testimonie of
Cipriane against
Demetrian. But if I should be asked the question, whether I thought that the bodies of men whiche were brought forth after the floud are lesse than those whiche were before the floud, I would peraduenture graunt vnto it:
Aulus Gellius but that they haue alwayes decreased from the floud euen to our tyme, I would not easely consent to that, and especially bycause of
Aulus Gellius wordes whiche he wrote in the third booke, where he sayth, that the measure of the growth of mans body is
7. feete, whiche seemeth also to be the measure at this day in mē of the bigger sort. But lest I should dissemble any thing, we read in the
Apochriphas of
Esdras the
4. booke about the ende of the
.5. chap. that our bodyes are lesser nowe, and shalbe euery daye lesse, bycause nature is alwayes made more weake. And the same doth
Cipriane (as I haue a litle before sayd) seme to affirme. But why I would not so easely assent thereunto, this is the cause, for that I can se almost nothing altered in our time from the measure whiche
Gellius defineth.
Pliny. But now to
Pliny agayne who sayth in his
7. booke, that in
Crete, when a certayn mountaine was rent by an earth quake, a dead body was founde standing whiche was
46. cubites long, whiche some beleued to be
Orions body, other some
Othus. It is also left in writing that the body of
Orestes being digged vp by the commaundement of an oracle, was
7. cubites long. But that whiche
Berosus affirmeth,
Berosus. that
Adam &
Seth his sonne were giauntes, and
Noah also with his children, as it is put without testimony of holy scriptures, so may it also be reiected.
Now it seemeth good to declare,
Why GOD woulde haue so huge giauntes some tymes. for what cause god would haue some men sometymes to be borne with so huge bodies. It was done for this cause
Augustine thincketh in his boke before alledged
23. chap. to leaue a testimony vnto vs, that nether the beauty of the body, neither the bignesse of stature, nor strength of the flesh are to be accompted among the chief good thinges, when as they are no lesse commune to the godly sometymes than they are to the vngodly. They surely which are desirous of godlinesse will iudge that spirituall good thynges are farre to be preferred before them,
Forme and stature auayle nothing to saluation. partely bycause they are an helpe vnto vs to saluation, and partely bycause they make vs more noble in dede than others. And that giauntes had no helpe by their huge stature to saluation, he confirmeth it by that which
Baruch the Prophet hath writtē in the
.3. chap. There are giauntes from the beginning of the worlde, famous men, expert in warres: those hath not the Lord chosen, neither hath he geuē them the way of knowledge, but they haue perished bycause they had not wisedome.
Giauntes toke not godly causes in hande to defende. Also if a man shall read ouer the holy scriptures, he shall neuer almost fynd that they tooke in hand any good or godly cause, whiche they would defend, and for the whiche they would fight: yea he shall rather se that by their peruersenesse and pride, they haue alwayes ben agaynst God. So did
Og king of
Basan behaue hym selfe, so also did
Goliah and his brethren. All these were most deadly enemies to the people whom God loued and had chosen from the rest to be peculiar to him selfe.
Giaūtes were ouercome in battaile of weake persons There is an other thing also besides, whiche may much confirme our faith, for the holy scriptures do alwayes declare how such mōstrous giaūtes were filthyly ouercome in battaile, and that by feable men and very vnexpert in warlike affaires, namely by
Dauid being yet but a shepheard, & the people of
Israel which were thē but yong beginners in matters of warre, wherby the spirite of god doth admonishe vs to be of a constaunte and valiaunte corage when for godlinesse sake we must fight against such monsters. We must haue no regarde there to our owne strength, seing that the holy oracles do so often declare, that it is god whiche deliuereth such beastes into their handes whom he defendeth. Whiche thinges seing they
[Page] are so, this without doubt cometh to passe, that we shoulde by no meanes be affeard of tyrannes, whiche are almost alwayes agaynst God, and trust to their owne great might, when they defend vngodly partes, and thincke that they can robbe and spoyle as they list them selues the flocke of Christ which is feable and weake: seing the might of gods word & power of his spirite will make vs mightie and inuincible agaynst them thoughe we be neuer so lowe and weake of nature. Moreouer if we should follow humane reason, beyng compared with thē, we should easely seeme either wormes or grashoppers: but being hedged & fensed w
t the might of god, we shall not only be superiours, but also, (to speake as
Paul speaketh to the
Romaines) we shal ouercome also. For Christ will ayde vs, who bindeth the strong armed man, & taketh away the most riche spoyles which he had gathered, he hath luckly wrastled with the deuill and his members, & we by him shal haue good successe in our warres, and shal obteyne a farre more noble victorye than that whiche the Poetes haue fayned that their gods obtayned of the
Ciclops Titans,
Why Giaunts haue resisted God. and other giauntes, whiche were (as they fable) destroyed by the lightnings of
Iupiter at
Phlegra. It is a playne token why gyaūtes in the old time & mighty princes now of dayes do w
t the wise men of this world resist god: surely bicause they cleaue & trust to much to their own strength, whereunto they ouermuch stickīg,
God accomplisheth his thinges by humble persons & not by giauntes. there is no mischief which they dare not enterprise, there is nothing which they thincke is not lawful for thē to do. But god vouchesafeth not by such men to accomplish those thinges whiche he hath decreed to bring to passe, but to set forth his might & power farre abroad he vseth rather to accomplish such things as he hath decreed to do by
Dauid and any abiect persones.
Whether Og were the last of al the giaunts.Of this thing I would thincke that I had spoken enoughe, but that there is a certein place remayning to be expounded: namely how it should be written in
Deut. that there was no more of the giauntes remayning but only
Og king of
Basan. I am not ignorante what
R. Salomo fableth, but his exposition is so childishe, & so worthy to be laughed at, y
t I am ashamed to rehearse it. I iudge therfore that it was not spokē absolutely & simply, that there were no more remayning but he, as thoughe there were no more giauntes in all the worlde but he: but it is meant that he onely was remayning in those places namely beyonde
Iordane.
The Moabites also draue Giauntes out of their coastes. Moreouer we must vnderstand that not onely the Israelites destroyed the giauntes out of those regions but also the
Moabites as it is written in the second chap. of
Deut. draue them out of their coastes, which must also be thought to haue ben brought to passe by them thorough the fauour of God: for it is in the same place written that god gaue vnto the
Moabites those regions to inhabite. Now will I returne to the wordes of the holy hystory.
And from thence they went to the mountaynes of Debir, and the name of Debir before was Kiriath Sepher.
Why this citie is called the citie of Letters. It is commonly translated the citie of letters, and therfore would they haue this citie so called, bycause the first letters wer found there, or els bycause learning or good studies florished in that Citie, as they do at this daye in vniuersities, where good sciences are openly taught. Some thincke that lawyers liued there, whiche kept the recordes of iudgementes. There be some also whiche write that there was a notable library there.
R.
D. Kimhi affirmeth that
Debir in the
Persian language signifieth a letter, but y
e worde
Sephir in Hebrew signifieth not properly a letter or a figure but rather a litle boke or scrolle written vpon. The Hebrues do make mencion that
Othoniel did in this place expound certein rules of the lawe, whiche before that tyme were almost blotted out, and of that dede was the citie so afterwarde named, but this cā scarse be probable, bycause it seemeth that that citie had that name before the
Israelites possessed it. We must know moreouer that this citie also was taken when
Iosua was a lyue, whiche is shewed in his owne booke.
And that by no meanes can be fayned to be sayd there by preuenting or (as they say) by anticipatiō. For it is written in the .11. chap. And
Iosua came at y
e tyme &
[Page 18] destroyed the
Enakims from the mountaynes, namely
Hebron, Debir and all the mountaynes of
Iudah. If these things should haue ben mencioned in y
e place, as things whiche should come to passe sone after the death of
Iosua, then had it not ben well spoken, to haue sayd, And
Iosua came at that tyme. And this I thincke the reader shall playnly see proued, if he will not thincke it paynfull, diligently to read ouer the
10, and
15. chap. of
Iosua.
12 And Caleb sayd: He that smyteth Kiriath Sepher and taketh it, to him will I geue Hacsah my daughter to wife.
13 And Othoniel the sonne of Kenatz Chalebs yōger brother toke it: and he gaue him Hacsah his daughter to wife.
Here is wont to be demaunded, how these cities
Hebron and
Debir should be written in the booke of
Iosua to haue ben taken of
Iosua, when as it is here put that
Chaleb conquered them,
Chaleb desired to haue these regions assigned him for his inheritaunce. whereunto I aunswere that all that warre was gouerned by the conduicte of
Iosua, who was the chief and principall gouernour of the whole hoste, but the principall settyng forward agaynst
Hebron and other places adioyning thereunto was committed vnto
Chaleb the chief of the tribe of
Iudah, and that not without a cause. For he, as it is written in the xiiii. chap. of
Iosua, desired to haue that parte assigned peculiarly vnto hym for hys inheritaunce: whiche requestes he easely obtayned. For he required the same, trusting to God hys promises:
Chaleb was a faithfull espye. for when he was sent with other spyes to view the lande of
Chanaan, he faithfully made relation of the things as they wer in dede, & not vnfaithfully as his fellowes did. Neither was he an author of the peoples seditiō as the other were, yea he rather encouraged the peoples myndes, and diminished those thinges whiche his fellowes had amplified concerning the fence of the cities, of the giaūtes also, and of the strength of the
Chananites. For he regarded not mās strength, but with a singular faith, most constantly remembred the power, the goodnesse & promises of god. Wherfore god being angry with the rest, destroyed them in the wildernesse, so that they came not to the promised lande. But he promised
Chaleb for his faithfulnesse this inheritaunce, whiche when he afterward demaunded, he put
Iosua in remembraunce of the thyng before done, and of the promises of God.
God promised Chaleb the lād whereon he should treade. And the place where the promise is contayned is in the 14. chap. of
Num. there God promised him that land wheron his foote should treade, whiche wordes the Iewes thincke thus to be expoūded. The rest of the spyes being amased for feare of the giauntes, and putting small confidence in god durst not entre into the citie of
Hebron, whiche
Chaleb him selfe searched with a valiaunt courage. The promise therfore of this possession was made vnto him in the second yeare after the deliuery out of
Egypt. Chaleb surely declared a valiaunt & noble hart, when as he did not only require the possession of these places, but he enterprised also to conquere thē for al that they were fenced & inhabited with most strong giaūtes. Wherfore we must beleue, that he tooke in hand such & so great an enterprise not by his owne power but by gods promises.
And here ariseth no small doubt, howe
Chaleb being of the tribe of
Iudah,
Hebron was one of the Cities of refuge. could obtayne y
e citie of
Hebron which by lotte belonged to the
Leuites. For god had cōmaunded that certain cities as wel beyond
Iordane as on this side, should be had for refuge sake,
The cities of refuge belōged to the Leuites that thither might flye as many as had slayne any man by chaunce, and not of pretensed purpose. And the possession of those cities whiche were therfore appoynted belonged to the
Leuites. Wherfore it was not lawfull that
Hebron should be geuen to
Chaleb,
The Leuites had the citie of Hebron, but Chaleb had the grounde and Lordship. seing it was numbred amōg the cities of refuge. These thinges are true, but we must vnderstand in the meane tyme, that the
Leuites myght possesse but their cities only, & the suburbes adioyning to the walles of them. But as for the grounde or dominion whiche they call at this day Lordship, it was not graunted them to haue.
Chaleb therfore desired to
[Page] possesse the grounde, but as for the citie whiche he had in his handes, he let to the
Leuites as the lawe commaunded. It is most certein that there is mention of the citie
Hebron in the booke of
Gen. when as it is there written, that
Abraham liued in the groue of okes of
Mamere, & the same had (if we may beleue
Ierome) a precious turpentine tree, which grew there from the beginnyng of the world, and continued till the time of
Constantine the great. It is said to be
12000. paces distaunte from
Ierusalem. Dauid reigned in it some while, before he was anoynted king ouer all
Israel. Neither haue we any thyng to do to write nowe of the auncientnesse therof, seing I haue somewhat spoken of it before.
And Chaleb sayd: he that smiteth. This whole history is declared in the
15. chap. of the booke of
Iosua, word for word, wherby it appeareth that y
t is most certain whiche I before admonished you of,
The conqueryng of Debit was harde. namely that all these thinges are now mencioned by a certain repeticiō. The conquering of
Debir semeth to haue ben paynefull and daungerous, and meruelously much desired of
Chaleb, when as he offreth so ample & noble a gift to the conquerour therof: namely his owne daughter to wyfe, being him selfe the prince of the most noble tribe of
Iudah.
And Othoniel the sonne of Kenaz Chalebs younger brother tooke it. It is certain that
Othoniel obtayned the victory: but whether be were
Chalebs brother, or his brothers sonne or some other kinne to him it cānot be gathered by these words. But how they were kinne it wer good to know, partly for y
e knowledge of the history & partly to vnderstand whether the matrimony which followed betwene
Othoniel and
Achsah were lawfull. In the first booke of
Paralip.
Hefron was called also Iephuna. and second chap. the father of
Chaleb is called
Hesron, whiche man was the third frō
Iudah: for
Iudah had
Pharez by
Thamra his sonnes wife: and
Phares begat
Hefron, which was called by an other name
Iephuna, for which cause
Chaleb is very often written the sonne of
Iephuna.
R. Salomoh. Of whiche thing I can not tell what fonde inuētion
R. Salo. writeth, namely that he was so called, bycause he disagreed from the mynde and counsell of the other spyes.
Panah signifieth in Hebrew to depart or to decline, wherfore he thincketh that this surname was geuen to
Chaleb for the cause now alledged. Neither maketh that any thing agaynst it (as he sayth) that he is called the sonne of
Iephuna,
Howe the Hebrues vse this worde Sonne, sometymes. when as in the holy scriptures it is a cōmon vse, y
t this phrase, the sonne of death & the sonne of perdition, are all one with these, he is worthy of death, and a mā lost. And by the same kynd of speach (saith he) y
e sonne of declination & turning away is all one in this place, as if he had ben called declining & turning away from the counsell & wicked will of the rest of the spyes. I will not deny peraduenture but that this opiniō of
R. S. is prety,
Many of the Hebrues had two names. What Othoniel was. but yet I thincke it maketh nothing to y
e purpose. For other seme to speake more simply whiche say that
Hesron was also called
Iephuna. Wherfore
Chaleb was sometymes called the sonne of
Iephuna and sometymes the sonne of
Hesron, neither is it a rare thing or vnheard of in y
e holy scripture, that some one man should be called by two names. Nowe we se what
Chaleb was, namely the fourth from
Iudah the sonne of
Iacob: wherfore we must speake somewhat of
Othoniel. He is here written to be the sonne of
Kenaz, and so is he likewise in the boke of
Iosua,
Othoniel was also called Iā hes. and also in the first booke of
Paralip. and iiii. chap. where he is called
Iambes also, and renowmed to haue bene noble and very excellent, his mother called him
Iambez, bycause she bare him with most bitter payne, for so doth that name signifie in Hebrew: whiche the father as an vnluckye name chaūged, and in stead of
Iambez named his sonne
Othoniel. We read that the same happened vnto
Beniamin, whō the mother as she was dyeng, named
Benoni, whiche name bycause it was not very pleasaunt nor luckye,
Iacob turned and would haue him called
Beniamin for
Benoni. Neither was
Othoniel notable only in strength and feates of warre, but he was very godly and religious, for in the boke of
Paralip, and in the place now alledged his prayers are described,
[Page 19] wherwith he most faithfully called vpō God.
Three excellēt condicions in Othoniel. Wherfore the scripture testifieth that his praier was heard, the Hebrues haue added therunto y
t he was excellently wel learned in the law of the Lord. And these thre vertues in one mā are most rare, namely to be a good warriour, to be religious, and learned.
But now seing his fathers name was
Kenaz,
What kin Chaleb & Othoniel wer together. &
Chaleb had
Hesron or
Iephuna to his father, how neere of kyn were they then? Some hold opinion that
Kenaz, when
Hesron or
Iephuna was deade, maryed his wife, who had not onelye her with him, but also kept her sonne namely
Chaleb, being but a litle one, whō she had by her first husband, then they say he had
Othoniel by her, whereby they conclude that
Othoniel and
Chaleb came both of one mother, but not of one father. Wherefore
Othoniel was by nature the sonne of
Kenaz, but
Chaleb was called also the sonne of
Kenaz, bicause he &
Othoniel were brought vp together with
Kenaz. R. D. confuteth thys opinion,
R. D.
[...]imhi. bycause it is neuer red in the holye scriptures that any
Israelite tooke his surname of hys mother, and much lesse of his Stepfather:
The surnames among the Israelites wer taken of the fathers. For euery one in that publique wealth tooke alwaies their surnames of their fathers, as the
Gersonites, Merarites, &
Leuites. And by the booke of
Paralip. he saith may be knowen that that maner was so styl kept & obserued. This reason if it be true in dede, as it semeth to be probable refelleth a certaine opinion of others, which say that
Chaleb had a brother, a great deale elder thā him selfe, who was called
Kenaz, with whom
Chaleb was brought vp lyke a son together with
Othoniel Kenaz sonne. Wherfore they seming after a sorte to be both of one age, & being nourished vp together, were easelye counted brethren, namely the sōnes of
Kenaz, wher as in dede
Chaleb was
Kenaz brother. Wherfore it came to passe that they wer both of them called the sōnes of
Kenaz. This I say doth
R. D. Kimhi iudge absurde: for if no man could attayne to any kynde of surname by the mother or stepfather, then vndoubtedly coulde he not haue it by the brother. But the same
R. D.
Kimhi thinketh that they were brethren euery way, bycause they had both one father and one mother. And therefore bothe of them are called the sonnes of
Kenaz, but not by their next Parentes, but by the name of the family, seyng that both brethren were borne of one and the selfe family, what shal we then do?
The Hebrues and our mē differ among thē selues of the kinred of Othoniel & Chaleb. We are not holpen by the history which we haue in hand, & we cannot dissolue the question by the places conferred euery way together. Yea and the Iewes agree not in it among them selues, neither doo they onely vary one from an other, but our writers also write nothing like one to an other of it.
Lyranus doth vtterly deny that they wer brethren, which neuertheles
Paulus Burgensis affirmeth, yea & that more is,
Lyranus agreeth not w
t hym selfe, for as in the interpreting of the booke of
Iosua hee denyeth that they were brethren, so afterward vpon the first booke of
Paral. in the second & fourth chap. he graunteth they wer brethren. But when I more diligētly weigh the reason why in the booke of
Iosua he contendeth that they were not brethren, I gather it to be this, bicause he thought y
t if they had ben ioyned together with so neare a bond of kinred, y
t ther could haue ben no mariage, wherby
Othoniel should haue had to wife
Hachsah his brothers daughter, seing y
t it was forbidden by y
e lawe (namely y
e
.18. &
.20. chap of
Leuit.) y
t no mā should mary his aunt. Wherfore he thinketh it must nedes follow, y
t the niepce by the brother is prohibited, bicause that we are ioyned w
t the same degree of kinred to the aunt, by which y
e vncle is ioyned to y
e niepce by the brother. But if
Hachsah &
Othoniel wer brothers children, then shal this absurdity be wholy auoided: for mariage betwene these was neuer forbidden by Gods lawes. But
Burgensis a man otherwise very wel learned, contendeth y
t they wer vtterly brethren, & saith y
t the vncle might by Gods law mary his niepce by y
e brother, & that the Iewes thē selues which otherwise are most diligent obseruers of outward lawes do kepe this custome at this day. He saith moreouer, y
t it cōmeth to passe oftentimes, as concerning mariages, y
t in degrees either of consanguinity or affinity, ther is found the like distaūce betwene persons, of y
e which neuertheles the one is forbiddē, & the other graūted.
[Page] And often tymes the prerogatiue of the men and baser condicion of the wyues altereth the thing. For in matrimony man is the head of the woman, as
Paule hath said in the first to the
Corinth.
In mariages the fyrst order of kinred maye not be peruerted. Wherfore ther must alwaies bee a regarde had, that in mariage the order of kinred bee kept, least the order which was before should be peruerted. For it is meete that mariages should obserue and not violate honesty of order among men. Which honesty should he violated if euery man might take to wife hys Aunt, his vncles wife, or mothers sister. For bicause that women ioyned vnto vs by this degree of kynred are to be reuerenced as mothers. But if they be made wyues then by the law of matrimony, they are made subiectes, and ar bound to honour, to obey and reuerence their husbands, whom otherwise they ought to haue had in place of childrē. Which semeth nothing els, than to commit thinges repugnaunt to nature. But if it be contraryly done, then is there no peruerting of order incurred. For hee which is an vncle either by fathers syde or mothers syde shoulde be honoured and reuerenced lyke a father, when he taketh to wyfe his niepce, the husband is made her head, and shalbe honoured and obeyed of her no lesse than if he wer her vncle, eyther by the fathers syde or mothers syde, neither commeth there any perturbation of order by coniunction of matrimony. These thinges
Burgensis alledgeth. Wherfore this place doth not onely admonish, but in a maner also cōpel vs, somwhat to entreate of degrees prohibited in contracts of matrimony. Yet wil I leaue at liberty whether
Chaleb &
Othoniel wer brethren, or whether they were ioyned with any other affinity together. This is most certain if
Othoniel wer y
e sonne of
Chaleb his brother, the mariage then was very lawfull. But the state of the question is, whether it wer lawfull for
Othoniel by the common lawe to marye hys brothers daughter.
In the law are not rehersed all the degrees in which maryages ar prohibited.This seemeth first to bee agreed vpon, that in the
.18. &
.20. chap of
Leuit. are not rehearsed al persons or degrees, in which mariages are prohibited: for there is no mencion made of Graundmother, when as neuertheles al men wyll confesse it to be most filthy, if anye man shoulde take to wife his Graundmother, which is farre aboue him in his yeares. The wife also of the Graundfather is not mēcioned of: & though the wife of the vncle by the fathers side be spoken of, yet is there nothing spoken of the wife of the vncle by the mothers syde. Yea, & that we more maruayle at, there is no prohibition for the father to marye hys daughter, when as al men confesse that these mariages are most incest. Wherfore it is to be thought, that in that place are set forth by the holy ghost certayne degrees prohibited, & those not many, but yet such, that by them as by certain exquisite and manifest rules we may iudge of the like. Wherfore we must thinke that those thinges which are spoken of the mother, are also commaunded of the Graundfather or Graundmother or wife of the Grandfather, seing that al these are to bee reckoned for Parentes. Those thinges also whych are spoken of the wife of the vncle by the fathers syde, do manyfestly declare, what is to be done with the wife of the vncle by the mothers side. For as much as these aliaunces or degrees are of one space or distaunce one from an other. Wherefore I am of this opinion, that I thinke the prohibitions mencioned in the law, are therefore set forth that by them we might euidently vnderstand, what is meete to doo in the lyke degrees. I graunt neuerthelesse, concerning
Paulus Burgensis reason, that they doo muche more violate the law which do concract matrimonies with persons forbiddē,
Who syn more greuouslye against the degrees prohibited.
It is vncertain whether the Iewes doo abyde in y
e right obseruyng of their lawe. and therwithal peruerting also the order of kinreds. For it semeth to me that he doth farre more vilye which marrieth his Graundmother, than he which marryeth his niexce by the brother, although I thinke that bothe these matrimonies are not lawful.
What the Hebrewes do in our time I passe not much to know: yea I much doubt of that which
Paulus Burgensis taketh vnto him as a thing sure & manyfest, namely that the Iewes are at this day most diligent in obseruing of theyr outward lawes. For me thinketh that I should doo well in not geuing to them
[Page 20] more dignity or religion than to Christians. Wherfore as it is manifest inough that we haue for mens traditions very much straied from the right obseruation of the comaundementes of God, and also from the right knowledge of the scriptures: so is it also lykely that the same hath happened vnto the Iewes, especially in this our age. Wherfore I am not iniurious against them, whē as I wyl not geue more to them, than to our selues.
The Iewes haue added mani other degres to the degrees expressed of god Neuertheles I wil not omit that the
Rabines haue added to their prohibited degrees in the law many more as wel in ascending as descending, which I see the most learned man
Paulus Fagius hath declared in his annotacions vpon
Leuit. nether can I be perswaded that they wer added by them for any other cause, but onely bicause they thought that those degrees wer comprehended in the degrees expressed by God.
What we must haue a respecte vnto, in iudging of degres. Wherefore to geue iudgement of any lawful mariages, that shal not be sufficient in my iudgemēt, if the degree wherin they are contracted, shal not be prohibited by manifest & proper wordes in the law, neither the order of kinred peruerted, for it maye be that the like degree, & of the same distaunce be forbidden by authority of the law.
The scripture declareth not by manyfest wordes the peruertyng of order, which is to be taken heede of in mariages. Nether doth the scripture as far as I can see, alledge in any place y
e reason concerning peruerting of order, although (as I haue before said) I doo not vtterly abiect that reason. Some man peraduenture wil saye: what matter is it for vs of this age, either to know or els to obserue those preceptes which ar contained in the
.18. &
.20. chap. of
Leuit. seing that we after the cōming of Christ are no more bounde to the ciuill lawes of the Iewes? I confesse that the Christians are not bound to the ciuil preceptes of the law: but yet I ascribe those preceptes whych are there geuē for mariages not to ciuil lawes, but rather to moral. And I think that I maye bring a reason out of the same place to confirme my sentence. For God, when he gaue those lawes, added these wordes therunto:
The Chananites ar reproued bicause thei had defiled thē selues with incest Take hede therfore, that ye defile not your selues with whordomes & such incestes, as the Gentiles haue done, whom I haue driuen out of those regions which I haue now geuen vnto you, for for bicause those nations haue ben polluted with so grieuous wicked actes I haue therfore so destroied them, & will do y
t like vnto you, except ye shal diligently auoid those thinges, which I cōmaund you as touching these euils. I thinke no man wil doubt but that the
Chananites whych receaued not the law by
Moyses, neither wer Citizens of the publike wealth of the
Israelites, could not by that law be condemned, bicause they obeyed not the lawes of the Hebrues. They wer subiect only to the law, which is called morall. Wherfore seing God for that cause reproueth them, bicause they wer defiled with such fylthy lustes & incestes, & affirmeth that for the same cause he depriued them both of their lande and lyfe: it is manifest that these lawes must bee ioyned not to ciuil preceptes but to morall, which al men are bound to obserue.
Neuertheles this semeth at the first sight to be against this sentence,
Abrahā & Amram seeme to haue maryed prohibited wyues. bicause
Abraham (a man otherwise most holy) is thought to haue maried his Brothers daughter namely
Sara. Amram also had
Iochabed his aunt to wife, of whom he begat
Moyses, Aaron, &
Mary. And it semeth that so godly & holy mē would not haue done this, if the moral law (as we haue saide) had bene against it.
The law of nature was darkned by synne. To thys we answer, first y
t the law of nature was much blotted by corruption & wickednes, which ouerwhelmed al mankind sone after synne, & for y
e cause they whych contracted such matrimonies, thought peraduenture that the same wer lawful, and therfore although they cannot altogether bee excused by that ignoraunce, yet it is to be thought that they committed lesse synne, than those which durst do such thinges after the lawe was geuen. I adde moreouer, that amonge the fathers certaine thinges are now and then spoken of,
It is not certaine whether Abrahā & Amram maried prohibited wyues. which other men must not take example of, whē as they are somtimes to be interpreted as prerogatiues or certain priueleges geuen to thē. But how soeuer it be, we may not (as I think) much labour to excuse y
e fathers in althings. Although I know there be which do say y
t
Sara was not the daughter of
Abrahams brother, but som other way of
[Page] and therfore she might be called his sister after the auncient maner of speaking, as though she were of some kinred vnto him, but yet not so nere kyn, but that they might mary together. And in like maner they say of the kinred of
Amram and
Iochabed. But I wyl omit these thinges, seing that the whole matter may be made playne by these two kinde of answers before alledged.
It might also be demaunded, if the preceptes of Matrimonye be morall, and pertaine to the lawe of Nature, why God woulde also constitute them in hys lawes?
The ten cōmaū dementes were blotted in the hartes of men before the law. Bycause the lyght of nature was come to that poynt that it was not sufficient, the brightnesse of it was daylye more and more blotted in the hartes of men: which thing doth manyfestlye appeare not onelye in these, but also in the tenne commaundementes, where it is commaunded that men should abstayne from theft and murther, and yet we reade in hystories that robbyng on the sea, and also on the lande got suche dominion,
Plato. that they were counted ful of honour and dignity.
Plato in hys fyft booke of lawes thought, that concerning procreation of children we should abstayne from Mothers, Graundmothers, and the degrees aboue them. Again from Daughters, Niepces, & degrees beneath them. But as for other persons he made free.
Ierome.
Hierome testifieth in his seconde booke against
Iouiniane, that the Scottes in his tyme had no certaine mariages, but they accompanied with their women as they lusted them selues, euen suche as came first to hande. He sayth moreouer, that the
Medes, Indians, Ethiopes, and
Persians confusedly contracted Matrimonies with their mothers, sisters, daughters, and Niepces: which semeth neuerthelesse to disagree with that which
Heroditus writeth of the
Persians. For
Cambyses (as he testifieth) desired to marye hys sister, for the which thing he asked counsel of his Lawyers and wyse men, and demaunded of them whether that matrimony wer lawful or no. To whom they answered, that they in dede had no law, by the which it myght be lawfull for the Brother to mary the Sister, but yet they had an other law among them, whereby it was lawful for the king of the
Persians to do what so euer him selfe lusted. Surely they answered wel in their first part of their answer, but in the latter part they most filthily flattered the tyranne. Howbeit the thyngs whych are written by this Historiographer (although sometymes he wryte fables) and those thinges which
Ierome writeth, vary not. Bycause the vulgare people being now corrupted with fylthy and wycked custome, contracted suche matrimonies, the wyser sorte neuerthelesse, in whom the lawe of nature dyd shyne, vnderstoode that the same were not lawful, althoughe beyng blynded wyth couetousnes they abstained not from them. Whom
Paule to the
Romaines hath greuously reprehended, saying: which men, though they knowe the righheousnes of God,
Incestuous persons haue afterward abhorred those whō they haue poluted. not onely doo suche thinges, but also haue pleasure in them that do them. And these matrimonies by their own nature are so well knowen to be vnlawfull, that they dryue an exceading great horrour into them whych do heare that such thinges haue bene done: yea and they them selues which haue commytted the same, when their lust asswaged, semed to abhorre those whom they haue polluted.
Cynara & Myrrha. The Poetes make mencion of
Cynara and
Myrrha hys daughter, how after the father vnderstoode that he had accompanied wyth hys daughter, yea, euen vnwares so hated her, that he persecuted her al that euer he might.
Ammō beganne so to hate hys syster
Thamra whom he had defyled,
Incest almost haue euer had horrible endes.
Ptholomey. that he commaunded her to bee violentlye thrust out of hys syght. Thou shalt also neuer almoste fynde if thou looke in histories, that incestuous mariages or carnal copulations came to good ende.
Ptholomey kyng of
Egipt tooke to wyfe by fraude and guile hys syster
Euridices,
Anthonius Carocalla. Nero. which the Historiographers and especially
Iustine haue manifestly set foorth to haue had yl successe.
Anthonius Caracalla who maryed hys stepmother, and
Nero whych committed fylthye fornication with hys mother, came not onelye to a most vnhappye ende, but according to their desertes they were wonderfully hated of the people, and were openly called Monsters of humane
[Page 21] nature. Wherefore we graunt both, that these commaundementes which do prohibite those sinnes pertayne to the law of nature, and were for iust cause renued by God in his morall lawes.
It may also be manifestly ynough declared by an other reason,
Romaine lawes forbad y
e mariage of the brothers daughter. y
e incestuous mariages were forbidden by the light of nature, seing that they were earnestly forbidden by the
Romane lawes, which were counted among the excellentest & honestest lawes, & these by name, wherby any man should marrye his niepce by the brother. Although
Claudius Caesar whē he would marry his brothers daughter
Agrippina, caused the fyrst law to be abrogated, and to be decreed that euery man might haue his brothers daughter to wife. But there was neuer a one at
Rome except it were one or two which would follow his example. And y
e
Romaines obserued the first law which was most honest.
The Romaine lawes in prohibiting mariages had certaine lawes not mentioned by God. Neuerthelesse we muste vnderstand, y
e diuerse persons were prohibited by the lawes of the
Romanes, of whom the law of god hath made no mention, and yet their prohibition was not without a reason. Wherfore the Citizens of
Rome were bound to obserue thē, although by the light of nature they could see no cause why they should so doe, which lawes were wont to be called a peculiar kinde of lawes, bicause it semeth to be priuate for certain places. I will make the thing more plaine by examples.
The tutor might not marry his pupill. The
Romaines would not as it is written in
Codice that matrimonies shoulde be contracted betwene the tutor and pupill committed to his charge. Bycause they saw that this would easely come therby, that that tutor which had consumed his pupils goodes, least he should be compelled after his tutorship to render accompt of those goods, might sollicite the mayden to mariage, which being obtained, he should be free from geuing accompt of her goods. This surely was a good law, but yet it was not perfectly obserued.
Cicero otherwise a graue man,
Cicero. was euill spoken of for the same cause: for being farre in other mens debt, when he had forsakē his wife
Terence, he maried his pupill, of whose goods & affayres he had charge ouer as a tutor.
The
Romanes deceeed also,
A prisident myght not marry a wife of hys prouince. that no president of any prouince should take to wife eyther to himselfe or to any of hys, any out of the same prouince wherein he gouerned. For they knew right wel, that it might so happen, that the
Pretor Proconsul, or
President in a prouince cleauing to his families and kynsfolke cō ming to him by his wife, might make new tumultes, and at length be alienated from the publique wealth. They saw also a great daunger to hang theron, least he should not be iuste and seuere in geuing iudgement, bycause he woulde gratifie his kinsfolke more than others. Lastly mariages shoulde not haue remayned at libertie in prouinces, bicause Magistrates might in a manner compel thē of the prouince to contracte matrimonies either with thēselues,
Felix had a Iew to hys wife. or w
t their frendes. We see also this most honest law violated. For
Faelix which gouerned
Iewrye vnder
Nero, as it is writtē in the xxiiii. chap. of the actes of the Apostles, had
Drusilla a Iewe to wife. But what nede I rehearse that these lawes of a small weyght were not obserued, whē as that people had shaken of, euen those lawes which we called morall and are knowen by y
e law of nature?
Cicero. The monstrug lust of Sassia.
Cicero declareth in his oratiō for
Cluentius, y
e one
Sassia a most wicked womā, was so prouoked w
t filthy lust, y
t she instigated her sonne in law
Aurius Melinus, to whō she had before maried her daughter, to repudiate his wife, wherby he shuld marry her self in stead of her daughter: which thīg at y
e lēgth she got him to do. And whē y
e dede was coūted ful of dishonesty, yet was it not punished by the lawes, neither do we rede that y
e matrimonye, whiche
Cicero cōtendeth to be cōtracted by no good grounds, by no authors, & altogether vnluckely, was dissolued by y
e power & cō maūdemēt of y
e magistrates. Wherfore hereof cōmeth a good reasō also, why god would againe inculcate by a law those things whiche by y
e light of nature were iudged honest. For y
e bonds, barres, & windowes of nature, were brokē by y
e impotent lust of mē, therfore it was necessary they should be boūd w
t an other bond
[Page] For the Israelites were no more shamefast in keping of natural honestye, than were the
Romaines. Neither is this to be left out, y
e god had certaine proper things in his law, whiche may be called peculiar thinges: for all men were not bound vnto thē by y
e lawe of nature, but the Hebrues onely. For he woulde not haue them to contracte matrimony with the
Chananites, Hamorrites, Iebusites, &c. And other people seme not to haue bene bounde to y
e law, neither should we at this day (if there were such nations still,
Matrimonyes ought not to be contracted in cōtrary religiō
Augustine.) be letted, but that we might ioyne our selues in matrimony with them. Although the cause of y
e law, ought at this day to be holden: which cause is, y
e matrimonies shoulde not be contracted with them which be of a contrary religion. For it is not conuenient that the Godlye should be ioyned with the vngodly. I know that
Augustine writeth concerning vnlawfull mariages to
Pollentius in the second booke and of the Sermon of the Lord vpon the Mountaine, y
t there is not a place in the new Testament, wherin by expresse words, matrimonies with infidels are prohibited. But of this matter I will not write much at this present, seing that I haue largely entreated of it in the Epistle to the Corinthians. This will I saye more ouer, that a good man ought in contracting of matrimonyes, to follow chiefly that which is honest, and not lightly to depart frō cōmendable orders & vsuall customes which are not agaynst y
e word of god. And if there happen peraduenture any doubt, let him not thinke it much to aske coūcell of his magistrate, otherwise he shal rashly put both himselfe, his wife and his children to daunger. For if he be maryed in any of the degrees prohibited by the peculiar law, he shal not then be counted a husband, but a whoremonger, and his wife a harlot, & their childrē bastardes. Howbeit the magistrate, although concerning matrimonie he maye forbid certaine other contractes besides those which God hath forbidden, yet can he not, neither ought he to remit any of those which God hath commaunded, & whiche he hath prohibited by his law, yea he must most diligently see that he burthē not the people to much,
The pope hath grieuously sinned concerning these lawes. or without an earnest cause, as we see the Pope hath done, who hath two wayes sinned in this thing: fyrst in that he durst vsurpe the office of making of lawes in a common wealth, which vndoubtedly pertaineth not vnto him, Secondly bicause in his lawes he followed not the word of god, but with out reason forbad fyrst al degrees euen to the seuenth, which when he saw afterward was not obserued, and al was ful of confusion, he cut of his prohibitions to the fourth degree. In which thing he is yet constant & hardened, if there come no money in, but if money be offred (wherof he must haue much brought hym to fyl his filthy cofers) he setteth at libertie as pleaseth him, both his own lawes and the word of god.
This we must also knowe, that God had in his lawes an other decree whiche may lawfully be called peculiar, bycause it extendeth no way to other nations, neither ought it to be in force at all tymes. And that was, that when any husband deceased without children, the brother which remained on liue, or some other next of kynne, should mary the first mans wife left, so that the first childe which should be begotten of that mariage shoulde be counted the sonne of hym that was dead, and should fully succede him as touching his inheritaunce. For God would not in that publique wealth, that men should altogether be extinguished, and he prouided that the same distinction of landes shoulde be kepte as much as might be. And seing the same is not vsed in our publique wealthes, neither hath God commaunded that it shoulde, it therfore pertayneth nothyng vnto vs. Wherfore we must keepe oure selues vnder the generall and common lawe,
She that is left of y
e kinnesman ought to he maryed. namely that no man presume to mary the wife of his brother being dead although he dyed without children.
Let vs also knowe that in the beginning, when onely the familie of
Adam lyued on the earth, brethren were not forbidden as they were afterwarde
[Page 22] For brethren were driuen of necessity to mary their sisters. But afterward whē men were increased in number, shame shewed it selfe forth, and they began by the instinction of God, or by nature, either to abstayn from prohibited persons, or at the least to know that such coniunctions were ful of ignominye. But what tyme they began first to abstaine, it appeareth not by the history.
The Gods of the H
[...]
[...] ried
[...]h
[...] Systers. Peraduenture the Heathen Poetes haue declared that necessity of the elders whych compelled the famyly of the first Parentes to constrayne the brother to mary the Syster, when as they fable that their Gods had their Systers to wyues: for the chiefe of them, namelye
Iupiter had
Iuno, whych in
Virgil speaketh thus of her selfe:
But I whych walke the Quene of the Gods both syster and wyfe to Iupiter.
And although the woorde of God,
Causes
[...] manye deg
[...]es in mariages a
[...] forbydden.
Augustine. and instincte of nature were sufficient by them selues to make vs to abstayne from the foresayde coninunctions, yet are there many good causes of prohibition alledged by diuers wryters.
Augustine in hys .xv. booke
De ciuitate dei and .xvi. chap. writeth that the same abstinence was very profitable to dilate more amplye the bondes of humane fellowshyp. For if mariages should be included wythin the walles of one family, thē should there come no kynreds with others. Furthermore, it is not meete, that one and the selfe man should occupye the persons of diuers kynredes, namelye that one man should be both vncle and husband of one woman, and the same woman to be both Aunt and wyfe of one man. Which reason
Cicero also hath touched in hys fyft booke
Definibus, and also
Plutarch in his
.108. probleme. And they being both Ethnickes could not haue sene this but being illustrate by the light of nature. This also is the third reason, bicause these persons, from whom we should abstain, do dwel together often tymes in one house. Wherefore if there shoulde be manye maryed folkes together, they woulde not vse them selues so grauelye and seuerely as domestical shamefastnes requireth.
Plutarch. The causes of strife betwene kinsfolk ought to be cut of.
Plutarch in the place before sayde, hath set forth two other reasons, besydes those which we haue declared: One is, bycause betwene kynsfolkes, discordes are to be feared. For they would soone complayne that the right of kynred should be taken away: whych saying I doo vnderstand thus, if eyther she or he which should ouerskyp the nearer degre, and marry with the degree farther of, she which were nearer would thinke that she had iniury done vnto her, as though in ouerskipping her, he would put her to shame: as it is a common vse in wylles and Testamentes, where they which are nyghest of kynne maye not nor oughte not to bee forgotten of hym which maketh the wyll. And in the lawe for raysing vp seede to the brother already deceased, the fyrst place must be geuen to the nyghest of kynne, who if hee refused to vse hys right, was made ashamed, as that law doth more amplye declare the same. Wherefore seyng discordes betwene al men are to be abhorred,
Womē for that they are weake ought not to haue their patrimonies diminished but increased. much more are they vtterly to be detested betwene kynsfolkes.
Plutarch also bryngeth an other reason, bycause women are weake, and therefore they haue neede of many & sundry patrones, wherefore when they are maryed to straunge men, if they shoulde be euyll handled by their husbandes, as often tymes they are, they haue al their kynsfolkes easely for Patrones: but if they be wyues to their own kynsfolkes, and happen to be euil entreated of them, they should then haue very fewe to defende their cause. For other kynsfolkes woulde not bee so ready, for their sakes to fall out with their own kynne, which they woulde not be greued to doo wyth straungers.
But nowe that I am in hande wyth
Plutarch, I remember that whych he hath wrytten in the syxt probleme,
Of the matrimoni of brethrē and Systers chyldren.
Plutarch. and I thinke it is
[...] vnprofitable to declare it, although it seme to disagree from that whych
Augustine wryteth in hys .xv. booke
De ciuitate dei .xvi. chapter of the matrimony of Brothers and Systers chyldren. For he affirmeth there, that before hys tyme, the same was lawfull, although those kyndes of maryages semed very rare, bycause men after a sorte
[Page] eschewed to contracte with persons so nigh: but he saith that y
e licence was afterward taken away. Which I surely can not perceaue in y
e
Romane lawes, which were publikely receaued & allowed: which yet wer vsed thorough out
Aphrica. Wherefore it maye seme obscure to some of what lawes
Augustine speaketh, wherby he sayth that in his time those kindes of matrimonyes were prohibited. But we must vnderstand, that in his time the law of
Theodosius the elder was of force, who was the fyrst among the Emperoures that I know of, which prohibited matrimonye of this degree. Which also
Aurelius Victor and
Paulus Diaconus do testifye. And that is found at this day writtē in the boke called
Codex Theodosianus, concerning incestuous mariages, by these wordes. Let this sentence remaine concerning them, whosoeuer from henceforth shall defyle hymself with the mariage of his cousin
Germaine, or of his sisters daughter, or of his brothers daughter, or of his wiues daughter, lastly of al whose mariage is forbidden and condemned. But that law is not in these dayes found in y
e
Digestes, neither in the booke of the
Code, nor in the
Authentikes. Which neuerthelesse
Clother the king followed, as it is red in the lawes of the
Almaines, entituled of vnlawfull mariages, yea and it is confirmed by the ecclesiasticall Canons and decrees in
Gracian. 35. Question the second and third, also by the counsel of
Agathen in the
61. Canon. And
Gregorye the fyrst in the same place is found to be of the same opinion in the chap.
Quaedam ex Romana, &c. This answereth to the sixth interrogation of
Augustine Bishop of Cantorbury, and affyrmeth that those which be ioyned by the degree of cousin
Germaines, ought to abstaine from contracting of matrimony one with an other. Yea and long before
Gregorye his time,
Ambrose hath in his
66. Epistle
ad Paternum, condemned the mariage of brethrens children, & he testifieth that it was forbiddē by the law of
Theodosius which I haue also brought. And if I should vse coniecture, I thinke
Theodosius did it by the persuasion of
Ambrose, who had a singular respecte to publique honestie. Neither was that law so seuere at that time, but that sometimes it might be released as he declareth in that Epistle to
Paternus. In that
Ambrose affyrmeth there that such mariages were prohibited by Gods lawe, It can be made probable to none, which shall attentiuely consider the wordes of the law of god, and doings of the fathers. How the
Romanes haue behaued themselues, toward their cousins, as concernyng matrimonyes in the old time, this I haue obserued
Ligustine sayth in the
2. booke and
5. decade of
Liuy, that his father gaue him his Vncles daughter to wife.
Cicero also writeth in hys oration for
Cluentius, that
Cluentia had lawfully maryed her cousin
Germaine M. Aurius. And
M. Anthonius the Philosopher tooke to wife
Faustina his cousin
Germaine, as
Iulius Capitolinus testifieth. And before
Rome was builded the mariages of
Turnus and
Lauinia were in hand, which came of two sisters. Howbeit
Plutarch writeth in the place aboue mentioned, that at the fyrst when
Rome was builte, it was forbidden by a lawe, that they whiche were nighe of kinne shoulde not marrye together. But yet he writeth that the lawe for brethren and sisters children, was vppon thys occasion released, bycause a certayne man beyng both honeste, and also well beloued of the people of
Rome, when he was greuouslye oppressed with pouertye toke to wife his sisters daughter which was ryche, and welthye, for the whiche cause he was accused of inceste. But the matter being decided, he was quyted by the iudgemente of the people of
Rome: for he was greatly fauoured in the citye. Then after that, it was decreed by the consent of the people of
Rome that from thence forth it shoulde be lawfull for brethren and sisters children to marry together. These thinges I thought good to declare of this kinde of matrimonye both out of Gods lawes, and the old & new lawes of the
Romanes, and also out of the fathers and ecclesiasticall Canons.
[Page 23] Whereunto I will adde that there be very many Cities professing the gospell whiche do not admitte the mariages of brethren and sisters children, as
Surike, Berna, Basile, Schapusin, Sangallum, Biema, &c. In the kingdome also of England when I was there, that degree was excluded from matrimony. Wherfore in places where the magistrate forbyddeth these mariages the faithful ought for those causes whiche I haue before declared to abstayne from them.
But now I will go to the present matter, If
Othoniel as I haue before sayd were cousin vnto
Achsa, he might mary her by the lawe of God: but if he were her vnckle, it was not lawful by the cōmō lawe. But he maried her. Wherfore we must nedes saye one of these two thinges: either that it was a faulte, for the fathers as we haue before sayd were not alwayes free from sinne: or elles that god would haue this done by a priuilege or certain prerogatiue, whiche we may not for all that take example by. Neither is this to be forgottē, that after the accustomed manner of Scriptures,
Kinsfolkes in scriptures are called brethren they whiche were any way of kinne together were called brethren, as
Loth is called the brother of
Abraham, & the kinsfolkes of
Iesus Christ the sonne of God are called in the history of the gospel his brethrē. So may it also be in this place that
Othoniel may be called the brother of
Chaleb, when as he was but only some other waye of kinne vnto him. And the interpretours do vse this expositiō oftē times, which I would not disallow, but y
t I se this particle in the texte,
The yonger, whiche is not wont to be added, but when sisters and brethren in dede are compared together. But now wil I go to other thinges whiche are to be considered in this history.
Chaleb had promised him which should cōquere the citie of
Debir,
Whether Chalebs promisse were a rashe promisse. his daughter to wife. What if any wicked persone had performed that, should he by the vertue of the promise haue ben made y
e sonne in law of
Chaleb? surely it semeth not. For what other thing had this ben, than to betraye his daughter? Therfore it may appeare that he promised rashly. For a wise man ought to foresee those thinges whiche might happen. How be it we must consider that there were not at that tyme such wicked and flagitious men among the Israelites, for as long as those elders lyued, whiche gouerned the publicque wealth together with
Iosua, as it shalbe declared in this hystory, the people feared god. Wherfore it followeth, that they vsed to put those to death by the lawe whiche were guiltie of very grieuous crimes. Therfore there was no daunger lest any such mā should conquere the citie, to whom for that act
Hacsah should be geuen to wife of duetye. But if there remayned certaine smal and common faultes in him which had conquered it, the same might be recompenced by his other vertues. For there is is none so absolute and perfect, but that some times he may fal. Moreouer there were some hope of amendement of life. And the conquerour might be so nighe of kynne, as peraduēture this
Othoniel was, that he could not mary the daughter of
Chaleb. Wherfore it seemeth that at the least in that part it was a rashe promise. But I do not thincke it can be accused of rashenesse,
A constant rule of all humane promises. for as much as all promises ought among the godly so farre forth to be of force, as they do agree with the word of god, which thing if
Iepthe had diligently considered, he would neuer haue suffred hym selfe to haue committed so vnworthy thinges agaynst his daughter. This cōdition surely in all couenaunts and promises ought to be counted for a most constant rule.
We gather also hereby, that it is lawfull to go about a wife by iust wayes and meanes, as we se
Othoniel now to haue done: and as also holy
Dauid did,
A man by iuste meanes may go about a wife. who did not only kill
Goliah the giaūt, but also he gaue
Saule an hundreth forekynnes of the Philistianes, for the obteyning of
Michol to wife. We are hereby taught also, that wise parentes ought to seke them a sonne in law, not by riches not by power or nobilitie, but by vertue. Now of days they do not so,
Howe a sonne in a lawe should be sought. and therfore the miserable daughters are very often tymes betrayed by their parentes, and very many mariages haue vnhappy successe. Wherfore I can not discommend
[Page] the sayeng of
Themistocles,
The sayeng of Themistocles. who being demaunded why he had preferred a poore man to be his sonne in law before a riche and wealthy man, he aunswered: that he had rather haue a sonne in law whiche wanted money, thā to haue money wanting a man.
It is lawfull to set rewardes for good dedesWe learne moreouer by this history, that it is lawfull for princes to stirre vp men couragiously to enterprise honest actes, and whiche they ought otherwise of dutye to haue done, to set forth vnto them some rewardes. For we see that
Chaleb did so nowe, and also
Saul, when he promised his daughter to hym whiche could kill
Goliah, and we remember
Christ hath promised them an hundreth fold in this life,
Good & honest actions are of them selues to be sought for. whiche for his sake should leaue father and mother, children and brothers. Wherfore we must knowe that good & honest actions, are by them selues sufficient to be sought for, for asmuch as in this worlde nothyng can happen more sweater, thā to obey god, & with a good conscience to be ioyned vnto him, in liuing vprightly according to his cōmaundementes. Wherfore admitte we should obtayne no other thing, yet a sufficient reward & gayne should be rendred vnto vs,
Why God set forth rewardes and giftes. if we may haue a quiet and pacified conscience, and be inwardly filled with spirituall ioye, but god (such is his goodnesse) would moreouer set forth vnto vs giftes and rewardes. For he seeth the disposition & nature of a mā to be feable and flowe to all thinges that be good, healthfull and honest: he would therfore stirre vp the same by promising manifold & sondry rewardes, whiche kinde of remedy we had not neded, if we had continued perfect and absolute, as we were created. Who I pray you, nedeth with reward to be stirred vp to drincke whē he is thursty, or to eate whē he is hūgry? surely no body. Wherfore neither nede men, if they hungred and thrusted for righteousnesse, (as they ought to do) a rewarde to stirre them vp to it. A mother also vseth not to be intised with rewardes to geue sucke, to feede, and care for her own child, that it perish not.
Promises and threatnynges are added in y
e lawe to the cō maundements. Wherfore the promises of god are therfore necessary vnto men, bicause they by reason of synne haue waxed colde from a vehement affection and zeale toward godly and holy workes, we be altogether dull and sluggishe to the offices of godlinesse and righteousnesse: wherfore God of his gētlenesse would adde spurres of promises: which appeareth most manifestly in the law, where almost for euery cōmaundement are both threatninges & also promises added. Wherfore seing holy men haue done this oftentimes, seing also the lawe of God hath done so, and the same is found in the new testament, we may conclude without doubte that it is lawfull. For then is that whiche we do, to be allowed, when it agreeth with the example of god him selfe, and rule of the scriptures, or els with the excellent actes of holy men.
Whether it be lawfull to do good for rewardes sake.But now must we se, whether he whiche doth good workes, and performeth y
e whiche he is bounde to do by the lawe of God, ought to be moued with hope of the reward, or whether rather he should only haue a regard to goodnesse, righteousnesse and gods pleasure? To aunswere to this question, I thincke that thys must be the first grounde, that a man is not only appoynted to some certein end, whē as god doeth nothing rashly or by chaunce, but also he is appoynted to many endes, which neuerthelesse are so ioyned together, y
t they do mutually serue and helpe one an other by a certain order.
How mā is appointed to an end. First we are created to set forth the glory of God: then that by the sight and perfect knowledge of God we shoulde come to be happy: and that whilest we liue here, we should lyue together among our selues in an acceptable fellowship to God. Souldiours do therfore beare weapons and make warres, to defende honest and iust causes, and that in that sorte by whiche God in his lawes hath commaunded to be defended, which men moreouer ought so to be encouraged to bring this thing to passe, that thoughe there were no other reward or gift comming vnto them, yet ought they to enterprise it. Moreouer men vse to fight to defend their country, wiues, children, kinsfolkes, & friendes. And if so be that they besides these looke for iust stipēdes,
[Page 24] whereby they may honestly norishe both thē selues & theirs, no man will counte that for a vice in them.
For what things we may auoyde wicked actes. For the Apostle hath sayd in the first Epistle to the
Cor. Who goeth on warfarre at his owne cost? But now to descend to things more perticular, when any mā tempereth him selfe from any grieuous wicked act, he ought to do y
e first to the entent he may obey the cōmaundementes of God, as it is mete. Then that therby he may escape either eternal or ciuile punishementes. Moreouer that he may not offend the myndes of the brethren, and plucke them backe from a holy conuersation and pure life, by his wicked example, and finally that by his wickednesse he prouoke not the wrath of God, either against him selfe or his familye, or against the people. Wherfore it is manifest, that the end of our actions is not simple, but sundry and manifolde.
And this being thus finished and concluded, we must diligently take hede,
Whiche end is to be preferred before the rest. that when many endes are set before vs, we may preferre that before the rest, whiche by good right excelleth the rest. For if it should be otherwise done, and if those thinges whiche are hindermost and of smaller valew should be preferred before the better, we should be iustly condemned for peruertyng the order of thinges. Wherfore we must take hede, that we directe not God him selfe or the worshipping of him, either to our owne commoditie, or els to any other endes. For thē should that surely happen vnto vs which
Augustine doth so sore detest,
Augustine. y
t we should haue the fruition of those things which we only ought to vse, & contrariwise we should vse those things which we should haue the fruition of, than which peruersenesse in humane actions no worse thyng cā be thought.
What is the chief peruersenes of humane actions. Wherfore when it is demaūded, whether it be lawful in well doyng to haue a respect to the gayne or rewarde. We can not well deny but y
t it is lawfull: for as much as god him selfe hath promised a reward to them whiche lyue godly: neither did God that for any other cause thā by his giftes and allurements to stirre vp men to iust, good, godly and holy workes.
Neither is the rewarde onely to be desired, neither y
e chief partes must be ascribed vnto it But although we do not vniustly in hauing a regarde vnto the reward offred vs by God, whē we are occupied in good workes: yet this is diligently to be taken hede of, that we be not moued onely bycause of the rewarde whiche is offred vs. Neither is this sufficient, for if a mā would say that he would in doing good both obtayne the rewarde set forth, and by the same worke obey God, he must take hede, that he attribute not the chiefest partes to the gift or rewarde, bycause alwayes (as I haue already sayd) that among the endes eche of them as he is more excellent by nature, so ought it to be preferred in the first place. And in this there nedeth a singular diligence: bycause it oftentimes happeneth, that we deceaue our selues, falsly supposing that nothing is more excellent or dearer to our mindes than god, from whom neuerthelesse we are by litle and litle withdrawen and plucked backe by reason of to much desire and delite of reward or gift. Wherfore it afterward happeneth,
If we preferre other things before god we incurre into grieuous punishementes. that we come to great miseries therby: For when god perceaueth y
t we more esteme those thinges, whiche ought to be of lesse estimation with vs, he withdraweth them away, lest they should more and more plucke vs away from him. Whiche thing happened many tymes to the Israelites, frō whom God sometymes toke away riches, libertie, and the promised lande, to call them agayne to him selfe, whom they lesse estemed than their riches, possessions, and also Idols. Wherfore those thinges being marked and obserued whiche I haue rehearsed, I doubt not but that it is lawfull for godly men after the sincere & earnest desire of God to do good for rewarde and gift.
Neither am I ignoraunt that
Bernarde writeth in his litle booke of louyng of God, that charitie by it selfe can not be empty, althoughe it behold no reward.
Bernarde. &c. By which words he putteth vs in mynde of two things: both that y
e workes of charitie in them selues haue so much delectatiō, pleasure and commoditie, as may be sufficient for them whiche lyue well, although of that their well doyng they should haue no other rewarde geuen them of God. And that we in louyng
[Page] of God should looke for no other reward, but this, that he according to his goodnesse wil not suffer, but faithfully to rendre those things which are to be rēdred vnto vs. And therfore no man ought chiefly to be moued with the desyre of the rewarde.
A comparison of the loue of the children & of the wife. And he addeth, that he doth farre preferre the loue of the wyfe toward her husband before the loue and obeysaunce wherwith the children loue the father. For as much as the sonnes do so loue their father, bycause they hope they shalbe enriched of him by his inheritaunce: wherfore their loue (as he thincketh) is not so pure. But the wife if she be such a one as she ought to be, she wisheth good to her husband for his owne cause and his owne sake, although she hopeth or looketh to obtayne no good at his hand. Many haue thought that the sentēce of this father ought to be allowed, & haue gone about to make playne the same by a certain distinction not so circumspectly inuēted by them in my opinion: for they affirme that we may measure God or his nature by our worthynes, or that we may beholde him, according as our perfection & vprightnesse is. Moreouer they say that we must do what soeuer we do, for his sake in the first consideration, and not in respect that he is our chief goodnesse and felicitie. And this they thincke that
Bernarde ment by the wordes now alledged. For they bryng these words which he writeth in another place,
We must worship god also in that he is our felicitie & blessednesse. namely that he suspected al that loue wherewith we loue any thing besides God. But these men do not marke that by this distinction, which is founde out rather by the iudgement of men, thā by the veritie of the Scriptures, that they are agaynst the sentence of God. For he sayd vnto
Abraham as it is written in
Gen. I am thy reward and that very ample: walke thou therfore before me, & be perfect, vndoubtedly by these wordes God offreth him selfe vnto vs, not imagined by him selfe, or plucked away from our commodities, but in respect that he is our rewarde.
Moreouer, as I sayd now at the first, god would not adioyne promises, gifts and rewardes to his commaundementes, in vayne or without effect, but aduisedly and moste wisely. Did he that I praye thee that we should close our eyes and ouerskip them?
To looke for a rewarde set forth vnto vs by God is not only of such as are vnperfecte. I thincke not. Neither canst thou say that they serue for the ruder sorte, and such as be not yet absolute and perfect: for I will demaunde strayght waye of thee, whether
Abraham, Moyses, Dauid, the Prophetes and Apostles were not so perfect, as either the nature of men in this life can be, or is required of vs? If thou wilt say they were imperfect, then can not I tell what excellencye or perfection of men thou faynest to thy selfe.
Paul certainly setteth forth him selfe vnto ythers as a perfect man, in such sorte, as a man may in this lyfe be perfect, when he wrote be ye perfect as I am perfect. I speake not how the Scripture yea god him selfe pronounceth
Moyses to be most meeke, he commendeth
Dauid also that he was made accordyng to his will and harte. Wherfore if thou wilt graunt that these were notable excellent and perfect men (as men may be in this world) neither canst thou deny the promises and rewardes offred to them of god. This without doubte followeth that men of the excellenter sorte may in well lyuing and doyng lift vp their eyes to the rewarde.
Augustine.And I thincke
Augustine hath trimely made manifest this thing where as he sayth in his booke of confessions, he loueth thee not (speaking to God) whiche loueth any thing besides thee,
We may loue gayne and rewardes for gods sake. which he loueth not for thy sake. By these words is gathered, that we may loue gayne and rewardes for gods sake: for it is lawfull to embrace the meane endes for the last and chief goodnesse. Neither are we forbidden but that we may sometymes wishe for meat, drincke, and cloth, and such thinges as are nedefull for this lyfe, yea and
Christ hath commaunded by expresse wordes that we should aske them, and he hath promised them to those whiche seke for the kyngdome of God: for he hath sayd, first seke the kingdome of God and these thinges shalbe ministred vnto you. Wherfore it is true, that these may be so hoped for, regarded and receaued of God as gifts and rewardes, and not as the principall thinges. For they also are to be referred to a farther
[Page 25] end, according to
Paules most wholesome admonition, who hath written: whether we eat, or whether we drinke, or whether we do any other thing, let vs do it to the glory of God. And finally seyng God him selfe, his glory,
What is the foundation of earthly promises. beneuolence & fauour are the roote and foundation of other promises, and of euery rewarde, so often as we shall beholde these other thinges, for as much as they are comprehended in those former thynges, we must neuer suffer to haue one separated from an other, but in the latter continually looke vpon those whiche are first. Wherby as
Augustine hath geuen vs counsell, we shall loue nothyng besides God which for his sake we should not loue. And thus much of this said question,
In latter promises the firste are continually to be beholden. now we will returne to the history. For as muche as it is now manifest that it was lawfull for
Chaleb to set forth a rewarde to all them, whiche should conquere the citie of
Debir, to encourage them to performe that, whiche they ought otherwise of duety to haue done: it was counted no sinne in
Othoniel (of whome we now entreate) couragiously to fight for the obtayning of a wife, whiche he knew otherwise to be acceptable to God.
14 And it came to passe, as he went, she moued him, to aske of her father a fielde and she lighted of her Asse, and Chaleb sayde vnto her: What wilt thou?
15 And she aunswered him, geue me a blessing, for thou hast geuen me a drye lande, geue me also springes of water. And Chaleb gaue her springes both aboue and beneath.
In the xv. chap. of
Iosua, where all these things of
Achsah and
Othoniel are rehearsed in maner, by so many wordes,
Dauid kimhi onely thre differences are perceaued in the word. One is, that which is here
Techitioth and
Alioth, is there
Techitith &
Alith. Moreouer there it is said
Tinna & here is
Hicah. Lastly there is
Scadah & here is
Haschadah. R.D. Kimhi hath noted these things. For y
e interpretors of y
e Hebrues are most precise, yea in obseruing the very prickes, I would they were as quicke in sight & diligēt in rendring reasons of annotatiōs.
Hachsah persuaded & prouoked her husband, to aske the field of
Chaleb her father, which I therfore tell you, bicause the Latine trāslation is corrupted. For it hath that the husbād persuaded the wife to aske the field of
Chaleb.
The pollicy of Achsah. Furthermore by this we may consider the sharpenesse of the witte of a woman. She therfore moueth her husband, to aske the field, bycause she was persuaded with her selfe, that her father would not deny him that whiche he should aske. (She thought moreouer that if her husband obtayned the field, she should easely by her selfe afterward obtayne the waters, wheras if she should haue asked them both at one time (namely the field and the waters) it might peraduenture be hard to obtayne both together. But if the field were first geuen to her husband, her father might be coūted very hard, if he should deny his daughter the waters, she requiring thē of him. And in asking she wisely watched a fitte tyme, namely when she should be brought to her husbād: for then parents are wont to shewe thē selues more gētle towardes their childrē, whē they se y
t they shalbe by & by taken frō thē. Wherfore thoughe they were at other times hard, thē yet they somwhat relent. In this reason of the petitiō I haue followed
Leui the sonne of
Gerson,
Leui the sonne of Gherson. who expoundeth that
Hachsah would therfore haue her husbād to aske y
e ground first y
t she might the better afterward desire the waters. But
R.
D. Kimhi. in interpreting of y
e boke of
Iosua, sayth, y
t he, namely
Othoniel would not aske it,
D. Kimhi. wherfore the womā her self was constrayned by her selfe to aske her father. And this semeth to be y
e meanyng of this interpretor,
Chaleb had before geuē vnto his daughter y
e field, as lād for her dowry, y
e soyle wherof was dry & barrē, wherfore y
e witty maydē toke occasiō to aske, y
t it might be fertile thoroughe water. But howsoeuer it be, it skilleth not much, let vs only deligētly marke this, y
t
Chaleb was liberal & honorable. For
[Page] that he graunted his daughter both the waters aboue, & the waters beneath.
She lighted of her Asse. She lighted, to declare her due obeysaunce towardes her father, and to make her peticion the more acceptable, and she so lighted that she kneled on the grounde with her knees, as the Hebrew word signifieth. For the Hebrewes vse that worde,
Sanach, when they will signifie a stake or wedge or any such thyng to be driuen. To be shorte, she asked vpon her knees those thinges whiche she desired.
Rebecka also, as it is written in the booke of
Gen. whē she sawe
Isaak to whom she was brought for to be hys wife, she lighted of her camele wheron she sat. Neither let vs meruayle that
Achsah beyng the daughter of a prince rode on an Asse:
Asses are very vsed in Siria. seing that in
Siria Asses are very muche vsed: for this kynd of beast, whiche is of his owne nature cold, is more vsed in hotter countreys, than in regions towarde the northe. And as we shall heare in this historye, fifty sonnes of a certain iudge road vpon fiftye Asses.
Mephiboseth also the nephew of
Saul the kyng, and
Balaam the Prophete vsed this kynd of beaste.
Riuers & fountaynes of waters are muche set by in Siria Why GOD brought hys people to drye regions. Neither is it in vayne that this request for waters is so diligently described in this place: for as muche as
Siria hath grounde fertile enoughe, but that it wāteth water here and there. Wherfore it commeth to passe that riuers and fountaynes of waters are muche estemed in those places. And God of purpose brought his people to these so drye regions, neither would he haue them dwell in watery places, that they wayling for water might continually depend vpon hym, and thereby might haue the better occasion, to pray the oftener to the heauenly father, and the more seruently to obserue his commaundements. Neither hath God him selfe left this his counsell vnmēcioned of in the holy scriptures.
The Hebrewe maydēs which had dowerye landes, myght marye out of their own tribeSuch things as
Chaleb geueth his daughter, belong (as some thincke) either to the dowery or to the augmentatiō therof, whiche might be done by the ciuile law of that nation. For it was not forbidden, y
e wiues might not geue ground, and landes to their husbandes in the name of a dowery, so that they maryed in their owne tribe and familie, as now
Achsah was geuen to
Othoniel, who assuredly was of the same tribe and familie that she was of. But if she had maryed in an other tribe, it had not ben lawfull for her to geue grounde and landes to her husband by the name of a dowery. For God had commaunded, and that diligently and precisely, that grounde and landes in especiall commyng by inheritaunce should not be alienated from their families for mariages sake. And the daughters of
Zalphead gaue an occasion of this lawe makyng, as it is written in the booke of
Num. the
27. and
36. chap. For those maydens, hauyng no brethren, obteyned of God by
Moyses, that they might not be put beside their Fathers inheritaunce, but that in the deuisiō of the lande of
Chanaan those landes might be assigned vnto them, whiche should haue ben geuen either to their father or to their brethren. But this was expressedly commaunded them that they should not mary out of their owne tribe and familie.
Whether husbandes in the olde tyme receaued doweryes of their wiues.But whether husbands receaued doweryes of their wiues before the law, it is vncertain. The seruaunt of
Abrahā rather gaue giftes to
Rebecka thā receaued, for as much as he brought with him golden and siluer vessels in the name of
Abraham and
Isaak to be geuen to his wife. But there is no mētion made of the maydens dowery.
Iacob also serued for his wyues, so farre was he frō receauyng any thyng of thē in the name of a dowery
Sechē also the sonne of
Hemorh inordinately louyng
Dina the daughter of
Iacob, with whome he had committed fornication, sayd vnto the sonnes of
Iacob: Increase her dowery as ye list, I will refuse no condition, so that I may haue your sister to wife. How be it I can not tell, how y
e custome of the auncient fathers in not taking but geuing doweries to wiues which they shuld mary, ought to be cōmēded, yet I thought good to rehearse those thinges which I haue read of this matter by y
e way. And to begyn w
t
Magadorus (as it is in
Plaucus) in his comedy
Aulularia when he should take to wife the daughter of a poore mā,
Magadorus of Plautus. being also without dowery, commendeth
[Page 26] hys counsell by these wordes. If (sayeth he) other men would do after my example, the Citie would then be in better concorde, and enuie should not be so ryfe among vs, as it is. They, namely the wiues will feare vs the more, and we shall kepe them with much lesse cost, &c. When I consider these things, they seme to be very wisely spoken. For now & then it happeneth, that one citie is after a sort deuided into two parts, whē as the daughters of poore men are without hope, to mary with them that be more riche, either bicause of the smalenesse of their dowery, or els bycause they be altogether without dowery. For they obtayne that neuer but by a certain happe, or els very rarely. Wherfore the richer and mightier sorte are much enuied & grieuously hated of the poorer sorte. Besides that, wiues that haue good doweries do not feare their husbandes, yea they contemne and despise them, countyng them as vnworthy to be matched with them in mariage. Lastly their ornamentes and lustes can not be satisfied but with extreme charges
Plutarch sayth in the
Apothegmata of
Licurgus,
Plutarch. whē he was demaunded, why he had cōmaunded by a law that virgines should mary without dowery, he aunswered, to the intent some should not be left vnmaried for pouertie sake, or other some should be to much laboured for, and estemed bycause of their riches, but that euery man diligently considering the manners of the maydens, might chose him a wife by her vertue. He sheweth also in the
30. probleme,
The lawe of
Decemuiri. that a bride brought to the bridegromes house onely a distaffe and a spindle. The
Decem viri of
Rome decreed also by the lawes of
Solon, that a woman should be without a dowery, and should bring from her fathers house onely thre garmentes & also certayne vessels of smal price, bycause they would declare that the fellowshyp of mariage is not confirmed by money, but by the loue of children. These certainly agree very trimme with that whiche is written of
Paul and
Vulpiā in the
Pandectes of gifte betwene the husband and the wife. It is written also of the Egiptians,
The custome of y
e Egiptiās. that if they receaued dowery of theyr wiues, they should be then counted, as their wiues bondemen. Whiche custome did manifestly teache, that it seemeth both full of ignominie, and also vnprofitable, to seke a dowery for wyues, when as nothing is more noble than libertie, and nature hath ordayned that the husband should rule the wife.
The maner of y
e Spaniardes And it is written that the
Spaniardes had a custome that the wyues should bring to theyr husbandes a distaffe with flaxe on it, in steade of a dowery. I coulde make mencion of a great many besides, to shewe, that all the men in the olde time allowed not, that husbandes should haue doweryes geuen them when they maried their wyues. But certainly the lawes of God make mention very oftentymes of a dowery. And I am assured that it was vsed somewhere before the lawe. In
Exodus, he which had defiled a virgin, was bound to mary her, so that her father were content: which if he were not, then was he cōpelled to geue her a dowery, as the lawe sayth the dowery of virgins is. Furthermore in the first booke of kinges .ix. chap.
Pharao gaue for a dowery vnto
Salomon which had maryed his daughter
Gazar, a citie whiche he had taken from the
Chananites. Besides this the
Romane lawes, whiche otherwise are most ful of equitie of all other lawes, do make much mention of doweryes, and haue many whole titles, in whiche this thing onely is entreated of.
But now seyng we are come thus farre,
The definition of a dowery. it were good to defyne what a dowry is, that therby we may the eassyer knowe, howe much of godly men is to be attributed vnto it in contracting of matrimonyes. A dowery is a right to vse things, whiche are geuen to the husband by his wife, or by others in her name, to sustayne the burthens of matrimonye. And althoughe a dowery be properly sayd a right of vsyng, yet notwithstanding those thynges which are geuen vnto the mā, are oftentimes called by this word dowery. But the end is chiefly to be marked in this definition, namely to sustayne the burthens of matrimonye. It semeth also that seyng the husband bestoweth very muche in noryshyng hys
[Page] wife, and honestly mayntaining her, iustice and equitie require that somewhat be recompenced vnto him agayne.
An errour concerning dowry Wherfore for as much as a dowery hath this foundation of iustice, there is no doubt but that it is a thing lawfull. But in it is an error not to be suffred, bicause some are not ashamed to say, that by a dowery concorde betwene man and wife is the easelier obtayned.
Frendshyppe grounded on profit and pleasure is weake. This both reason and experience teacheth to be most false. Who is ignoraunt, that that kynde of amitie whiche hath a respect onely to profit, and whiche is founded only vpon pleasure, is very fraile and transitory? Moreouer experience teacheth, that mariages so contracted that no other thyng be considered but onely beautye of the wife, & the dowery, haue very ill successe. Wherfore those are reprehēded by the cōmon prouerbe,
Agaynste to great dowryes and such as be against all vertue & honesty.
Qui vxores oculis & digitis ducunt, such as marry wiues with their eyes and fingers: that is whiche are moued onely with beauty and money. Wherfore iust lawes ought not to take away dowryes, but seuerely to forbid, that they be not to much encreased, or that they be not contrary to vertue and honestye. Therefore the
Romane lawes commaunded those doweryes to be cut of, whiche were greater than the abilitie of the geuer could beare, as it is written in the
Digestes of the lawe of doweryes. And contrarywise we must take hede, that the parentes or tutors being ouercome with couetousnesse geue not lesse than honesty requireth, as it is written in the title
de dote inofficiosa. And bycause doweryes are geuen to sustayne the burthens of matrimony, those can not be excused, whiche when they haue receaued them of their wiues, are not affeard afterward to vse their wyues vnworthily. They be besides that vniuste bycause they violate the lawe of God, by whiche they ought to loue their wiues as them selues and their owne body, when as they will not conueniently helpe them with their owne goods. Yea there be some, whiche if they were not letted by publicque lawes would consume, sell and vtterly alienate their wiues doweryes. And y
t that should not happen, lawes, chiefly the Romane lawes haue diligently prouided for: for they decree that the dominion of the dowery should remayne with the wiues althoughe the husbāds had y
e fruit & vse therof as lōg as y
e mariage should last. But what, I pray you, shall I say of thē, which do suffer so grieuous & intollerable burthens of matrimony to be dayly augmented, in to much cokering & flattering of their wiues? Surely they sinne most grieuously, for as much as now neither their own patrimony, neither their wiues doweries cā be sufficient, they will so abound euery way in ornamēts & sumptuousnesse. How beit godly husbāds & holy wiues ought to appoint all thinges moderatly. But why thinck we haue y
e lawes ordained so many things, & by so many ways cōcerning doweries?
Why the dowry ought to remayne for the wyues. Bicause they would kepe y
e citizēs w
tout hurt or damage, whē they marry & are ioyned together in matrimony. For it is expedient for the publicque wealth, y
t if the husbād do dye, y
e dowery may remayne whole vnto y
e wife, wherw
t if she wil she may mary agayn. Or if y
e wife dye before, y
t the dowry may serue to nourishe, apparell & bring vp the children gottē by matrimony.
But thou wilt aske, wherfore are doweries sayd to be geuen by this title to susteyne the burthens of matrimony?
A dowery is not the price of matrimony. Least the same dowery should be counted a price, as thoughe wiues & mariages were thinges to be sold. For whiche selfe cause in the digestes, giftes betwene the husband & the wife are prohibited, namely, that in matrimonyes already contracted, giftes betwene the husband and wyfe should not be receaued. Furthermore when as diuorcements were geuen by that ciuile lawe, if giftes betwene man and wife had ben lawfull, mariages should most easely haue ben dissolued.
[...]. For if one of the maried would not geue vnto the other as muche as he would demaunde, he shoulde by and by haue ben repudiated. The men in dede might geue certaine giftes vnto their wyues before the mariages, whiche were called ioyntures, as some certaine recompencinges of the dowery. But when they were once maried together, the
Romane lawes permitted not that they should geue giftes one to an other. Of whiche
[Page 27] thing
Plutarch also hath made mention, out of whom neuerthelesse is brought an other reasō, thā y
e which I shewed to be taken of y
e lawes. These be y
e words in the
35. &,
36. precept of matrimony: Certain bodies are said to consist of seuered things, as an host, & an nauy, other bodies of things ioyned together, as a house and a ship: other some are vnited & congeled together as al liuing creatures are. Wherfore matrimony which consisteth of liuing creatures is vnited and setled together. But y
e matrimony which cōsisteth either for dowry sake, or for childrē longeth to bodies ioyned together. And y
e which consisteth for pleasure & carnal copulation, may be numbred among the seuered bodies. For there man & wyfe may be said to dwel together, but not to liue together. And as in liuīg creatures the temperatures of humors run through out all the partes: so mariage muste mingle bodies, money, frends & kinsfolkes together. And y
e maker of y
e
Romane lawes forbad persons coupled in matrimonye to take or to geue giftes one to an other, not to the entent they should not be partakers of any one thing, but that they should thinke all things to be cōmon, &c.
Certayne maydens had dowryes oute of the treasorye. But these things are to be vnderstand of free giftes & not of doweryes, which otherwise were both lawful & also much vsed in the
Romane publique wealth. For the daughters of
Scipio, Curius and
Cincinnatus had dowryes out of the treasorye, bycause of the pouertie of their parentes, to the intent they should not be maried without doweries.
Yea and y
e generall councell holden at
Orleaunce (as it is rehearsed in the
.30.
The generall councell holden at Orleaunce.
Questi. 5. chap.
Nullum sine) decreed y
t no matrimony should be contracted without a dowery. Let the dowery (sayth it) be according to the habilitie, neither let any person presume to marry but publiquely.
It is false that matrimonie can not be cōtracted without a dowrye. This Canon I gladly allow in y
t it condemneth secret mariages: but in that it decreeth y
e matrimonies can not be contracted without a dowery, for as much as it is not confirmed by the testimony of the word of God, I can not admit it. For there are & haue bene very many which haue maried wiues cleane without any dowery, yea & those mē of so great honestye and authoritie, y
t it should seme very rash to condemne their fact, seing the holy scriptures are not against it: neither do I iudge that matrimony should by any meanes be denied to those womē which are without dowery, if thei haue nede of matrimonye.
Paule furthermore testifyeth, y
e matrimonye shadoweth the coniunction of
Christ with the church: wherfore if we should loke vpō the truth, the church had nothing which it could offer vnto
Christ in the name of a dowry, yea rather (as
Ezechiel teacheth) God found it rolled in bloud and myre. The fathers in the old testament seme to haue had wiues sometimes withoute dowries. Wherfore it semeth to be decreed, y
e men may and y
t it is lawfull to receaue doweryes when they are geuen, & that the same custome is honest, so that y
e iust meane be not exceded, and he which marieth be not allured to matrimony by y
e name of the dowery as the principall cause. The manners and godlinesse of the wyfe ought chiefly to be regarded, neither ought any man by and by to persuade himself. If I shal marry a wife without a dowery, I shall therefore haue her the better and the quieter,
Ierome. The wyfe of Law. seing (as
Ierome declareth in his fyrst booke against
Iouinian) Cato Censorius had
Actoria Paula to wyfe, who was borne of a base kinred, who was poore also and without a dowerye, and yet for all that shew as a dronckard, weake, and proud vnto the same
Cato.
16 And the children of Keni Moyses father in lawe, went vp oute of the citye of the Palme trees with the children of Iudah, into the wildernesse of Iudah, that lieth in the south of Arad: and went and dwelt among the people.
In the conquering the citie of
Hebron and
Debir there is mention made also of the children of
Moyses father in law: they were Ethniks in dede by kinde,
Of the Kenites
[Page] but they wer ioyned w
t the Israelites in will and fayth, from whō also in y
e fyrst ofspring of kinred they wer not straungers: for as much as they came of
Madian the sonne of
Abraham by his wyfe
Keturah. And the same
Kenites constantly abode with the Hebrues tyll theyr captiuitye into
Babilon, for as much as the
Rechabites came of the
Kenites, as it is written in the booke of
Paralipomenon. But why they were called
Kenites it is vncertaine. But some thinke y
t it came of this, bycause the sonne of
Iethro, namely
Hobab, the brother of
Moyses wife, was called
Kin by an other name. He therfore in the beginning with his familye dwelled together with the
Beniamites in the fieldes of
Iericho, when the Israelites passing ouer
Iordane vnder
Iosua possessed the city of
Iericho. But after when they sawe that the tribe of
Iudah possessed the cityes of
Hebron &
Debir, they went vnto thē, and dwelt more cōmodiously in y
e plaine of
Harad, although they had no certayne houses, but liued continually as it were in tentes.
The citie of Palmes.Although some suspecte the citie of Palmes to haue bene
Engaddi, yet moste part of the expositours interprete it to be
Iericho, with whom
Iosephus de Antiquit. Hebr. agreeth, and also
Paraphrastes Caldaicus, yea and the booke of
Deut in the xxxiiii. chap. testifyeth the same. For as much as that citie had a notable groue of Palmes of a hundred furlongs,
Strabo. which thing
Strabo also testifyeth. And yet we may not thinke that y
e
Kenites reedifyed the citie of
Iericho: for it was accursed by the commaundement of
Iosua, who amongest other thinges published this (as it is to be beleued) in the name of God, namely that he which should attempt to repayre it, should wrappe himself vnder the curse which came to passe in very deede: For in the time of
Ahab the wicked king, one
Aiel builte it vp agayne, but to his own great hurt. Fo his two sonnes
Abiram &
Segub perished whē y
e citie was in repayring, as it is written in y
e first boke of kings .xvi. chap. But the countrey or ground thereof belonged by diuision vnto the tribe of
Beniamin.
The fielde of Iericho belōged to the tribe of Beniamin. And these
Kenites as it semeth had pitched tentes there, eyther for warfare, or els for keping of shepe, in which thei liued for a time eyther about y
e cicie or els betwene y
e decaied places of y
e city. And there was a regard had vnto thē in distributing of y
e land, & in assigning of fieldes (as
Iosephus also testifieth) according to y
e promise made vnto thē by
Moyses, which is writtē in the x. chap. of
Num. And it is thought to be very lykely y
t their lot was in the tribe of
Iudah which being not yet possessed by the children of
Israel, they dwelled (as it is said) in the land with the
Beniamites in the field of
Iericho. This exposition semeth ful and manifest inough.
KimhiBut
Kimhi followeth an other opinion, and thinketh that the children of Israell, when they after they had conquered
Hebron and
Debir in the time of
Iosua, had determined vtterly to destroy the citie of
Iericho, vnderstanding that the
Kenites dwelte there lyke straungers as I thinke (bycause they came of the stocke of
Madian) before they ouerthrew al the city, they called them away, that they might not perish with the other
Chananites. The same curtesie dyd
Saule shewe vnto them, when he should make warre agaynst
Amelek, as it is writtē in the fyrst booke of
Samuel xv. chap. For he commaunded the
Kenites to depart, least they shoulde be destroyed with
Amelek: and he shewed a cause, namely bycause they were good and gentle vnto the Israelites comming vp out of
Egipt. Kimhi addeth moreouer, that
Amelek and the
Kenites were of a farre contrarye affection toward the Israelites. For the
Kenites loued thē wonderfull wel. But
Amelek hated thē deadly. Wherfore euē as god had bound himselfe by an othe, y
e warre should be continually made agaynst
Amelek: so would he haue y
e
Kenites recōpenced alwayes with benifites. This interpretation should be very likely, if this departing of y
e
Kenites frō
Iericho, were not put by our history after
Hebron and
Debir were conquered. But
Iericho was conquered of
Iosua fyrst of all after he had passed ouer
Iordane: and certainely before he had gotten
Hebron &
Debir Besides thys oure historye entreateth eyther of the
Kenites whiche remayned
[Page 28] in
Madian, or ells of those which had ioyned thēselues in fellowship with y
e people of
Israel. It semeth y
t this can not be spoken of the first, whē as
Iericho is not in
Madian, yea it is farre distant frō thence, but if we shal vnderstand this to be spoken of those which came with
Israell, how shuld it be vnderstand y
t they dwelt in
Iericho, before
Iosua toke it? Moreouer it is not found in y
e texte of the history, y
t they were called forth as
Kimhi writeth: but it is playnly written y
t they went frō thence to
Iudah. Wherfore I can better agree with
Iosephus,
Iosephus. Why y
e Kenites departed from Iericho. who writeth y
e they therfore departed frō thence, bicause in y
e deuision of the land, & distributing of fieldes (as I haue before sayd) their inheritaunce fell about the tribe of
Iudah wherfore they got thē vnto it when
Hebron &
Debir were conquered. But why frō the time they came ouer
Iordane euen to this time they dwelt rather about
Iericho thā in any other place, seing the scripture speaketh not of it, I am cōtent to lacke the knowledge therof.
But bicause this
Kenite (as many Hebrues confesse) was the father in law of
Moyses, which thing also
Ierome confyrmeth in his booke of traditiōs or Hebrue questions vpon the first boke of
Samuel & vpon
Paralip. we must therefore call to memory
Iethro, of whom is mentiō made more largely in the boke of
Exodus. That
Iethro was he to whō
Moyses came when he fled out of
Egipt,
What this word
Cohen signifyeth. who was also either prince or priest of
Madian. For y
e Hebrue word
Cohen signifieth both, & therfore the holy historyes writeth of y
e sonnes of
Dauid y
t they were
Cohenim y
t is princes, & highly exalted amongest magistrates:
ii. Sam viii. Aben-Esra for so were kynges wont to exalte their children. Although
Aben-Esra affirmeth
Moyses father in law to haue bene priest of
Madian. And sayth y
t he ministred not to Idols, but to the true god: for the pure worshipping of god was not so peculiar to the people of
Israell, but y
t there were godly men in other places, which worshipped god sincerely. There is no doubt but y
e
Melchisedech was such a one, whō the scripture calleth the priest of the high god.
Moyses defended the daughters of this
Iethro frō the shepherdes at the wel, by which meanes he was made his sōne in law. And afterward when he fed his shepe not farre frō the mount
Sina he was called of god, to deliuer the people of
Israell frō the
Egiptian bondage. Wherefore he asked leaue of him to depart & went his way to
Egipt, & frō thence after wonder full works of god, he led the people into the deserte, and fought agaynst
Amelek in whose land
Kenite the
Madianite dwelt. And when
Moyses had obtayned the victory,
Iethro, who was not with
Amelek in the warre, came vnto
Moyses hys sonne in law, & reioyced at his happy successe in the battaile, he did sacrifice, and cōmunicated together with his sonne in lawe, & the rest of the Israelites in geuing thankes to god. He gaue also vnto
Moyses wholesome coūsell, not to weary himself in hearing al causes: But rather that he should haue men chosen out, which might both heare & also determine cōmon and light causes, & such as wer harder, to be referred only to him: and he for y
e most hard matters to aske coūsel of god, and loke what god had answered & commaunded, the same to be decreed for the people. Whē
Iethro or
Kenite had done these with
Moyses in the wildernesse after the warre of
Amelek before the law was geuen, he returned into his own countrey as it is written in the xviii. Chap. of
Exodus.
But concerning his returne into his own countrey, there are two opinions,
Of the returne of Moyses father in law into his countrey. both of the Hebrues & our men. Some say that he returned to dispose and set an order in his domesticall things, and to make preparation for his familie to iourney with the Israelites. Which things being al finished almost in one yeares space, he returned to his sonne in lawe, and went together with him and the Israelites to the land of
Chanaan. And so they say, although it be sayd in the historye that he departed before, yet it is truely put in the boke of
Num. that
Moyses spake with him, in the second yeare from the departure out of
Egipt, when the tabernacle was then finished, & orders appoynted, wherby the Hebrues shoulde go forward. For he destred him, not to depart frō him, but to be as it were an eye
[Page] to the Israelits in this their iourney into straunge countryes, for that he knew all the places of y
e desert very well, bycause he was borne in the countrey adioyning vnto it. Not bycause the pyllers and cloudes led not the Israelites safely & soundly, but bycause this man was very cunning in pitching and camping an hoste.
Moyses woulde therfore (as they say) haue him to instructe the troupes of Souldiours which shoulde goe forth, and to prouide that they going forwarde, shoulde abyde ioyned together, and shoulde keepe the iuste manner of warlyke order. Whereunto thys also was a helpe, for that by reason of hys knowledge of the countreyes he coulde easely admonyshe the Israelites of the nature of those places, and howe farre distante and nyghe they were together. Howbeit other say, that
Iethro so returned to hys house, after he had reioyced with
Moyses that he retourned not vnto hym agayne: for as it is to be beleued, he was very aged, and therfore he spent the reste of hys age with hys neyghbours and familye in
Madian, exercisyng his office eyther of a prince or ells of a priest. Neuerthelesse they thynke y
t he left a sonne with
Moyses, called
Hobab, to the entente he might be throughly enstructed by
Moyses hys kinnesman, and by
Aaron, and other excellent men of the Hebrues, in Godlinesse and knowledge of worshipping of God. Therfore they wil haue this man to be he, whō
Moyses spake vnto in the .x. of
Num. and made ouersear for pitching of the campes. Besides y
t they say y
t this mans sonnes & familye were now at this present called
Kenites. And I my self, to say what I thinke true, do much agree with this latter sentence.
For
Balaam the Prophet in the .24. chap. of
Num. prophecied peculiarly of the
Kenites,
Balaam the Prophet. that they should haue their habitations in the most fenced places, and y
t thei should there abide, til they were led away captiues by the
Assirians, & he ioyneth them (as it appeareth manifestly in that place) with
Amelek: for (as I sayd before) they inhabited al one land with the
Amelekites. Wherfore it is gathered that
Iethro so departed from
Moyses into
Madian, to dwell there continually. And so it might be that
Balaam the Prophet ioyned the
Kenites with the
Amelekites, of which
Kenites neuerthelesse part were with the Israelites, for as much as
Iethro (as it is sayd) left his sonne with them.
Besides this in the .x. chap. of
Num. Hobab was desired of
Moyses, to come & go with the Israelites, whether they went: who refused to goe any farther, bycause he was mynded to returne home into his countrey. For he was left there of his father to be better instructed in the worshippyng of God, and he abode with the Israelites tyll they were readye to depart thence, And then he thought to haue returned into his countrey: but being desired of
Moyses, he consented at length to iourney forth with y
e Israelits. But these things could not haue bene so, if we should thinke y
e
Hobab had bene
Iethro, which after he had deuided & set his things in order should haue returned againe to
Moyses, with y
e minde & purpose to haue gone forward with y
e Israelits. For what neded
Moyses to haue entreated hym to do that, for which cause he came from hys owne house to doe? Or why shoulde he haue chaunged hys purpose to retourne into hys owne countreye, whiche he had before vtterly forsaken? Lastly why shoulde he afterwarde haue denyed to goe, which he had before decreed with hymself to do? I know in deede there be some but not many which affyrme, that
Iethro was that
Hobab with whom
Moyses spake in the booke of
Num. which thyng let thē affyrme for me, howbeit I thought good to declare what I iudged most likely.
And that the familye of the
Kenites dwelled long among the
Amelekites or very nyghe adioynyng vnto them, the fyrste booke of
Samuel testifyeth, where it is written that
Saule called forth the
Kenites, least he should haue destroyed them together with the
Amelekites. Wherefore it semeth that parte of the
Kenites dwelled with the
Amelekites, & part with the Israelits, of whiche both of thē were alwaies most frendly to y
e Hebrues. And god declareth y
t he had excellētly adorned thē in their publique wealth, & that w
t three principal giftes.
[Page 29] For they excelled in the study & knowledge of the law.
Three thinges God seemeth to haue geuen to the Kenites. They were also notable in obtaining of a great victorye. Lastlye they liued vertuously and godlye. And concerning the study of the law, wherein they floorished, the first booke of
Paralipomenon
1 and seconde chapter towarde the ende, is a wytnesse vnto them. For there is mencion made of them with the family of
Iambes, that is, of
Othoniel, and they ar said to haue bene Scribes: wherby it appeareth that the tradition of the
Hebrues is not to bee despised, that in the doctrine of the lawe, they were the disciples of
Othoniel: for they ar reckoned in his family. And it is a very common thing, to count disciples in the place of children.
Ierome.
Ierome also in hys questions vpon
Paral. alloweth this opinion, which (as it is said) seemeth to agree with the scriptures. Neither do I thynke that for anye other cause there is mencion made of them in this place among the actes of
Othoniel,
Why mencion is made here of the Kenites. but onelye bycause they lyued together alwaies with his family most louingly. They ar also counted with the tribe of
Iudah, although they were not of the stocke of the Israelites. Wherfore they amongst other wer a fygure of the callyng of the Gentiles. The other notable ornament of theirs in that publique wealthe was that
2 noble victory, which is declared in the .4. chap. of this booke. For
Iahel, the wife of
Aber the
Kenite slew
Sisara the captayne of warre of
Iabin king of
Chanaan, and God would by the hand of a woman of this familye graunt great health to the Israelites. Lastly that they wer wel manered, and obseruers of their fathers
3 commaundementes, the family of
Ionadab the sonne of
Rechab hath declared. They dronke no wyne, which at that tyme was the maner of the
Nazarites,
Prayse of the Rechabites. and notably despising earthly thinges they dwelled not in houses, but lyued in tentes, and exercised the arte of a shepherd which is most simple. For which thing they are very much commended of
Ieremy the Prophet, and adourned wyth a most ample promisse aboue the Iewes, bycause they had geuen more seruice & obedience vnto him namelye
Rechab their parent, than the Hebrues had done vnto God himselfe, which neuertheles dyd continually boast in that father and holy progenitours. Wherefore we knowe that to be most true which
Paul hath taught to the
Romanes, that they in dede had
Abraham to their father, whiche followed the steppes of hys fayth, they were not Iewes by nature, but by wyl and faith were made
Proselites, and in godlynes and holynes farre passed very many of those which were by nature Iewes.
We gather moreouer hereby,
It is very profitable for men to ioyne them selues to good & godly persōs. that it muche auayleth vs to ioyne our selues with good men, and with the fellowshyp of the godly. The
Kenites which wer the posterity of
Hobab, if they would haue rested (as the most part of men do) in their own countrye, and in the place where they were borne, they had fallen at length into the ignoraunce of God and of his lawes, wherby they should easely haue bene lyke vnto their neighbour
Amalek. But bycause they despising theyr owne thinges, and kyndled with the faith of the promisse of God, ioyned themselues vnto the Israelites,
What are the moste honest causes of peregrination. therfore God gaue them suche good successe in theyr thinges. We ought to remember with our selues the moste honest cause of the peregrination of these men. For al good men trauayle not into straunge countries for one purpose. There be very many, which do therfore often tymes leaue their countrey, bycause they may not worship God there after the sincere & lawful maner of worshipping, yea they are grieuously troubled there, if they endeuour them selues therunto. So
Abraham was called out of his lande and from hys kynred, least he should styl haue gone forwarde with his elders to contaminate him selfe with idolatry. So Christ also said, if they shal persecute vs in one city, let vs flye vnto an other. But ther be other, which though they be not letted at home from the true godlynes, yet for al that they wil go see those places, wher they thinke they may yet get more profyt,
Plato his pergrination is praysed. and be more certainlye enstructed in thinges deuine and necessary for saluacion. For which cause
Plato is commended, bycause he came to the
Egiptians, & went to a part of
Italy, that is great
[Page]
Greace: he went also vnto diuers nations, as though he should follow wisdome flieng from him. So in like wise
Saba the quene is commended in the holy scriptures, which trauailed from so farre countries to heare
Salomon: after this maner the
Kenites (of whom we entreate) folowed the people of
Israel: for although at home they knew & worshipped one God, whose Priest their father also was, yet neuertheles they desired to be styl more instructed, and more absolutelye to receaue the lawes, institutions and worshipping of God.
They are also very much worthy of praise, which do for this cause only trauaile into other countries to profyt others, and to helpe and deliuer them from the miseries wherewyth they be oppressed. After which sorte the Poetes haue sayd that
Hercules wandred through the world,
Hercules. by his might to destroy wicked and hurtful men, which miserably afflicted mankinde. Neither did the Apostels trauaile throughout the whole worlde for any other cause, than to deliuer men out of the mouth of the deuyl, and by the preaching of the Gospel to loose them from their chaines of errours. Christ also for this selfe same cause would trauail and iourney among men, that by his doctrine and death he might delyuer mankind frō eternal destruction. Wherfore the
Kenites may be numbred with these: for they also adioyned them selues companions with the Israelites, to helpe thē through the deserte. For (as it is said) they hauing good knowledge of those places, might stand the Iewes in great steede. These counsels are plainlye iudged good and honest, for whose causes peregrinations which are taken wythout cō pulsion, are honest and prayse worthy.
There maye be other reasons also of peregrination, which as they be not alwaies to be refused, yet are they nothing to be compared wyth these, eyther in praise, or els in worthynes. Wherfore let godly men take hede when they iourney into farre coūtries, that they apply them selues as much as is possible vnto these causes & reasons now mētioned. And as God hath not defrauded these
Kenites of the fruit which they looked for, but made them partakers and that plentifully of those good thinges which he had prepared for his people, so seyng also he is now the same God which he was then, we must beleue, that he wil not suffer him selfe to depart from his accustomed maner and perpetuall goodnes, so that we obserue the good and iust causes and reasons of peregrination.
Seneca What is chiefly to bee obserued in peregrination.But in that thing we haue nede of great warenesse and diligēce, namely that chiefly (as
Seneca hath wel admonished in his .105. epistle to
Lucillas) we depart from our selues, that is that we laye awaye our wicked affections, bycause the chaunging of places do lytle profit, if we cary about together with vs the same affectiōs, which we had before. Yea and y
e chiefly helpeth to the renuing of godlynes, that we bee made other from our selues. For what had the good lawes, honest maners, and chaste religion which the Iewes professed, profited the
Kenites, if they would haue brought their own thinges with them, and continued in the same wherin they wer conuersaunt before? Wherfore they which do trauaile into other countries for studye and godlynes sake, ought not to haue thys purpose before them, to behold the Cities, buildinges, riuers, fieldes, vineyards woods, playes and qualities of men: For all these thynges although they somewhat delite the beholders, as chyldren which with pleasure do maruayl at euery new and straunge thing, yet they do nothing, or very lytle helpe. The chiefe cause ought to be, y
t they onely study aboue al other thinges to be made better, as touching godlines & doctrine. For if they shal despise this, they shal be sayd to wander, rather thā iustly to iourney. Let them not therfore retaine with them any longer those euyls which are to be auoided, yet let them aboue all thinges iourney from the ignoraunce of God, from the vnskilfulnes of the holye Scriptures, from corrupt affectiōs, and from wicked and pernitious examples. This is the iust cause of peregrinatiō, which the
Kenites by their dede do declare vnto vs. If the
Lacedemonians had had a regard to thys, they would not by theyr
[Page 30] lawes haue prohibited peregrinations: But I suppose that they regarded thys,
The Lacedemonians prohibeted peregrinations. which they marked so to come to passe for the most part, that the citizens in trauailing into straunge countries, learned of the straungers whom they went to see, not their vertues and wisdom, but rather their vices and errours, and afterward being infected with many euyls, they returned into their country, where they destroied their Citizens by a certayne pestiferous contagiousnes. Whych thing surely no man doubteth but that it is a grieuous euyll and discommodity to a publique wealth.
Why peregrinations do profyt. And yet we may not therfore decree that al peregrinatiōs are hurtful. For there can be found no City, no people, nor no publique wealth in the world, which hath not many things vnperfect in maners & lawes, which may be amended and corrected by the sight and knowledge of others.
Licurgu
[...].
Lycurgus certainly which made that law, profited much in trauailing into straunge coū tries. Yea and the
Decemuiri of the
Romanes went them selues into
Graecia,
Decemuiri of the Romanes. to the end they would know the lawes of that people, and by that meanes they wonderfully prouided for their publique wealth. And thus muche for peregrination.
And now let vs finish this history, iudging that the children of
Kenite were of that stocke which wer begotten of
Hobab in y
e wildernes among the chyldren of
Israel: And that
Hobab was the sonne of
Moyses father in lawe, & hys wiues brother germaine. Neither ought this to moue vs bycause it is saide in the .x.
Aben-Esra. of
Num. Chothen bycause as
Aben-Esra there testifieth, that woorde signifieth not onely a father in law, but also the brother of the wife, and some haue translated the same woorde there not for a father in lawe, but a kynsman. But these
Kenites departed out of the fielde of
Iericho, that they might obtayne possession with the tribe of
Iudah. And therfore they ar sayd to haue dwelled with the people. For first they followed them in iourneyeng with them, & nowe by the same right they are sayd to haue dwelled with them. And they ascended,
The situation Iericho. bycause
Iericho was situate in a valley, and betwene it an
Ierusalem was a deserte longing to
Iudah, which as it is very lykely had in it wooddy places, and mete for pasture. And that it was so, it is easelye gathered out of the Gospell of
Luke, where
Christ put foorth a parable, namely that a man descended from
Ierusalem to
Iericho, and fel into the handes of theeues. And certainly if he descended, it is manifest y
t these ascended, when they followed the tribe of
Iudah going toward
Ierusalem. And bycause the place was ful of wooddes, it was an easy matter (especially in the time of
Christ when the common wealth of the Hebrues was very much out of frame) for it to be ful of theeues. There certainly (as farre as can be perceaued) the
Kenites receaued their lot. And I think I haue spoken inough as touching this hystory.
17. And Iudah went wyth Symeon his brother, and smote the Chananites dwelling in Zephat, and vtterly destroyed it, and called the name of the City Horma.
18. And Iudah tooke Hazza and the borders therof, and Ascalon with the borders therof, and Aekron with the borders thereof.
Now we are come to that place where the long
parenthesis (which I before admonished you of) endeth. And whatsoeuer followeth after these woordes:
The children of Iudah fighting against Ierusalem tooke it.
Here the aforesaid parenthesis endeth.
&c. to thys place, are declared by a
parenthesis. For al those thinges happened not after the death of
Iosua, but when he was yet lyuing. And now the history retourneth to that setting forward to battaile which they of
Iudah and the
Symeonites tooke in hand, styrred vp by the oracle of God. And therfore it is written:
And Iudah went wyth Symeon hys brother, and smore the Chananites dwellyng
[Page] in Zephat, and vtterly destroyed it, and called the name of the Citye Horma.
The vowe of
Cherem that is of the curse. The Hebrues did not vtterly throw downe nor destroy certain cities which they possessed, but dwelled in them. Howbeit som they cursed and cleane defaced. And their vowe was called in Hebrew,
Cherem, of the thing that was promised, deriued from this woord
Charam, which is to waste, to destroy, to kil, to deface, & to geue vnder curse. The
Grecians called that woord
[...]: They called
[...] also,
[...], and
[...] as thinges consecrated and put apart. And it may be that so they called them, bycause they were hanged vp in temples, and were seperated from the vse of men, neither was it lawfull to remoue them out of that place. Yea and men somtymes wer called by that name.
Paule also vsed that woord many tymes, for he saith to the
Galathians: Let hym be accursed whosoeuer shal preache any other Gospel. And to the
Romanes he wished him selfe to be made a curse for the brethren. And to the first of the
Corinthians he saith: he y
e loueth not y
e lord Iesus, let him be accursed,
Maranatha, wher he taketh this woord
[...] for this woord
Cherem, that is, a thing seperated and seioyned vtterly from mans occupying or vse, so that it was wycked either to touch it, or to put it to any vse. Wherfore we haue a testimonye in the booke of
Iosua,
Why the cytye of Iericho was made a curse. the .6. chap. of the city
[...]cho. And it semed to haue bene so accursed bycause it was after a sorte th
[...]
[...] fruites of the Cities that were taken. For after they were passed ouer
Iordane, it was the first of al the cities that was conquered, and that by no mans helpe, for that the walles therof fel downe of their owne accorde, and through the woorking of God. And therefore it was mete that the spoyles therof should altogether bee consecrated vnto God..
Whether the destruction of cities pertayne to the worshipping of God. But that semeth to be vtterly farre from the worshipping of God to destroy both cities and men, and these seme to haue a shew of cruelty, rather than of religion. To that I answer, that the destruction of townes in dede of their own nature, belong neither to religion nor yet to godlynes, but so farre forth as they ar referred to the glory of God. And that may happen two maner of wayes. As whē that destruction is counted as a certayn monument of the seuerity and iustice of God against those nations which he for their wickednes would haue destroyed, or as a certain testimony of Gods goodnes and mercy towards the Israelites, whom in that expedition he mercyfully helped. Therefore the ouerthrowing of the city, houses, men, and beastes, did shew the iustice and seueritie of God. And the consecration declared the goodnes, helpe and mercy shewed to that people. Moreouer God would by that meanes proue the obedience of his people in abstaining from the spoiles which wer consecrated vnto God.
God by these curses proued hys people. For we know that souldiours when they haue gotten the victory, are hardlye restrained from the pray. But they which obeied not the curse published, wer most grieuously punished: which the holy history of
Iosua declareth to haue happened vnto
Acham, bicause he vsurped vnto him selfe some of the spoiles of
Iericho. We know also that
Saul for this cause was depriued of his kyngdome, bicause he had reserued
Agag the king, and certain oxen and fat cattel of the pray which wer bound before to the vow of the curse.
The forme of the curse.Of the forme and end of the curse we haue spoken enough. For the forme is the destruction of cities, men and beastes, and the consecration of gold, siluer, yron, brasse, precious stones, and costly things, which wer appointed onely to the vse of the tabernacle. But the end was that they might be monuments of Gods goodnes and iustice,
The end of the same. and also an exercise and trial of the Israelites. Now resteth somewhat to speake of the matter and efficient cause therof.
The matter was, what soeuer was found on lyue in those cities, for al that ought to be killed,
The matter of the same. and the buildinges and other garnishinges of the city ought to be cleane destroyed: but as for the ornamentes and riches, they were (as it is sayd) consecrated vnto the worshipping of God. But ther is to be marked, that none wer vowed vnto so horrible a destruction, but such as were already declared
[Page 31] and knowen to be enemies of God: for it is not lawfull to kyll Innocentes. Wherfore they sinned most grieuouslye which so vowed
Paules death, that they would neither eate nor drinke tyl they had killed him. And at this daye they behaue them selues more than wickedly,
Iephre. which saye that they haue vowed them selues most cruelly to kil al the Professours of the gospel. Yea, and
Iephte without doubt was deceaued,
Agamemnon. which bicause of hys kynde of vowyng thought that his daughter should either be slaine, or els compelled to perpetual virginity.
Agamemnon also is to be condemned, which (as
Cicero declareth in his booke of offices) vowed vnto
Diana the fairest woman that should be borne in his kyngdome. And to performe this foolish vowe, he sacrificed his daughter
Iphigenia.
The efficient cause of a curse But the efficient cause of the vow
Cherem, somtimes is God, as it is written in the .vii. and .x. chap. of
Deut. For ther it is commaunded that places dedicated to Idoles, aulters, ymages, groues, & monumentes should be vtterly destroied, and that was a perpetual curse in the land of
Chanaan, and to be alwaies obserued. Somtimes the Prince made such a vow, as we reade of
Iosua, and somtimes the people, as we find in the .21. chap. of
Num. The prophets also somtimes did this, & so
Samuel cōmaūded
Saul, cleane to destroi al things belōging to y
e
Amelekites
The name of this city, wherof we now entreate, was afterwarde called
Horma, for it was not so called before, and it was so called of the woorde
Cherem. For such a name were they wont to geue vnto such places as were wasted and destroyed by a curse. In the booke of
Num. 21. chapter a certaine portion of the
Chananites, which the Israelites possessed by violence, was by reason of suche a vowe called
Horma.
But some peraduenture wil aske,
These destructions of Cities are not agaynst charity.
Augustine. whether these destructions of townes wer against charity? To whom I answer no. Bicause such enemies were chosen to be vtterly destroyed of the Iewes by the iudgement of God, and not by the lust of men. But as touching the loue or hatred of enemies, wee must vnderstande that
Augustine hath written toward the ende of the first booke vpon the sermon of the Lord on the mountaine, that he doth ascende one steppe of righteousnes, which loueth his neighbour, although he yet hate his enemy. But then shall he performe beneuolence and gentlenes at the commaundement of hym whyche came to fulfyl the law, and not to breake it, when he shall stretch it euen to the loue of the enemy. For that degree, though it be somwhat, yet it is so smal, that it may be commō also with Publicanes. Neither that which is said in the law:
Thou shalt hate thine enemy,
It is not lawfull for the vnperfecte to hate their enemyes. is to be taken as a commaundement vnto the iust man, but as a permission to the weake. Thus much he writeth, with whom (yf I should speake as I thinke) I do not agree, but am certainly perswaded, that to hate our enemies is not permitted of God, no not to the vnperfect. For it is an euerlasting precept, that we should loue our neighbour as our selues.
Who is oure neyghbour. And he is our neighbour whom we helpe by anye occasion, as Christ hath declared in the parable of the Iewes and of the
Samaritan. They were compared as enemyes one to an other, wherefore the condition of enmitye when it happeneth, can not let, but y
t such as are enemies one to an other be yet neighbours. Moreouer for as much as we se y
e
Dauid & other prophets did oftentimes curse their enemies, by what meanes can we cal thē weake, whō God gaue liberty to hate their enemies. For they wer holy men and very perfect.
Augustine, Neither doth that seeme to make much to the purpose, which the same
Augustine saith, namely that the sayinges of these holy men were no vowes & desires, but rather forespeakinges & prophecies of them, who liuing vnder the old testament did oftentimes prophecye the chaunce of thinges to come. For the Apostels ar also found in the new testamēt not only to haue spoken words of cursings (as
Paul when he saith: I woulde to god they wer cut of which do trouble you) but also to haue most grieuously punished some. For as much (as it is written in y
e actes of the Apostels) the same
Paul depriued
Elimas the Magicien of his sight, and
Peter slewe
Ananias and
Saphira.
[Page] Wherfore we must rather say that these great mē did not such things of an hatred graunted to vnperfect men, but y
t they wer driuen therunto by some other maner of meanes.
Marke the distinction. And therfore me thinketh we must make this distinction, that they somtimes had to do for their own causes, & sometimes for gods cause. Whē they had to do for their matters, al their doings wer ordered w
t al modestye and gentlenes. As we se
Dauid to haue done, who many times spared
Saul his deadly enemy.
Moyses also & other holy men did constantly & valiauntly very often grieuous thinges. But when the matters of God wer in hand, the same mē behaued them selues seuerely & nobly. And if they should haue done that in theyr own causes, they might haue semed to wrest the swerd out of the hande of God and of the Magistrate, which they do which reuenge their own iniuries.
This is also to be added, that men which are appointed to take in hand & to defend Gods cause,
What is chieflye to be taken heede of when Gods matters are in hand. although they may then do thinges sharpely & seuerlye, yet they must precisely & diligently take hede, that vnder that pretence, they cocker not their owne affections. The Apostels when they desired Christ to sende fyre from heauen vpon the
Samaritanes (as they knew was done in the olde tyme, at the prayers of
Helias) wer rebuked of the Lord, bicause they knew not of whose spirite they wer, which without doubt was a most apt answer. For they whom God sendeth to execute these offices, ought not nowe to be counted priuate or symple men,
Whether it bee lawfull to pray against tyrans & to curse them
Augustine. but such as wer prepared and enstructed of him, to be in hys steede vpon the earth. But whether it be lawful for priuate men to praye against vngodly and cruell Tyrannes, by whom the true worshipping of God is hindred, and to curse them,
Augustine aunswereth, that it is alwaies lawfull for godlye men to pray vnto God against the kingdome of synne. And that maye be cleane taken away, when the vngodly forsake their wickednes, for whose vnfayned repentaunce we must alwayes pray vnto God. But if they seeme past all hope, it is lawful to praye that their synnes maye sometymes at the length come to an end: namely that when they are taken awaye, they myght cease both to hynder the woorshipping of God, and also to trouble the Saintes. For as much as it is not expedient that theyr synne shoulde escape vnpunished, for when it is leaste without punishment, it is mere vniustice. But when the punishment of God is adioyned vnto it, then ther is in him lesse deformitye. Wherefore God is of the same
Augustine called verye wel not a cruell tormentor,
Augustine. but a iust correctour. Moreouer, bycause holy men are very familiar with God, and therefore when by some heauenly reuelation,
Saintes sometimes reioyce & also are sory for the destruction of the wycked. they are acertained of his wil, bicause they exceedingly loue him, they cannot but allow his sentence, yea they faithfullye praye that the same may be accomplished. Although (in that they be men) they be both sory, and also take it grieuously to haue their neighbours so vexed. After whych sorte
Samuel mourned for
Saul the kyng, whom be knew neuertheles to be reiected of god.
Ieremy also wept for the captiuity which was at hand, and Christ wept for the City of
Ierusalem which should be destroyed. For they which be mē in dede,
God requireth not the not feeling of the Stoikes. can not chose but be sory for their neighbours and their own flesh when it is afflicted. Neither doth God require of vs that
Stoike lacke of compassion. But as touching this matter, if the Reaver desire to know more, let hym looke vpon my Cōmentaries to the
Corrinthians. But as touching this present purpose, that is to say, that the people of
Israel in destroying & cursing of these peoples, followed not their own hatred, but the instinction of God, for they wer his Lieuetenauntes, and might be called his woorkemen, when as they destroyed those whom god himselfe had declared to be enemies, and cōmaunded that they should be destroyed by them.
And Iudah tooke Hazzam, and the borders therof. These words do al so cōfirme y
t those things which ar now declared, wer don after y
e death of
Iosua, when y
e publique wealth of the Israelites was gouerned by elders. For when in the booke of
Iosua the .xiii. chap. those Cities were reckoned which were least
[Page 32] vnconquered after
Iosuas death, these cities
Haza, Ascalon, and
Accaron are expressed by name. But there is a doubt, after what sorte these Cities were sayde to haue pertained to the
Philistians in the tyme of
Samuel, when
Saul dyd then raigne. Yea and the same is written in the third chap. of this booke. There are some whiche affirme that these Cities were not nowe altogether taken, but so possessed, that the Israelites obtained some part of the lande which belonged vnto them, which semeth not very lykely vnto me, seing that the historye sayth that not onely euery one of these Cities wer taken, but that also the endes and borders of them came into the power of
Iudah. Wherfore I would rather iudge that their opinion is best, which affirme that
Iudah dyd now in deede possesse these Cities, as it is written, but afterwarde when the Israelites synned, they wer agayne dryuen out of them by the
Philistians, who wonne them agayne to their own vse, and so did wynne them, that they counted them as most principal dominions, for they dyd set ouer eche of them certaine noble gouernours. Neyther ought that much to moue vs, bycause the history doth onelye name
Iudah now, & speaketh nothing of
Symeon. For that might be, bicause the lot of both these tribes was ioyned together, and they had made a couenant to fyght together: therfore when we heare the name of the one, we must therwith also vnder stand the name of the other. And the name of
Symeon is rather vnspoken of, bicause God hymself in his oracle gaue
Iudah the principality in this expedition.
19 And the Lord was with Iudah, & he possessed the mountayne: for he could not dryue out the inhabitauntes of the valley, bycause they had yron Chariotes.
He possessed the mountayne.
The figure
zeugma. It is written in Hebrewe
Veioresch Hahar, which if it wer properly translated is, he draue away the mountain, which without doubt is a figuratiue phrase, for the figure
[...] is added, by whych figure, one and the selfe woord serueth for two members, bycause that woorde
Ioschebe which is inhabitours, ought to be repeated: that euen as it is said that
Iudah could not dryue out the inhabitours of the valley, so also must be vnderstand that the inhabitours of the mountaine were expelled by him, so that thys woord
Hahar is the genitiue case, as is this woord
Haamak, that is, of the valley. The conquering of both these was paynfull, bycause Cityes founded vpon mountaines are by nature of the place wel fenced, and they whych dwelled in the
[...] valleys, wer very experte in a kynde of fence, I meane yron chariotes. But least peraduenture we should thinke that the inhabitors of the mountains wer driuen out of their place of
Iudah by the strength of men ther is set before.
And the Lord was with Iudah. As though it had ben said, bicause they fought by the fauour of God, therfore the hilly places wer conquered. Wherefore if God had ayded them of
Iudah with the like fauour in their battayl in the valley, they should also haue ouercome those which inhabited the valley. There semeth also a cause to be geuen bycause they had yron chariotes.
He that shal reade the Iliades of
Homer, shal easely perceaue that the men in the old time vsed chariotes in battails, & also the same may be gathered both out of the most auncient histories, & also out of the latter writers,
Quintus Curtius. & amongest other
Quintus Curtius writing the life of
Alexander doth playnlye make mencion of such chariots in the battail fought against
Darius. But I thinke no writer writeth more plainly of them than doth
Liuie.
Titus Liuius. For he in that battail wherin
Antiochus was ouercome of the
Romanes, which is in the .4.
decade, & seuenth boke, thus describeth the chariotes whych he calleth hooked. He sayth that they were fenced chiefely after thys maner.
The description of hooked chariotes. The poyntes aboute the draught tree standing out from the yoke, had as it were hornes, wherwith whatsoeuer they met they mighte thruste it throughe: and twoo hookes hoong oute at eche ende
[Page] of the cart, the one euen with the carte, the other fastened downewarde to the earth, the former serued to cut asunder what so euer came on the syde of it, the other was made to crushe them which fel downe, or went vnder. There were also two sundry hookes fastened after the same sorte to the exetrees of both the wheles. &c. The vse therfore of these chariotes endured til the tyme that
Antiochus was ouercome. Howbeit wee neuer reade that the
Romanes vsed them. And that they wer horrible to behold, and hard to be conquered, may manifestly be gathered by the booke of
Iosua: For ther in the .vii. chap. when the tribe of
Ioseph complained bicause it was so many in number, and had obtained so narrow a lot,
Iosua commaunded them, that if they had not roume inoughe, they shoulde go and dwel or els conquere the places of their enemies adioyning vnto them. They excused them selues, that they coulde not doo that, bicause their neighbours had yron chariotes. But to repeate more auncienter thinges,
Pharao (as it is written in the booke of
Exodus) when hee persecuted the Israelites which fled, is said to haue had chariotes, and with the same he tooke vpon hym to enter into the sea. But they beyng ouerthrowen by the power of God, hee was punished for breaking his fidelity.
Yron chariotes cānot resist godBut this is diligently to be considered of vs, whether either yron chariotes, or hooked cartes can withstand the power and promise of God, which if we shal deny (as in very dede we must deny) why ar they then put here as the cause that the victory was not obtained?
Marke the distinction. Whereunto I aunswer, that in this place is set foorth vnto vs the nighest cause, namely that which was sene. And certainly it was a cause, if we should looke onely vpon mans strength. For the
Chananites being so armed and appointed could not be ouercome of the Israelites, whych wer weaker than they,
Why god graū ted not the hole victorye vnto Iudah. and not so wel armed and fenced. But if the power and might of God be considered, the same could not be letted either by chariots and weapons or els by power of souldiours. Why did not God therfore whych had geuen part of the victory, graunt the whole also?
Kimhi aunswereth that God dyd it to proue the Israelites thereby. For if they should haue bene constrayned (as in deed they were) to dwel for a while with these nations, then experience should haue tryed how much they woulde set by theyr God, namelye whether they woulde perseuer in the lawfull woorshypping of hym, or whether they would enclyne to their owne madde customes and woorshipping of Idoles. Thys in deede is a true cause, and is set foorth also in the thyrd chapter of thys booke, and toward the end lykewyse of the second. There is also an other cause added, namely to teach them the arte and faculty of fyghting: for they whych lyued before their tyme, had no skyll of these thynges. And it is written in
Exodus that it was done that wylde beastes shoulde not to muche abounde, whych must needes haue followed, if the land shoulde haue bene brought into a wyldernes, before the Hebrues could haue fylled it all. And of these causes I haue made mention before.
But the
Paraphrastes Chaldaicus bringeth an other cause besydes these, and sayth that the chyldren of Israell had synned: Wherefore he thincketh it was done, that God iustlye and woorthylye withdrewe hys ayde and gaue not vnto them when they fought, the whole and full victorye. And that, though the scripture doo not now expresse it, may euidently be gathered by other places. For we are very often taught by the holy scriptures that idolatry and synnes were iust causes why the Israelites sometymes went without the victorye promysed vnto them. And though there had bene no other synne, we myght alledge thys, that their faith and prayers were sometymes somewhat more slacke than they ought to haue bene.
When faith & praiers waxe fainte, then the victory is takē away. Whych manyfestly appeareth in that warre which the Hebrues made in the wyldernesse againste
Amelecke for the enemye ouercame, when
Moyses beganne to be faynte in prayer. And agayne, the victorye was restored vnto the people of God, when the fayth and prayer of
Moyses was more
[Page 33] earnest and vehement. Sinne therfore is not onely y
e cause of death, but it bringeth also al infirmities, weakenesse and miseries. Contrarily faith is the cause of all strength, myghte, and victories. Wherefore it is very well written in the xi. Chapter to the Hebrues, that the Sainctes through fayth haue wonne kingdomes. Which may and oughte to be referred to the spirituall victorye. Wherfore Iohn doth faythfully admonyshe vs, when he sayth. This is the victorye which ouercommeth the world, euen our fayth.
By these may be gathered that God leaueth those destitute of hys ayde,
God forsaketh thē that forsake hym. which do forsake hym. And that may easely be declared by oure fyrste Father
Adam. Who, as he was created of God, before synne, he had that power of strength and will, that he myght if he had would haue resisted synne.
Adam was not altogether forsaken of God after hys synne. But when he filthely fell from God, God also forsooke hym, but not vtterly, howbeit he forsooke hym so that he lost many of hys giftes, and much fauour. For God would not haue taken so many good thynges awaye from hym, but that he fyrste had alienated hymselfe from God through synne. After the same sorte happeneth it to those whiche are nowe borne a new, who although they haue not yet recouered a perfecte free will, neuerthelesse for so muche as they are somewhat restored, and may nowe woorke together with God, if they shall despyse the gifts whiche they haue in them, and will not vse them as it is meete they shoulde, God will iustely forsake them, seing they shrynke fyrste awaye from hym. As we maye see in the parable of the Lorde, wherein it is written, That the maister going into a farre countrey distributed money vnto hys seruauntes, to be encreased by theyr industrye and laboure, whiche thyng as many of the seruauntes as dyd, they were both commended of theyr maister when he retourned, and also nobelly rewarded. But he whiche despysed the commaundement of hys Lorde, was greuously reproued, and greuously punished, for the money committed vnto him.
But if we shall speake of the fyrst generation,
Concernyng eternall reprobation, the reprobate are forsakē of God before they forsake him. whereby we are borne the children of wrath, and we all are of that masse, which lieth vnder the curse, from which God by his election deliuereth whom he will: and whom he will not, he forsaketh according to hys own will and purpose, which is alwayes iust, though it be hidden from vs. Seing that that is not brought to passe by works foresene, neither that we haue done any good or euill before we were borne, it is manyfest, that certayne, I meane reprobates, are forsaken of God as touchyng hys election, before that they forsake hym by theyr propre will, for so much as they had not it from the beginning. But we at thys present, speake not of thys matter, neyther will descend into thys question. But that which we haue now affirmed
Augustine hath set forth in the .14. chap. of his
Soliloquii animae ad deum.
Augustine. Thou Lord (saith he) doest not forsake me, vnles I firste forsake thee. And in his booke
de natura et gratia against the
Pelagians in the .27. and .28. chap. he elegantlye expoundeth after what sorte God is forsaken of men before hee forsaketh them.
By pride god is forsaken before he forsaketh. Among other vyces (sayth he) pryde whych is borne in vs, is the head of al euils. Which pryde vseth then to shewe foorth it selfe, when wee are doing well, and when we are in the chiefe course of the victory. There the vayne hart of man is puffed vp, so that euerye man thinketh hym selfe not to bee as other men are. Thys is for the most parte, the fyrst departure from God, whereby hee agayne wythdraweth hym selfe from vs. And euen as wee doo not departe from hym by steppes, but in hart and affection, so is he seperated from vs, not concerning place, (for, for as muche as he is infinite he occupieth all thynges) but he wythdraweth from vs hys fauour, gyftes, grace, and helpe.
God vseth also to punyshe the electe to theyr saluation.
And when he is so departed, they whych are forsaken, vndoubtedly fal & come to great misery: which falles yet & miseries (as he is good) he vseth as remedies toward his elect, y
t they may learne that in the same mysery whych before they had forgotten, namely, that their strengthe was supported by God, and that it
[Page] was his mere gifte, in that before they dyd any thing that was good, or attayned to any prosperous things: that being so admonished, they myght retourne into the waye, and with moste faythfull prayers to emplore of hym helpe, ayde, and strength, as they whiche had nowe proued, by theyr own ill, that they had all these thinges of him when they stoode. And after thys sorte is that interpreted, whiche the Apostle writeth to the
Phil. With feare and trembling, worke your saluation. For it is God whiche worketh in you both to will and also to perfourme, accordyng to hys good pleasure. Wherefore feare and tremblyng ought alwayes to be driuen into vs, least when thinges goe wel land prosperous with vs we waxe proude, and whilest we profite in our renouation and instauration. Then must we alwaies with feare and trembling marke that it is God which worketh in vs both to will and to performe.
We must not liue in securitye Neyther dyd the Apostle say, liue rightly and holily with securitye: For he which is secure from himself, estemeth thinges so, as though they depended of himself, which is not to be suffred, when as it is God himselfe which worketh in vs both to will and to perfourme.
But peraduenture thou wilte aske, seing God from the beginning noblye promysed vnto
Iudah, that he would deliuer the land into his handes, and hath not nowe graunted the perfecte victorye,
Augustine. Whether the wil of god may be chaunged. whether he haue chaunged hys sentence? Heare what
Augustine writeth of the will of God in hys .22 booke
De ciuitate Dei and first chap. The will of God (sayth he) is not chaunged, but we are chaunged. But he semeth after a sort to be chaunged, when where as before he was gentle vnto vs, he now appeareth angry: and contrarilye where as before he shewed himself to be angry, he now in a manner gently offereth himself vnto vs. Wherefore when we our selues are chaunged we doe finde him after a sort, to be chaunged in those things which we suffer. Euen as the sunne semeth to be chaūged, when we our selues are halfe blind, or that our eyes be greued by some disease. For he which before was pleasaunt, mery, and swete, beginneth now to be troublesome & hurtfull, not as touching his own nature (which alwaies abideth one, & is vnchaūgeable) but by reasō of our disease & vice, wherunto we are newly fallen.
What were the causes of the vnperfecte victorye of them of Iudah. Wherefore let vs more plainely gather y
e causes of y
e vnperfect victory. The nighest cause and y
e true cause was, bicause y
e
Chananites had Iron chariots: for taking away Gods helpe, the Hebrues were not like vnto thē, being so wel fenced & appoynted. And god (as
Ionathas y
e
Chaldeian testifyeth) withdrewe his fauor & ayde, bycause they had sinned. Wherfore a iuste punishment followed them, y
t they went without the victory. But God whiche is alwaies very mercifull to his electe, vseth this punyshment to the commoditye of the Israelites: namely fyrst to teach them the arte of warfare: then y
e his ayde, being withdrawen, they might fele their own weakenesse, & might see w
t what māner of enemies they should haue to do. Besides this y
t the earth might not be wasted of wilde beasts, & brought into a wildernesse. Finally, therby to trye thē.
What temptation is.Temptation is nothyng ells, but to take profe or triall of any thyng. Wherfore the end of temptation is ryghtly called knowledge: as they which wil passe ouer a water,
The end of temptation. do trye oute the shallowe places, to knowe the depth of the water: woundes also are tried of Surgeons, to fele the depenesse of thē. In tempting therfore knowledge is sought. But God nedeth not that new and freshe knowledge, for such is his nature, that he knoweth al thyngs most perfectly. But whē he tempteth, he only doth it, to leade mē to the knowledge of those things which they ought to knowe.
To what end holy men are tempted. Wherfore when he sometymes tempteth good & holy mē, he bryngeth into lyght and maketh open the fayth, obedience, strength and godlinesse, which before lay hid in theyr hartes, that they which see the same things, might glorifie God the author of them. And that they which are so tempted, whē they haue gotten the victory, may geue him thankes, and desire of him, that euen as he hath done now, so he would vouchsafe to helpe thē cōtinually in tētations
[Page 34] Moreouer therby, thei do conceaue a greater hope, y
e god wil be with thē to helpe them in time to come, when as they see y
t he hath so louingly graūted vnto them the same helpe now. Wherfore the ende of these temptations is, not that God should know those things, wherof he was before ignoraunt, but that therby his giftes, fauour and grace might not be hidden. But bicause sometimes it happeneth, that in temptations, euen the elect are ouercome, god graūteth them after their fall, to rise vp againe frō sinne a great deale more modest than they were before, which the holy scriptures testifie to haue bene done in
Peter and
Dauid. The end theyfore of such temptations, is, y
t we knowing our own weakenesse, might lay down our Peacockes tayle, and haue a regard to God him selfe, as to the fountayne of all good thinges. But the reprobate do fall in temptations,
For what cause y
e reprobate are tempted. and that alwayes from one euill to a worse, that their iniquitye, vnryghteousnesse and wickednesse might be manifested, which before lay hyd in theyr harts, and whilest they laye hyd, they myght easely appeare vnto men, good men. But God will haue those thinges brought to lyght, that hys iudgementes and condemnation vpon them may appeare, as in very dede they are most iust. And certainely after this manner were the Israelites tempted in the desert, as many as were reprobate.
If temptations turne to good for the godly, why do they praye agaynst them,
Whether we may pray agaynst temptations. when as they pray in the Lordes prayer, Lead vs not into temptation? Whervnto I answere, that we may not pray against y
e first kinde of temptatiō, wherin we get the victorye, except peraduenture for as muche as we are full of imfyrmitye whilest in that battayle we ouercome the enemye, we also our selues are in some part wounded. For godly men desyre that all fallynges, though they be neuer so litle, may be driuen from them.
Temptations wherein we, ouercome are not of them selues to be prayed agaynst Howbeit we may not praye to be rid of these battayles altogether, wherin we ouercome: Yea holy men haue somtimes desyred to haue the same graunted vnto them. For
Dauid sayd: Proue me God, burne my raynes and my hart,
Iames also sayth that such temptations pertayne to our felicitye when he writeth. Blessed is the man which suffereth temptatiō, &c. So farre is it absent, that it should seme to be prayed agaynst.
What kinde of temptation we must pray agaynst. But those are to be prayed agaynst wherin godly men slippe and are ouercome, although at length they turne to them to good: bycause that in euery falling, both God is offended and also his law violated, which we must by al meanes abhorre and deteste. For although we persuade our selues, that therby some good thinges will come: yet must we alwayes remember, that the same happeneth not by y
e deserte of sinne, but by the goodnesse of god. And it is a constant rule that sinnes are not to be wyshed for, though we might get neuer so muche good thereby. The thyrd kynde of temptation wherby men fall into destruction,
What the godly must wayte for when they are tempted w
t aduersitye. must altogether be prayed agaynst, although they which be godly in dede, and the electe of god, are not affeard of y
e kinde of temptation, For as much as they stand not in doubt of theyr saluation. But the godly must alwayes loke for this, when they are afflicted by the goodnesse of god, that it would please him to mitigate the temptations, and geue thē strength to beare them, for as much as he hath promysed by his Apostle so to do. For it is written to the
Corinthians: God is faythfull, whiche wil not suffer you to be tempted aboue your power, but will with the temptation make a way out, But whether god doth stirre vp men to sinnes by temptation, shal be afterward declared. But now to the history.
20 And they gaue Hebron vnto Chaleb, as Moyses sayd: and he expelled thence the three sonnes of Enak.
21 And the children of Beniamin dyd not caste oute the Iebusites that inhabited Ierusalem: Wherefore the Iebusites dwelled with the children of Beniamin in Ierusalem, vnto thys day.
Thys sentence is therefore repeated, bicause now the warres of the tribe of
Iudah are declared, of which warres,
Chaleb without doubt was the captayne. Wherefore here is declared what he obteyned. Namely those thynges whiche God would haue done (as he had spoken by
Moyses) as it is written in y
e fyrste chap. of
Deut. and .xiii. chap. of
Num. and xiiii. and xxv. chap. of
Iosuah. But that which is written after it how that the children of
Beniamin dyd not caste out the
Iebusites that inhabited
Ierusalem, but dwelled together with them, perteyneth to those things, which the other tribes had to do with the
Chananites, and it beginneth with
Beniamin for thys cause, bycause that tribe was next to
Iudah, yea and that which is now written of
Beniamin,
The citie of Ierusalem was cōmon to Beniamin & Iudah is declared of the tribe of
Iudah in the booke of
Iosuah toward the ende of the xv. chap. And I thynke that that was therfore done, bicause the citye of
Ierusalem was in the limite of both the tribes, and was inhabited together both of them of
Iudah, and also of the
Beniamites. Yea and some affyrme that y
e part of the citye where the temple stoode belonged to the tribe of
Beniamin, and to that purpose do they wrest that, which
Iacob the Patriarch sayd on his death bed, when he blessed hys sonne
Beniamin: Beniamin is a rauenyng wolfe, early taking hys pray, in the morning, and deuiding the spoyles at euen: thynkyng thys oracle to belong to the morning and euenyng sacrifices of the Temple. But howe truly they so doe, I will not nowe reason. But yet they are not so farre oute of the waye, as
Augustine, whiche drewe the saying of the Patriarche to
Paule the Apostle, bycause he was of the tribe of
Beniamin.
A fayned tale of the Hebrues.I am not ignoraunt, how the Hebrues write, that the
Iebusites were not cast out for thys cause, bycause that
Iudas and
Beniamin would kepe the couenaunt, which (as it is written in the xxi. chapter of
Gen.) was made betwene
Abraham and
Abimilech King of the
Gerarites, where the moste holy Patriarche sware, that he woulde not molest neyther the same
Abimilech, neyther hys children, nor yet hys childrens children, wherefore seing he and hys posteritye inhabited
Ierusalem, and hys childrens children liued euen to thys tyme, they saye it was not lawfull for the Hebrues, for bycause of theyr othe geuen, to caste them oute. But afterwarde vnder
Dauid, the tyme of the couenaunte was oute, bycause then were the childrens children of
Abimilech worne out. And for that cause
Dauid dyd caste out the
Iebusites oute of the citye of
Ierusalem, as it is written in the latter booke of
Samuel the v. chapter. But these are but fables, yea if we looke in the foresayde booke of
Samuell we shall fynde, that the strong fenced Castle of that citye was the cause that the
Iebusites were not caste oute before.
For
Dauid to y
e end be would obtayne y
e castle, promised a noble reward to him that coulde conquere it, namely that he woulde make hym Captayne of the whole hoste of
Israel:
Two causes why the Iebusites were not expelled oute of Ierusalem. whiche office
Ioab obtayned, bycause he fyrste of all Conquered the Castle. There were two causes why they of
Iudah and y
e
Beniamites dyd not caste oute the
Iebusites out of the citye. One was bycause they obeyed not the worde of God as they should haue done: wherfore they are muche to bee blamed. The other cause was, bycause by the prouidence of God, and hys moste wyse dispensation, the whole victorye of these nations was reserued for
Dauid and
Salomon. For so God abuseth the synnes of men, that they hynder not but set forwarde hys Counselles, specially for the aduauncyng of hys electe.
But to retourne to the Hebrues howe shoulde they knowe that the posteritye of
Abimilech dwelled in
Ierusalem. The Scripture testifyeth no suche thyng. Neyther can they tel whether
Abimilech & his stocke belonged to the
Iebusites. Wherfore let vs leaue their fayned opinion vnto thēselues,
Ierusalem was in the olde time called Iebus. & let vs follow this sentence nowe alledged, as the truer. But this is not to bee ouerskipped, that
Ierusalem was sometymes called
Iebus. For as muche as the .xix. chapter of this boke testifyeth the same, & also the fyrst booke of
Paralipomenon in the xi. chap.
[Page 35] The summe is, the
Iebusites possessed the castle, whiche being well fensed, & for as much as God had iustly with drawen his helpe for the Hebrewes, they could not be dryuen out of it, but
Beniamin and the tribe of
Iudah obtayned the Citie in the meane time.
Why Saul & Dauid triumphed in Ierusalem. Vnto whiche citie
Saul and
Dauid went after they had gotten the victory against the
Philistians, and
Dauid himselfe brought thether the hed of
Goliah whom he had slayne. Peraduenture that citie semed mete for that triumphe, bicause it was cōmon to the tribe of
Iudah and
Beniamin, vnto which tribes
Dauid and
Saul belonged. For as
Dauid was of the tribe of
Iudah, so was
Saul a
Beniamite.
And the Iebusites dwelled in Ierusalem, vnto this day. That is euen to the time of
Samuel who is thought to haue written this booke. For afterwarde came
Dauid, when he ruled ouer all
Israel and expelled the
Iebusites from thence, as it is sayd.
22 In like maner they that were of the house of Ioseph went vp to Bethel, and the Lord was with them.
23 And the house of Ioseph caused Bethel to be searched (whiche before tyme was called Luz.)
24 And y
e spyes saw a man come out of the citie, and they said vnto hym: shewe vs, we pray thee, the way into the citie, and we wil shew thee mercy.
25 And when he had shewed thē the waye into the citie: they smote it with the edge of the sworde. But let the man and all his houshold go free.
26 And the man went into the lande of the Hethites, and built a citie, and called the name thereof Luz: whiche is the name thereof vnto this day.
After the tribes of
Iudah and
Beniamin is also declared in a certaine ordre what the other tribes did. The house of
Ioseph cōprehendeth with it
Ephraim &
Manasses. First therfore is declared what those tribes ioyned together did, afterward shalbe shewed of eche of their doings perticularly. This is chiefly set first, that God was with them, to make vs to vnderstand that this enterprise had good successe, bycause God wrought with them. The name of the citie (but afterward) was called
Bethel, that is, the house of God, bycause
Iacob when he had there sene God and his aungels ascending and descending vpon a ladder (as it is written in the 28. chap. of
Gen:) so named it.
Luz is not Ierusalem. But in the olde tyme it was called
Luz, whiche worde signifieth in Hebrewe a Walnutte, or an Almond or els a Filberd Nut, bycause peraduenture that place was set with Wallnut trees, Filberd trees, Almond trees, and the like kynde of trees. They are very muche deceaued, whiche thought this citie to haue ben
Ierusalem, for
Ierusalem was taken long before, neither was it euer called
Luz or
Bethel. And besides that this citie pertayned to the house of
Ioseph,
A forged tale of the Iewes. but
Ierusalem longed to the lott of
Beniamin and
Iudah. But that whiche the Hebrues trifle concernyng the gate of this citie, is not worthy to be rehearsed. For what is more childishe than to saye, that the way of entraūce into the citie was thorough a caue, at the mouth wherof was a nut tree, a tree I say great and hollowe, wherby they went down into the caue whiche would entre into the citie, and for that cause it was called
Luz. They should haue spoken somewhat more likely, if they had sayd, there had ben a gate in some secrete part or side of the walles, the commyng wherunto should haue ben by certaine turnings, and circuites so that straungers should not easly haue found out the way vnto the same.
Dauid Kimhi
D. Kimhi writeth that there were many gardynes there.
If I should speake my fantasie herin, I thincke that the spyes of the
Israelites
[Page] did not aske him which came out of y
e citie for the dore or gate therof, but whiche was the weaker part of the city or lesse fenced, that therby they might the easier take it.
The third espiall mencioned in the scripture Now is rehearsed in the scripture the third espiall. For the first is written in the 13. chap. of the booke of
Num: And other happened vnder
Iosuah, when those two searched the citie of
Iericho, whom
Rahab the harlot kept with great fidelitie, and this is the third whiche we haue now in hand. Although I am not ignoraunt how
Ioseph in the boke of
Gen: layd to his brethrens charge that they were espies.
What in y
e office of spyes. But the office or worke of spyes is (as
Chrisostome sayeth expounding those wordes of
Paul in the second chap: of the Epistle to the
Galathians, y
t there were false brethren entred to espye out our libertie) to know the doynges of the aduersaries, that they & theirs may haue the easier entraunce to conquere or repulse them.
The end of espiall. Now we vnderstand that it is an action, and we se to what end it is ordayned. Moreouer it commeth from enemies and from the mynde of an aduersarye, but it is done priuily and craftely. As it is lawfull to fight with enemyes by violence and weapons, when warre is iustly taken in hand: so is it iust and lawfull to vse the arte and subtelty of especials.
Ierome. Espyall is a thing īdifferēt.Wherfore
Ierome vpon the 27. chap. of
Ezechiel sayeth, that espiall, is an indifferent thing, namely whiche a man may vse both well and euill.
Moses and
Iosua vsed it wel, and also the house of
Ioseph. If so be that the warre be vniust, the espiall also seruing thereunto must nedes be vniust. Wherefore the brethren of
Ioseph, when he sayd vnto them, by the health of
Pharao, ye be spyes, did put that away from them as an iniury or a rebuke.
The punishement of spyes. But the punishment of spyes is, if they be taken, all one with the punishment, wherwith enemyes are punished when they fall into the handes of their enemyes. For it skilleth not whether a man fight with weapons, or by subtilty and craft. Wherfore they must be of a valiaunt courage,
Spyes muste be valiaunt.
Iosephus. which for the common profit aduenture their lyfe in playeng the spyes. For it is not euery mās office to be a good spye.
Iosephus writeth that the spyes whiche were sent by
Iosua, were Geometricians, bycause they ought well and clearly to knowe the situation of the lande of
Chanaan. And
Homer made
Vlisses and
Dyomedes spyes,
Homerus. whiche otherwise were noble men.
Paul the Apostle in the Epistle to the
Galath. The place before mentioned the secōd chap. excellently referred the worke of espiall to cententions of Religion, where he writeth that there were
[...], that is, that there were certain incommers being false brethren, whiche
[...], that is, came in.
[...], that is to espye out our liberty as though he should saye, they subtilely sought & searched out our opinion, to resist it, and made search with great diligence whether they that were with vs kept vncircumcisiō, and that was to espye out the libertie of the Churche, namely that by it, they might ouerthrowe Christians.
And the spyes saw a man come out of the citie. For what cause he wēt forth the history declareth not: but there may be many causes ymagined, either for that he went to seke somewhat to serue him for his houshold, or els bycause he would flye out of the citie being besieged, or finally, that he also might spye out what was done by his aduersaries.
And they sayd vnto him: shewe vs, we pray thee, the waye into the citie. They speake fayre vnto y
e man, & they pray hym, y
e matter is not done by violēce, but they go aboute by frendly wordes to allure him to betray the Citie.
Whether the spyes of y
e Chananites coulde promise safely?
And we will shewe thee mercy. Seing y
e spyes had not the chief gouernment in the publicque: wealth, how durst they promise safety vnto this man, especially if they had no peculiar commaundement to do it. Thou wilt say peraduenture, they did trust that the Senate of the publicque wealth and Captaynes of the warre would ratifye that whiche they had promised. But the superiour power can not confirme that whiche is done by the subiectes, vnlesse it be also lawfull for the same power both to promysse and also to performe that whiche
[Page 36] they did. And God had prohibited by expresse wordes that the
Chananites & those proscripte people shuld haue their liues graunted thē. Peraduēture they had before their eies y
t exāple of
Rahab the harlot, whose lyfe in the time of
Iosua was not onely spared, but also she was receaued with all that belonged vnto her, and had in honor of the Hebrues. And therby they iudged that it was in their power,
The lawes made by god against the Chananites myght be mitigated. to promise mercy and safety vnto this man. And as touchyng the commaundement of God they thought gods lawes not to be so rigorous, but they might be mitigated with some equitie, as they remembred was done with the
Gabaonites, who were neuer the lesse
Heuites or
Hemorrites. Thou wilt say peraduenture: They were so saued, that they were brought into bondage.
Bondage is a ciuille death. And necessitie of bondage is a certain kynde of ciuile death: wherfore in that the life of the body was graunted them, the commaundement of the Lord seemeth not to be violated, for they were killed after a sorte. The question is not dissolued by this reason. For God prescribed by law that the
Chananites should be put to death, he referred not that to a ciuile death, but to a naturall death: for otherwise
Saul might haue excused him selfe, bycause he killed not
Agag the king of
Amalek with an outwarde death. For he might haue sayd that he had alreadye kylled hym ciuilly.
But bycause we are fallen into talke of the
Gabaonites,
Of the Gabaonites. I thincke it good to say thus much of them.
God ratified the othe performed to the Gabaonites. First that God did ratifye that othe whiche the Israelites performed vnto them, for as muche as he ayded the host of the Hebrues in deliueryng their citie from the other
Chananites. But if so be that they had violated the curse, whiche was set forth of God, he would not then haue done it. For, bycause of the sinne of
Achan, who had by stealth saued somwhat of that whiche was cursed in
Iericho, he did not helpe his people, but suffred them fowly to be slayne, when they fought against the citie
Hay. Besides this it is writtē in the latter booke of
Samuel that God plagued the Israelites thre yeares continually with most grieuous famine, bycause the
Gabaonites were contrary to the othe slayne & of
Saul miserably dispersed. Wherfore (according to their request) they had seauen of
Sauls posteritie deliuered them to be hanged. These are most certayne signes that God ratified the couenaunt which was made with the
Gabaonites, althoughe the Hebrues did grieuously sinne bycause they asked not counsell of God.
Augustine sayth vpon the x. chap. of the Iudges,
Augustine, when he interpreteth that place where it is written, that God promised
Iosua that he would be with him in the defence of the citie
Gabaon. For he sayd, be not affeard: for I will deliuer them (namely the
Chananites whiche besieged that citie) into thine handes, if this league (sayth he) nowe made with the
Gabaonites had displeased God, then would he haue commaunded
Iosua, not to take in hand that expedition, but rather to haue broken the couenaunt made with that nation. But contrarily he encouraged hym, and of his owne accord, not called vpon, promised to aide him in the fight, as it may appeare by the history.
But why he did allow the league so made,
Why God allowed y
e league made with the Gabaonites. there may be two reasons geuen for it. One (which is there mentioned) bycause they had bounde it with an othe. And if the Israelites shuld haue violated that, their neighbours would haue coū ted them as irreligious and vngodly, and their God should haue ben mocked and contemned. Wherfore lest the name of God and the fame of the Israelites should haue ben euill spoken of, it was ratified, althoughe it was vnwysely and without prayse perfourmed. The other cause is,
The Gabaonites were turned to the true God. bycause the
Gabaonites did now beleue in the true God, and were redy to embrase his religion and worshipping. Whiche may easely be gathered by two argumētes. For they sayd (as it is written in the ix. chap. of the booke of
Iosua) that they came in the name of the Lord beyng therfore moued therunto, bycause they had heard what thynges God had done for that peoples sake both in
Egypt, and also in the deserte, and lykewise about
Iordane. This is a tokē, that they now beleued the God of the Israelites.
[Page] Moreouer the same appeareth in that they were appoynted by the Hebrues to cary and to prepare wood and also to draw water for the sacrifices whiche were done vnto the true God. Therfore they were made labourers and seruauntes of the tabernacle, and of the tribe of
Leui, wherof they were called
Nathinites.
Nathinites.And that y
e lawes whiche were made of God agaynst the seauen nations which inhabited the land of
Chanaan were by this equitie to be interpreted and mitigated that if they returned to y
e true God, & would make peace with the Iewes, they should not be destroyed, it manifestly appeareth by that whiche is written in the xi, chap: of the booke of
Iosua, namely howe those nations were therfore destroyed, bycause none of them (the
Gabaonites only excepted) made peace with the Israelites. For God, to the end he would extinguish them, had hardened their hartes, and therfore they most obstinatly fought agaynst the Israelites.
Why god hardned the hartes of the Chananites.But the cause why God so hardned their harts was, bycause their sinnes were ful. Wherfore they beleued not as did the
Gabaonites, neither adioyned they thē selues vnto the Israelites. And for that cause they continually resistyng them, fought so vnluckely, that at length they were cleane destroyed. But if so be that they had made peace with the Iewes, and not despised their godlynesse and religion, they should haue had the same geuen them whiche the
Gabaonites had.
But in that they did not so, their former sinnes were the hinderaunce therof, for God for those sinnes tooke away his spirite and grace from their hartes, that at the last they might suffer most iust punishment for their wickednesse. This is the equitie and mitigations of those lawes against the
Chananites.
Why the Gabaonites were brought into bondage.But there ariseth a doubt, why the punishement of bondage was imposed to the
Gabaonites, if they nowe became so good and faithfull. Whereunto is aunswered, that they therfore fell into bondage, bycause they vsed fraude and guile.
For God would for this cause haue them so punished, lest he should seme to allowe disceate and euill artes.
Whether the Luzite repēted
Ierome.Now resteth to enquire what this betrayer of
Luz did, whether he beleued and embrased the true worshippyng of God. Out of the holy scriptures we can gather nothing of this thing. Peraduenture it may seme to some, that he abode still in his vngodlynesse, bycause he went awaye from thence, neither abode he with the Iewes. But this is but a weake reason. For
Iethro also departed from
Moyses, whō he came to se in the desert, although (as I thincke) he left his sonne with
Moyses. Neither would Christ haue all those continually with him whom he healed, and whiche beleued in him: yea he sayd to one of thē, who would haue dwelled with hym, returne to thine owne and shew vnto them what hath happened vnto the. &c.
¶Of Prodition or treason.
THis place admonisheth vs somewhat to intreate of Prodition or treason, and it is demaunded, whether it be at any tyme lawfull: or whether it be alwayes forbidden?
Ierome
Ierome de optimo genere interpretādi to Pammachius sayth, that princes in dede do admitte treason, but they condēne the traytours,
Antigonus. wherunto agreeth the sayeng of
Antigonus the kyng, whiche is, I loue traytors so lōg as they are in betrayeng, but whē they haue betrayed I hate thē.
Plutarch rehearseth the same of
Rhimotalcus kyng of the
Thracians,
Plutarche. who fell frō
Anthony to
Augustus, and after his victorye, boasted of the same among his cuppes,
Augustus. and that so insolently and aboue measure, that
Augustus turnyng hym to his frend, said this sentence of him, I allowe the treason, but I prayse not the traytor. Which sentence thoughe it semeth allowable and iust at the first sight, yet ought it not to be counted either true or wise. For if wise men will allowe and prayse any action, they must also prayse and allowe the author therof. Neither doth any man that lawfully vnto others, whiche he would not suffer hymselfe. And there is no man whiche would be content to be betrayed hymselfe or
[Page 37] any of his.
Lasthenes. Furthermore one
Lasthenes when he had betrayed his countrey
Olinthus to the
Macedonians, & thought that for the same he should haue ben highly honored of them, it happened farre otherwise vnto him. For he was called of the souldiers a traytor euery where through out the campe. Wherfore he grieuously complayned of the same matter to
Phillip the king, who made him aunswere.
Philip of Macedonia. That his
Macedonians were very rude & rusticall people which knew not how to cal things by any other name, than by their owne & propre name. They call (sayth he) a bote, a bote. This was as if he shuld haue answered, Seing y
u art such a one, thou oughtest not to be called by any other name.
Asconius Paedianus.
Asconius Paedianus in secundam verrinam sayth, that to betray is worse then to besiege. For the enemyes (sayth he) besiege, & it ought not to be coūted a vyce in them. But they betray whiche would seme friendes, and ought to be such in dede towardes vs. And therfore when they departe from their office of friendship,
Ierome. Theodosius y
e Emperour. they synne farre more grieuously than do the other.
Ierome also in the place before alledged
De optimo genere interpretandi ad Pammachiū, sheweth how
Theodosius the Emperor put to death
Hesychius the consull, bicause he opened the letters of the patriarche
Gamaliel, neither was that any meruayle, bycause with the
Romanes it was death, to open the secretes of any man, as it is writtē in y
e digestes
De re militari, in the law
Omne, & in the third law & in the
Codice de cōmerciis & mercaturis And in the digestes.
Ad legē Iuliani maiestatis in the law 1. 2. 3. he y
e geueth ouer munitions committed to his charge, falleth into the daunger of treason.
The example also of
Camillus is worthy to be noted,
Camillus. who commaūded the scholemaister of the childrē of the
Phaliscians to be with stripes brought home of his disciples into his countrey, bicause he would haue betrayed them.
The Phisition of Pirrhus. The Phisitiō likewise of
Pirrhus, which promised vnto the
Romanes that for their sakes he would kill his kyng, was by them detected vnto the king, that he might the diligētlier beware of him. Wherby peace followed betwene
Pirrhus and the
Romanes. Esay in the xvi. chap: doth therfore vehemently rebuke the
Moabites, bycause they had so cruelly intreated the Israelites when they were oppressed of their enemyes, and admonisheth them, not to betray the Iewes flyeng vnto thē in their tyme for succor. And
Paul writeth in the latter Epistle to
Tymothe, that in the latter tymes there should be men corrupted with most grieuous and mischieuous dedes, among whiche he reckeneth traytors also. Bisides this the citizens are sworne vnto the Magistrates, to defend the citie or publicque wealth whē nede shall require. And thoughe they were not sworne,
The mēbers of al liuing thīgs do endāger thē selues for the nobler partes. yet the natural and common lawe requireth the same of them: whiche thing the members of all lyuing thinges do testifie, whiche do willingly and most readily endanger them selues for the bodye, and for the nobler partes therof, I meane the hed or harte. Whiche selfe thing the citizens are by the lawes of nature bound to do for their countrey, if it be in dāger. Wherfore if they should betray it, they can not be excused, but that they sinne most grieuously.
But it were good before we go any farther, to define what proditiō is.
What is to betraye. To betray semeth in Latine (as much as nedeth to this presēt purpose) to signifie thre things, namely to bewraye, to deceaue & deliuer vp. Prodition therfore is an actiō, wherby by guile, bewrayeng or deliuering vp, our neighbours or their goods are hurt, and that especially of those, which ought rather to defend the same.
But there be many kindes of prodition. For they do betraye,
Many kyndes of prodition.
Augustine. which do by subtile guile detecte the faultes of their brethren
Augustine. confirmeth this kynde of proditiō in his 2. questiō first, chap.
Si peccauerit, where he sayth reprehend thy brother secretly, of whose sinne y
u hast priuate knowledge: for if y
u shalt do it before al men, y
u shalt not then be a corrector of sinne, but a betrayer. Also he which circumuēteth an other, & bringeth him into dāger, he betrayeth hym. Wherfore
Ierome (as it is written 24. question the 3. chap.
Transferunt:
Ierome.) sayth that the same belongeth principally vnto false Prophetes & euil Pastors, which by their euill
[Page] doctrine and examples destroye the shepe of Christ committed to their charge, whome they ought to defend. They are numbred amongest them, which deliuer castels and munitiōs vnto their enemies. Wherof it is written at large, 22. question the .5. chap.
De forma. They are also counted betrayers, which do detecte & open secretes cōmitted vnto thē, especially such as are of great waight, & bring in danger the life, estimation or goods of their brethren. And this kind is noted in the title.
Chrisostome.
De paenitentia, distinct. 6. chap.
Sacerdotes. Finally
Chrisostome vpon
Matthew the .25. homely, as is alledged in the decrees 11. question the third, and chap.
Nolite timere. Not onely they are sayde to betraye the truth, whiche in the place of it speake a lye, but they also which do not frely professe the same. Wherfore there are reckoned many wayes or kyndes of prodition. But we will not speake of them all nowe presently: but onely will touche those kyndes whiche make for our purpose.
One man some tymes is both a betrayer and a spye.Howbeit I thincke it good, this to be added, that some iudge that prodition & espiall do not much differ one from another, and that it maye sometimes come to passe, that one man may be both a betrayer & a spye. For if any Citizen be corrupted with money by the enemyes, the same is both a betrayer of his countrey, & is also in the meane tyme a domesticall spye. But this semeth not to be wisely spoken, bycause the nature of these things (as it appeareth by their definitions) doth very much differ, although sometimes they cleaue both in one mā, so y
t the same man, may be both a betrayer & a spye. Euen as musike & Grammer differ much one frō an other, & yet it oftētimes happeneth y
e one mā is both a Grāmarian & a Musitian. Neuerthelesse y
e differēce (which I haue before mencioned) is for y
e most part obserued, although not alwayes, namely y
t espial cōmeth of enemies, and prodition of them which be amongest vs, whom we trust as friendes.
Whether prodition be at any tyme lawful.
Augustine.But to the end we may the playnlyer know, concerning prodition, whether it be at any tyme lawful? I thincke it best to cal to memory those wordes which
Augustine writeth against the letters of
Petilianus y
e second booke and 10. chap: We may not (sayth he) heare the complaynts of such as suffre, but seke out the mynde of them whiche are the doers. This the man of God wrote agaynst the
Donatistes, whiche accused our men, as betrayers & persecutors. And to them he answereth y
e
Paul also deliuered vp some to Sathā, whose saluatiō neuerthelesse semed to be committed to his charge: but for all that, bycause he did it of a good mynde, namely to teache them not to blaspheme, and that their spirit might be saued in the daye of the Lorde, he could not be accused either of treason, or els of deliueryng vp, bycause (as it is before sayd). The complaintes of them whiche suffre are not to be heard,
What proditiō is good. but we must seke out the mind of the doers. Wherfore when warre or controuersy shall happen betwene any, of which the one part is knowen to haue a iust & good cause, if the other part which defendeth the worser cause, & therfore doth vniustly, wil by no meanes be brought to any good & reasonable conditions, surely good men whiche peraduenture are founde on the same syde, ought in such sort to helpe & to defend the other part as they may aduaunce iustice. And if it be nede, they ought to fall from the vniust to iust men. Neither can their prodition be condēned iustly as ill, although before they were neuer so much friendes & very nighe vnto those, which worke vniustly.
What cause y
e Israelites had against y
e Chananites.
Epiphanius:Now must we speake somewhat of the Israelites cause agaynst the
Chananites whiche may be considered of vs two manner of wayes, namely either by common lawe and ordinary lawe of nature, or elles by fayth, and by the worde of GOD. Concerning the naturall or common lawe
Epiphanius writeth that the lande of
Palestine pertayned in very dede to the children of
Sem, by occasion whereof
Melchisedek reygned there, whiche was either
Sem hym selfe, or elles one of hys children. But the
Chananites whiche came of
Cham, passyng ouer the boundes of
Egypte and
Africa, whiche were appoynted vnto them, dyd caste out of
Palestine the sonnes of
Sem. And therefore the Hebrues, whiche were the posteritie of
Sem, when they required to be restored to their Fathers
[Page 38] landes, semed to do it iustly, and rightfully. Wherefore (as he sayeth) GOD did both restore vnto the Israelites the countreys whiche belonged vnto their auncestors, and also punished the
Chananites for their wickednesse, and this he did all with one and the selfe same worke. Howbeit I can not easely agree to
Epiphanius opinion, for there was past prescription of very long time, for at the least there were fyue hundreth yeares. Wherefore it could not be sayde that the
Chananites possessed that lande vniustly. If we should go by this reason now in our tyme, then should there be none in a manner counted a lawfull prince and iuste possessor, when as their auncestor came to the possession of those prouinces and kingdomes by violence, driuyng out botht the kings and the inhabitors that were in them before. Wherfore the Israelites semed not to haue any iust causes by mans lawe, by whiche they might make clayme vnto the land of
Palestine as to their owne, neither alledged they at any tyme any such reason. And yet for al that they had good ryght therunto for as much as god testified as wel by words as by wonderfull workes, that it was his wil that the Hebrues should haue the possession of those regions, to whom (as
Dauid hath wel said) both the earth and the fulnesse thereof belongeth. Neither could the
Chananites murmure agaynst the iudgement of God, for as much as they were iustly cut of from their ryght, for their sundry and manifold wicked Actes. Wherfore none could in this cause iustly defend the
Chananites if they wil cleaue to the true God, and beleue his wordes. Wherby it followeth that this
Luzite which betrayed hys citizens dyd it either of faith, as did
Rahab in
Iericho, or els by some humane bargayne. For the kepers or spyes sayd vnto him,
VVe will shewe thee mercy. If he were stricken with feare, howe could that (as they say) happen vnto a constant man (for he was after a sorte a prisoner, and was fallen into the handes of hys enemyes) then was he brought to it by humane conuention, and then did he fowly, for it is not lawfull for any man, to make any fylthy couenauntes agaynst hys countrey. Neyther can he be excused bycause of feare,
It is not lawfull for any mā to make any fylthy couenā tes against hys countrey. for nothyng is to be done agaynste iustice and conscience, althoughe what feare so euer he should be stryken with, but if he were stirred vp vnto it by fayth, and for that he sawe hys citezens obstinately to resiste the worde of God and his workes, then he did well, neither can hys treason be either disallowed or elles condemned. For no lawes, no vowes, no couenaūtes or bondes, thoughe they be neuer so strayte,
Feare must not cause vs to do any thyng against iustice. can bynd any man to fight agaynst or to resiste the worde of God: whiche worde all men must earnestly labour to haue done and fulfilled. For this sentence abydeth and shall perpetually abyde: That we must obey God more than men. Neither can any man (as Christe sayeth) serue two maisters, specially if they commaunde contrary thinges.
It is lawfull for the magistrate priuely to send inquisitors. Moreouer the Magistrate is to be ayded in rooting out of vice and naughtynesse, and to hym without doubte is lawfull priuely to send men, to make enquiry, and to deiecte wicked Actes, that the offendors may be punished, and (as God hath commaunded) that euill maye be taken awaye from the worlde. Yea and it is also lawfull for hym to offer rewardes to men confederated together for some ill purpose,
It is lawfull for them to offer rewardes to conspirators to open theyr conspiracye.
Augustine to allure them to open and detecte the conspiracye, bycause that assuredly pertayneth to treason. Howbeit heresy is neuer either to be dissembled, or to be praysed, or any wicked Acte to be committed that lawfull kynde of treason shoulde haue good successe. Wherefore
Augustine in hys latter booke of Retractions testifieth, that he wrote hys booke
de Mendatio chiefly for thys cause, bycause some, to the ende they woulde detecte the
Priscillianistes, fayned them selues to be followers of the same heresye, for that the same
Priscillianistes when they were accused,
Of the Priscillianistes. affirmed with greate stoutenesse, that they were farre from any suche doctrine. But for all that afterwarde they disclosed them selues vnto those, whome (beyng deceaued by theyr dissimulation) they thought they myght well haue trusted. But
Augustine in the same booke
De mendatio, teacheth that by this dissimulation of the
[Page] Catholickes, very many euils & daungers chaunced. For there they commende
Priscillianus, they vniustly praise his boke which is entituled
Libra, they allowed the heresy, pronouncing many things which could not be spoken without blasphemie. Moreouer y
t which they did was dangerous: for if they whiche after this sort dissēbling were of any authoritie or estimation, the heretikes might by their commendation be confirmed in their opinion, & those specially with whom they did so dissemble. For those peraduenture were
Priscillianistes before (althoughe not very firme & constant) which after they heard their heresy to be praysed of a graue man, did then sticke more & more in their error. Furthermore in thus dissembling, and beyng conuersaunte with the
Priscillianistes, the dissembler also might easely fall into danger, that he him selfe at length might become of a Catholicke, a
Priscillianiste. And finally the heretikes them selues by the dissimulation of our men, might easely gather, that they did very well, in hyding, dissemblyng and denyeng their doynges. But that betrayeng is sometymes lawfull in a iust cause, and such a cause as is without the dangers aboue mencioned, not onely the reasons whiche we haue before alledged do declare, but we may also proue it by very many examples written here and there in the scriptures.
The Gabaonites.
Rahab. The
Gabaonites betrayed the rest of the
Chananites, when they fell from them to the Hebrues.
Rahab also betrayed her publicque wealth or kyng, in receauyng, hydyng, and sendyng awaye them whiche were deadly enemyes vnto it: who is sayed neuerthelesse in the Epistle to the Hebrues to haue done those things by faith.
Iahel.
Iahel also the wife of
Aher the
Kenite betrayed
Sisara, for she by a meruelous craft slewe him whom she had called into her and closely hidden: as it shalbe afterward declared in his place in this hystory of the Iudges.
Ionathas. Yea and
Ionathas the sonne of
Saul betrayed vnto
Dauid the wil and counsels of his father, as it is written in the first booke of
Samuel.
Husay the Arachite. Besides all these
Husay the
Arachite betrayed
Absolon the sonne of
Dauid, when he withstandyng the counsell of
Achitophel did thrust in his owne counsell whiche was farre worse, and shewed all things vnto
Dauid. I might bring in a great many more examples. But I thinke these are sufficient for the ware reader.
Certein cautions are to be added to lawfull prodition. The first caution.Now resteth only to declare certain cautions or prouisoes, wherewith lawfull treason is to be decked and adorned, and not to be condemned. The first is, that he which betrayeth be by a certain faith assured that the cause is iust which he aduaunceth: whiche can not be done, excepte that he haue sure proofe of the goodnesse therof by the word of God. Neither do I at this present argue, whether the same word be reuealed vnto him in harte,
The secōd caution. or whether it be opened vnto him in the holy scriptures. Then must he take hede, that being now well assured of the righteousnesse and honesty, wherunto he is inclined, he be only prouoked therunto with the loue therof, and not with the hope of rewarde or gayne, or for feare of any misfortune, whiche he desireth to escape, or to satisfy his hatred and enemities deceaued.
The third caution. For so should he seke his owne, and not iustice, neither the obedience of hys fayth, and of the will of God. Furthermore it is very necessary that a man be not dryuen to that but then when all other kynde of remedyes wante. For
Rahab so did: for except she had then so kept the Hebrew spyes, they had bene by mans reason vndone, neither was there then any other waye to saue them. And certainly it oftentymes chaunceth, that all other ways & meanes being tryed, the worse parte will not be brought to sobernesse, so that there is no other remedy, but onely by prodition. And I would therefore haue these cautions diligently obserued, bycause that men are to muche prone to proditions, and that such as are both filthy and wicked. Wherfore we must take hede that by the exāple of good men they flatter not thē selues as though they were innocent.
The fourth caution. Moreouer
Paul hath admonished vs not only to auoyde that which is euill it selfe, but also y
e shew therof. Howbeit we must vnderstand this doctrine of his in such sort as we may accomplishe it. For it is lawfull sometymes to cōmitte a
[Page 39] thing whiche is euill to see to, but not euill in very dede: whilest yet there is hope that the thing may be straight way made playn, so that y
e which at the first sight semed euill, may manifestly be knowen to be good. So the Apostle hym selfe circumcised
Timothe, and shaued his hed, whiche of them selues and in very dede were not euil, although they semed to haue had a certayn shewe of euill vnto certayn of the Ethnickes which were cōuerted, & wer not yet wel strēgthned.
The fifth caution. Finally periury or lyeng are not to be mingled w
t those proditions whiche may be allowable. For as much as it is manifest by the Apostolical rule, y
e euils are not to be cōmitted, wherby good things may follow. I know there be some which go about to defēd those kynd of lyes which are called officious or honest.
Honest and officious lyes are not to be allowed.
Augustine. But
Augustine doth not allow that. Whose reasons they which are desirous to know, let thē read his boke
Ad Consentiū. I assuredly agree vnto his opinion. For though there were no other reason, yet me thincketh this were sufficient, bycause the lyer bringeth himself out of credite, wherby nothing y
t he afterward speaketh cā scarcely be beleued, for they which heare it wil suspect it alwaies as a lye. And besides this y
t scripture doth euery where detest lyes. And we are cō maūded (as
Peter saith) to speake as it wer the wordes of god. And these wordes are pure, neither must we graūt y
t there is any lye foūd in thē, as
Augustine hath very wel writtē vnto
Ierome.
What is to be aunswered cō cernyng y
e lyes of the sainctes. And thoughe we read y
t the sainctes did somtimes lye, yet we must either not excuse thē, seing they were mē, or els we must thinke y
t it was done by the wil of god. For then y
e actiō, which of his own nature, appeareth to be vicious, ceasseth
[...] to be sinne, when it is manifest y
t god hath cō maūded the same. And after this sorte
Abrahā is excused, in that he would haue killed his sonne. The Israelites also are defended, whiche when they departed, tooke away with them, those things which they had borowed of the Egyptiās.
These cautiōs at this presēt offer thē selues vnto me,
He answereth to the reasons put in the be-beginning. wherby may be adorned this kind of proditiō, which may be allowed or defended, whiche otherwise is a thing to be cursed & detested, as it is manifest y
t the prodition of
Iudah was. Neither cā the reasons which I haue alledged in y
e begynning, any thing hinder but y
t some prodition may be approued. We declared first by y
e authoritie of
Ierome,
To the first.
Antigonus, augustus, &
Philip of
Macedonia y
e traitors haue ben accustomed to be euil spokē of. I answere y
t therfore y
t happened, bicause proditiōs for y
e most part lacke these cautiōs before declared. For they which are traytors haue not for the most part a respect to y
t whiche is iust & honest, neither are they sure of y
e will of god, neither haue they any sure proofe y
t the cause is right which they follow, but are only brought to betray for hatred, & for their own cōmodity, & for feare & wicked affectes. And they might also oftētimes haue defēded iustice by other wayes & meanes. Besides this they are not afeard therin to make lyes, & to cōmit manifest sinnes. Furthermore I repete y
t agayn which I sayd before, y
t it was euill said of thē in pronoūcing y
t they loued y
t treasō, & hated y
e traitors: seing either semeth either equally to be allowed, or els equally to be cōdēned. And to be brief, y
e testimonies which wer brought cā only take place in naughty & dānable treasōs. And to such as cōsider of thē selues, y
t they would not thē selues nor theirs to be betrayed, & therfore wil not y
t any kind of prodition should be coūted good, we must answere as
S. Augustine sayth. That the complayntes of such as suffer are not to be heard, but we must seke out the mynd of the doers.
Secondly we declared by the oppinion of
Appianus,
To the second. that prodition was farre worser than besiegyng, bycause thys namely besiegyng is done by ennemyes, but the other by friendes. We wyll easely graunte to that: for if a naughtye and vniuste prodition be conferred also with an vniuste besiegyng,
As some besieging is iust, so also is some prodition good than shall prodition be iudged farre worser, for as muche as it commeth from friendes, of whom we looke neither to be hurt, nor yet to receaue any damage. But euen as some besiegyng is found iust, what inconuenience shall it be then, or not agreeyng with the truth, if some prodition also be found iust? The cōparison therfore
[Page] of
Appianus, is so to be vnderstād, that either of the things compared together be euill. For as the Grāmarians say, the comparatiue degree alwayes r
[...]quireth the positiue degree, wherin the comparison is made. And in that
Theodosius the Emperor (as
Ierome testifieth) did put to death a betrayer, it is no meruayle, when as the
Romane lawes so ordayned in the digestes, & in the
Codice as it is before shewed & they determine so of y
e prodition, wherby places of mūnitiō are deliuered vp to the enemies,
Euill proditiō is to be coūted amonge moste grieuous crimes. & likewise for treason. And assuredly that prodition which is euill, ought to be coūted for a most grieuous crime. For if therby come any losse of name or fame, then is it against the cōmaūdement of god, which cō maundeth. Thou shalt not beare false witnesse. But if it bring losse of good and possessions, then is y
e cōmaundement broken which is ordained against theft. Finally if it be y
e cause of losse of body & life, it violateth y
e precept, wherin god hath cōmaunded, Thou shalt not kill. And there is no doubt, but y
t of proditions such murthers oftentimes happen: for the inhabiters of cities which are betrayed, are wont to be slayne of their enemies.
Naughty proditions are iustly punyshed with death. Wherfore when y
t warre is vniust, the wicked betrayer is guilty of the murther whiche therof followeth. And therfore if lawes or princes haue ordayned death for this wicked crime, I thincke it is not vniustly done: but y
e letteth not, but that there may be good proditions founde. Who doubteth but that thieues should be hanged, when as neuerthelesse it
[...]s lawfull in iuste warre to take spoyles from the enemies.
To the thirde.The
Romanes (as it was afterward declared) toke vēgeaūce of y
e scholemaster of the children of the Phalisciās, & they detected vnto
Pirrhus his phisitiō which would haue betrayed him. These things are true in dede, but I may easly aunswere y
t the
Romanes had here a regard to two things. First y
t these (namely the scholemaster & the Phisitiā) had not in y
t which they did, a regarde to iustice, but were only stirred vp therunto by couetousnesse or hatred. Wherfore they semed to haue deserued not a reward but a punishmēt. Furthermore y
t
Romanes had a wōderful great desire of glory, which they called valiātnesse of mind. And being stirred vp with y
t, they thought y
t victory in a maner vnworthy, whiche they got not by force, but after this sort, which semed to be very cowardly. And it is possible, that they thought to wynne those agaynst whom they warred, and rather by benefites, or at the lest way no lesse by benefites than by force.
To the fourth. The Edomites
[...]nd Moabites did vniustly betraye the Iewes.
Isai (as it was sayd) admonished y
e
Moabites in y
e name of God, y
t they should not betray them whiche did flye vnto them, bycause they semed to do that of enuie and malice, and not that they were desirous to set forward the will of God. For God had not commaūded the
Moabites to afflicte the Israelites. Wherfore when the Hebrues were betrayed of the
Moabites or of the
Edomites, that could not be done but of crueltie, for as much as the lawes of neighbourhed & kynred were violated. And that
Paul spake vnto
Timothe of a wicked prodition, it is more manifest, than I shall nede now to declare.
To the fyft.Lastly were obiected othes & lawes of nature wherw
t citizens are bound to defend their countrey. Of which I answere, y
t all these are so farre forth to be obserued, as long as the othes and promises be not agaynst the worde of god and good lawes. Which thing if it be afterward knowē, thē are they of no force, yea they are thē vtterly voyde. To these I adde, y
t it manifestly appeareth by y
e cautions now alledged, y
t we must neither for sweare nor lye, wherby a laudable & good proditiō should succede. Wherfore they which sweare vnto their magistrates,
The prodition of the Counsel holden at
Constantia. & promise to defēd the citie, cā not be excused, when their minde is to betraye & to deceaue. This haue the Antichrists done in y
e counsel holden at
Constantia. For y
t they might thē eassier allure thither Iohn Husse, &
Ierome of
Praga, they promised him safety by publique fayth. And therefore they can not defend their prodition (admitte it were nothyng els) as iust and honest. But they were without doubt treacherers and wicked betrayers in swearyng & promysing that by their letters whiche they would not performe.
But now we must returne to the history.
Howe the Luzite might be suffered of the Israelits to go in safety. It is not certain (as it is sayd) whether this
Luzite had faith, or whether he wer an infidel. If he had faith, his prodition is to be commended, otherwise it is to be discommended. But if he beleued not, neither cleaued vnto the true God, why did the Israelites let hym go? Forsooth bicause he of his own wil went into banishment. Neither seemed this to be against the counsel of God. For God woulde therefore haue those people cut of, least they dwelling together with the Hebrues should haue geuen them an occasion of falling and offence. Wherefore when they departed, and chose wylful banishment, that came to passe, which God would haue to be done. But thou wilt say: By this meanes might al those nations haue bene sent away,
Why the Chana
[...]it s departed not, & giue place to the Israelites. neither ought they to haue ben slain as god had cōmaūded. What might haue ben done I nede not to answer, for as much as that is demaunded which coulde not be done. For so manye and so great were the sinnes of those nations, that they vtterly deserued death. Wherfore god taking away his spirite from them, dyd so harden their hartes, that they endeuoured not them selues to depart, but rather to resist the Israelites as much as in them lay. They made many battailes therfore, in which as god had ordained, and as they had deserued, they came to vtter destruction, although a very few of them were saued in departing, or els in embracing the true religion.
And they smote the cyty wyth the edge of the swoorde. This is not to be ascribed to cruelty, but rather to obedience and religion towarde the true god: for so was it his wil to be done, and so had he commaunded.
But they let the man and his houshold go free. Howe they coulde discerne this mans family from the rest it is not writtē. But it is most lykely that either he entred with the Israelites into the city, or els he shewed vnto them his house, by some token, wherby they might leaue it safe and vntouched according to their purpose.
Rahab certainly in
Iericho hong a purple corde in the window of her house, to auoid the misery and sacking of the souldiours.
And the man went into the land of the Hithites, Kimhi wryteth that these
Hithites were none of those seauen nations, which were commaunded to be destroyed in the land of
Chanaan. But he declareth not what these
Hithites wer. And these are the names of those nations, which should haue bene destroyed of the Israelites. The
Chananites, the
Iebusites, Hemorrhites, Gergesites, Pheresites, Hithites, and
Hiuites. These are the nations which god commaunded to be weeded out of the land promised vnto the Israelites. But this is to bee noted by the way, that there is a difference betwene these woordes
Kethim and
Chethim, for that which is written by
Kaph signifieth, as they interprete, the Italians, or such as dwel in Ilandes, or the
Macedonians: and that woorde is found in
Esay, Ieremy, and in the booke of
Num: where the prophecies of
Balaam are mentioned. But that woord which is written with this letter
Cheth, signifieth either one of the seauen nations of the country of the
Chananites, or els those to whom it is sayd that this
Luzite went.
And he built a City, and called the name of it Luz.
The maner of banished mē in buildyng or adourning of citi
[...]s. So men that wer driuen out of their countrey wer wont to do, that being moued with the loue of their country, to cal the places which they did build, either by the name of their country which they left, or els to builde them as neare as they coulde in forme like the other. So it is said that
Aeneas dyd in Italy buyld
Troy, & the city of the
Pisites was in the same country built by the
Graecians. Like wise the Israelites leauing the land of
Palestine, decked vp a city graunted vnto them in
Egipt, like vnto
Ierusalem, building a temple there, ordaining also Priestes and sacrifices, as they had before in
Ierusalem. In which doing they synned most haynously, although neuerthelesse they were moued thereunto by the loue of theyr countrye whych they had forsaken.
Vnto thys day. The tyme of
Samuel is by those woordes noted, who is thought to be the writer of this history. And by this sentence the Hebrues do gather, that that City and the name therof, endured to the time of
Samuel.
27 But Manasses did not expel Beth-Sean, with her townes, and Thaanach with her townes, the Inhabiters of Dor wyth her townes, the inhabiters of Iibleam with her townes, nether the inhabiters of Megiddo with her townes. And the Chananites began to dwell in the land.
28 And it came to passe, that as sone as Israel was waxed mighto, they put the Chananites to tributes, and expelled them not.
29 In lyke maner Ephraim expelled not the Chananites that dwelt in Gazer, and therefore the Chananites dwelt styll in Gazer among them.
30 Neither dyd Zebulon expel the inhabiters of Kitron, neyther the inhabiters of Nahalol, wherfore the Chananites dwelt among them, and became tributaries vnto them.
31 Aser also dyd not cast oute the inhabiters of Acho, and the inhabiters of Zidon, & of Achlab, Achzib, Helbab, Aphik, and Rehob.
32 And the Aserites dwelt among the Chananites the inhabiters of the land: for they did not driue them out.
33 Neither did Nephtalim driue out the inhabiters of Beth-Semes, nor the inhabiters of Bethanath: but dwelt amōgest the Chananites the inhabiters of the land: and the inhabiters of Beth-Semes, and Beth-Anath became tributaries vnto them.
The synnes of the Israelites.In this place the holy history setteth foorth the synne of the Israelites, in that they did not cast out and destroye those peoples, as God had commaunded them, but made them tributaries vnto them. Before the other tribes
Manasses is reckoned: and the names of his Cities, which are here mencioned, ar rehearsed in the booke of
Iosuah, the, 17. chap. where almost these selfe same woordes ar rehersed, namely how
Manasses although he did not conquer them, did for all that make them tributaries vnto him. But that is not so to be vnderstād, as though this sinne were then committed: for as long as
Iosuah lyued, the people dyd not so openly fal, yea rather the people did their duty diligently all
Iosuas time, and al the time of the Elders, which had seene
Moses, and had liued together wyth
Iosua, as we shal heare straight way in this booke: but these thinges are spoken in that place by
[...] that is, by anticipation.
And the hebrewe phrase is to be noted, namelye: And
Benethiah, that is, her daughters. For it signifieth litle suburbes, townes and villages, whyche when they are compared with greater cities, do seme to be daughters of those Cities. The same kinde of speaking is vsed also in other languages.
Cities called Matrices and
[...].
Scithopolis. For we call often times the principal Cities
Matrices, that is, chiefe Cities, and the Grecians call them
[...] and
[...].
Beth-San was a City in the tribe of
Manasses, which was afterward called
Scythopolis, of which city both
Ptholomey and also
Ierome haue made mencion.
Thaanach is reckoned to be .x. myles distant frō
Cesaria, in the way to
Ptolemais.
But the Chananites began to dwell in the land. This hebrewe woorde
Ioel, which the latine interpretour translateth
presumpsit, and we haue turned it
caepit, that is, began, signifieth also to wyll, to be at rest, and to sweare. The sence seemeth to bee this, that the
Chananites, seyng they were not rooted out,
[Page 41] would haue gladlye bene content to haue taryed in those places, where before they dwelled, and that peraduenture with a bond and an othe, but in such sorte that they would haue giuen a certayne tribute vnto the Israelites, which nowe had preuailed. But they of
Manasses, bicause they could not cast these out, were punished for their smal faith. For if they had perfectly beleued, euen as God was with them in the conquering of
Luz and other Cities, so would he also haue ayded them, in casting them out: but bicause their fayth was so diminished, God withdrew his ayde from them, but in the meane tyme hee referred this punishment (as I haue before said) to profitable endes, & meete for his prouidence. And they although they could not vpon the sodayne expell their enemies, yet ought they not to cease of from making warre against them, neither was it lawful for them to make any couenaunt or league with them.
And it appeareth that they required tribute of these nations, and bargained with them without anye lawfull cause: for thus speaketh the scripture.
And it came to passe that as soone as Israel waxed mighty, they put the Chananites to tribute. Wherefore they preuayled against them, and they wer stronger than those nations: and therefore they can not be excused, in that they most filthilye made couenauntes with them. For they seemed to be entised thereunto by couetousnes of money and seruitude of those nations.
And in expellyng dyd not expell them.
What the doubling of a word signifieth w
[...]h the Hebrewes. Thys doublyng of woordes in the hebrew expresseth a perfect and absolute action, and this signifieth as muche as if it should haue bene said: And they brused them, and some of them they expelled, but they did not vtterlye destroye them, as God had commaunded. But what can we answer of
Salomon,
Salomon also brought these nations vnder tribute. which (in the first booke of kings the .9. chap. and in the .8. chap. of
Paralip.) is written to haue brought vnder tribute the rest of the
Amorrites, Hethites. &c. I beleue verely that the rest of those nations embraced the religion of the true God. For
Dauid, who was otherwyse a most noble king and valiaunt Captaine, and who possessed his kingdome perfectly, suffered them not to worship ydols in his dominions. And if
Salomon dyd afterward lay a greater burthen on them, than hee did on the Israelites, hee can not lawfully be blamed: for he did so also with the
Gabaonites. For it is meete that the Israelites should be handled more gentlye of their King, than straungers. Neither should
Salomon be excused, if he did that for to muche greedye desire of money, or if he did bargaine with them for money, that they keeping still theyr idolatrous and false worshipping, might liue vnpunished in his kingdome.
Ephraim also expelled not the Chananites. It is not declared that this tribe did put their enemies to tribute: which I thinke neuertheles they dyd, whē as it was declared before that
Manasses did so, and we shall heare straight way that the tribe of
Zebulon did the same. For it is not verye lykelye that those
Ephraites wer better than their felowes. As touching the city
Gazer, Ierome saith that it was .4. myles distant from
Nicopolis, which is
Emaus: and is called by an other name
Gazer. Kitron also in the tribe of
Zebulon and
Nahalol were compelled to pay tribute, that they might haue
Chananites to be their citizens. The city
Acho was afterward called
Ptolemais.
Ptolemais. Dispa.
Achzib also was called afterwarde
Dispa, being .ix. miles distant from
Acho in the way toward
Tire. Likewise the tribe of
Nephtalim brought the
Chananites vnder tribute.
¶Of Masse.
BIcause in these places there is often mencion made of this hebrew woorde
Masse, which signifieth tribute, of which word is deriued
Mishah,
Whence the woorde Masse is thought to be deriued. whyche of some is taken for tribute, which was wont to be payde of euerye person: And some of the Popes hirelinges thyncke that their Masse had hys name from thence, therefore peraduenture it shall not bee vnprofitable somewhat to write of it. That woord is red in
Deut. the .16. chap. whē God commaunded that
[Page] seauen weekes should be reckoned after Easter, and then should be kept the feast of
Pentecoste. Thou shalt appeare (saith he) before the Lord, and shalt geue
Missah Nethobath Iedecha, that is, a free oblation of thine owne hand. And that oblation was so called as an yearely tribute, which neuertheles was willing and without constraint. Howbeit, other (and peraduenture more truly) do interpretate that woord to signify sufficient, namely that ther should be geuen as much as should be inough and sufficient: for in the .15. chap. of that booke, where the Lord commaunded the Israelites to open their handes vnto the poore, & to lend him that which might be sufficient, that hebrew woord
Dai the Chaldey Paraphrast enterpreth
Misshah. In which place I take it that there is a regard to be had as wel of the pouertye of the poore, as of the abilitye of the geuer. For that was commaunded to be osberued in voluntary oblations, namely that so much should be geuen, as the ability of the geuers could beare, and as much as seemed mete for the worshipping of God. From hence do these our Papistes think their Masse to be deriued, as though it were a tribute, and a willing oblation, which might be offered euery where vnto God in the church, for the quicke & the dead. But I thynke not so.
Certeyne Hebrew wordes are obserued in the latin church The hebrew words cam not vnto the latine church but by the Greeke churche. I know right wel, that the church hath borowed certayne words of the hebrues, as
Sathan, Osianna, Zebaoth, Halleluia, Pasah, or
Pascha, and such other mo. But we must marke, that those woordes came not vnto the Latine Church, but by the Greeke Church: for as muche as those woordes are found in the new Testament, as it is written first in Greeke, & also in the translation of the old Testament, as it was turned by the .lxx. Wherefore wee haue no hebrew woordes deriued to our Church, which the Greeke Churche had not first. But if we shal diligently peruse ouer the bookes of the Greeke father, we shal neuer find this woord
Missa which is Masse, vsed of thē. Wherfore I thynk that this woord of
Missa is not deriued from the Hebrues.
[...].The Greeke church called the holy supper
[...], which woorke signifieth a common & publicke woorke. Neither is that woord proper to holy things: yea it is also applyed vnto prophane actions which ar publike. And who knoweth not that the administration of the supper of the Lord is a thing pertaynyng to Christian people? For as many as be present, ought to be partakers thereof, and to communicate together.
An argument against priuate masses. And least I should ouerskyp thys, the etimologie of this woord bringeth no smal argument against priuate Masses. Bisides this that woord pertaineth not only, to the Lords supper, but also it is attributed to other holy functions, wherefore it is written in the actes of the Apostels the .13. chap.
[...], whcyh some haue tourned, whilest they did sacrifice, whē as rather they should haue said, whilest they serued or wrought publikely, namely in a holy thing which they did without doubt in preaching of the Gospel.
Names of the holly supper among the Latynes. This holy function namely the Lordes supper had other names among the Latines. For it was sometimes called the Communion, sometimes the supper of the Lord, other sometimes the Sacrament of the body of Christ, or the breaking of bread. And our fathers haue often tymes called it as the Greeke fathers dyd, dreadful misteries and
[...].
Howe the fathers called the supper a sacrifice. I wyll not speake of, how they vsed to cal it oftē times by the name of a sacrifice, not therfore (as our aduersaries do foolishlye imagine) bicause that there the body & blood of Christ is offered vnto God for a sacrifice for the quicke & the dead. Although the fathers abhorred not from that kinde of speche, whereby they sayde that the body and bloud of Christ was offered vnto God. But what they vnderstoode by those words, if they be diligently red, they do manifestly expound, namelye that then were thankes geuen vnto
The most auncient fathers vsed not y
e maine of Masse.
Augustine.By those names did the most auncient fathers call the Lordes supper. But they made neuer mencion of the Masse. For it thou shalt reade
Ireneus, Tertulilan, Ciprian, Hilary, and their like, thou shalt neuer finde that woord in them in that signification.
Augustine maketh mēcion twice of it, namely in her sermon
[Page 42]
de tempore. 237. where he maketh mencion of the Masse of those that were to be instructed before baptisme. In that place he exhoreth men to forgeue iniuries one to another. For (saith he) we must come to the Masse of those that are to bee instructed where we shal pray: forgeue vs our trespasses, as we also forgeue our trespassers. And be writeth also in the sermon
de tempore .91. these woordes: In the history which is to be red at Masses. Some are in doubte whether those sermons were of
Augustines writing or no,
Whē the name of Masse begā to be vsed. but to me they seme to be the style and sentences of
Augustine. And as I coniecture, I thinke that this name Masse began almost to be vsed at that time: howbeit but seldome, and not often. For if it had bene then a woord in much vse,
Augustine in especial who framed hys wryting vnto the vulgare people, would oftener haue made mencion of it.
They alledge
Ignatius in his Epistle
ad Smyrnenses.
Ignatius An argumēt against priuate Masses. But that place maketh very much against the Massemongers: for asmuch as there
Ignatius ordayned that Masses shoulde in no wyse be had, vnlesse the Bishop were present, wyth such great warinesse did antiquity abhorre priuate cōmunions. For he would haue al men to be presēt at y
t doing of it, & specially the Bishops. These thinges haue I said, as grautning vnto the aduersaries, that it was the very booke of
Ignatius,
The epistles of Ignatius are Apocriphas. & that it containeth in it the word
Masse, which yet we ar not compelled to graūt: For it is
Apocripha, yea, and that as their own
Gratian testifieth. Moreouer those Epistles were written in Greeke, and therefore I am assured, that be which turend it into latin, did put this word Masse for
[...]. For thus it is written in Greek,
[...]: and straight way after that,
[...]. &c. This is the Greeke sentence of
Ignatius, wherein as appeareth ther is no mencion made of this woord Masse.
Leo also is cited in his .9. Epistle to
Dioscurus,
Leo. And argumēt againste priuate Masses. where I confesse that that father made mencion of Masse, but yet in such sorte, that in the same place he is wonderfullye againste priuate Masses. For he was demaunded, seing that the temple was not so large, that it coulde not containe the whole people, which came while holy thinges wer administred, what the rest of the multitude should do which remained without and could not be present.
Leo answered, that when that part of the people is gone forth which was before present at the holye celebration, the residue might succede and repeate againe those holye thinges. If so be that priuate masses had bene then in vse, what needed of that matter to haue asked counsell of
Leo the bishop of
Rome? Surely this question is a manifest token that Masse was not vsed to be had but once.
They wer wont also to bring
Iohannes Cassianus,
Iohannes Casianus. who lyued in the tyme of
Honorius, and was driuen out of the Churche of
Ierusalem by heretickes, from whence he came to
Massilia, and was a Monke by profession. For hee maketh mencion of Masse in his .3. booke .7. and 8. chap. but he wresteth the signification of that woord farre otherwise than to the holy Communion. For by Masse hee vnderstandeth perfection, finishing, and absolution. Wherfore he saith:
praestolatur congregationis missam. Let him tarye the ende or fulnes of the congregation. That is, that the multitude and congregation maye be absolued and fulfyled. And by and by after,
Contenti somno, quia missa vigiliarum vsque ad lucem conceditur, That is, being content with the sleepe which is permitted them frō the end of the vigiles vnto day light: wherby this woord
Missa he vnderstandeth that time of the watch wherin the vigiles wer ended. For then was it lawfull for the Monkes to slepe vntil day light. Neither must I ouership, that ther is mē cion most manifestly made of Masses in the exposition of the .xi. chap. of the Prouerbs of
Salomon, which exposition is ascribed to
Ierome.
The exposition of y
e Prouerbes is falsely ascribed to Ierome. But that boke without cōtrouersy is none of
Ieromes writing. For
Gregory is there alledged, who liued long after
Augustine and
Ierome. Bruno Amerbachius in his epistle which he set before the booke, saith that he saw in an old booke, that that interpretatiō
[Page] was entituled to
Beda.
Many abuses in the church in the time of Beda. And if it wer so, then it is no maruaile, if hee made mention of Masses, for then in the time of
Beda the priest, many abuses had crept into the church. I do therfore admonish you of that, bicause in that place that coū terfait
Ierome affirmeth that the souies of such as are dead, are by the celebrations of Masses deliuered out of Purgatory.
Ierome was not so wont to speake
From whence thys woorde Masse cōmeth.Now resteth to declare from whence the name of Masse, which vndoubtedly is a latin word, semeth to be deriued. The old fathers, if a man wyll diligentlys marke their writinges, did put this word
remissa, which is forgeuenes, for this woord
remissio,
Tertullian. which is also forgeuenes.
Tertullianus in his .4. booke agaynsts
Marcion, the .249. syde. We haue spoken (saith he)
de remissa peccatorum, that is of the remission of synnes.
Ciprian.
Ciprian de bono patientiae, saith:
Qui remissam peccatorum erat daturus lauatro regenerationis tingi non est dedignatus. He whyche came to geue remission of synnes, disdained not to be washed with the lauacre of regeneration. The same man writeth in the .14. epistle of his .13. booke.
Qui blasphemat spiritum sanctum remissam peccatorum non habet, that is, he which blasphemeth the holye Ghost, hath not remission of sinnes. Wherefore seing in steede of
remissio they haue said
remissa, they may be counted also in stede of
missio to haue vsed this word
missa. Therfore that which was done in the Church
post missionem Cathecumenorum,
Cathecumenites, that is after the sending away of the Cathecumenites, they called
Missa, that is Masse.
[...] (to declare that also by the way) is to teache & to enstruct, especially by voice, and not by writing: whereof they wer called
[...] which wer not yet washed with the lauacre of regeneration, but wer instructed of their faith.
Tertullian called them
Audientes or
Auditores, that is, hearers. But
Augustine called them
Competentes, that is desirers, or requesters (that is of baptisme.) For before they should be baptised at Easter, they signified their names .40. daies before, in which space they wer instructed, & not onely their faith, but also their life and maners wer examined of the Pastors of the church.
The Cathecumenites & not cōmunicantes wer sent out by the Deacon.
Cyrillus. Gregory. But in the holy assembling when the holy scriptures wer red, & the sermon done, the Deacon cryed:
Exeunto Catechumeni, that is: let the Cathecumenites go forth, & the Grecians said
[...], that is, holye thinges for holy ones: as it is gathered out of the seruice booke of the elders. Also out of
Cyrillus vpon
Iohn the .xii. boke & .l. chap: yea in
Gregories time (as hee testifieth him self in his second booke & .23. chap. of his dialogues) it was sayd: if any man cōmunicate not, let him geue place. And that maner maye appeare to be very like vnto a certaine custome of the Ethnikes: For in a certayne vsage of their seruice of God (as
Festus declareth) the Sargeant said:
Festus. A maner of the Ethnikes in a certaine seruice of theirs.
Apuleius.
Exesto hostis victus, mulier, virgo, that is, let the ouercome enemy, the woman & the maide go foorth, for in that kinde of seruice it was forbidden that those kinde of persons shoulde be present. And
Apuleius in his .2. booke saith, that the Priest did vse when he offered sacrifices, to say thus:
[...], that is, who shal abide here? To whom was answered:
[...], As though it should haue bene said: honest & good men, when as they which wer polluted & vnworthy wer gon. So was it done in our church:
[...]. for after that saying aforesaid of the Deacon,
[...], fallers away, & such as wer put to repentance went their way. Of these orders
Dionisius made mencion. They wer called
[...], which wer vexed with euyll spirits. Peraduenture they wer excōmunicated, for those at that time, I meane in the primatiue church, wer deliuered vp to
Sathan.
Missa
as it wer Missio. Ambrose.Therfore (as it now appeareth, by that which we haue said) the Latin church called the celebration of the sacrament of the holy supper
Missam, as it wer
missionem, that is, a sending away. For
Ambrosius also said in a certain place,
missas facere. And surely this sentence semeth muche more probable vnto me, than doth theirs which thinke that name to be deriued of this hebrew woorde
Masse. But now that we haue entreated of the name of Masse,
Partes of the Masse. we wyl also set foorthe the partes thereof, as they were had among the elders. The Grecians seeme to
[Page 43] haue begon their
[...], that is, the exercise of the Lords supper at
[...],
[...].
[...], that is, Lord haue mercy vpon vs, As though before al they would implore forgeuenes of their sinnes. Which phrase the latin church hath borowed of the, which some attribute to
Gregory. But whylest the people gathered together, and before they were assembled, they song a peece of some Psalme,
Introitus. or some part of the scripture, and that song they called
Introitus, that is an entraunce, bicause that at that time the people might enter in. And they make
Celestine authour of that. After
[...], the people being in a maner glad, for the obtaining of pardon for their synnes, to geue thankes vnto God,
Gloria in excel
[...]s
Collectes. did syng this hymne
Gloria in altissimis, that is: Glory to God on high, which they wil haue to be the inuention of
Telesphorus. Then had they Collectes, which are ascribed vnto
Gelasius. Moreouer, certain lessons were rehearsed out of the holye scriptures, either out of the old testament, or els out of the Actes, or Epistles of the Apostles.
The Epistle. Whiche lessons being done, there was to be rehearsed some part of the Euangelicall hystory. But when the Readers had red vnto the church the fyrst lessons, the deacon stoode vp in a high place, or pulpit, namely to be sene, and to be vnderstande of al men,
The Gospel. The graduale.
Halleluiah. wher he distinctly pronounced that which was to be redde out of the Gospell. But whylest hee went and ascended vp the stayres, the people vsed to syng some verses of Psalmes, which commonlye they called
Graduales, that is, stayre songes. They added also vnto them,
Halleluiah, that is, prayse the Lord, as it were clapping of hands with a ioyous cry, for the glad tidinges of the gospell. This hebrewe woord
Halleluiah, semeth to be taken out of the Churche of
Ierusalem: whereof there is mencion made also in the Apocalipse, and in the tytle of certayne Psalmes, When the Deacon had red the Gospell, the Byshop,
A Sermon. or the Pastor of the Churche added thereunto an interpretation and exhortation: wherin vices were reproued, and deliberation taken of such as wer to be excommunicated. Which thinges being thus finished,
The Papistes haue transposed the sendyng away of the people. the
Cathecumenites and others which woulde not communicatr, were sent awaye. But in our tyme, bycause there are found very seldome any
Cathecumenites, and they whych do not communicate doo stande myngled with the rest, yea almost none communicate except it be the Sacrificer alone. The Papistes haue differred that
Missio, that is, that sendyng awaye, to the ende of their abhominations. For then they vse to say with a loude voyce,
Ite, Missa est, That is: Go your way,
Ite Missa est. nowe is the departure.
But in the olde tyme, those thinges being finished,
The Symbole of the fayth. whyche wee haue rehearsed, they which abode to be partakers of the holy Supper, dyd sing the Simbole of the fayth, that they might diligentlye instruct one an other in the principal heades of religion, wherein they consented. For in Symboles is comprehended the fumme of faith, whiche comprehension or summe,
The Symbole is called the tradition of the Church.
Tertulian. The counsel of Nice. if a man wyll diligently reade the olde Fathers, he shal finde to be called
Traditio Ecclesiae, that is the tradition of the Churche, which is both taken out of the holy Scriptures, and also necessarye to be beleued for saluation. And sometimes
Tertullian bringeth it agaynst the heretickes which denyed the holy Scriptures. The Synode holden at
Nicena made a full and perfecte Symbole, but not the fyrste, for as muche as there were certaine Symboles before, as we may know euen of
Tertullian hym selfe. Then whyle they soong the Creede or Symbole, such as were present offered of theyr goods suche thynges as they thought good.
Three vses of oblation. The offering serued for three maner of vses, for parte of it was spent on certayne moderate banquets, whiche the Christians dyd at that tyme verye religiouslye celebrate among them selues, and they were commonly called
[...],
Charitable banquetes. that is charitable banquets. Part of that which remained was distributed vnto the poore. And finally some of the bread & wyne was layd vp for the vse of the holye Supper. And that thys oblation of thinges was then added,
Offertory. Collectes. twoo thinges doo testefye. Fyrst certayne verses which were soong by the people, whilest the offering
[Page] was in doing, which was therfore called of thē
Offertorium, that is an offring. The same is also knowen by those collectes which are redde in that part of the Masse. Yea, and
Iustinus the most auncient Martyr hath made mencion of the same oblation in his Apologie or defence, and
Ciprian also, and some of the old Fathers.
Sursum corda. After these thinges, when they came to administer the holye Supper, they sayde
Sursum corda, that is: Lyft vp your hartes, as the Ethnickes vsed to cry in their holy thinges,
Hoc age.
Hoc age, that is, do this. And surely the Christians said so verye aptlye, and in conuenient time, thereby to admonishe them selues, to thinke at that time vpon no carnal nor earthly thing, but wholy to lyft vp their myndes vnto heauen, where Christ is to be sought, and not in earth, as thoughe he were included in the breade or wyne. After that they gaue thankes, when they sayd:
Gratias agimus tibi. From whence is had the name
[...]. Proper words of the Supper The Lordes Prayer.
Sanc
[...]us. Prefaces.
Canon We geue thankes O Lorde holye father, almightye, and euerlasting God, through Christ our Lorde. &c. These thinges are moste auncient, and are found very often in old ecclesiasticall wryters. Yea and that mystery of the bodie and bloud of Christ was called
[...], that is, geuing of thankes, bycause all the accomplishing thereof dependeth vp on thankes geuing. And when the people had sayd: Through our Lorde Christe, he went to the proper woordes of the Supper. Which being rehearsed, there was said the Lordes praier. But
Xystus before the rehersall of it, would haue the people to sing
Sanctus Sanctus. &c. that is, holy, holy. &c. And that there might be better occasion geuen to come to that song, certaine prefaces were put before. And to those they peeced theyr
Canon, which one
Scolasticus (as
Gregory mencioneth in his Register) made: whiche in deede the same
Gregory alloweth not, bycause he woulde put in thinges of hys owne, and neglected the Lordes prayer. The kysse of peace, is sayd to be the inuention of
Leo the seconde.
Kisse of peace. Which seemeth not so to me, for as muche as that maner was in the Churche, euen in the tyme of the Apostels, that Christians shoulde entertayne one another wyth the kysse of peace. Yea and
Paule in hys Epistles hath made mencion of that kynd of saluation.
Agnus dei. And
Iustine also the martyr in his second Apology hath mencioned of this kysse. The song of
Agnus dei, that is the Lambe of God,
Distribution of the sacrament. is said to haue beene brought in by one
Innocentius. And when all these thinges were finished, they came to the distribution of the Sacrament. Whych whilest it was in doing, or when it was finished, they song a song of thanks geuing,
Post cōmunion Praiers at the end. which they called
Post Communionem, that is, an after Communion. And all these thinges beyng finished and ended, the Minister sent away the people, blessing them with a lucky blessing.
All these thinges, althoughe they led awaye the Christian people from that fyrst simplicity of vsyng the Lordes Supper, very manye thinges beyng added as it seemed good vnto sundrye men: neuerthelesse after a sorte they mighte bee borne withall, neyther can they iustly be accused eyther of superstition, or els of Idolatry.
Rites were not like in all churches. The churche of Millayne. Howbeit they were not a lyke in all Churches, neyther were they obserued after one maner. For yet in the Churche of Millaine it is otherwyse vsed after the institution of
Ambrose. But afterward the
Romanē Antichristes corrupted all thynges, as I shall declare in an other place.
And that by the olde institution were obserued those thinges whych I haue mencioned,
Tertulian. I coulde easely proue by most auncient wryters.
Tertullian in hys Apologye sayth: we assemble and gather together, that wee praying might embrace one another, as though we would make a rushing into God with our praiers. This violence is acceptable vnto God. We pray also for Emperours, & for their ministers & powers, for the state of the world, for the quietnes of things, & the tariyng of the end. These things declare the sūme of the collects. And for the rehearsing of the Scriptures, hee addeth: wee assemble together to the rehearsal of the holy scriptures, if the quality of the present time doth compel vs, either to foresee any thing, or diligently to acknowledge any faults, we do assuredly fede our fayth wyth holye woordes, wee erecte our hope, wee fyxe oure confidence,
[Page 44] and yet we continually repeate discipline, by inculcating the preceptes of God. Ther are also exhortations, castigations, and sharpe iudgementes of God, for there was iudgement with great waight. &c. These are the thinges whych wer done in the holy assembly. Wherunto those thinges are also to be added, which the same authour saith in an other place, namelye that the Lordes Supper was wont to be receaued at the handes of the chiefe Ministers. &c. We may by these woordes perceaue the principal partes of the Masse which we haue made mencion of.
Iustine the Martyr in his second Apologie maketh mencion that the Christians assembled together on the Sonday,
Iustine martyr but he writeth nothing of other feast daies. There he saith was rehersed the holy scriptures, whereunto the Byshop dyd afterward adioyne his exhortation. Which being finished (saith he) we ryse and pray. He addeth afterward: The bread and drinke is brought to the bishop, ouer which he geueth thankes as earnestly as he can: to whom all men answer,
Amen. These two words declare that they wer not carelesly to be passed ouer. First thankes were not geuen rashlye, but with as muche earnest as might be, that is, with a singular affection. Moreouer, it is manifest that all these thynges were spoken with a loud voyce, seing al the people answered,
Amen. Afterward (saith he) is distributed the Lordes supper, then is the common geuing of thankes, and the offering of almes.
Dionisius in
Hierarchia Ecclesiastica maketh mencion almost of these same things, namely of the reading of the scriptures, singing of Psalmes, Cōmuniō,
Dionisius. and other thinges, which wer to long now to rehearse. But (which is muche to be maruailed of) he maketh no mencion of the offering of the body of Christ.
The workes of Dionisius ar not hys whych was the
Areo-Pagite. Yet we must not thinke that he was that
Areopagite, of whom the Actes of the Apostles haue mencioned. But whatsoeuer he was, it is not to be doubted, as farre as I can iudge, but that he was an old wryter. But why I can not thincke that he was an
Areopagite, these are the reasons that leade me thereunto. First, bycause the kinde of writing which he vseth, especially of the names of God, and
de Hierarchia celesti, containeth in it rather the doctrine of vayne Philosophye, than the pure doctrine of Christian religiō, and vtterly wanteth edefiyng: moreouer those bookes ar in a maner voyd of testimonies of the holy scriptures.
Monkes were not in the churche in the Apostles tyme. Furthermore in his
Hierarchia Ecclesiastica hee maketh Monkes as a myddle order betwene a Clarke and the Lay men. When as in the Apostles time, that kynde of life was not yet in the Churche. Besides this, the auncienter Fathers neuer made mencion of those bookes: which is a good argument, that those wrytinges wer none of that Martyrs doing.
Gregory the
Romane was the first of all wryters that made any mencion of him, who in one of his Homelies mencioneth of his writinges. But let vs leaue him and come to
Augustine.
Augustine.
That father in his .59. epistle to
Paulinus, when he dissolueth the .v. question, expoundeth the .4. words which ar written in the .1. epistle to
Timo. the .2.
A place to Timothe expounded.
1, Tim:
2. chap. And these are the woordes:
[...], and
[...]. And he affirmeth
[...], to go before the celebration of the sacramēt: but
[...] he maketh prayers, which are said in the administration of the sacrament, wher after a sorte we vow our selues vnto Christ, and he thincketh
[...] to bee peticions and requestes, with which the Minister of the Church prayeth for good thinges vnto the people standing by. And finally
[...] he affirmeth to be the cōmon geuing of thankes. I could to these bring a great many more monuments of old writers, but that I thinke these are sufficient at this present.
But now to returne to the name of
Missa,
Note an other kind of mission I see ther haue bene some whych haue thought it to haue ben deriued of the word
Missio, that is sending, bicause those thinges which wer offered of the faithfull, were sayde to be sent, and they thyncke that this hebrewe woorde
Missath gaue the occasion to that name, bycause in Penticoste the Iewes vsed to send gyftes. But why I doo not thyncks
[Page] the name of
Missa to be deriued of the hebrewe woorde, I haue before declared. And nowe I adde this, that if
Missa were so named of the oblation of thinges, which wer geuen of the godly, then do the Papistes abuse that name, who haue no regard at al to the almes of godly men, but onely to the oblation of the bodye and blood of Christe, which they commonlye boast, and that impudently, that they doo offer it vnto God the father for the quicke and the dead. But of these thinges I thinke I haue spoken inough and inough.
34 And the Amorrites draue the childrē of Dan vnto the moūtain, for they suffered them not to come downe into the valley.
35 And the Amorrites began to dwel in the mount Heresch in Aialem, and in Saalbim: and the hande of Ioseph preuailed, so that they became tributaries.
36 And the coast of the Amorrites was from the going vp of the Scorpions, and from Petra and vpward.
They of the tribe of
Dan distrusting the mercy and fauour of God, wer driuē by the
Chananites or
Amorhites, into the hilly places, wher they were scarse able to abide. For their enemies began to vsurpe the mountaine of
Heresch, whych was appointed to their lot: but the house of
Ioseph aided them, and so preuailed, that they made the
Amorhites tributaries.
The borders of the Amorrites wer very large And how farre the borders of the
Amorhites extended, is brieflye touched. For they reached vnto the going vppe of Scorpions, which is a place in the South borders of the tribe of
Iudah, not farre from the dead sea, almost euen to
Petra, which city is the Metropolitan or chiefe city of
Arabia,
Petra. Strabo. from which it is called
Arabia Petrea. Strabo describeth it, that it was situated in a plaine ground, compassed in with high rockes, from the bottomes whereof flowed moste plentifull fountaynes, when as the whole region which lieth by it, was altogether dry and a deserte.
Whether it be lawfull for Christiās to dwel with infidels.
BVt seing the Israelites fel, bicause they dwelled together with vngodli nations, and did rather exact tributes of them, than vtterly wede them out, according to the cōmaundemēt of God. I thinke it good to entreate whether it be lawful for godly men to be conuersant and to dwell together with the vngodly.
Reasons which proue that. The first reasō
And assuredly ther are many reasons, wherby that maye seme to bee lawfull. First, bicause Christ despised not the feastes af Publicanes, Phariseis, and Sinners.
Reason. 2 Secondly,
Paul to the
Corinthians the first epistle, geueth not libertye to a faithful wife, to depart frō an infidele, so that he be content to lyue & dwel together
Reason. 3 w
t her. Moreouer, the same Apostle writeth, that if any infidele byd you to a feast, and ye wyll go with them, then eate suche thinges as are set before you.
Reason. 4, By these his woordes therefore he maketh it free. Furthermore, the same Apostle in the same epistle, saith that he had admonished the
Corinthians to auoyde whooremongers, rauenours, euyl speakers, and suche lyke: but not al (sayth he) for so must you go out of the world, but if any be called a brother. &c. Wherfore we are not forbydden to auoyde the fellowship of al the vngodly. Besides these
Reason. 5
Abraham was called out of Chaldey, and commaunded to dwell as a straunger among nations, which were farre from true religion. Wherefore hee dwelt in
Reason. 6 the land of
Chanaan and
Egipt, whych places were altogether geuen to idolatry. Yea, and
Lot seperated him selfe from the fellowshyppe and familye of his
Reason. 7 kinsman
Abraham, and went and dwelt in
Sodome. Naaman also the
Sirian returned to his idolatries. Christe also retayned not with him al those whom hee
Reason, 8 had healed of diseases, but sent them agayne, sometymes to their owne, to declare there, what had happened vnto them. Finally by ciuyl lawes certaine heretickes
Reason. 9 haue had places appointed vnto them, as the
Nouatians had in the citye
[Page 45] of
Constantinople, and at this day the Iewes haue euery where leaue to dwell among the Christians.
This questiō surely as it is weighty, so hath it also very many doubtes.
A distinction. Wherfore we must fyrst make a distinction, what may be lawfull to Magistrates, and what to priuate men.
An other distinction. Then must we vnderstand that the conuersation with infidels hath two considerations: one is, wherby men are driuen by compulsion to Idolatrous and vnpure worshipping of God, & an other, whereby they remaine at libertye. Then we must marke,
The third distinction. y
t they which liue together with the vngodly as touching religion, are sometyme learned and strong, and sometimes they are both weake and also vnlearned. Wherfore I thynke it good to be iudged as touching priuate men, that if they be learned,
The learned & strong may be conuersaunt with Infidels. and haue with theyr learning adioyned constancie, so that they be not compelled to cōmunicate with vngodly rites, may lawfully haue to do and be conuersaunt with men that are infidels, prouided that there be certayne cautions added.
The fyrst caution is, that they do it with thys minde,
The fyrst Caution. to teach those which are without godlynesse, and to bring them to the sincere and pure religiō. And therfore whilest they are conuersaunt among thē, they ought not to cease: but ought alwayes to go about that purpose, for which they dwell in those places. And that theyr instruction and doctrine may be fruitful, they must take diligent hede, that they be courteyse, gentle and bounteous towarde those, whom they thynke to ioyne vnto Christ. For vnlesse they be fully persuaded, that they which do admonyshe them and instructe them do loue them, & haue them in price, the thing, which they haue taken in hand shal haue but euill successe.
Furthermore they must take hede, that they liue holily, iustly and honestly,
The second Caution. for if the infidels should be offended with theyr maners, their ministerye would vtterly be vnprofitable: for as much as it nothing auayleth to build with one hand and to destroye the same with the other hand.
Moreouer this most of al is to be sene vnto,
The third Caution. y
t vnder the pretence of gentlenesse or frendship they myngle not themselues with vngodly vsages no though they were persuaded, that they could that way allure thē the easlier vnto Christ. For the rule of the Apostle must abyde vnshaken, which is that euil thinges are not to be committed, wherby good thyngs may happen.
They must beware also, y
t in being conuersaunt with thē,
The fourth Caution. they seke not theyr own cause or commodity. For some there are found, which although they make a pretence that they are desirous to haue the Gospel spred abroad. Yet neuerthelesse in very dede follow & seke for their owne pleasures, & gayne or aduantage. Wherfore if there be no hope (which neuerthelesse can seldome iustly happen) of the health of such infidels, we must no longer haue to do with them, but so much as eyther our necessitie or theirs requireth: that is, if peraduenture they shoulde be very sore sicke, and could not be holpen no other waye but by our helpe: or if we our selues shuld not be able to get things necessary for our liuing any other where but among them. It shall be lawfull also to be conuersaunte with them, as much as naturall and ciuile necessityes requyre, as if they were our princes, fathers, wiues or maisters & such like. Now resteth to cōfyrme this sentence,
Proues oute of the holy scriptures.
Math. 9. either by testimonies of y
e holy scriptures or els by examples. Christ assuredly did so, who for this cause was cōuersant w
t publicanes, sinners, pharisees, & scribes to instruct thē of saluation, & to conuert thē frō sinnes to vertues, and godlinesse, Wherfore
Ierome on y
e 9. chap. of
Mathew hath thys saying:
Ierom
[...]. Christ in dede went to the feastes of sinners, but to that end y
t he myght haue occasion to teache thē & to recōpence theyr biddings with spirituall meates: neyther are there any other things in the rehearsal therof spoken, but such as Christ himselfe spake or dyd, and what was the power of his doctrine, &c. Thys same manner dyd the Prophets in the old tyme vse, when they were conuersaunt w
t an Idolatrous people
[Page] And in lyke sorte dyd the Apostles, when they were sent by Christ, to go abroad among the Ethnikes. Neyther dyd
Paul disdayne when he came to Athens, to vewe the temples of the Idols, and there curiously & subtilly to loke vpon y
e titles and inscriptions of the altares, wherby he learned that inscription
Ignoto Deo, that is, To the vnknowen god, and therof he tooke matter to make an excellent Sermon there, that he might after a sort reproue the men of Athens out of there owne proper tables. I thynke these thynges are sufficiente to confyrme the sentence before alledged.
How we maye be conuersaunt with excommunicates. But before I goe from thys matter, I thoughte it good to admonyshe you of thys, that the same cautions being added, it is lawful for godly mē to be conuersaunt with such as are excōmunicate, namely to bring them into the way, so that they communicate not with them in their faulte, or haue to do with them for affection sake.
The weake & vnlearned ought not to haue to do with infidelles.
But let vs go forward, and declare what is to be iudged of the weake and vnlearned men. They, although they are not cōpelled to pollute themselues with Idolatrous customes, yet ought they not to dwell together with Infidels. For being vnlearned, they haue no pretence of teaching. For if they should go about to enstruct others,
The ignorance of Christiās as touching fayth is to bee reproued. they should by their vnskilfulnesse easly cause y
e true doctrine of Christ to be had in derision. And surely the ignoraunce of such men is earnestly to be reproued: forasmuche as among Christians, there is none so very an Ideot founde, but that he is bounde to be able to rendre a reason of his fayth and in a sorte able to enstructe straungers. And certaynely all men moughte quickely do that, if they would suffer themselues to be instructed euen meanely in the Cathechisme. Neuerthelesse such as are infected with thys ignoraunce ought to seperate themselues from hauyng familiar fellowship with Infidelles as much as nede of the body and ineuitable necessities will suffer.
But what shall we saye of Scholemaisters? they are oftentymes enemyes to pietye which yet are appoynted to teach good artes and Philosophye.
We maye not haue to do with vngodly scholemaisters. I say that it is daungerous to vse them, for as muche as they doe instille oftentymes peruerse thynges into the myndes of the hearers, and when as the Schollers are wonte to haue a meruelous opinion of a learned Scholemaster it easely afterward commenth to passe,
Godly scholemaisters do easely aduance religion. that they beginne to reuerence them, and that exceedingly. Wherfore when they see that they are eloquente and very well learned both in the liberall artes, and also in Philosophy, they can scarce persuade them selues, that those Scholemasters can erre or myserablye be deceaued in the true religion.
Origene. For on the contrarye part we see that
Origene the
Adamantiue, being besydes the religion of Christ, wherin he was instructed, wonderfully indued also with good artes and Philosophy, dyd in teaching disciplines of the Ethnikes bring very many of hys hearers to Christ.
Augustine. We know also that
Augustine, when he willingly gaue eare vnto
Ambrose for hys eloquence sake, was turned from a Manichite to a Catholyke. So, yea and that more easlye (for as muche as we are more prone to euill then to good) it may oftentymes happen that they which are weake and vnlearned in religion, may as touching vngodlynesse very much increase vnder vngodly Scholemaisters. And vndoubtedly by thys meanes fell
Iulianus the Apostata from Christ, in takyng
Libanius, Iamblicus, and
Maximus to be hys Scholemaisters. Wherfore for as much as suche Scholemaisters can not be had without greate daunger, my iudgement is that we should altogether leaue them.
Thou wilt say peraduenture y
t
Paul the Apostle in his fyrst Epistle to y
e
Cor. hath not written these cautions or exceptions of the weake and vnlearned ones, when as he plainly writeth: If any that is an infidel shal cal you, & ye wil go, &c. By these words he semeth to testifye, y
t al that is referred to our wil. Wherunto I answere, y
t the Apostle did not permit y
t to be free to euery wil, but to a wil y
t is ryghtly & wel instructed. For if a mā should go to these feastes, to be dronke to pamper his belly or gorge, or to solace himself w
t filthy talke without doubt he
[Page 46] can not be excused w
t the permissiō of
Paule, but is earnestly to be reproued, for his vnhonest wil and wicked purpose. Likewise if a mā being cōuersaūt with infidels should doubt of his own constancie, & should see y
t he could nothyng profite them, among whō he dwelleth, vndoubtedly y
e man can not go thither with a sound conscience, or an vpryght will. And if he should go, he should not directe y
t which he doth, to to glory of god (as he is cōmaūded.) Furthermore although
Paule hath not in the same place by expresse wordes put thys caution alledged, yet it followeth not therby, that the same is not to be added: forasmuch as it is both by firme reason manifest, & also proued by other places of y
e holy scripture, y
t that is in no case lawful. And y
t self same Apostle sayth in the same Epistle the vi. chap. that he doth well, which surely purposeth in his hart, y
t he wil kepe his virgin: Howbeit he addeth this condition, so y
t he haue no nede, and that he hath power ouer his own wil. For if he should otherwyse appoynt thē his daughter would, or had nede, then vndoubtedly he should not do well.
To the goodnesse of an action it is not sufficient that it be not of his own nature euill. Wherby it appeareth y
t to the goodnesse & vprightnesse of y
e worke, it is not sufficient to see that y
e work it self of his nature be not euill, or repugnant to y
e word of god. But more ouer thys is required, y
t we attempt the same with an vprighte, perfecte & whole mynde. Wherfore euery one y
t is vnlearned & weake, ought to separate himself frō the fellowship or familiaritie of y
t vnfaythfull, as much as naturall & ciuile necessity suffreth. For seing y
t he perceaueth that therby will come some danger to his soule, he can not with a good minde & sound counsel be conuersaunt with thē. Howbeit he may do such duties vnto them as are cōmaunded in the law of God, least he be made guiltye of y
e sentence of
Paul, where he sayth: whosoeuer hath not a care of hys, & especially of hys houshold, he hath denyed the fayth, & is worse than an Infidell. Yea and the same Apostle hath commaunded, that seruauntes of necessitye should obey their Maisters.
Now resteth to shewe reasons & testimonyes of the holy scriptures,
Testimonies of the holy scriptures for y
e sentence alledged. for y
e dysalowing of this conuersation. Fyrst our Sauiour feared not to say in
Mathew the 5. and 18. chap. If thy hand, fote or eye be an offence, or let vnto thee, cut him of, and cast him from thee, And these (as the wyser interpreters do declare) spake he not of the members of the body, but referred thē vnto those, which are our familiars, & most nygh of kynred vnto vs. They al are to be seperated frō oure cō pany, although they seme profitable and cōmodious, when they eyther seperate vs frō God, which is the euerlastyng saluation, or do put lets and hynderāces, wherby we are called frō hym.
Chrysostome.
Chrysostome in a maner intreating the self same argument sayth in the 56. Homely vpon Iohn: If we cut of a rotten membre frō the body, least it should corrupt the other partes of the body, which vndoubtedly we do not, bycause we despyse that member. For who at any tyme hated hys owne fleshe? How much more should we do the same in those which are wickedly ioyned vnto vs, not that we should despyse them, but that we should prouide that our saluation be not there indaungered, where we see y
t we can nothing at al profite them. Wherfore in thys case, it is muche vnprofitable to desire, or to seke for familiaritie or concord. To this also doth y
e law of Christ tend which he gaue in the 18. of
Mathew, y
t they which are in a manner past hope of saluatiō, & wil not heare their brethren iustly admonishing thē, yea and also despise y
e voyce of the church correcting them, let them be counted as Ethnikes and publicanes. Which thing
Paule also hath taught, who in the fyrst of the
Corrinthians the v. chap. commaunded the incestuous person to be excōmunicated, that a litle leuen should not pollute the whole dough of the sainctes.
Moreouer the same Apostle taught, and y
t in the same Epistle the 15. chap. out of a verse of
Menander y
t Poet, y
e euil cōmunications corrupt good maners. And therby he shewed, y
t the ryght fayth of y
e resurrection, was greuously weakened among y
e
Corinthians, which were newly come vnto Christ, and y
t for that cause bycause they had lightly geuē credite vnto y
e arguments & prophane reasons of
[Page] Philosophers or rather heretikes. It is not possible to be thought, how y
e bewitching of wicked words corrupteth the tēder fayth of the weake ones. Wherfore profitably and conueniently were the
Corrinthians admonished, & with thē all such as are weake ar exhorted,
The coūsels of Phisitions to auoyde contagiousnesse. to abstayne frō y
e fellowship of infidels. The phisitions also do counsell, y
t when a contagious disease shal infect either a familye or the next familie vnto it, y
t such as yet are of perfect health goe not vnto them which are sicke. For y
t in the bodyes & temperatures of men there is a certayne agrement, wherby an affection easly issueth frō those which ar sicke to thē which are whole and sound,
[...] the poyson wherof, though it be not byandby felt, of those which take not hede vnto themselues, yet for al y
t within a litle whyle after it deadly corrupteth. Wherfore seing we are bidden so diligently to beware of the diseases of the bodye, muche more ought we to prouide agaynste the vices of the mynde that we no way prouoke them vnto vs.
Our nature is on euery side subiect to corruption.Furthermore our nature is so framed, by reason of our naturall or originall sinne, y
t we are on euery side subiect to corruption, as both y
e holy scriptures, and also very many experiences do daily teach vs, so that it is not to be doubted, but y
t we should easly sucke in the poyson of other mens sinnes, if we shoulde not w
t great diligence auoyde them. And those synnes as they do without any laboure cleaue vnto vs before we beware, so being once conceaued, they can not be plucked from vs but with great paynes.
Chrysostome. Wherfore
Chrysostome in his 56. Homely vpon Iohn which I a litle before brought, semeth wisely to saye: If we coulde make thē the better, and not hurt our selues (he entreateth in y
e place of infidells and vngodly ones) we should do all things: but when we can do them no good, bycause they are past amendment, and that we may greuously hurt our selues, then are they vtterly to be cut of. And to confyrme hys sentence more strongly he bringeth in that which
Paule writeth in the fyrst Epistle to the
Corinth. the .5 chap. which is, Take away euil from among you. Which wordes of the Apostle can not be vnderstand of synne, forasmuche as the Greeke woorde is
[...], that is euil. By which kynde of speache a wicked man is signifyed. Wherfore I shall nothyng erre, if I a litle bend the wordes of the Apostle to the commoditie of the weake ones, saying: Take away your selues from among the euill ones. For if ye, being weake and vnskilfull, shall company with them, ye must nedes both see and heare very many thynges agaynst godlynesse & the religion which ye professe. And bicause ye are not able neyther to confute, nor to reproue them, ye shall seme to be called as witnesses of blasphemies and reproche of the truth. And peraduenture there shoulde remayne a styng in your myndes, wherewith your conscience should be vexed longer than ye thynke for. Let vs herken vnto the wyse mā, who hath wel and faithfully admonished, That he which toucheth pytche shal be fyled with it, and y
t he which hath fellowship with a proude man, wil proue like vnto him.
The vices of other men are like vnto pitch. Take vpon thee no greater burthen, than thou art able to beare, & ioyne not thy selfe vnto a mightier thā thou thy self art.
Ecclesiasticus the .13. chap. These things do two wayes serue for thys present matter. Fyrst in that the vices of other men are lykened vnto pytche, whiche sticketh wonderfull fast to the fyngers of them which touch it,
We must haue a regard to our own strength. and also to garments. Secondly are we faythfully admonyshed to haue a regarde to our own strength.
Examples of y
e holy scripturesLet the examples of y
e holy scriptures in any wise teach vs. The Israelits were 70. yeres captiues in Babilon, & were so infected with y
e conuersatiō of vnfaythful natiōs, y
t afterward whē they had leaue geuē thē fyrst of
Cirus & thē of
Darius y
e most noble kings to returne home, very many of thē wold not returne, but being ouercome with y
e cōmoditie of houses, fields & marchandises, they remained stil among y
e
Chaldians, Medes, &
Persians: So cold became they in y
e loue of godlinesse & study of religiō.
Exodus.
[...]2. They were reproued in dede by
Esdras, Nehemias, &
Zachary, but they were litle y
e better therby. And how much y
e Hebrues wer corrupted
[Page 47] by their long conuersation with y
e
Egyptians, the things which were by & by done in y
e wildernesse, do playnly testifie. For although they had yet before theyr eyes y
e singular benefites of God towards them, yet they fell frō hym to Idolatry, and bycause in
Egypt they had sene an oxe supersticiously worshipped,
Numeri. 2
[...]. they therfore instigated
Aaron, to make them a calfe to worship. Whiche beyng geuen thē with great reioysing they began to crye. These are thy gods O Israell, which brought the out of
Egypt. Besides this, they iorneyng, thorough the wildernesse, when they came to the borders of the
Moabites, and were conuersaunt with that nation more familiarly than was mete, they were brought to thys pointe, that they did not only commit filthy whoredome with the shamelesse womē of the
Moabites, but also they offred sacrifice vnto the most filthy idole namely
Baal-Peor and suffred them selues to be admitted to his most vnpure sacrifices.
Peter the chief Apostle,
Mathew. 26. when he had entred into the vngodly hawle of the chief Priest, and had there ben conuersaunt with the maydens and vngodly seruauntes, forswore his maister Iesus Christ our sauiour. For the whiche faulte afterward, when he departed, he wept most bitterly.
Isay. 6.
Isay when he sawe God syt in the temple like a iudge, and angels standing about hym, whiche most purely celebrated prayses vnto him, althoughe he semed not to himselfe to be guilty of his owne faulte, yet he cried out: Wo vnto me bycause I dwell in the middost of a people, y
t haue vncleane lippes. For y
e man of God felte, that he had gotten no small infection, by reason he had dwelled so long with an vncleane people.
Alexander that Macedonian,
Alexander of Macedonia. which by strength and most noble victoryes had subdued vnder him the most part of the earth, was so weakened and effeminated by the maners of the
Persians, that those whom he ought to haue drawen to his own maners and qualities, he himselfe tooke their garments, weaknesse, hawtenesse and pride, so farre was he from bringyng them to the institutions of the
Macedonians. Wherfore he rā into great hatred of his soldiours. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that long conuersation of the godly with infidels (except there appeare some fruite of their cōuersion, and that the same be by all meanes sought for) doth breede a let or hinderaūce to their saluation. For when they perceaue that our men do liue so familiarly with them, they thinke that the superstitions and idolatries, wherwith they are infected are not so euill, and so much to be detested. And peraduentur they are brought to this poynte, that in perseueryng in them, they distrust not but that they may attayne to saluation. For vnlesse it were so, they could not persuade them selues, that our men would dissemble it. Besides those things, there are very many of our men, whiche by the example of this mingled conuersation do thinke that they also may do the same, which they se others to do. Wherby by the dede or exāple of certain, euill should spreade abrode more amply, and our fayth and godlynesse should be had in derision of the Ethnikes and Papistes. And that oftentymes cōmeth to passe, which we know to haue happened in the tyme of
Paul (as it is written in the first Epistle to the
Corinthians) that they which otherwise were faithful, by this conuersation do communicate with wicked and polluted rites. For by ouermuch familiarity with the Infidels, is by littell and littell made a steppe to followe theyr superstition and Idolatry. Wherefore not without a cause did the Apostle crye: Flye from Idolatry. I will not speake also, how that it is not possible, but that, where our men whiche are weake & without learning and knowledge, are conuersant with infidels, sometymes there may happē some talke of religion, wherin althoughe they slippe not, yet when they can not ouerthrowe the Sophistical and crafty argumentes of their aduersaries, brawling and strife sometymes ariseth & frō y
t they fall into hatred, cursing & reproches, which haue no edificatiō, but rather hinder it, so farre is it of to get a steppe to set forwarde. To this serueth y
e which
Paul hath written in the secōd Epistle to y
e
Corinthians: draw not y
e yoke w
t vnbeleuers. For what fellowship hath righteousnesse w
t vnrighteousnesse? What participatiō hath light with darckenesse? or what concorde betwen
[Page]
Christ and
Belial? what part hath the faithfull with the vnfaithfull? or what agreeth the temple of God with Idoles? These things are so manifest, that they nede not the light of interpretation: neither ought they to be vnderstand onely for contracting of matrimonyes, when as they extend farre and ouer all, & pertayne also vnto all kinde of conuersation with the vngodly, whiche we haue w
t them for our owne cause. I know that the shadowes of the olde law are now by y
e benefite of Christ remoued frō vs. Howbeit, it is not to be doubted but y
t those things abide, of which the people of God was by them at that time admonished.
What was meante by the hemmes of the Hebrues.Wherfore I demaunde, what God ment, when he commaunded the Iewes, to sowe hemmes to their garmētes which they ware? Vndoubtedly this he mēt, that they beyng taught by that signe, might vnderstand y
t they were seuered frō the Ethnikes, and that it was not lawfull for them to ioyne them selues with them, but as muche as necessitie should compell. God oftentymes forbad them that they should not returne into Egypt, and that they should not seke ayde of straunge nations. For he would haue cut of from his people all occasions of superstitions and Idolatry, yea and the place, whiche we are now in hande with, testifieth that the Israelites grieuously sinned, bycause they had brought these Idolatrous nations vnder tribute, and had made a league with them, and dwelled together in the same cities & fieldes with them. And assuredly to what euill it torned them vnto, the history it selfe declareth: for they brought not the
Chananites to the true worshippyng of God, but they them selues rather forsakyng their God, became lyke Idolaters.
I speake not, how that the conuersation betwene the Hebrues and Samaritanes was so odious euen to the tyme of Christ, that the woman of
Samaria (of whom Iohn mencioneth) sayd vnto Christ,
Iohn. 4. that the Iewes were not wonte to be familiar with the Samaritanes. Moreouer it is not mete for Christians, to take away from them selues the boldenesse and liberty, frely to speake of Christ. Whiche they must nedes do, if they dwell among infidels. For if they dwellyng with infidels should familiarly haue free talke of Christ, either should they be laughed to scorne, or elles they should not be suffred. Vndoubtedly the holy fathers in the old tyme, were both grieued and also mourned, when by any necessitie they were compelled to dwell from the people of God.
Dauid therof is witnesse, who sighed when he was by reason of the vniust violence of
Saul constrayned to lyue in deserte places. And it appeareth in the Psalmes, how grieuously he complayned and lamented that he was forced to dwell among straungers, & such as were farre frō god.
Daniel & his fellowes mought haue had the fruition of the kinges table, and of most delicate meates, and yet they abiected those commodities & pleasures, lest they should defyle thē selues with the delicate meates of the Ethnikes, and with the vncleane bankettes of the vnbeleuers.
Moses also (as it is written in the xi. to the Hebrues) whē he mought haue ben counted the sonne of the daughter of
Pharao, and therby haue attayned to great honor, he contemned all this, and went vnto his brethren, which were oppressed with miserable seruitude, in making bricke and tyles. They whiche followe not these examples, do manifestly declare, that they haue small mynde of the glorye of God, and that they will not redeme the same with their own losse or binderāce, thoughe it wer neuer so smal or littel. Do we (sayth
Paul to the
Corrnth. 1.) prouoke God? Are we stronger than he? Wherfore they whiche are weake and vnlearned,
It is not lawfull to dwell with infidelles when we are compelled to cō municate with theyr vngodly rites. whilest they take vpon them to dwell among infidels, they do without doubt tempte god, and in a maner prouoke him, as thoughe they would be strō ger thā he. I could gather a great many more reasons for this sentēce: but these whiche I haue brought, shalbe sufficient at this tyme.
Now let vs come to those, whiche do so dwell among infidels that they are compelled to be present at their vnlawfull rites, whether those be learned or vnlearned, whether they be strong or weake, what they be, in this case, it maketh
[Page 48] no matter: For I comprehend them altogether. I say that none of them, such an habitation or coniunction is to be suffred: but either they must flye from thence, or rather suffre death, than to commit Idolatry.
Paul sayd (as I haue before declared) Flye from Idolatry. The lawe and Prophetes, the olde and new Testament are full of ordinaunces, commaundementes, lawes, admonitions, rebukes, wherby straunge worshipping is forbidden.
Daniel. 3.
Daniels fellowes chose rather to be cast into the fornace, than they would worship the ymage set vp by a moste mighty king.
Machabea the mother with her children would rather dye,
Machab. 7. than she would against the lawes of God eate swynes fleshe. I could reckon an infinite numbre of Martyrs, which most cōstantly suffred death, rather than they would forsake theyr godlynesse, which they had professed, hauing this sayeng alwayes before their eyes, feare not them whiche can kill the body &c.
Paul in his first Epistle to the
Corinthians affirmeth the same, bycause we are the temple of God, the members of Christ, and partakers of the table of the Lord, which table can haue nothyng common with the table of deuils.
All these thinges are to be applied vnto our tymes, when in the tyme of Papistrie godly men, if they dwell with the vngodly are compelled to be at their Masses and most filthy seruices: whiche of all thinges is not lawful vnto them. But some take these probations by me now alledged to be vnderstand of sacrifices done to Idoles, and not of the superstitions, whiche are now vsed in the tyme of Papistry.
An outwarde worke can not be counted for y
e worshipping of God, excepte it be grounded by hys worde. But they ought to remember that no outward worke is to be had for the true worshipping of God, vnlesse it be appoynted by the worde of God: whiche if it be not, it can be nothing els but an inuention of man. For we can not without faith worship God: and fayth can haue no place, where y
e word of God is withdrawen. Wherfore in humane actions, how goodly in shewe so euer they be, vnlesse god by his word do allow them, they can be no worshipping of him. Surely if we would honor men, we are wont chiefly to marke,
A similitude. in what things those men do delite in: and when we haue found that out, we thinke we haue bestowed our labour well, when we haue shewed vnto them those thinges wherin they were wont to reioyce and delyte. Why then do we not after y
e same sorte with God, to serue him with that kynd of worshipping whiche he hath allowed by his oracles? Let vs heare him in
Esay, how that in the oblations, sacrifices, incenses, and offringes which were brought into the temple without faith, he was rather weryed than reioysed in them. He abhorreth and detesteth these kyndes of sacrifices as the Prophetes haue taught vs. Yf these thinges are spoken of those sacrifices whiche they by the word of God vsed, & that for that cause only, bycause they were offred without faith: what thinke we is to be iudged of the inuētions of men, & fayned worshippinges, which beyng voyde of y
e word of God cā not be done with faith?
There is no true god which delighteth in fayned worshyppynges. we may verely say that they pertayne vnto Idolatry. And that may be manifestly gathered hereby, bycause there is no true God whiche wil be worshipped with these thinges. Wherfore it followeth that the vngodly whilest they adioyne such rites vnto their holy seruices, they do not worship the true God, but him whom they haue fayned with them selues to delyte in these thinges. And for as much as in the whole nature of thinges there is no such, they worship the Idole of their owne mynde, and therfore iustly and worthely they may be called Idolaters.
But they say that those thinges which are sayd & done in the Masse,
We must haue no regarde to the begynning of Ceremonies but whether they agre with the worde of God. had their beginning by the institution of Christ, althoughe they were afterward vitiated thoroughe mens defaulte. That helpeth them nothing, for as much as in these thinges we may not haue a regarde or consideration to their begynning but to their nature and forme. And we must diligētly marke whether they agree with the worde of God. The brasen Serpent by the commaundement of God had his beginning, it was also endewed with miracles,
The brasē Serpent. for the Israelites were by looking vpon it deliuered from their venemous byting. The same Serpent neuerthelesse,
[Page] when the Iewes worshipped him, and offered incense vnto it, the godly men detested it. So that the most holy king
Ezechias brake him in pieces, & therwithall vtterly put away the worshipping therof. We must not therfore haue a regard to the originall of a thing,
What the Hebrues meante whē they made thē selues the golden calfe. but we must looke how it is vsed, whether it agree with the first institution. The Hebrues when they compelled
Aaron, to make them a calfe to worship, had not that mynde to fall from the true GOD, when as they confessed that he brought thē out of
Egypt. This was onely their entent, to worship him vnder some signe or visible forme, and they chose that forme wherby they had sene the Egiptians expresse their God by.
The maner of of y
e Ethnikes in their Idolatry. So the Ethnikes testified that they worshipped one God, as the chief author of all thinges, which they fashioned vnto them selues by dyuers and manifold shapes. For by
Pallas they say was signified his wisedome: by
Mars his power and myght. By
Iupiter his iustice and goodnesse. Wherfore rites and ceremonyes are not to be estemed by the counsell and will of men. No otherwise must we thinke to haue happened of
Ieroboam the sonne of
Nabat.
The counsel of Ieroboam. For he would not (as he pretended) plucke away the people from worshipping of the true God, but bycause he was affeard of his kingdome, and sawe that it might easely happen, that if his men should often go vnto the temple of
Ierusalem, they would fall from him, and returne vnto the familie of
Dauid. He sayd therfore, that to worship the true God, they neded neither the tēple of
Ierusalem, nor yet the arke of the couenaunt. For that God
Iehouah, as he was signified vnto the
Iewes by the wodden arke and tēple of
Salomō, so also might he be expressed vnto y
e Israelites by signes of golden calues, so that that worshipping which they should performe at
Ierusalem, they might commodiously celebrate vnto
Iehouah in
Bethel & in
Dan. This man therfore went about no other thing but made an outward worke, whiche he obtruded as a worshipping of GOD, and that vtterly without his worde, whiche wanting, all y
t was done was mere superstition and Idolatry. Tyrannes therfore and princes, when they compell men to polluted rites, although they say they do them for a good intente (as they terme it) and how soeuer they pretend some certain beginning of aūciēty, are not yet to be heard.
Paul doth in this maner admonish the
Ephesians. Communicate not with their vnfruiteful workes, but reproue them. He called them their workes, bycause they could not be called the workes of God,
What is to be done when superstitions are obtruded vnto vs. for so much as they very much disagreed from his worde. But, what is then to be done, whē they are obtruded vnto vs? Surely we ought to reproue them, and with great libertie (when nede requireth) reprehend them. But that is dangerous (say they:) we shall lose our goods and dignities: we shalbe put to death. I graunt that, but none of vs hath vpon this condition receaued the religion of Christ, that hys lyfe, goodes and dignities, should remayne safe vnto hym selfe. Yea Christ hath by expresse worde testified vnto euery one of vs. Excepte ye renounce all that ye haue, and take vp your crosse, and follow me, ye can not be my disciples: and vnlesse you lose your soules ye can not possesse them. After this sorte must we frame our selues.
The aunswers of
Ciprian.
Ciprian (as
Augustine declareth) when he was led to execution, the president beyng desirous that he might escape, sayd vnto hym. Now I geue thee space to deliberate, to chose whiche thou wilte, whether thou wilte thus miserably be slayne, or obey, and so let go free. The man of God aunswered, In a thing so holy, deliberation hath no place. They whiche are not affected with this mynd, but are wonderfull carefull,
Their punishmentes which cōtaminate thē selues with superstitions. lest their lyfe or goodes should perishe, those men do easely pollute them selues with Masses and vnpure superstitions, and for the same cause do suffre most grieuous punishementes. First truely their conscience miserably afflicteth them. Secondly the light of the truth whiche before was kindled in their myndes, is by litle and litle extinguished. Thirdly very oftentymes they exceadyngly delyte them selues in that dissimulation, so farre of are they, to repente them of it. Yea and they go about to persuade the same vnto
[Page 49] others, and those whiche will not obeie admonitions, they begyn to hate, and lastly as muche as lyeth in them, they stirre vp agaynst them, the anger, force and might of Tyrannes and worldly princes. Such a most vnhappy end of many of them haue I my selfe sene.
And in this their dissimulation; thus they vse to defend them selues:
Outward workes are certain shewes of confession. we do not this (saye they) from our hearte: we so behaue our selues onely in bodye and outwarde gesture. But why do no they consider, outwarde actions to be a certayne shewe of confession: and euen as in the profession of fayth and Religion the tongue ought not to disagree from the hearte, so also what soeuer is outwardly done in deuyne ceremonyes, ought with the same profession to agree. Adde also thereunto thys sayeng of
Paul, with the hearte we beleue vnto ryghteousnesse, with the mouth is confession made to saluation.
It is no true fayth whiche bursteth not out into Acte. Christe lykewyse sayde: Who soeuer shalbe ashamed of me before men, I will also be ashamed of hym before my Father. Furthermore I woulde haue those men to vnderstand, that that is not pure and true fayth, whiche bursteth not forth into actions agreable vnto it. Moreouer our sauiour (who most earnestly sought the glorye of hys Father) when he had purged the Temple from Marchantes, sayde: The zeale of thy house hath eaten me vp. But these our men shewe forth no followyng of that godlynesse and fayth, whiche they crake to be closed in their heart.
Neither do they remember,
An inwarde & outwarde worshipping. that euen as the inwarde worshyppyng of God is founde to be it, whereby we iudge of him truely and honorably: so also the outwarde worshyppyng is,
Idolatry is of two sortes. whereby we worshyppe hym ryghtly and as he hath appointed. And that Idolatrye lykewise is of two sortes, for one is, whereby we fayne vnto our selues in our hearte by euill doctrines such a GOD as we lyst our selues. An other is, whereby we transferre the outwarde worshyppyng not onely to creatures and Idoles, but we vitiate the same also with our owne inuentions and lyes.
We retayne (say they) in our heart the right opinion. Graunt it be so, but ye abandone your bodyes to Idoles and to the deuill. And
Paul affirmeth, that your body is the mēber of Christ, why do ye then take it and geue it to an harlotte? But
Paul (saye they) wrote that of fornication. I knowe that. But the Prophetes in the meane tyme teache vs that Idolatrye is the greatest fornication of all. For
Ieremy, Ezechiell,
Idolatrye is the greatest of all fornicatiōs. and other holy Prophetes fo inueyghe against the Iewes and their Churche, that they saye the same Churche is lyke vnto an harlotte whiche vnder euery greene tree hath abandoned her selfe to Idoles and prophane worshippynges. Moreouer howe vayne the excuse of these men is, the oracle of GOD playnely declareth, whereby GOD aunswered thus vnto
Elias the Prophete. I haue left me 7000. men, whiche haue not bowed their knees before
Baal: he sayth not whiche thincke ryghtlye in theyr harte, and whiche in their mynde beleue vpryghtly, but on the contrary setteth forth a signe of outwarde worshyppyng, namely of bowyng the knee.
God hath created the whole man and wyll haue him whole And he whiche created the whole man is not content with the halfe of him, neither will he haue his creature parted with the deuill. To me (sayth God) to me onely I say shall euery knee bowe. Furthermore if this their reason had bene of any valew, the
Corinthians might also by it haue excused their doing. For they might haue said vnto
Paul, what, art thou so vehement agaynst vs? We our selues know also, that an Idole is nothyng, and we kepe the right opinion in our heart, Let God be content with that.
Other mennes faultes are not layde to oure charge but that we cōmunicate with them. Yt is lawfull for vs in the meane tyme with the body and outwarde presence to serue our owne commoditie.
Furthermore they saye: These thynges we do nothyng at all vitiate, yea we would haue them vncorrupte and perfecte. Wherfore what synne soeuer is here committed, it ought not to be ascribed vnto vs. Whereunto I aunswere. That
[Page] that is true in dede, that an other mans synne is imputed to no man, but yet whilest ye are present at prophane rites, that is blamed in you, and iustely imputed vnto you, in that you communicate with an other mans vngodlynesse. The Apostle in hys firste Epistle to the
Corinthians sayde: do ye not knowe that they whiche do eate of the sacrifice, are made also partakers of the Temple? What saye I than? That the Image is any thyng? or that it whiche is offred vnto Images is any thyng? Nay. But this I say: that the thyngs which the Gentiles offre, they offre vnto deuilles. But I woulde not that you shoulde be partakers of deuilles, ye can not drynke of the Cup of the Lorde, and of the Cup of the deuilles, ye can not be partakers of the Lordes table, and of the table of deuilles. &c. Wherefore, thoughe the corruption of the Sacrifices is not to be imputed to the communicantes, yet for all that the communicatyng it selfe, from whiche they ought to haue kepte them selues, maketh them blameworthy. And vnlesse the thyng were so, why would not the holy Martyrs communicate with the rites of the Ethnikes? why did
Paul so reproue the
Corinthians? But here they returne agayne to this, to saye, That the Masse is not to be compared with the Idolatrye of the Ethnikes. For (saye they) thoughe it somewhat straye from the institution of Christe,
The Masse hath nothyng common with the institution of the Lord. yet ought it not to be counted a prophane and an Idolatrous thyng. But I affirme it to be so muche peruerted, that almost it nothyng at all agreeth with the institution of Christ, yea it is most vtterly contrarye vnto it. Whiche is very easye for me to declare.
Firste the Supper of the Lorde, as it was instituted by Christe, was a common or publique worke:
A contrarietye betwen the supper of the Lord & the Masse. but nowe commeth forth the sacrificer adorned with monstrous garmentes, and doth all thynges alone, the rest stand by & onely see and heare. Wherefore if
Paul did iustly and worthily rebuke the Corinthians, which taryed not one for an other, & sayd that they could not eate y
e Lordes Supper: how can they worthily call the Papisticall Masse, by the name of the Supper of the Lorde, whereas onely one sacrificer eateth and drinketh? Vndoubtedly by no meanes. Wherefore let them rather call it by any other name, than the Supper of the Lord.
Furthermore they saye, that they do there offre the sonne of GOD vnto the eternall Father. And that is by expresse wordes denyed in the Epistle to the Hebrues. For it teacheth that all thynges were fynished by the onely one oblation of Christe. Whiche beyng perfect, we maye not renewe the same agayne. They wyll offre vp Christ euery daye. The worde of GOD affirmeth, that it was to be offred but once. I confesse in dede, that the Fathers (as I haue before sayde) did sometymes in suche sorte speake as thoughe the body and bloude of Christe were either offred or sacrificed in the celebration of the Sacramentes.
How in the supper the body & bloud of Christ is offred vnto God. But they very oftentymes interpreted them selues, that those oblations or Sacrifices, were onely thankes geuyng, or a memory and figure of that oblation and sacrifice, which Christ dyeng vpon the crosse made.
They affirme also, that the bread and wyne, are chaunged into the substaunce of the bodye and bloud of Christe, when as the holy Scripture doth teache vs farre otherwyse. Moreouer they lyftyng vp the bread and wyne, do set forth to the people creatures to be worshypped in steade of GOD. For what is more filthy, than religiously to worshyppe a piece of bread, and a Cup of wyne? It is true in dede, that they are made partakers of the bodye and bloude of the Lorde, namely in hearte and mynde, whiche eate and drinke the signes of thankes geuyng, with syncere fayth, & as the Lorde hath instituted. But yf a man do onely beholde and worshyppe them, then are they nothyng vnto him, but a piece of breade and a Cup of wyne.
Moreouer the ministers of the Churche, when as their duety is to go about all that in them lyeth to lift vp the myndes of the people vnto heauen, that they
[Page 50] mought not seke Christ in the world, nor looke for any carnall or earthly thing in the supper of the Lord, they miserably holde the people geuyng head to the visible signes. The Apostle in the first Epistle to the
Corinthians commaunded that they should not vse a straunge tongue in holy assemblyes, bycause euery one must aunswere Amen. And bycause aboue all thinges the edifieng of the hearers is to be sought for. But in the Masse all thinges are done in the Latine tongue. And those wordes whiche should be to the great comfort of the standers by, when as to them the participation of the body & bloud of the Lord is promised, those wordes do they speake softely, yea they mumble them vp so darkelye, that though a man vnderstande the Latine, yet can he not vnderstande those wordes. They do for this cause so softely mumble them vp, as thoughe the members of Christ were not worthy to heare them:
The Greke Churche. when as neuerthelesse the Lord hym selfe spake them openly, and the Greke Churche, euen to thys daye pronounceth them with a moste loude voyce. Yea and in the olde tyme, it was a custome vsed (as
Ambrose and
Augustine among other do testifye) that at those wordes the people aunswered
Amen. But as I thinke,
Ambrose. Augustine. these men do therefore mumble vp those wordes, bycause they are affeard lest their lyes shoulde be founde out. For there they saye, Take ye and eate: and also,
The Papistes in the Masse make many Lyes. As often as ye shall do these thynges, ye shall do them in remembraunce of me. When as neuerthelesse they haue appoynted to eate and drinke it alone. And vndoubtedly very many other thynges speake they secretly and openly in the Masse, as thoughe many did communicate or should communicate, when as the sacrificer alone doth it in dede. A lye is euer fylthy, but then most filthy of all, when it is admitted in holy thinges, and before the Lord.
But what shall we saye of their applications? They affirme that they can as they luste them selues applye the sacrifices whiche they make vnto the quicke and the dead.
Euery man is iustified by his owne faith and lyueth & dyeth in hys owne righteousnesse. But the Scripture teacheth that euery man is iustifyed by hys owne fayth, and that all men shall either dye or lyue in their owne ryghteousnesse or vnryghteousnesse: but they saye otherwyse, for they can as they saye, helpe both the quicke and the dead by their Masses. If they woulde attribute that vnto prayers, namely that they taught that by prayers they mought helpe the necessityes of others, it myght be borne with all.
By praiers we he
[...]pe other. But when they affirme, that the worke it selfe, namely of the Masse, hath in it so muche power and vertue, that it can helpe all kynde of men, that maye by no meanes be suffred. Besides this Masses are very oftentymes celebrated in the honour of certayne Sainctes: whiche vndoubtedly is moste farre from the truthe: for as muche as Christe hath for thys purpose instituted hys Supper, that it shoulde be a memorie of hys death, and not of other Saynctes. I will not speake howe that it is moste commonly sene, that there is nothyng founde certaine of those Sainctes whome they there worshyppe:
The lyues of many sainctes are Apochripha and full of Fables. the lyues of them are Apochripha, and very often also full of fables, and Poetes faynenyngs. There are also in it, certayne, yea very many straunge rites, signes to be laughed at, gestures in a manner foolyshe, and garmentes not vsed: the significations of whiche thynges are vtterly vnknowen, not onelye of them whiche stande by, but euen the sacrificers them selues,
Significatiōs of Ceremonies in the Masse are not knowē if they shoulde be demaunded what they meant, they coulde not aunswere. Wherefore either they aunswere nothyng, or if they go aboute to saye any thyng, they bryng forth not one thyng, but thyngs moste disagreyng: whereby thou mayste easely gather that there is no truth in their wordes. Wherefore fayth can haue no place in these thinges whiche they do in theyr Masse, when as it onely there hath place, where the worde of God offreth it selfe vnto vs.
And that they can not defend them selues from the detestable synne of Idolatry,
[Page] the ymages do testifye,
Images are worshipped in the masse. vnto the whiche they turnyng them selues do celebrate their most vnpure seruices. For they can not be content in the Masses to looke vpon them, but they cense them, and kneele before them, and finally they do vnto them all kynde of worshippyng, whiche is to be done onely to God. And bycause (as I haue before mencioned) they dare affirme that the Masse hath affinitie (I can not tell what) with the institution of Christ: it shall not be from the purpose,
Sacrifices of the Ethnikes are more agreable with sacrifices appointed by God, thā is y
e Masse with the holy supper and it is easy to be done, to declare, that (if we marke the tokens) the olde Ethnikes may with much more likelyhode excuse and defend their sacrifices, than these can defend the Masses. For the sacrifices of the gentiles did not differ from the maner of sacrificyng whiche the fathers had before the lawe, and whiche God allowed in his lawe, when as these men in their Masse differ from that supper whiche Christ prescribed, and as the Euāgelistes and the Apostle
Paul haue deliuered. There on euery syde was inuocation of God, a temple, an alter, Sacrifices, Priestes, Killing, sheding of Bloud, Salte, Wyne, Oyle, Meale, a holy banket, religious garmentes, washynges, fumigations, continuall fyer, singing, oracles and such lyke, whiche would be to long to rehearse. Let the Popishe sacrificers shewe as many thinges, if they can, in their Masse, whiche do agree with those thinges whiche Christ did in the supper. But if so be they can not, let them then thinke that their Masse doth no more agree with the godly celebration of the holy Supper, than do the rites of the Idolatrers agree with the legall sacrifices. Wherfore let them cease of so to kysse their littel daughter, and to preache that it ought to be counted the institution of Christ and of the Apostles. I will not speake of the yearely Obites, and Funerals of the dead whiche are oftentymes vsed there, of whiche thinges the Lord hath nothing commaunded. By it they stablishe Purgatory, wherof the holy scriptures write nothyng. That furthermore is most farre from pietie, bycause in their Masse they poure out prayers vnto sainctes, whiche are already departed out of this lyfe.
In hearyng of Masses the anger of God is not pacified, but prouoked. Finally all the thynges whiche they there do, they make a market of them, sell, bargayne and set them out to most filthy gayne. Wherfore we must diligentlye take hede, that whilest we desyre to worshyp GOD and to haue hym mercifull vnto vs, we do not in hearyng of Masses exceadyngly prouoke hys anger agaynst vs.
What is to be answerd to the exāple of Naaman the SiriāThese superstitious men go forwarde, and by the example of
Naaman the Sirian will proue that it is permitted them, to be present at the most fylthy Masses.
Naaman prayed
Elizeus the Prophet, that if he bowed his knee in y
e tēple of the Idoll
Rimnon, when the kyng, whiche leaned his hand on his shoulder, should so do, he would implore for hym mercy and forgeuenesse of GOD. To whom
Elizeus aunswered only, go in peace. These our men ought to consider with thē selues whether they onely haue sene and read this diuine history. I thinke not: For the holy Martyrs in the olde Churche were studious day and nyght in the holy Scriptures. Wherfore this history of
Naaman was not hidden from them. And what cause was there then, that they would not followe such an example, and that with the losse of their lyfe? These auncient noble men and pillers of our fayth sawe that, whiche our aduersaryes recken not with them selues, namely that that
Naaman whiche is set before vs, was newly conuerted vnto the true God, and was yet a weake souldiour, who was not also yet ready, to deny both hys owne and hym selfe for Gods cause, but desyred after a sorte to kepe hys olde place and dignitie with hys kynge. The whiche thyng to attayne vnto, he sawe that it myght easely come to passe that he should fal into y
e sinne, whiche he declared vnto the holy Prophete.
Naaman the Syrian knewe that his deede was culpable & nought. And when he knewe ryght well that the same agreed not with true godlynesse, he required the prayers and intercession of the man of GOD, whereby he fallyng of weakenesse, hys faulte myght be forgeuen hym. Otherwyse there is none whiche nedeth to aske
[Page 51] pardon for that which he thynketh is lawfull for hym to doe. We make intercessions for sinnes, and not for thinges permitted vs. Wherefore thys place maketh much agaynst our aduersaries, and that that is sinne which they moste earnestly goe aboute to excuse, is manyfestly proued by thys historye. I would to God they woulde diligentlye marke in that action, that which theyr
Naaman selfe: And if they shoulde fall (as thys man feared that he shoulde fall) they woulde not cloke it with a vayne defence, but woulde emplore the mercye of God, and prayers of holy men, that that maye gentlye be forgeuen them,
Elizeus gaue not Naamā libertie to go vnto Idols. whiche they naughtely haue committed. Neyther did
Elizeus (as they persuade themselues) geue
Naaman the Sirian liberty to go vnto Idoles, he sayde onely: Go in peace. Which was also an accustomed kinde of salutation at y
e time. Neither may we gather any other thing out of these words, then y
t the Prophet promised to do that which he was requested to do. Namely, to pray vnto God for y
e saluation of y
e man. Fyrst to strengthen him y
t he should not fal. Secondly that if he sinned, his fault might be forgeuen him.
They vse to obiecte also certayne woordes out of the Epistle of
Ieremye the Prophet, which are written aboute the end of a litle booke entituled of
Baruch.
An answer to a place of Baruch And these are the wordes. In
Babilon ye shall see Gods of golde and Siluer borne vppon mens shoulders, to caste oute a fearefulnesse before the Heathen: Take heede ye followe not the Gentiles, when ye see the multitude of people worshipping behynde and before. But saye in your hartes. O Lorde it is thou that oughtest onely to be worshipped. &c. By these wordes do our
Nicodemites thinke it to be sufficient, that they which are presente at Idolatrous worshippings, do say in their hartes: O Lord it is thou that oughtest onely to be worshipped. But they shoulde more attentyuely consider, that the Prophet (if he were a Prophet which spake these woordes: which I therefore speake, bycause the little booke of
Baruch is Apochriphus,
The boke of Baruch is Apochriphus. and is not founde in the Hebrewe) gaue not the Iewes libertye to goe into the Temples of the Idols, and to bee there present at prophane and Idolatrous rites, and there to speake with the true God in themselues in theyr hart onely. But he speaketh of those Images which were caryed about the citye: for that was the manner among the
Babilonians as the historie of
Daniell testifyeth,
Images amōg the Babilonians wer crried about the citye. which maketh mencion that an image set vp by
Nabuchadnezar was openly caried about, with great pompe, and with Musicall instrumentes and sundry songes. At the hearing whereof, al men were commaunded to worship the Image which they beheld, which the felowes of
Daniel would not do. Of those images I say, it is writtē in y
e Epistle and y
e Godly are faythfully admonished that they should not, as the
Ethnykes did, who were behinde and before thē, reuerence or worship those images. Yea rather in detesting their wicked worshipping they should say, or at the least way in their hart: O Lord it is thou only that oughtest to be worshipped. These metings comming by chaunce through the citie could not be auoyded, the Godly therefore were to be admonished, how in suche metinges they shoulde behaue them selues.
But with great importunitye, as they be shamelesse,
Why Daniell was not cast i
[...] to the fornace with his fellowes. they yet go farther and demaund, how chaunce
Daniell was not cast into the burning fornace with his fellowes, when as the punishment was a like appointed vnto thē, which would not worship y
e image of
Nabuchadnezar? Wherfore these mē fayne with thēselues, that
Daniell dyd make as though he worshipped it, and for that cause the Chaldeians medled not with him. And they saye also, that they may lawfullye do that which they thinke thys holy Prophet of God dyd. They consider not that they openly fal into a false kynde of reason, which commonly is called
Non causa vt causa, which is, when that which is not a cause, is put for a cause.
Paralogismos. For there might be very many other causes, why
Daniell was not then punyshed.
[Page] Peraduenture he mette not y
e image which was caryed about, or if at any time he met it, the Chaldeians marked not what he dyd. Or being founde faultye in it and marked, he was not accused, bycause the Kyng loued him excedinglye. But we must not beleue,
Daniel dissimuled not the worshipping of the image. that the man of god for feare of punyshment or death, would dissemble the worshippyng of the image agaynst the lawe and pietie: whē as it is afterwarde declared how for piety sake he was caste to y
e Lyons. Wherefore forasmuche as there myghte be diuerse causes that he was not deliuered to be burnt in the fyre with his fellowes, Why do these men thē snatch vnto thē only one cause, and y
t such a cause, as was vnworthy and ful of reproche to such a holy man, and specially seing in the holy scriptures, there is not so much as a suspition of so detestable an acte any way geuen vs?
Of Paule who toke on hym a vowe & clensed hymself after the manner of the Iewes.They seeme to themselues to speake much to the purpose, and trimlye to defende theyr doing, when as they bryng that whiche is written in the Actes of the Apostles the xxi. Chapter where it is declared that
Paul, by the Counsell of the Elders of the Churche of
Ierusalem tooke vppon hym a vowe and foure other men with hym, and purifyed themselues after the manner of the Iewes. If the Apostle of God, saye they, woulde vse the ceremonyes of the lawe alreadye abolyshed, we maye also be suffred sometymes to admitte and to be present at rites and ceremonyes so long tyme receaued.
The sūme of the Preaching of Paule. But y
t thys may the playnlyer be vnderstande, we muste knowe, that thys was the summe of the Preachyng of
Paule. We thynke that a man is iustifyed by fayth without workes. As many as are vnder the law, the same are vnder the curse. The iuste man shall lyue by hys fayth.
How far legall ceremonies were graunted or condemned in the primatiue church. Wherefore the Apostle in that fyrst tyme of the Preachyng of the Gospel dyd not condemne the ceremonyes and obseruations of the lawe towarde the Hebrues, vnlesse they were retayned with that fayth and mynde as thoughe iustification shoulde come by them. And thys hys sentence hath he moste manyfestly set forth in hys Epystle to the
Galathians, where he sayth: ye whiche are circumcised, haue fallen both from Christ and from grace. For Christ is made of none effecte vnto you, if ye shoulde be iustifyed by the lawe. As thoughe he woulde say. These thynges of
Moyses do not alienate you from Christ, excepte ye exercyse them with thys mynde and purpose, that therby ye myght be iustified, Take awaye thys opinion and the Apostle commended good woorkes, and as for ciuile and accustomed institutions, so that they were iuste and not Idolatrous, he suffred still in their owne place, neyther dyd he let but that the legall ceremonyes myghte bee still vsed. Wherefore he writeth. In the Lord there is neyther Iewe nor Greeke, nor seruaunte, nor free man. And that circumcision also and cuttyng of the foreskynne, are nothyng, but only the obseruyng of the commaundementes of God and a newe creature. Agayne he that is circumcised let hym not desire to haue hys foreskynne which is cut of: if thou be called when thy foreskin is cut of, be not then circumcised. Let euery man abide in that wherin he is called.
Indifferent thynges may sometimes be kept & sometimes left.And that suche thynges as were ciuile and indifferent, myghte sometymes be obserued, and sometymes lefte out, as serued for edification, the same Apostle declareth by that which he speaketh of hymselfe. I am made all thynges to all men, to win very many: to the Iewes I am made a Iewe, and to those which are without a lawe, I am as without a lawe. Neyther did he no lesse confyrme his sentence by examples, than by doctrine. For when he was requyred, that he woulde as the manner was circumcise
Timothe, he graunted vnto it. But when they would haue compelled hym for the ouerthrowing of the Christian libertye, to circumcise
Titus likewise, he declared that he woulde not geue place not for an houre: bicause sayth he false brethren are therefore entred in among vs to searche out our libertye. He obserued therefore the Mosaicall ceremonyes, when the same myghte be done without any ill purpose and hurte of the church.
[Page 52] And by this meanes be auoyded the offence of the Iewes,
The ceremonies of the law are not to be cō pared with the inuentions of men. least they shoulde be alienated from the Christian religion which they had receaued. Neyther ought the Nicodemites to conferre the ceremonyes of the olde law, with the inuentions of men. For they were brought in by the woorde of God, but these were thrust into the Church by the pollicye of the deuill and of deceatfull men. They were not forbidden by and by after the Ascention of Christ into heauen, but might be so long obserued,
Howe long the old ceremonies were lawful in the church. as the temple and publique wealthe of Israel remayned, and vntil the Gospell of the Sonne of God were reuealed and Preached, and vntill the Church were well augmented both of the Iewes and also of the Gentilles.
Neyther was it mete (as
Augustine Godlye and learnedlye writeth vnto
Ierome that those ceremonyes,
Augustine. of the auncient Sinagoge should strayghtwaye without honour be reiected. But Idolatrous and superstitious thinges alwaies were, are, and shall be prohibited. Wherfore for a tyme it was lawfull to obserue them, so that by them were not sought the true ryghteousnesse. Wherfore
Paule the Apostle, though thou shoulde looke vppon the actions themselues, which by the law he obserued can not be iustely reprehended, and much lesse can he be blamed if thou consider hys mynde, purpose, and (as they terme it) hys entent. But to the supporters of the Masse both these thynges wante. Fyrst they defend a thyng, which is contrary to the woorde of God,
Thei which by dissimilatiō do go vnto y
e masse seke not God but their own. and (as I haue declared) is wonderfully agaynst it. Moreouer in that theyr dissimulation, they studye only for themselues, namely to kepe still theyr riches, degree, place, dignitye, and estimation, when as
Paul for this cause only sometimes obserued the legall ceremonies, least the Iewes should fal from Christ and that he myght the better and easiyer allure them to the Gospel.
They obiecte also, that by their dissimulation they woulde auoyde offences.
Whether we should go to messes to auoid offence. For say they: If we shoulde be vtterly agaynst Masses, we shoulde be counted wicked and vngodly men, and we shoulde be a great offence to our countrey. I beleue in dede, that these men do auoyde offences, but yet offences of the world: they will not geue an offence, but it is vnto myghtie men, tirannes, and Antichristes, namely least they shoulde prouoke their weapons, anger & madnesse agaynst them. But these are not those offences which Christ taught to be auoyded, whē he sayd of y
e Scribes & Pharisees. Let them alone, they are blynd & leaders of the blynde. What offences therfore are to be auoyded?
What offences ar to be auoided Those namely which hinder the spreading abroade of the Gospell of the sonne of God, & which kepe backe men frō comming to the pure doctrine, & which do call backe men already beleuing from Christian religion which they haue receaued. Now let thē consider I pray you, whether by their dissimulation, they do not offende the superstious and Idolatrers? Vndoubtedly yes. For those namely the superstitious and Idolatrers saye with themselues:
The vngodly by that dissimulation are more confyrmed. See those men whiche knowe the truth of the Gospell, and haue embraced it, doe come also vnto oure Masses. Surely if they were so vngodly, as they are sayd to be, these men also woulde abhorre them. Wherfore being confirmed by these mens example, they oftentymes are setled to perseuer in their purpose.
The weake ones by y
e dissimulation goe backe frō theyr purpose lately receaued. Yea & the weaker brethren newly conuerted vnto the Gospell, when they perceaue these learneder sorte, and as it were the ringleaders to dissemble, they dare also do the like, and they suspecte that they were deceaued: and they which ought to haue gone farther in religion, do then go backeward.
But we must (say they) beare with the weake ones, and sometymes to frame our selues vnto them. For we haue very many, whiche are not yet persuaded y
t the Masse is an euill thyng: and if they shoulde perceaue that we came not vnto it, they would not heare of other chiefe poyntes of religion. Wherfore we must beare somewhat with their weaknesse, as
Paule faythfully hath counsayled in his Epistle to the
Romanes. We graunt that we must somewhat beare with
[Page] such as be so weake,
Somwhat is to be borne with the weake ones only in thinges indifferent. but with
Paule we may not suffer that to be done but in things indifferent. But thinges which by themselues are euill, and by God forbidden we may for no mans fauor counsel to be done. For this is a most firme & sure rule (as I haue oftē before said) y
t no man is permitted to cōmit euil things, y
t therby good things might ensue. Yea we must not alwayes bear w
t the weake ones in those indifferent things,
The imbecillitie of the weake ones is not to be mainteyned. but til such time as they be better & perfectlier taught. But when they once vnderstand y
t thing, & do for all y
t still sticke, theyr weakenesse is not to be norished. Moreouer we must not so much beare with thē that by our example, we shoulde hurt other mēbers of Christ, and that many.
Whether we shoulde dissemble for the preseruation of the churches.Againe they obiect vnto vs: If we should do so, as ye would haue vs to doe, eyther we must flye, or els we shal strayght way be put to death. Which thing if it should happē, our churches should be vtterly forsakē, & there should be no more there to teach vs. Wherunto I answere, euery one of vs seeth that also. And y
t more is, it is not hidden from God him self, whose cōmaundement neuerthelesse we must obey. Let vs commit the end vnto him, to whom the church belongeth: Let vs not doubt but that he wil louingly, & that in time prouide for his spouse. Christ said vnto
Peter when he called him, and he taryed, and demaunded what should become of Iohn: If I will that he tary till I come, what is y
t to thee? Follow thou me. We are taught therefore to follow the word of god, whether so euer it call vs, and let vs cōmit to the caller the care of other things, which seme to hinder vs.
Doctrine which is sealed with flight and with death edifieth. Furthermore this is not to be ouerpassed, that that doctrine oftentimes is of more value and more edifieth which is sealed by flight and by death, then that which is set forth only by words. Let vs not be affeard though one of vs fall or flye. But let vs hope that god in his place wil rayse vp very many moe. But if we contemne and long dissemble the light of the truth, and flambe of charitie whiche is kindled in the hartes of men, will by little and little be extinguished.
They bring examples of the Prophets, of
Zachary, of
Iohn Baptiste, and of
Mary the Virgin,
Whether in the corrupted church of the Iewes it were lawful to cōmunicate with the legal rites. and of
Ioseph, who in those corrupt & defiled times went vnto the cōmon seruices, and to the temple of y
e Iewes. And therfore they thinke thei may also be permitted to do in like sort. But they ought to consider with themselues, that at that time there were many pernitious doctrines and euill opinions among the Scribes and Phariseyes. But yet the manner of sacrificyng was not chaunged, for the same beastes and oblations were stil offred which the law had cōmaunded: the same daies and ceremonies were obserued. Wherfore holy mē might vse thē, for as much as they had the word of god ioyned with thē. But as for the corrupt doctrines, opinions and manners of certaine priests, bishops and Scribes, were no let vnto holy men, especially seing they were pure and farre from them, and in all thinges: both iudged and also liued according to the word of god. And the corruptions of doctrine, and vices when opportunitye serued, they reprehended and sharpely reproued. This doth
Augustine testifye as it is writtē in the .xxiii.
Augustine. Question the fourth Chap.
Recedite, and in certaine other Chapters, also which are there writtē. Let the papists do so in these dayes with vs, let them so setforth the Lordes Supper and other rites as they are appointed by the woorde of god, and we will not refuse to vse them, so that they compell vs not to the confession of wicked opinions, and preache not heresyes vnto vs, but deliuer vnto vs the pure and vncorrupte woorde of God. If they them selues thincke euill, and if they liue fylthilye, we will bee sorye for them, we will admonyshe, rebuke, and accuse them, and put them if we maye from the holye administration, when as they are paste amendemente, althoughe we abstayne not from the Sacramentes.
That vndoubtedly y
e Lord ment when he said: The Scribes & Phariseis sit
[Page 53] on the chaire of
Moyses, and what they say, doo ye: but what they do, do ye not. It was lawful therfore for the blessed Virgin, after she was deliuered of our sauiour, to offer a paire of turtle Doues, or two yong Pigeons,
The Virgin mari might after her delyueri offer the oblations required by the lawe. bicause it was so commaunded in the law. Wherfore let them shew vnto vs that their Masse by them corrupted is commaunded by the woorde of God, and not forbidden, and then wil we nothing contend with them in that matter.
Last of al, when they ar confuted in these obiections, they come to this point, to say: Although it be sinne to be present at Masse, yet it is but a light sinne, and not to be so seuerely reproued by vs. But when they thus say, why doo they not remember, that al synnes haue their weight, not by the nature of the workers,
From whens
[...] synnes haue their weighte. which are prohibited, but by the woord of God, and the law whereby they were forbidden? Here hence do synnes get al their heauines and waight. Whereunto
Iames the Apostle seemeth to haue had a respect, when as he saith in his seconde chapter. He which obserueth the whole law, & offendeth in one of them,
A place of Iames expoūded. is made guilty of them all. Neither do I speake so, as though I woulde haue all synnes by al meanes alyke, which thing
Augustine in his. 29.
Sinnes are not equal.
Augustine. How philosophers proue y
e vertues are knit together. Epistle to
Ierome aptlye and manifestlye denieth. He confesseth in deede that the Philosophers went about to proue it, when they affirme that al vertues are so knyt together, that he which hath one vertue, hath al, and he which wanteth one, doth want them all. For as much as prudence is not feareful, neither vntemperate, nor yet vniust. Wherefore it hath al the other vertues with it. And againe Iustice, Strength, Temperance and the other vertues, ar not without wisdome, and therfore they are al had being knit together. These thinges (saith he) agree not with the holye scriptures. For there it is written: In manye thinges we al offende. And if we say we haue no synne, we deceaue our selues, and the truth is not in vs. Wherfore seing we synne in many things, we can not in synning haue vertue which is opposite vnto sinne which we commit.
Oftē tymes he whiche slideth in one is constante in an other. And neuerthelesse it often chaunceth that hee whiche falleth in one thing, maye be constant in other thinges. Peraduenture hee whiche is angrye, or eateth or dryncketh excessiuelye, rendreth for all that to euerye man his owne, and is readye in Gods cause valiantlye to lose his life, and therfore though he be somewhat angry or vntemperate, he may for al that be called iust, liberal and strong.
A similitude of the Stoikes. Moreouer the same father confuteth the similitude of the
Stoikes, wherin they say, that he is as wel drowned in water, ouer whose head the water is but an hand bredth, as he which hath the water tenne or twentye cubites ouer his head. This similitude (saith hee) is not aptly brought. Wherefore wee must bring in an other more fyt to the purpose, namely a similitude of light and darknes. Vndoubtedly the more a man departeth from darkenes, and commeth nearer to the light, hee beginneth then somewhat to see. Wherefore it commeth to passe, that although he be couered wyth darkenes, yet for al that after a sort, he is somewhat partaker of the light. But he which is desirous to know more of this thing, let him reade ouer that .29. Epistle. And these thinges haue I to this end brought, to confirme that all synnes are not equal, as the
Stoikes iudged.
Let vs returne therefore to the place of
Iames, which I before brought.
The obseruation of the law is not to be receaued with an exception. Hee which offendeth in one, is therfore made guyltye of all, bicause the obseruing of the law, is not to be receaued with an exception, so that we shoulde chuse vnto vs any certaine part of it to keepe, and lay away and neglect an other part for a tyme as we wil and lyst our selues. God hath ioyned together the commaundementes of the law. And it is not our part to seperat them as we lyst.
Seing the cō mandemētes of the law are ioyned together, it is not our part to seperate thē. We must looke vpon the authority of the lawgeuer, which ought to be of force as well in one commaundement as in al. This interpretation
Iames hym selfe seemeth to confirme, when he saith: He which said: Thou shalt not commit adulterye, The same saith: Thou shalt not kyl: as though he would say: God is as muche resisted in breaking one of these commaundementes as in an other. But it maye be
[Page] proued also by an other reason, that he which synneth in one, is guilty of al. For if as we should be driuen by temptation, lust or occasion, whereby we shoulde be styrred to any certain transgression of the law, so if by the same or lyke violence we wer driuen into any other transgression, we shoulde as well breake the one as the other.
Augustine also teacheth in the place now alledged, that the sentēce of
Iames is for an other cause true, bicause sinne which is committed is vndoubtedly contrary vnto charity, wherin the obseruation of the whole lawe dependeth. In sūme, to this end haue I rehersed al these things, to declare that sinnes which are committed, are not for that cause to be diminished or extenuated, bycause they are counted light, for so much as the transgressions of the law ar not to be waighed onely by the waight and woorthines of their actions, but rather by the strength of Gods woord, and authority of the lawe of God, who hath forbidden to synne.
The ryght obseruing of y
e sacramentes perteyne vnto the first table.But least in this thing I should seeme to rough, I am cōtent that they haue some consideration, euen of the acte wherin the synne is committed. And surely, as touching that, I cannot see how to sinne against the sacramentes can be iudged a light fault, when as that kinde of sinne pertaineth to the first table, wherin vndoubtedly the worshipping of God is set forth. Which worshipping alone kept whole and sound, other thinges are easely corrected. And on the contrarye, that being corrupted and defiled, all other thinges whatsoeuer we doo, become most vnthankeful vnto God. Furthermore they thinke that the fault, whereof we entreate, maye therefore be extenuated, bicause they affirme that they slide not of minde and purpose, but onely by constraint. Whom if thou shouldest demaund, what maner of compulsory that is which they pretende? They cannot vndoubtedly geue any other answer, but bicause they would not incur the losse of their goodes,
Aristotell. Shipmen suffer wise wyth their willes, & not bi cōstraint their fame and their lyfe. But these thinges make not but that the action is voluntarye. For as
Aristotle hath taught in his
Ethikes, when as shipmen in daunger do hurle their goods in to the sea, to auoyde the daunger of shipwracke, they are said commonly to be compelled, when as in dede they willingly throw them in. For they take deliberation, and with knowledge they determine rather to lose their goodes than their life. And as they in that worke do wisely, so do our men for the loue of lyfe and body, & couetousnes of the goodes of this world, vnwisely choose the losse of eternall life, when as with a wycked dissimulation they go vnto detestable Masses. Wherefore the excuse which they bring, cannot be receaued as iust. The
Corrinthians also mought by this reason when they were reproued of
Paule, haue defended them selues. If wee go vnto the feastes dedicated to idols, we go not thether of our own affection, as though we would allow such sacrifices, but by iust reasons we are compelled to go thether: For if we should flye from such feastes, we should be coūted seditious, euyl Citizens and without humanity: we should lose pleasant amities, and most profitable defences, and also peraduenture our riches and country. If thei had said these thinges to
Paule, would he haue heard them? No trulye. For he was not ignoraunt, but that they might haue said so, and yet for al that (as it is wrytten in his Epistle) he vehementlye and most sharpelye reproued them.
Aaron also might according to these mens opinion iustly and rightly haue defended himself in that he made a Calfe vnto the Israelites. For he mought haue said, I dyd it not from the hart, but I was compelled so to do: bicause the people, except I had obeyed them, would haue stoned me. In dede so be answered: but
Moyses which knew right well that that necessitye or compulsion was not iust, but came of a naughty condition or ground, which neither Iustice woulde suffer to be receaued,
Masse is a certain to
[...]ē wherby the
[...]ythful at
[...]
[...]en frō y
e superstitious nor God would by any meanes admyt, therfore dyd
Moyses I say sharpely reproue him.
They ought also to be most assured of this, that the Masse is a pledge, an earnest peny, a token and signe, whereby Papistes knowe theirs from others. For
[Page 54] whether a man geue almes or no: whether he pray or not pray, whether he lyue chastly or vnpurely, and such like things they neglect, they onely haue a regarde to this, whither he come to Masse: which if they perceaue that he doo, by and by they count him for one of their own. And againe to detest the Masse,
Masse is a certaine profession of popery. and not to heare it, they take it for a most certaine signe of falling awaye from Antichrist. Wherfore we may commonly cal Masse a publike profession of Popery. Wyth what colour therefore, or with what countenaunce can they extenuate so great a crime? They ar grieuous euils (say they) which hang ouer vs: and we put our selues in most great daungers, vnlesse we communicate with the Papists in hearing of Masses, I confesse that: but let them remember that God also foresaw al these thinges, and declared that they should come to passe, who for al that wyll not suffer, that his lawes shoulde bee chaunged. Wherefore as touching these chaunces, let vs cast our care vpon hym which hath cōmaunded these thinges, & is not ignoraunt that these euils are ioyned with the obseruing of his cōmaundementes.
Persecutions abrogate not y
e lawes of God. We maye not part our selues betwene God & the deuil. The nature therfore and strength of troubles and daungers is not such, to be able to abrogate the lawes of God. They abide, yea and for euer shal abide, and therefore let vs not desire to haue them broken by our daungers or miseries. And men are healthfully and rightlye counselled, not to part them selues betwene God and the deuil, to deliuer vnto God their affection or hart, and graunt vnto the deuil their body and outward partes.
For so much as by the partes of the distinction before put,
Of princes and maiestrats how they oughte to behaue them selues wyth infydels.
A distinctiō of powers. we haue sufficientlye spoken of priuate men as touching their dwelling together with Infidels, now resteth to declare of Princes or Magistrates. And they are either principal, as they which depende of no other, neither haue anye power aboue them, or els they are inferiour powers, which lawfully as of right are subiect vnto Superiours, either bicause they are their Deputies or Ministers, that is, Officiales or Vicars, as they are commonly called. Let vs fyrst therfore speake of suche as be absolute and mere higher powers, asking whether they in their dominiōs may suffer the faithful to be conuersant with Infidels? I thinke it be lawful,
It is lawfull for princes to suffer y
e couersation of y
e faythfull with the vnfaythfull with certayne cautions. so that ther be certain conditions or cautions put. For when the
Romane Empire receiued the Christian religion, euery one which wer vnder that Empire beleued not by and by in Christ, who wer for al that suffred both to lyue, and also peaceably to dwel there. Yea in the tyme of
Ambrosius, Symmachus who was wythout Christ, was not ashamed to require of the Emperours that the rites of the Ethnikes might be restored, which he obtained not. And nowe when as kyngdomes and dominions haue admitted the preaching of the Gospell, ther are many stil suffered, which are wonderfully affected towarde the Pope and his wyckednes. Which cannot without great perturbation of things be seperated from them which are of the Gospel. Wherfore Princes are compelled to suffer suche conuersations, neither is that to be ascribed a fault in them,
The first caution. so that they departe not from these iust cautions. The first of those cautions is, that they constrayne the faithful to no vngodly woorshippinges: for then should they not execute the offices of the Ministers of God, but rather of the deuil and of Antichrist, by good woorkes they shoulde not be a terrour vnto the wicked, neither shoulde they aduaunce
Caution. 2 the woord of God, but the tyranny of Sathan. Secondlye, let them beware, that they permit not vnto the Infidels wicked rites, and vngodly ceremonies in their dominions. Of this crime was
Solomon guilty, not that he compelled the Iewes to worship Idoles, but for bicause to his wyues and Concubines which wer straungers, he permitted temples in Iewry, wherin they might worship
Astartes and
Chamos and other straunge Gods.
Salomon was for his sinne punished by the law of the lyke called
Lex talionis. But that God was grieuously angry with him, the holy historye declareth. He was iustlye punished by the law of the like. That as he had deuided the holy worshipping in graunting part of it to God, and part vnto Idoles: so was his kingdome deuided, and part of it was graunted to his sonne, and part was geuen vnto
Ieroboam the Sonne
[Page] of
Nebath. But his fault spred abroad into his posterity. For
Achas, Manasses, and many other vngodly kinges had wicked and detestable woorshippinges at
Ierusalem. Wherfore they were by the Prophetes grieuouslye and sharpelye reproued.
The magistrat ought to reuenge idolatrye. And vndoubtedly a Magistrate cannot but be blamed, when he nourisheth idolatry, when as he beareth the sword to reuenge wicked actes. Wherefore he must either thinke that idolatry is no wicked acte, or that it is by the Magistrate and other to be aduenged.
Augustine.
Augustine often times excellentlye well entreateth of this place of
Dauid: Be wise now therfore O ye Kinges, be learned ye that are Iudges of the earth, serue the Lorde in feare. &c. He sayth also, it is mete that kinges serue the Lorde. Neither entreated
Dauid of them, in that respect that they are men: for so are they wyth other bounde to obserue common lawes.
Howe and in what sort Kinges ought to serue God. Wherfore for so much as they are kinges, they are admonished, namely to vse the power and sword geuen them by God, to defend the verity of the tru faith, and to put downe the vngodly, that the catholike truth and churche of the sonne of God, as far as their dominions extend be not assaulted. Wherefore it is not lawful for Princes to graunt vnto the vngodly vnpure worshippinges, yea it is their part, chiefely to vrge sound doctrine, ceremonies and rites, which agree with the woord of God.
We maye not vrge to keepe the externall rites alyke euery where.And yet for al that (to speake a woord or two of that by the waye) I doo not thinke that we should to much contend, that rites and ceremonies may be al alike, and obserued euery where, after one maner. But this is to be prouided for, that they be not against the word of God, yea rather let them drawe vnto it as much as may be, and as farre as they are able, let them set forth edification, and a decent order. For otherwise it skilleth not whether we receauethe sacrament of the Lordes Supper, standing, or sitting, or kneeling, so that the institution of the Lorde be kept, and occasion of superstition be cut of. Neither is it any matter when the brethren communicate,
Diuersity of ceremonies is profitable. whither some one place of the holye scriptures be red, or Psalmes and thankesgeuings be song of the people. Yea I think that this variety in rites much profiteth to bring in a true opiniō of ceremonies, namely that al men may vnderstande, that those ceremonies which are not set forth in the holy scriptures,
Augustine. are not necessary vnto saluation, but may be chaunged for edification sake as time shall serue. And
Augustine to
Ianuarius and to
Cassulanus was also of this opinion.
Caution. 3 The thirde condition or caution that is to be added, is that Princes take heede that those infidels whom they suffer in their dominions, be continuallye with diligence instructed. And not (as the maner commonlye is) neglect them in those thinges which pertaine vnto godlines: otherwise the glory of God cannot be looked for, by their suffering, if without teaching they may be suffered continually
Caution. 4 to abide in their vngodly opinion. For in processe of time they becom nothing the better, but farre worse then they were before. Moreouer they must beware that by that mutual conuersation they infect not the people committed to
Caution. 5 their charge with the scab of infidelity and errours.
They must be cōpelled at the last to the soūde and pure outward worshippinges of God. And finallye, when they are wel instructed and taught, they must compel them to sound and pure woorshyppings, which are prescribed by the holy scriptures. For the Magistrate maye not suffer his Citizens to liue without exercises of godlines. For the ende of ciuyll rule, is that the Citizens should lyue both vertuously & happely. And who seeth not but that godlines & the worshipping of God is the chiefe of all vertues?
Whether a prince ought at the length to compell his subiectes to the right vse of the sacramentes.But peraduenture some wyll say: If a Prince shoulde compell those vnto the right vse of the sacramentes, which are not yet persuaded of the truth, he should driue them hedlong into synne: so farre is it of from setting forwarde their saluation. For there they should do against their conscience: and what so euer they so do (euen as the Apostle witnesseth) is synne. Wherefore I thyncke it good to make a distinction betwene that whiche is of or by it selfe, and that which is at
[Page 55] aduenture and by hap, or (as they are wont to speake in Schooles) that whiche commeth
per accidens, that is by chaunce. The Magistrate in this thing which we haue now in hande, setteth foorth to his subiectes that thing which is of it selfe right, good and iust, but in that, synne therby commeth that happeneth nothing at al by his default, but rather by those mens incredulitye or misbeliefe, whereof he is not to be accused, when as he hath diligentlye laboured to haue his Citizens wel instructed. Neither the Papistes, which at this daye are suffered of Christian Magistrates are ignoraunt that wee oughte to haue in vse the Sacramentes instituted by the Lord. Wherfore they cannot iustlye complaine of their Magistrates, if they wil haue them vprightlye, and in due order ministred vnto them.
Moreouer they which obiect these thinges vnto vs, must diligently marke this, that by the same waye wee maye cauill againste God. For hee hath sette foorth vnto menne his lawe whiche is most perfecte to bee kept of them. Shall we say vnto him, we are weake and of a corrupt and vitious nature, neither can we perfourme thy commaundementes, as thou commaundest: wherefore whether we do against that which thou hast commaunded, or whether we endeuour our selues to perfourme that which thou hast bydden, wee shall euer synne, bycause we shall fainte, neither can we obey as we should doo. Wherefore what soeuer we do we shall not auoide synne?
If anye manne brawlinglye shoulde speake these thinges againste God, myghte not hee by good ryghte aunswere? They bee iust and ryght which I haue sette foorth vnto you to bee obserued. But in that ye are feable and weake, it oughte not to bee counted a fault in mee. For I haue excellentlye holpen your weakenes, whyche for your sakes haue geuen my Sonne vnto the death. If ye shall beleue onelye in hym, what so euer ye shall not accomplish in perfourming my preceptes, it shal not be imputed to you to euerlasting death.
So also may a good Prince aunswer: I require of you those thinges whych are written in the woord of God, and which are decent and do edefye. Wherefore if your opinion or conscience bee againste it, that is not to bee ascribed vnto me, which haue diligently laboured that ye might not be ignorant of the truth and miserably perish. For I haue diligently sene vnto, that ye should be taught and instructed in the truth, & so wyll I styl go forward in exhorting, admonishing and commaunding you: but reade ye the holy Scriptures, heare your Teachers, and pray vnto God to open the eyes of your mynde. These thinges if the Prince shall say vnto those men which doo so cauil against him, I do not see by what right, or by what meanes he can be reprehended.
And I thynke thys is not to be omitted that
Augustine sayde,
Augustine chā ged his sētence for compellinge of heretikes. that hee was once of that opinion, that nothing should be done by violence against heretiks, but onely they should be instructed by admonitions and doctrine. But hee confesseth that hee was admonished by certayne Byshoppes of more experience, whych shewed hym of certayne Cities, whyche before were in a manner vtterlye destroyed by the errour of the
Donatistes, and were by violence and lawes of the Emperours compelled to come vnto the Catholyque Churche, whyche Cities beyng thus at the length syncerely couerted vnto the truthe, rendered thankes vnto GOD, neyther woulde they, if by anye meanes they mought haue retourned agayne to so pernicious opinions. Wherefore a godly Prince shall nothyng hurt suche men, yea he shall proffyt them muche, if after he haue instructed them, he compell them to receaue the Sacramentes duelye, as they be delyuered by the woorde of God.
But this is to bee vnderstande as touching his owne Citizens, hys natiue
[Page] countrey men and Denizens, whiche enioye the ryght of the Citye or prouince. Otherwyse I do not thinke that he ought to vse any violence towarde straungers that passe to and fro, and whiche doo occupye the trade of Marchaundize, either inwarde or outwarde. Althoughe also as touching those men, I thynke that he must diligently beware that they infect not the people with wycked doctrine.
An example of the Israelites which is to be obserued. Wherefore I suppose that the steppes of the Israelites are to be followed, who made none a Iewe or a Proselite, neyther endewed any with the right of their people, except first he circumcised hymselfe, receaued the lawe of
Moyses, and communicated with their sacrifices. And seing that that was so diligently obserued of them, there is no cause, why our Princes ought not to doo the lyke, namely to suffer none to be of their City, or as one of them, or a straū ger to be made free, but first they shoulde constrayne hym to seruices and ceremonies agreing with the woord of God.
What is to be sayd of magistrates which are subiect to a superior power A distinction.But now let vs go on and speake of those Magistrates or Lordts whyche are subiect to a superiour power. These seeme after thys manner to be deuided, some to haue iurisdiction eyther proper, or by heritage, or els committed vnto them by Emperours, Kynges, and publique wealthes. Or els they are wythout iurisdiction and are counted noble onely for nobilitye of bloude, or for ryches heaped together.
And assuredly for so much as those latter sortes differ nothing almost from priuate menne, in myne opinion wee muste so iudge of them, as before I haue taught of priuate men. But the first which are Rulers of Prouinces, Cities and places, eyther by inheritaunce, or by office committed vnto them, they ought not otherwyse to doo in the thyng whereof we now entreate, than wee haue before prescribed for those which are mere and full Magistrates. For by the commaundement of the superiour Princes, it is not lawfull for them to compell the Subiectes whom they gouerne, vnto vngodly religion, neyther to permyt the same to those Infidels whych inhabite in their dominions. But if thou wilt say, we must obey the hygher power: I graunt that, but
vsque ad aras, that is,
An answeare of the Lacedemonians. as farre as religion suffereth. When they whych ouercame the
Lacedemonians commaunded suche thynges as were against their lawes and institutions, they sayde: We woulde rather dye, yea, than ye shoulde commaunde vs thinges harder than death. Wherefore suche kynde of Magistrates must in all other thynges be subiect to the superiour power: but in those thynges whyche are agaynste the woorde of God, they muste not in anye sorte followe theyr affection.
An example of y
e Machabites.The Machabites when the Iewes then lyued vnder the
Macedonians, Antiochus, Demetrius, and
Alexander, who wythdrewe the Iewes from the true woorshypping of God, would not be obedient vnto them. And when that that house of priesthoode was chiefest next to the kynges house, least the syncere and auncient religion should be destroyed, it fell from these kynges.
The bookes of the Machabits conteyne not so do argumēts wherby the doctrin of the faithful cā be prouedNeyther in alledging these thynges count I not the bookes of the Machabites to be suche, from whence I woulde iudge any strong argumentes of doctrine maye be taken, but that I counte that storye true, as a storye whyche is not onelye contayned in theese bookes, but also hathe beene wrytten of other authours.
An example of Ezechias.I wyll adde also the acte of
Ezechias the kyng, who as it is wrytten in the seconde booke of Kynges the .xviii. Chapter, was bounde to the kyng of the
Assirians. For as it is mencioned in the same booke the .xvi. chapter,
Achas had yelded hym selfe vnto the kyng of the
Assirians, to whom hee dydde not onelye paye tribute, but to please him with all, he chaunged the woorshyppyng of the true God. For he goyng to
Damascus to meete the kyng, commaunded an
[Page 56] aultar to bee made at Ierusalem, accordyng to the example whiche hee had there seene, and followed the religion and woorshyppynge of the
Sirians. But
Ezechias his Sonne beyng verye godlye, perceauing that those thinges which his Father had done were against the woord of God, vtterly fel from the king of the
Assirians, who then ruled ouer him as a superiour power. But first he assayed to pacifye him with giftes and money: but when he saw that woulde take no place,
We must beware as muche as is possible of sedicions. he defended both his people and him selfe against him with al his power. We must take heede neuerthelesse that in those thinges wee beware of seditions, as much as may be, and we must most diligentlye prouide, that suche Magistrates vnder pretence of religion seeke not their own.
These thinges if they obserue, and resist their superiour Magistrates, onely for godlynesse sake, let them not suspect, that they commit anye vniust thyng. Moreouer the holy Scriptures commaunde, that euery soule shoulde bee subiect to the higher powers. But that must be vnderstande as muche as shall be lawfull by the woord of God. For in the same scriptures it is written: That a Magistrate is a feare not to good woorkers, but to euyll. Wherefore if the inferiours doo not set forward euell workes but good, they do not then resiste theyr powers. Wilt thou not feare the power, sayth the apostle? do good and for that thou shalt be praysed. Wherfore if they defend godlynes, they shall deserue rather prayse than blame. But if thou do euyll, feare the power: for he beareth not the sweard in vayne: for he is the minister of God, and a reuenger to anger against him which doth euyll. Al these sentences do confirme the courages of the inferiour powers, that they should be nothing afearde of the superiour power, when they in defending of religion obey it not.
But thou wilt say: by what lawe doo inferiour Princes resist either the Emperour or Kynges, or elles publique wealthes, when as they defend the syncere religion and true faith? I aunswer by the law of the Emperour, or by the lawe of the King, or by the law of the publique wealth. For they are chosen of Emperours, Kinges, and publique wealthes, as helpers to rule, whereby Iustice may more and more florishe. And therfore were they ordeyned according to the office committed vnto them, rightly, iustly, and godly to gouerne the publyke wealthe. Wherefore they doo according to their duty, when in cause of religion they resist the higher power. Neither can that superiour power iustly complain, if in that case the inferiour power fal from it.
The Emperour testifieth in the
Code,
Iustinian. that his mynde is not that any of hys decrees shoulde take place in iudgementes agaynste right, but that they ought to bee made voyde and of no force, if that peraduenture they bee knowen to declyne from Iustice. Wherefore
Traian is not vnworthily commended,
A goodly sentēce of Traian. whych when he delyuered the sweard and the gyrdle vnto the Lieuetenant of the Pretorshyppe, sayd: If I rule iustlye, vse it on my syde: but if I rule vniustlye, vse it agaynst me.
Gregory a Byshoppe of
Rome can not bee excused,
An errour of Gregory Bishop of Rome. whyche knowing that the lawe made by
Mauritius was vniust (for he had decreed that no manne beyng occupyed wyth busynes of the publique wealthe, or appoynted for warrefare should be made a Clarke or a Monke) wrote in deede to the Emperour, that when hee had seene hys lawe, he was wonderfullye affrayde, and therefore desyred hym, eyther to remytte somewhat of the rigour thereof, or els vtterlye to alter it. Howe beit he added, that he woulde (nowe that hee hadde done hys dutye in admonishing hym) bycause of that obedience and seruice whych he oughte vnto hym) publyshe the lawe at
Rome as he was commaunded. Vndoubtedlye thys act of
Gregory cannot but be reproued, bycause he ought not to haue obeied the superiour power in that thing, whych he iudged to be vniuste or wycked.
[Page] When we do after this sorte write of these thinges, we do nothing at all open a way vnto seditions, but onely this is our care, that those things which belōg to God may be geuen, yea rather restored vnto God, and those thinges whyche pertaine vnto
Caesar, may be rendred to
Caesar. If the hygher power woulde require, either goodes or thinges of this worlde, for the vse of the publike wealth, my counsel is that they should be geuen, but not when those thinges are required to bee subuerted and destroyed, whiche belong to the woorshipping of God. And vndoubtedly by this meanes we maye easelye excuse iust
Naboth,
Naboth is excused. whyche woulde not graunt vnto his King his vyneyarde. For hee dyd not that of couetousnes or of pride, but bycause he sawe thereby the lawe of God to be violated, whereby it was ordayned, that landes and possessions among the people of
Israel should remaine distributed by iust diuision. This law of god the king went about to violate, and to the performaunce thereof hee sought the consent of that man, which he with a good conscience could not performe.
Whether y
e inferior powers ought in those cases to forsake their offices.Some thinke that when superiour powers go aboute to driue the inferiour powers to wicked thinges, it were good and meete, that they whiche exercise the inferiour office should resigne and departe from their office. But I thynke not so, for this were to fall from his vocation, which ought not to be done, especially, when as we see that we must geue ouer to the vngodly, which eyther resyst or oppresse the kingdome of God. I iudge therfore that they ought to continew, vntyl they be by force cast out by the superiour powers, that they maye in keeping their office valiauntly defend the glory of God. But (alas) we see verye manye Dukes, Earles and Princes which if the Kyng or Emperour woulde take away frō thē their dominions, they would not leaue a stone vnmoued, to defend & keepe their own. There would they with al their force resist the higher powers for this cause and vnder this title, bicause they would vniustly depriue them of their thinges. But when the kingdome of god, godlines, and pure religion are assayled of them, and these inferiour powers are required as Ministers to be at hand, and to helpe to ouerthrowe them, they dare not speake or resistany thing at all. Wherfore wee can thinke nothing els, but that they haue lytle regarde of the kingdome of Christ, and of true godlynes.
Answears to y
e argumētes put in y
e beginning. To the first.
Christ did well in being conuersant with the vngodly.Now resteth to answer to those argumentes, which were put foorth in the beginning by which seemed to be proued, that conuersation together wyth Infidels is lawfull. Christ was alledged who was conuersaunt with Phariseys, Synners, and Publicanes. But he was not onely strong and wyse, but also the chiefe of all wyse and strong men, and he could so profit the euyll, that the malice of others could nothing at al hurt him. Wherefore they which are constant and learned, may lawfully (as we haue taught) be conuersaunt with Infidels, to the end therby to profyt them to saluation.
Secondly was brought foorth a place of
Paule, who prohibited, that a faythfull husband or wyfe should not departe from an Infidell,
To the second. How farre the vnfaythfull mā or wyfe oughte to bee borne with all. so that he or she were content to dwell together. We declared also that natural and ciuyl necessities, especially suche as are instituted of god should be obserued. And yet for all that, that which is there sayde by the Apostle, must not be vnderstand so symply as it is pretended: bycause if an vnfaythfull housband should entise hys wyfe beyng a Christian vnto vngodlynes, or woulde not cease to blaspheme Christ, suche a matrimonye ought not to continue.
To the third. Why Paul cō maūded not the infidelles but euyll bretheren to be auoyded.Thirdly there was declared a sentence of the same Apostle to the
Corrinthians, which is that all couetous persons, euyll speakers, drunkardes, and whoremongers are not to be auoyded, for otherwyse wee must go out of the worlde, but he sayd that those onely were to be eschewed which were counted brethren. As touching this purpose of
Paule, we must diligently marke, fyrst that he sawe ryght well, that the necessities of lyfe could not suffer, that all those which beleued
[Page 57] not at that time in Christ, shoulde be auoyded: for the greatest parte of men at the beginning were farre from Christ, neyther coulde the infideles haue bene made better, if our men had seperated themselues altogether from them.
But by the sentence of
Paule the corrupte brethren were driuen both to griefe and shame, whilest they sawe that for their sinnes they were eschewed of those, to whom before they had bene familiar and deere, and were ioyned vnto them as members of one body. Furthermore when this discipline floryshed, the Churche was not euill spoken of for the sinnes of the brethren, which woulde otherwyse haue happened, if they had wincked at wicked actes.
To the fourth. Therefore these sentences are nothing agaynst those thinges, which we before determined. And much lesse that which was alledged of
Abraham how he iourneyed as a straunger among Ethnikes and Idolatrers.
The peregrination of Abrahā among y
t Ethnikes is defended. Fyrst bicause he did it by the calling of God. Secondly bicause he was of so greate constancye and wisedome that he coulde be conuersaunte with the vngodly withoute any hurte to hymselfe, and to theyr greate profite. For whether so euer he went, he caried aboute with him the name of God and the worshipping of him.
To the fyfth. Of Loth. We may aunswere the same also of
Loth: If he went vnto the fyue cities with a good mynde, namely to teache the Sodomites godlinesse and the right waye. But if he wente thither being moued onely with the commoditie of the place, he dyd not well. And assuredly his going thyther had but ill successe. For he was ledde awaye captyue, and
Abraham was fayne to redeeme hym. And when afterwarde those places were by the power of God burnte, he was compelled whether he would or no, to remoue from thence. I neede not to speake muche at thys presente of
Naaman the
Sirian, for I haue before entreated inoughe of hym. Moreouer I thinke it be manifeste inough what was the cause, why some of them that were healed by Christe were sente backe to theyr owne, namelye to Preache and faythfully to declare vnto them, what had happened vnto themselues.
Now resteth somewhat to speake peculiarly of Iewes and Heretikes.
Of the Iewes. For these kynde of men are suffred almost in all cities, prouinces and kyngdomes to dwel together with Christians. Why the Iewes should be suffred.
Augustine.
Augustine among other bringeth forth certayne reasons. He in his .iiii. and .xviii. bookes
de ciuitate Dei, and also vppon the .lviii. Psalme, and in other places, writeth, that they ought therefore to be suffred, bicause they before other kynde of men had the promise of saluation, neither are they paste all hope, when as daylye some of them, although but a fewe, retourne vnto Christ. Blindnesse (sayeth
Paule to the
Romanes) fell partly on Israel: as though he woulde say, not on al. Moreouer the same Apostle addeth, when the fulnesse of the Gentiles is entred, then all Israell shall be saued. And least thou shouldest peraduenture thinke, that these wordes are to bee vnderstand allegorically,
Paule writeth them as a miserye, and to confyrme his sentence he bryngeth the Prophecye of
Esay the Prophet: namely that iniquitie shal be then taken away from
Iacob.
Furthermore they are now called enemyes vnto God, for our sakes: but called frends, bycause of their fathers. The same
Augustine in hys Questions vppon the Gospell, the second boke and xxxiii. Question (if that these bookes be of
Augustine his writing) when he interpreteth the parable of the prodigal sonne, he sayeth that that sonne signifyeth the Gentiles. For it is written, that he departed into a farre countrey, bycause the Ethnikes were so farre departed from God, that they openly worshipped Idoles, and with open profession.
But the elder sonne, by whome was shadowed the people of the Hebrewes, went not so farre. And although he were not in hys Fathers house, whiche is the Churche, he dwelled for all that in the fielde. For the Iewes are exercised in the holy Scriptures whiche they doe not ryghtlye vnderstande, nor yet
[Page] with that spirituall sense wherein the Churche of Christe taketh them, but in an earthlye and carnall sense. Wherefore they are not vnaptelye sayde to bee in the fielde. Thys Elder sonne entreth not at the begynnyng into the house of hys Father, but in the latter dayes he shall also bee called and come.
The same Father also bringeth for thys sentence that which is written in the 58. Psalme, as he readeth it, Do not kil them least they forget thy law, but in thy power disperse them. The Sonne of God (sayth he) prayeth vnto the father, that that nation might not be destroyed, but might wander euery where throughout the worlde.
Other prouinces when they were ouercome of the
Romanes, followed the lawes and rites of the
Romanes,
The Iewes receaued not the lawes and customes of the Romanes. so that at the length they were made
Romanes: but the Iewes, although they were ouercome by the
Romanes yet woulde they neuer followe their lawes, rites and ceremonies, they yet obserue theyr owne as muche as they maye, and being dispersed they wander abroade. Neither haue they vtterly forgotten the lawe of GOD: not that they Godlye applye themselues to obserue it, but only reade it, and kepe certayne signes and institutions wherby they are discerned from other Nations. Moreouer it semeth that God hath put a signe vppon them as he dyd vppon
Caine, bycause he had killed his brother
Abell, namely that euery man shoulde not kill them.
The dispersing of the Iewes is profitable to Christians.Neyther is thys theyr dispersion through oute the worlde vnprofitable to the Christians, bycause (as it is written to the
Romanes) they are shewed vnto vs as broken bowes. And for so much as we were grafted in their place, when as we
1 see that they were so miserably cut of, we acknowledge the grace of god toward vs, and by beholding of them we are taught to take heede that we also bee not
2 likewyse cut of for infidelitie sake, for which self cause they are broken of. There is also an other commoditie, whiche commeth vnto vs by theyr dispersing, bycause our bookes are saued by them, I meane the holy Byble, whiche they euery where carye aboute with them and reade: And althoughe, bycause they are blynded,
Against those whiche burne the Bibles in Hebrewe they beleue not, yet they confesse that those writynges are moste true. They are in harte deadly enemyes agaynst vs, but by these bookes which they haue and reuerence, they are a testimonye to our religion. Wherefore I can not inough meruaile at those, whiche doe so much hate the Iewes tongue, and Bibles in Hebrewe,
Augustine. that they desire to haue them destroyed and burnte, when as
Augustine de doctrina Christiana thinketh that if we chaunce somtymes to doubt of the Greke or Latin translation, we must fly vnto the truth of the Hebrue, And
Ierome in many places writeth the same.
Whether the Hebrues haue corrupted the bokes of holy scriptures.
Ierome.But they say that the holy bookes were vitiated and corrupted, by the Hebrues. To thys
Ierome vpon
Esaye the .vi. Chapter towarde the ende aunswereth thus. Eyther they dyd thys before the comming of Christ and Preachyng of the Apostles, or els afterwarde. If a man will saye that it was done of them before, then seing Christ and his Apostles reprehended the moste greuous wicked actes of the Iewes. I maruaile why they would speake nothing of that sacrilege, and so detestable a wicked acte. Vndoubtedly they woulde haue reproued them for viciating and corrupting the Scriptures. But if thou wilt contend y
t there were afterward faultes brought in by them, then will I say y
t they ought chiefly to haue corrupted those places which do testifye of Christ and his religiō, and which were alledged by the Lord himself, and of the Apostles in the newe Testament. But they remaine vncorrupt, and the same sentence remaineth stil in the Hebrue Bibles which they put. For they wer not so carefull for y
e words. Wherfore it is not likely that they as touching other places haue corrupted the holy scriptures. Yea if a man diligently reade ouer their bookes, he shall finde in
[Page 58] them a great many more testimonyes and those more plaine and manifest, than our common traslatiō hath. Do not they read in the second Psalme: Kysse ye the sonne, which ours haue translated, Take ye hold of discipline? Which woordes vndoubtedly are referred vnto Christ. But I meane not at this present to bring all such testimonies. It is sufficient if with
Ierome I proue that y
e bokes of holy Scriptures are not corrupted by the Hebrues, neither assuredly if they woulde they should haue missed of their purpose. For there are found many most auncient & handwritten bookes, which haue bene of a long time most diligently kept by Christians, which came neuer in their hands to corrupt.
But let vs retourne to treate of that commoditye which
Augustine hath declared.
3 There are very many (sayeth he) that would peraduenture thinke, that those things, which we declare of the auncient people, and of the Prophets are vayne and fayned of vs, vnlesse they saw y
e Iewes yet remaining on liue,
The Hebrues & their bokes ar most plaine witnesses of our fayth. which with their bookes maintaine our sentence euē against their will. Wherfore although the Hebrues be blinded in hart, & are against vs as much as they maye, yet are they with their bokes most plaine witnesses of our fayth. And vndoubtedly of al testimonies, y
t testimony is most of value,
God wil haue a church euen by the testimonies of his aduersaryes. which is witnessed by our enemies. And god hath wonderfully prouided for this kinde of testimonies for his church, For we haue not only the bokes of the Hebrewes witnessing with vs, but also Verses of the
Sibillas, which were borne in sundry countreyes. Neither is it to be supposed that our elders fayned those Verses of themselues.
Verses of the Sibillas. For in the time of
Lactantius, Eusebius of
Cesaria, &
Augustine, which alledged those Verses, the bokes of the
Sibillas were rife in euery mans hand. Wherfore if our elders should haue adioyned vnto them any counterfayte Verses, the Ethnykes which were then many in number, and were full of eloquence, and deadly enemies to our religion, would haue reproued them as vaine and liars. What then remaineth, but that god would wonderfully defend his church euen by the testimonies of our aduersaries? Therfore y
e Iewes are now suffred among Christians, partly for the promise sake, which they haue that saluation should be geuē to their kinred: partly bicause of the commodities, which I haue now rehearsed out of
Augustine. Wherfore they are not only suffred but also thei haue Sinagoges, wherin they openly read the bokes of the holy scriptures, and also cal vpon the god of their fathers. In which thing neuerthelesse the diligence of y
e Magistrates and bishops is much to be required, who ought to prouide that they do there no other thing, and by al meanes to beware that in their commō prayers, exhortations, and Sermons, they curse not nor blaspheme Christ our God. If the Magistrates and bishops haue not a care ouer these things, they can not but be most iustly accused.
The Turkes ought not to haue any Sinagoges graūted them. But it is not lawful to graunt vnto the Turkes any holy assemblies for that they haue not a peculiar promise of their saluation, neither would they there read either the old Testament or the newe, but only their most detestable boke called
Alcoran.
Furthermore the Iewes muste be forbidden that they exercise not false bargayning and Vsurye among Christians,
The Iewes must be prohibited from false bargaining and vsurie. therby to vexe and afflict the poore Christians before our face, which can not be done but with great horror. But our princes exacte of them a very great tribute and receaue at their handes a great pray by their handes by vsury and false bargayning. So farre are they of from prohibityng them from these euill artes. Furthermore (which is more hurtfull) they prouyde not to haue them taughte, when as they oughte to compell them, to come often to the holy Sermons of the Christians:
Princes ought to care that the Iewes may be taught otherwise, whilest they are so neglected and vnloked vnto, they waxe euery day worse and worse, and more stubborne. So that either very little fruite or ells almoste none at al, can now be looked for by theyr dwelling among Christians.
It is also diligently to be sene vnto, that they corrupte not our men, in seducing
[Page] them to their Iewishe religion.
The heresie of the Marranes. By reason this thing hath bene neglected, the heresie of the
Marranes hath much increased and that chiefly in Spaine. Moreouer it is mete, that they may by some apparail or certain signe be knowen from Christians, least a man vnawares should be as familiarly conuersaunt with thē as with Christians. And as touching this kinde of infidelles these thynges are sufficiente.
What heresye is.Now must we speake of heretikes. The woorde
[...], is deriued of thys verbe
[...], which is to electe or choose, For those kinde of men chose vnto thē selues some certaine opinions, which are against the holy Scriptures, and doe stubbornly defend the same.
The causes of heresye. And the causes of this their choyse, for the most part are either bicause they are ignoraunt of the holy Scriptures, or els if they know them they dispise them, and being driuen by some couetousnesse they applye thē selues to the inuention of some errors. Wherfore
Augustine in his booke
de vtilitate credendi writeth.
Augustine. An heretike is he which for the loue of gayne or rule, eyther bringeth vp, or els followeth new opinions. The definition therfore of heresie is a choyse and stubborne defending of opinions,
The definition of heresye. which are against the holy Scriptures, either by reason of ignorance or els contempt of them, to the end the easlier to obtaine their own pleasures and cōmodities. The choyse and stubburne defending is in this definition in stead of the forme. But the opinions disagreing with the holy scriptures serue for the matter. Pride and couetousnesse make heresie. And the obteining of dignities, gayne and pleasures are appoynted as endes of thys so great a mischiefe. By this definition it is manifeste inough (as I thynke) who be heretikes, I minde not at this presente to speake of the kindes & sortes of heresies. I shall as I trust haue better occasiō, & a place more mete to speake therof. This wil I say briefly, as touching this questiō, we must haue none otherwise to do with heretikes, than with infidels and Iewes. And I suppose that these things are sufficient as touching this question, whiche hath bene hitherto discussed, I woulde God so perfectly, as with many woordes. Wherfore I will returne vnto the historye.
The second Chapiter.
1
ANd the Angel of the Lord ascended from Gilgal to Bochim and sayd: I made you to go out of Egipte, and haue brought you vnto the Lande whiche I sware vnto your Fathers: And I sayde, I wil not breake mine appoyntmente that I made with you.
TWo things haue hitherto bene set forth vnto vs. Fyrst the noble victories which the Israelits obteined as long as they obeyed the word of God. Secondly the transgression, wherby contrarye to y
e commaundementes of God, they both saued and also made tributaries vnto themselues those nations, whom they ought vtterly to haue destroyed. But nowe is set forth vnto vs, how God of his goodnesse by hys Legate reprehended the Israelites for the wicked acte whiche they had committed, and that not without fruite. For whē they heard the word of God, they repented.
Fyrst the messenger of God maketh mencion of the benefites which god had bestowed on his people.
The principall poyntes of the Sermon. Secondly he vpbraydeth thē of their wicked actes, wherwith they being ingrate requited so great giftes. Lastely are set forth the threatninges and punishementes wherewith God woulde punishe them excepte they repented.
But before we come to entreate of the oration of this legate, it were good to declare what he was. The Hebrew worde
Melach,
It is doubtful what this Legate was. and also the Greke worde
[...], are doubtfull, and sometymes they signifie a nature without a body, I meane spirites the ministres of God, and other sometymes they signifie a messanger, what soeuer he be. There are examples of these in many places of the scriptures, which should be superfluous now to declare. Some supposed y
t some certayne spirite was sent from God, whiche appeared vnto the people in a visible forme, and reproued them as he was commaunded: And they persuade them selues that he was first sene in
Gilgal, and there commaunded the people, to ascend from thence to a place, whiche was afterward called
Bochim of weapyng. The Hebrew word
Melach is not agaynst this interpretation: and that maketh with it also, bycause he speaketh as God.
The aungell speaketh in the person of God.
I haue made you (sayth he)
to ascend out of Egypt. With whiche selfe same kinde of speache the Aungell in
Genesis spake to
Abraham, and in
Exodus to
Moses. Where it is also written, that God put his name in him. But it semed vnto the auncient fathers,
That aungell whiche spake vnto y
e fathers is thought to haue ben christ that that aungell which in the olde Testament appeared & spake in the name of God, was Christ the sonne of God. For it is writtē in
Iohn, No man hath sene God at any tyme: the sonne which in the bosome of the father he hath declared him. These wordes declare vnto vs that what soeuer thinges are sayd to haue ben spoken by God in the olde Testament, the same were made open by Christ. But other suppose that this messanger or legate was a minister of the Churche, y
t is either a Priest or a Prophet, whose office was, to reprehend the sinnes of the people. Amonge the Hebrew
Rabines,
Leui the sonne of Gerson.
Leui the sonne of
Gerson doth therfore thinke this to be very likely, bycause it is not conuenient, that an aungell should openly speake to so great a multitude. But his reason is very weake. for seing God whē he gaue the lawe spake in the mount
Sina to the whole multitude of the Hebrues, what should let, but that he could teache an angell to do the same? But this is of some what more strength, bycause it is declared in the history, that this messanger ascended from
Gilgal to
Bochim. For if he were an angell, it semeth that it should rather haue ben sayd, that he discended from heauen, & not ascended from
Gilgal to
Bochim. And surely it appeareth a fayned thing, y
t they fayne that he first appeared in
Gilgal, and then called the people together to
Bochim. For he mought haue in
Gilgal expressed vnto the people those thinges whiche he afterward declared in
Bochim. Wherfore the Hebrues affirme that this Prophet or Priest receaued in
Gilgal the spirite and inspiration of God, wherewith he was stirred vp and appoynted to the assembly of the people, whiche then for certaine causes were assembled in
Bochim,
Praises of Phineas the priest there to expresse the commaundementes of God to the people, yea they say that that Prophet was
Phineas the Priest the nephew of
Aaron, I meane the sonne of
Eleazar for he was a very seuere man, and most zelous of godlynesse and righteousnesse. In the booke of
Numb: it is mencioned how he slew
Zamri a prince of the family of
Simeon namely for this, bycause he cōmitted open fornicatiō with a
Madianitishe harlot. And the father of y
e harlot was a prince among the
Madianites. And God manifestly allowed the zeale of
Phineas. For he promised him the priesthode of his nation, with an euerlastyng couenaunt: and ceassed from destroyeng the people, being mitigated with his noble acte.
Phineas therfore was not onely godly, but also of a stoute and valiaunte courage. He feared not for gods cause to entre into grieuous hatreds, and to put himselfe to present daunger. Wherfore
Dauid in the 106. Psalme rehearsing this history commendeth him after this sorte:
Phineas stode vp and reuenged, and the plague ceassed, and it was coūted vnto him for righteousnesse from generation to generation for euer. Wherfore that acte whiche by his owne nature mought haue semed cruell and horrible, did not onely please God, and was of him allowed for a iust acte: but he also deliuered the people from a most grieuous plague, wherewith they were then vexed. The counte of the yeares if they
[Page] be rightly counted is not agaynst this opinion now alleged. Yea and it is found in this selfe same boke, that he was on lyue, when warre was made agaynst the tribe of
Beniamin to reuenge the wicked acte perpetrated in
Gabaa.
R. Salomoh.
Rabbi Salomoh also declareth, that the booke which is entituled
Sedar Olam, testifieth the same.
Kimhi. Likewise
Dauid Kimhi & the old Hebrues seme to encline to this opinion. But what soeuer he was, I thinke it skilleth not much. This ought to be most certain and sure, that the thinges declared by him were the wordes of God.
Where Gilgal lyeth.
Gilgal, is a citie lyeng in the playne of
Iordane, not farre from the citie of
Iericho. And it had that name hereof, bycause there
Iosuah by the commaundemēt of the Lord prouided that the people of
Israel, whiche had wandred vncircumcised thoroughe the wildernesse, celebrated a solēpne circumcision. And when they had so done, God aunswered, y
t he had remoued from thē the reproche of
Egypt. For
Gal signifieth in Hebrew to turne away and to remoue. Moreouer in that place, but not at that tyme, but long before, was y
e tabernacle, & the Arke of the couenaunt. Namely in the tyme of
Iosuah when the people passed ouer
Iordane. And by that meanes that place was counted religious. Wherfore
Saul the first king of the Hebrues was annoynted in
Gilgal. But
Bochim was so called of thē whiche wept as we shall strayght waye heare. And it is called so now by the figure
Prolepsis, bycause it was not yet named by that name. And as it appeareth by y
e history they goyng from
Gilgal ascended to
Bochim. Furthermore we must note that the legate speaketh not in hys owne name, but in the name of God & yet he vseth not those kinde of phrases which the other Prophetes did, namely
Thus saith the Lord. &c. The word of the Lord came vnto me. &c. And in rehearsing the benefites bestowed on the people. First of all he maketh mencion of the delyuery of their fathers out of
Egypte, bycause that had newly happened vnto the Hebrues.
The benefites of God are like wordes which testifie of hys nature & goodnesse. And God, to the end the knowledge of him should not be blotted out, vseth to put men in mynde of those benefites that he hath bestowed on thē, and will haue thē to be as certain wordes, expressing his nature and goodnesse vnto vs. And he alwayes begynneth his rehearsall at thinges that are latest done, and of them he claymeth vnto him selfe titles or names attributed vnto him,
God taketh surnames by hys benefites. by whiche he would be both called vpon and also knowen, for at the beginning God was called vpon by that that he created heauen and earth, and afterward by that that he was the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and
Iacob. After that as a deliuerer out of
Egypte. Then as a deliuerer out of the captiuitie of
Babilon.
God beginneth the rehearsall of benefites last geuen.But lastly as the father of our Lord
Iesus Christ. But now of the benefite lately bestowed on them, he calleth him selfe the delyuerer out of
Egypte. Afterward he adioyneth an other benefite.
And I haue brought you into the lande whiche I sware vnto your fathers. It was not sufficiēt y
t they wer deliuered out of
Egypt, but they had ample & noble places assigned vnto them. Thirdly he saith, This haue I geuē you.
That I would haue my couenant made with you to haue cōtinued for euer, if it mought haue ben by your obediēce But ye haue not suffred it. These benefites whiche in this place are rehearsed are playne and manifest ynough.
Two principal thynges to be considered in the couenaunt. But as touching the last, namely of the couenaunt, two thinges are to be considered in it, First whiche is also the chief of all good thinges, is the redemption whiche should be made by Christ. Neither could this be hindered by any sinnes of mē. For God is faithful (as
Paul testifieth to y
e
Romanes) neither departeth he from his truth, for our euill desertes. The second is, the successe of outwarde good thinges and ciuill ornamentes. Whiche kinde of couenaunte or promesse, bycause it was conditionally it myght therefore sometymes be altered, and vndoubtedly of this doth our preacher at this present speake. And what conditions God required of the Israelites, here he declareth in this sermon.
2 And ye also shall make no couenaunte with the inhabiters
[Page 60] of this lande, but shal breake downe their altares: Neuerthelesse ye haue not obeyed my voyce, why haue ye this done?
3 Wherefore I haue also determined, I will not cast them out before your face, but they shalbe as prickes in your sydes, and theyr Gods shalbe a snare vnto you.
God by couenaunt had prescribed two thynges in especiall,
What god prescribed the Israelites in the couenaunt. first that they should make no league with the
Chananites: secondly that they should plucke downe their altares and temples. These are euery where written in the law especially in
Exodus the 13. and 20. In the booke of
Numb: 33.
In Deut. 7.
Now after these conditions required of God is set forth the transgression of the Israelites.
But ye (sayth he)
haue not hearkened vnto my voyce. The Iewes were not yet fallen so farre that they committed Idolatry, they are onely reproued for violating the couenaunt, bycause they had saued the Idoles and altares of the
Chananites. The wonderfull goodnesse of God surely is shewed by these wordes:
VVhy haue ye this done?
A vehemente maner of amplifieng of synne. He demaūdeth the cause as being ready to heare their excuse, if they could bring any that were iust and lawfull. And by this meanes also the grieuousnesse of the sinne is amplified, as being so grieuous y
t it could by coulour be defended. And vndoubtedlye thus it is.
God is not afeard in iudgement to contēd with synners. Gods cause agaynste vs is so good, that he is not affeard in Iudgement to reason with synners, as the Prophetes
Esay and
Micheas haue playnely taught. The preacher goeth forwarde, and sheweth what punishement they shoulde haue for thys faulte.
For so much as ye haue not stande by your couenaunt, I wyll also go from my promises. I will not expell the
Chananites out of this region as I had promised: & if so be that I do not expell them, ye are so weake and feble that by your owne power, ye can not cast them out. They shal remayne therfore as ye would haue it, but yet to your great discōmodity.
For they shalbe as prickes in your sides, namely as thornes, where with ye shalbe oftentymes sharply pricked. The Hebrew worde is
Letsdim. And in dede
Tsad signifieth a side. Althoughe some thinke that worde to be deriued of this verbe
Tsud, whiche is to hunte or to fishe and bycause the hookes of fishermen are very sharpe, therfore the worde is by a certaine Metaphore transferred to signifie thornes. And after the same sorte we might say they signified nettes, vsing the same Metaphore whiche we may deriue of hunters. But the firste reason of the interpretation, to signifye sides, I sets both simple & also more allowed by the commentaryes of the Hebrues.
And theyr Idoles shalbe a snare vnto you. Namely wherewith ye shalbe taken, and when ye shalbe geuen to their Idolatry, ye shalbe punished with most grieuous punishementes and discommodities.
Augustine in his 13.
Augustine. questiō vpon this booke hath noted, that God threatneth after his accustomed maner, y
t at the length it shall come to passe, that he will punishe synnes by synnes. For y
e Israelites in not obeyeng the commaundement of God committed synne: and he agayne threatneth that Idoles shalbe a stumblyng blocke vnto them, namely that they should worship them, wherfore afterwarde they should be grieuously punished. By whiche wordes he declareth that the first transgression should be punished and chastised with the wicked crime of Idolatry, as
Paul testifieth to the
Romanes, that the Idolatry of the Ethnikes was punished with most filthy lustes. But y
e punishement of the Israelites (as it is here set forth) hath with out doubt a great emphasys. For what can there happen more grieuous, than to be among thornes, and continuallye to fall among them? Vndoubtedly hereof followe woundes almost thoroughe out al the partes of the body, and new paynes, and those vehement succede one an other. And as thornes if they sticke in the fleshe do sharpely pricke, so to dwell among enemyes, and to haue them ioyned
[Page] together with vs, can not be but very full of troubles.
The punishement whiche God here threateneth, is no new punishement, for al that is here written, was forespoken in the boke of
Iosua the 23. chap. Namely that it should come to passe, that if they obeyed not the preceptes of the law of God, God would not then performe to destroy those natiōs before them: yea, he sayth, they shalbe vnto you a snare, a stumblyng stocke, a whip for your sides, and thornes to your eyes, vntill ye be destroyed out of this good lande, whiche the Lord your God hath geuen you, &c.
For the Israelites had afterward experience of these miseryes, bycause they were oftentimes brought into bondage by their enemyes among whom they dwelled, and with whom they had vngodly ioyned them selues. And finally for y
t they would not ceasse of from Idolatry, they were cast out to the
Assirians and
Babilonians. This chidyng of God contayneth iust causes, wherfore the Israelites were destitute of his helpe for a tyme.
Causes why god forsoke the Israelites for a tyme. And the end of the whole sermon is, that the people might be stirred vp to repentaunce, and that most aptely. For among those thinges whiche do vehemently amplify synne & do set it playnly before our eyes,
A vehemente amplyfieng of synne. is the greatnesse of y
e benefites of god, which ought to stirre vs vp to y
e obseruing of the law. Afterward is set forth y
e grieuousnesse of the punishmēts, bycause the waight of the synnes cōmitted, doth euidently declare y
e burtheu of thē. Wherfore these two things are worthily alledged in the sermon, to the end the Hebrues might fele the enormity of the wicked acte whiche they had committed, whereas otherwise they would haue thought it but a light faulte.
Two Antitheses to be considered in thys oration.Furthermore we must consider in this oration the contrary positions artificially ioyned together to augment the vehemency. For to that benefite, wherin God had brought them out of
Egypt this is layde agaynst, that they draue not the
Chananites from the countrey geuen vnto them. And to this benefite, that God had geuen them an aboundant and fertile countrey, this is contrary, that the people suffred Idolatry to be no lesse vsed there than it was before. And this was to rendre euill for good. Wherfore God would not suffer that to be left vnpunished, but caused it to happen otherwise vnto them than they thought. For the nations whiche they for their cōmoditie had saued, did them great hurte, so y
t they are cōpared to thornes. And the Gods of those nations, which they had not abolished turned to a snare & greuous stumbling blocke to the Hebrues.
Whether the people wer by this oratiō stirred vp to faith.But this sermon may seme vnperfect enoughe, for so muche as fayth is not set forth in it, wherunto the mynde of the hearers should be erected: onely the synne is declared, and the punishement wherewith they should be punished is expressed. And these thinges, except fayth be mixed with thē breede rather desperation thā saluation: so farre of is it y
t they should bryng a iust remedy. To this I aunswere, that that parte whiche semeth to wante, is elegantly contayned in the sermon nowe alledged, so that it be somewhat more diligently considered. For when the benefites bestowed on them by God are expressed, they make vs assured of the goodnesse and mercy of God, whiche benefites also remayne still for the Israelites if they will repente. For god is not chaunged, but is perpetually of the selfe same nature and will. And vnlesse he be resisted by sinnes he is towardes men very fauorable and louyng. Furthermore fayth is stirred vp in the hearers, when it is shewed vnto them, that god would that his couenaunt made with them should abide for euer. Wherefore it is manifest that this was his will, that the impediment of synnes beyng by full repentaunce taken away, his couenaunt whiche he had made might be of force for euer. Wherfore there is no cause why we should complayne that fayth is left out, when as both the promises and the couenaunt are mencioned, whiche can not be conceaued and established but onely by fayth.
There yet remayneth a doubte whether God require the selfe same thyng of Christians, whiche he woulde haue to be done of the Hebrues,
Wether it be required of vs that we should breake Idoles namely that they should by violence take awaye and breake in pieces the Idoles and superstitions both of the infidelles, & also of heretikes. If thys should be demaunded as touchying Princes and Magistrates, it is without controuersie that they ought to purge their dominions from such euils, and to that end haue they receaued of God the sword and power. But they which are priuate persons ought to abstayne from violence, for so much as to them is not committed the sworde and power to constrayne. Of thys thyng
Augustine in the .x. tome and 6.
Augustine. sermon after this manner aunswereth, that the Christians ought so to do as God commaunded the Hebrues in the 7. of
Deut: where he expressedly commaunded that these thinges ought then to be done of the Iewes, when the lande was in their owne power. Wherfore Christians ought also to do the same, but yet in those landes, cities and houses whiche they possesse, namely they must there ouerthrowe Idoles and superstitious altars. Howbeit it is not lawfull for them to breake into other mens houses landes and Townes, and with violence to breake and ouerthrowe Idoles and altares. This (sayeth he) is not to heale the synne of Idolatrye, whiche lyeth chiefly in the hearte, it ought chiefly be weyed out of the heartes of our neighbours, by the worde and doctrine, whiche beyng done, as many as we shall wynne vnto Christ, will helpe vs to take awaye outwarde Images, when as they are persuaded by the worde of GOD, and that by our diligence, they haue first shaken away the same thinges out of their own heartes.
Cōsilium Eliberinum. And accordyng to this meanyng the Counsell holden at
Eliberium did decree in the 60. Canon.
By these thynges we muste note, that this is the will of GOD, that we should abstayne from traffickes,
We must haue no felloweshyp with the vngodly. matrimonyes and fellowshippes with infidels and heretikes, as by the lawe it was forbidden, that the Iewes should make no league with the
Chananites, but this would I haue so to be vnderstande, as I haue before and that largely declared. Moreouer we are playnely taught, that the commaundementes of GOD are simply to be obeyed,
The commaū demēts of god are not to be mitigated by man his inuentions. so that we may not go about either to mollefye or to mitigate them by mannes inuentions. Seyng that GOD punished the Hebrues and that grieuously, whiche peraduenture thought that they had sufficiently fulfilled hys precepte, when they had made the
Chananites tributaries. But as touchyng their Idoles and superstitions he required nothyng elles of the Israelites, but that they woulde not worshyppe them. Wherefore suche interpretations are to be taken hede of, whiche do either vtterly take away the worde of GOD, or at the least do make it to be of small force. This did the sonne of GOD sharpely reproue, when he sayed that the Phariseys by their doctrine and humane inuentions did wrest the law of God, as thoughe it had ben made of ware, to their filthy lustes & wicked desires.
This sermō is takē out of the holy scriptures We must also marke that this whole sermon is taken out of the holy Scriptures: for there is nothing contayned in it, which is not found in the bookes of
Numb: Deut: and
Iosuah. Whereby we gather, that preachyng is then of efficacy, when it is drawen out of the worde of GOD, and not of the inuention of man.
Sinners ar punished by the same thinges whereby they haue trāsgressed. Neither is it to be passed ouer, that it is a common thyng with the Iustice of God to punishe synners by the same thynges whereby they transgresse. As nowe it is declared that y
e Israelites should incurre most great damages, as well by the nations, as also by the Idoles, whiche they contrary to the commaundement of GOD had saued. Furthermore let vs learne hereby, euery man for his owne parte to beare continuall hatred to the wicked affections of the fleshe. For we ought neuer to come into fauour again with them,
We must make no league with wicked affections. or to make peace or a league with thē: for so much as God hath appoynted, that we should continually make warre agaynst his enemyes.
What is the office of Princes against heretikes & Papistes.Finally let Christian Princes be taughte, howe they ought to behaue them selues agaynst Papistes and heretikes, namely diligently to persecute, correcte, and amende the errours in them, and at the length to compell them to returne into the right waye: otherwise in permittyng them to take deeper roote, and to lyue at will and idlely, they noryshe thornes for them selues, and do willyngly drawe vnto them blockes, to stumble at.
4 And when the Aungell of the Lorde spake these wordes vnto all the children of Israell, the people lifted vp their voyce & wept.
5 And they called the name of that place Bochim, and offred Sacrifices there vnto the Lorde.
The fruite of the sermon, whiche was preached is by certayn outward sygnes expressed vnto vs, whiche were in a manner apt witnesses of repentaunce, and of a conuerted mynde.
Thre apt witnesses of repē taunce. Thre thynges therfore are mencioned. First when the people had heard this sermon they lifted vp their voyce wherby as it is to be beleued, they confessed their synnes, and implored the mercy of God. Secondly it is added that teares were ioyned with the voyces: and lastly that they offred Sacrifices vnto God. What they said when they lifted vp their voyce, the scripture doth not expresse, but I haue expounded what is most likely that they sayd, and therfore I will stande no longer about that thyng: but I will somewhat tary in those thinges, whiche the history hath mencioned of, what thynges they are, namely as touchyng teares and Sacrifices. Wherein we must knowe that true and lawfull repentaunce consisteth chiefly of two principall poyntes,
Two principal pointes of repētaūce, which do spryng out of fayth. namely of a sorowe conceaued for the wicked Actes committed, and of a sure confidence to obtayne pardon by Christe. Neither ought we to be ignoraunte, that these two thynges do burgen out of fayth, as out of their propre and naturall roote. And fayth, when it bryngeth forth suche fruites, is occupyed about two thynges. First it assenteth vnto the lawe of GOD, and to the threatnynges there set forth, and confesseth them to be true, whereby we beyng assured of the will of GOD, whiche we vnderstande to be by our synnes violated, and nothyng doubtyng of the threatnynges adioyned, we can not but be grieuously sory. Secondly fayth embraseth the promise of forgeuenesse of punishementes by Christ. And whilest it is occupyed about these two thynges, so many outwarde signes also do follow.
Two outward signes followe true repētaūce For of sorow come syghinges & teares, which haue adioyned vnto thē confessiō of the sinnes committed, whiche is sometymes expressed, & sometymes close. And where there is conceaued an assuraunce of forgeuenesse, there followe Sacrifices. And bycause fayth is the mother of these thynges, and it is conceaued by the worde of GOD, therefore the historye declareth that the Israelites did at the length weepe and do Sacrifice after that they had heard the sermon.
The worde of god stirreth vp repentaunce. For (as
Paule sayeth) fayth commeth of hearyng, and hearyng by the worde of GOD. Wherefore weepyng and sighing followed fayth by whiche weepyng the sorowe then conceaued in the hearte manifestlye appeared, whiche affection of the mynde it is manifest to haue come by reason of the euill whiche then did oppresse them:
What is the grief & sorowe of repentaunce and that euill was the anger of GOD, wherewith they felte them selues to be oppressed, and whereunto they knewe by the sermon preached that they were guilty. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that the weepyng of those repenting people was no common or easye weepyng, for so much as of the efficacy and aboundance thereof, the place was called
Bochim. Which worde signifieth in the Hebrew tongue, men weepyng.
The Ethnikes do not allowe teares.The teares, whiche the Ethnike wyse men, do either reproue, or contempne as comming from a softe and womanlyke hearte, God, when they burst forth of true repentaunce, doth exceadingly allowe them, and counteth them as most
[Page 62] acceptable:
Seneca writeth in hys 64. Epistle to
Lucillus,
Seneca. that sometymes we may let teares come from vs, but we must not weepe. He would not therefore haue weepyng to haue the rayne: howbeit somewhat he permitted it, bycause by the violence of nature they are expressed, and they burste forth euen of them whiche will not, and do restrayne them, as the same authour testifieth in hys
[...]00. Epistle. But we ought not to cōsider what they would, but what is allowed of our heauenly Father.
God accepteth the teares of such as are repentaunt. And he wonderfull louyngly accepteth a contrite and humble hearte, and the teares of suche as are repentaunt. Then it is sayde that they offer Sacrifices, whiche were certain tokens of fayth conceaued of the forgeuenesse of synnes by Christe. For whilest the Sacrifices were a kyllyng, it was set forth, that synne in a sorte was transferred into them.
What the killyng of sacrifices signified. For the Sacrifice bare the punishement, whiche the transgressour ought to haue had. Neither is it to be doubted, but that those Sacrifices whilest they were sacrificed, dyd shadowe the death of Christ. Wherefore those ceremonyes did testifye that the Elders, did constantlye beleue, that by the oblation and death of Christ all their synnes were taken awaye, and already forgeuen them. Neither vndoubtedly can true repentaunce be founde wantyng suche a fayth.
Take awaye fayth & repentance is desperation. For take awaye thys fayth, and it may rather be called desperation, than repentaunce. Furthermore in these Sacrifices were thankes geuen vnto God, whiche would so by Christ be reconciled vnto men.
Some man will say, what shall we do therefore when we repente? we may in dede haue teares as witnesses of our inwarde sorrowe: but there remayne no Sacrifices in our tyme,
That whiche y
e old fathers did by the bloud of beastes, the same do we in the supper of the Lord. whereby we should testifye the fayth of the forgeuenesse of synnes by Christe. To this I aunswere. That whiche they did then by the bloud of beastes, and death of cattell, we do also nowe in celebratyng the Supper of the Lorde. For there we kepe in memorye the death of Christe by outwarde signes, as he hym selfe hath instituted: and thereof it came that the olde Fathers did so often call the administration of that Sacramente, a sacrifice.
Not bycause (as the Papistes falsely beleue) the Sacrifice offreth Christe vnto God the father,
Why the Papistes called y
e supper of the Lord a sacrifice but bycause the memorye of hym beyng once offred is called to remembraunce. Moreouer we must take heede that we persuade not our selues, that God is pacified, either by teares, or by Sacrifices, or by the receauyng of the Sacramentes whiche are but outwarde thynges.
God is not pacified by outward thynges of them selues. For by one onely Sacrifice, by the death I saye of Christ, God is made mercifull vnto vs: the fruite, of whose death euery man applyeth vnto hym selfe by fayth. And of that fayth we haue those outward thynges as witnesses and sygnes. Wherfore if at any tyme we shall heare either the Fathers or the Scriptures them selues to saye that by teares synnes are wyped awaye, or that by Sacrifices, or Sacramentes GOD is made mercyfull vnto men, so ought we to vnderstande their speaches that we referre the Sacrifices, and Sacramentes both to Christ hym selfe,
The properties of thinges are oftentimes attributed to the signes of the same thīgs and also to faith in him, for so much as all those are signes of him. Neyther let vs thinke that this is a newe, or an vnaccustomed thing, that the properties, operations, and efficacy of thynges shoulde be transferred to the signes, whiche by the institution of God do note and signife vnto vs the same thinges. But these thinges left a syde let vs speake somewhat particularlye both of teares and syghing, and also of Sacrifice.
¶Of Teares.
TEares are counted as certayne thynges added and ioyned to repentaunce,
Teares are adioyned both to repentaunce & also to prayers and also to prayers. For not onely the repentaunte, when they with a grieuous sorowe deteste their synnes, do vse to weepe: but also as many as do earnestly and vehemently contend to obteyne any thyng. Howbeit the tokens of
[Page] true repentaunce are not alwayes measured by teares.
Weepyng is not alwayes a tokē of true repentaunce.
Teares do not alwayes declare y
t the praiers are of efficacy. 2.
Sam. 12. For we reade both in the booke of
Genesis, and also in the Epistle to the Hebrues, that
Esau also wepte. Teares also do not alwayes declare, that the prayers are of efficacye to obteyne that whiche is desired. For
Dauid after hys aduoutry fasted and wepte whilest he earnestly prayed that lyfe might be spared vnto hys sonne whiche was borne vnto hym by
Bethsabe: whiche thyng neuerthelesse he could not obteyne, but that teares in those examples had no good successe, there were diuerse causes thereof. For
Esau as we shall strayght waye declare, mourned not of fayth: And
Dauid obtayned not that whiche he desired, bycause GOD had ordayned to geue him that, whiche was much better and more noble than that whiche he required. In dede the sonne whiche was conceaued by aduoutry remayned not a lyue. But of the same mother he afterwarde had
Salomon, who succeded the Father in a peaceable and moste ample kyngdome after his death, yea and he beyng yet lyuyng. But contrarywyse let vs marke howe in
Peter teares were tokens of very true repentaunce. And also in that woman, whiche (as the Euangelistes declare) with her teares washed the feete of the Lorde.
And as touchyng prayers
Ezechias was hearde, when with weepyng he prayed, and the death which was threatned hym was differred to an other tyme.
Iosias also was hearde, who prayed vnto GOD with many teares. The 126. Psalme speaketh thus of the fruite of prayer, whiche hath sighyng and teares adioyned with it: They wente and wepte, castyng their sedes, but doubtelesse they shall come, & with ioye shall bryng with thē their sheaues. And they which sowe in teares, shall reape in ioye. It is also written in the 7. Psalme: The Lorde hath hearde the voyce of my weepyng. And in the 56. Psalme: The teares of the Sainctes are in a manner put before GOD in a bottle or potte, and faythfully sealed in hys booke.
Dauid also in hys 95 Psalme stirreth vs vp by these wordes: Let vs weepe before the Lorde whiche made vs, &c. But muche more are we instigated vnto it by the example of Christe, who (as it is written in the Epistle to the Hebrues) with a loude crye, and with teares prayed for vs.
Paul also in the 20. of the Actes sayeth, that he had longe serued the Lorde with an humble hearte and with teares.
What teares ar not allowed of God.Neuerthelesse God alloweth not those teares, whiche are by a certayne naturall nation powred out without any affection of the mynde: as it commonly happeneth vnto those, whose eyes are striken with any stroke, or to those whiche runne either on foote or on horsebacke, and whiche with ouer muche drinke become dronke: for these are naturall accidences, neither pertayne they any thyng to godlynesse. But affections after which teares do followe are these: heauynesse of the mynde,
After what affections teares do followe. whiche other call sorrowe, also gladnesse: and that by contrary reasons. For of sorowe spryngeth cold, whereby as the whole bodye is constrayned together, so also are the humors of the hed, whereby it commeth to passe that weapyng by violence bursteth forth. But contrarywyse in gladnesse the pypes, pores, & wayes about the eyes are loosed, wherby there is made a waye open vnto teares. And vndoubtedly of those two affections we haue a testimony in the booke of
Esdras. For there it is written, that when the temple was built, the people wept, but not all for one cause. Parte of thē very sory that the new buylding differed muche in dignitie and ornamentes from the fyrst. But contrarywise other reioysed, that the house of GOD, whiche had layen so longe prostrate, was raysed vp agayne. And it is manifest in the holy hystorye, that
Ioseph when he sawe hys brother
Beniamin whome he loued, wepte for ouer muche ioye.
Anger hath sorrowe and pleasure mingled together. Furthermore there are other affections mixed of sorrowe and ioye, whiche make vs to weepe: as is a vehement anger, whiche hath by reason of contempt sorowe myngled with it and also some ioye and pleasure, whilest it goeth aboute reuengement as thoughe it were present. Mercy also
[Page 63] shaketh out teares, for that we are troubled and are sory for other mens euils, and are desirous to profite the afflicted. For a vehement desire also casteth out teares. Wherfore the men of God, when in prayeng they earnestly desire to obtayne any thing, easely burst forth into teares.
But what the matter of suche an humour is,
The Phisicall matter of teares. we leaue to the consideration of naturall Philosophers: for they do not well agree among them selues as touching it. Some thincke that they do come by reason of the gaule beyng troubled, vnto which opinion agreeth the first booke
de mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae,
Augustine. the x. chap: whiche booke is entituled to be
Augustines wryting. Other suppose them to be a certayne kynde of sweate, whiche
Plutarche affirmeth,
Plutarche. but some do thinke, that euen as from mylke is seperated whay, so also a watrish humour is separated from bloud, wherof the greater parte turneth into vrine, and that whiche remayneth is thrust forth into teares. Lastly
Seneca in his 100.
Seneca. Epistle to
Lucillus thincketh that with the stroke of grief and sorrowe the whole body is almost shaken, and therwithall the eyes, out of whiche eyes, the humour lyeng nighe vnto them is expressed. But howsoeuer this matter be, it littell pertayneth vnto vs. Wherfore let vs come to the causes, for whiche it besemeth a godly man to weepe.
Augustine in his 4.
Augustine. Causes why we shoulde weepe. sermon of the first Sonday in Lente writeth y
t there be two causes in true repentaunce that bryng forth weepyng: one is, for bycause we haue thoroughe negligence omitted many thynges whiche we ought to haue done, And by ouer muche boldenesse commytted many thyngs which we ought not to haue done.
Synnes of cō mittyng and omittyng. These are cōmonly called synnes of commyttyng and omyttyng, and in the same place he interpreteth thys sentence.
(Brynge forth worthy fruictes of repentaunce) after this maner, that we shoulde weepe for the synnes alreadye committed, and we shoulde take hede that we do not the same agayne.
Chrisostome also vpon the Epistle to the
Collossians,
Chrisostome. the 12 Homely cō playneth that the Christians abused teares, and when as otherwyse teares are good creatures of God,
The abuse of teares. they diffame them in adioynyng them to those thynges whiche deserue not weepyng. Synnes onely (sayeth he) are to be weeped for, not onely our owne synnes, but other mens also. Whiche
Paul performed in very dede, who in the 2. to the
Corinthians: sayde that he was affeard, not to come vnto them, but so that he was deiected & compelled to weepe for very many which had fallen and not repented.
Oure owne synnes & other mens also are to be wept for. Yea and he exhorted the same
Corinthians, to weepe for other mennes synnes, when in hys first Epistle he sayde, ye are puffed vp, and ye haue not mourned, namely for a grieuous cryme of an incestuous man. And
Dauid in his 119 Psalme wryteth, Myne eyes haue brought forth riuers of waters, bycause they haue not kepte thy lawe. That most holy Prophete wepte, bycause of the publicque transgressions of the lawe, and when he sawe the same transgressions euery where perpetrated, he aboundantly poured out teares.
And
Ezechiell in the 8. chap:
Godly men do easelyer weepe than laughe. commended certayn whiche wepte for the wicked Actes of other men. And hereof it commeth that when holy men see horrible spectacles of synnes oftentymes to happen, they easelyer burste forth into teares than into laughter. For so Christ vsed, whom we read to haue oftentimes wepte, but neuer to haue laughed. Whiche selfe same thyng also we must do at thys day, when as so great, and euill an haruest of synnes doth on euery syde offer it selfe vnto vs.
Lastly we muste knowe, that all kynd of mournyng is not allowed of god.
That weeping is not allowed which cōmeth onely of the feelyng of the punishmentes. For some there are, which (as I haue before said) are moued only with y
e feeling of the punishmētes, neyther are they moued any further. To be sory in dede for cause of paines and punishementes, is a certayne degree of true repentaunce: & for that ende, GOD doth both punyshe and also threaten men whilest they lyue here. Howebeit this sorowe is not sufficient, neyther is it by it selfe allowed
[Page] of god: for it spryngeth of selfe loue, & is in a maner a thyng vnprofitable vnlesse it go further: Wherfore the Lorde sayeth in
Zacharie the 7. chap: that the Hebrues had fasted for them selues, & not for his glorye: so these wepe for them selues and mourne, not bycause they haue violated the commaundementes of GOD. Furthermore thou mayste see other some somewhat worse than these, whiche beyng moued with the sorowe of troubles do wepe,
Their teares are condemned whiche when they weape speake euill of God. and among their teares do speake euill of GOD hymselfe, beyng angry with his Iustice, as thoughe he were to seuere, and a harder Lord than he ought to be, and suche mournyng belongeth not to repentaunce, but rather to desperation. An example therof we haue in the booke of
Numb. the 14. chap. Where the people when they heard the bytter relation of the spyes, fell to weepyng, and spake euill both agaynst Moyses and agaynst God, and determined to returne into Egypt.
What mourning pleaseth God most.The thirde kynde of mournyng, is very acceptable vnto god, and that is when we are grieuously sorye, for that we haue violated hys lawe, and bycause we se a great numbre of others to resiste hys moste holy will. To this kynde of Lamentations did
Ioel and other holy Prophetes stirre vp the people of the Hebrues. Christe also persuadeth vs vnto them, when he sayeth, that they are blessed whiche mourne, bycause consolation is layed vp for them. The Churche lykewise vseth sometymes to stirre vp the people to these kynde of mournyngs, when as at sometymes it set forth publicque repentaunce, whiche althoughe it ought continually to cleaue in the heartes of Christians,
Repētaunce is sometymes openly to be renewed, yet by reason of publicque calamityes, and a certayne sluggishenesse grafted in vs, is sometyme to be renewed by the diligence of the Pastors. Wherfore god in the olde lawe once in a yeare, in the 7. moneth I saye, instituted a fast, whereby that daye the people of
Israell myght for the synnes whiche they hadde committed, afflicte them selues before god. And to the ende it myght the oftener be done, he dayely sent hys Prophetes to rebuke the people, as we see in this historye he did, when he commaunded this sermon whiche we nowe expounde to be made vnto the people.
¶Of Sacrifice.
Oure actions are either volū tary, or naturalNOw riseth somewhat to speake of Sacrifice. The definition wherof when we searche out, first we fynde it to be a certayne action; and that voluntary: whiche I therefore saye, bycause there are founde some actions whiche they call naturall: but those for so muche as they depende not of humane election, they can not therfore be called voluntary. Furthermore Sacrifice ought to be referred vnto religion:
Some actions are religious & are separated from political & oeconomicall actions. whiche I do for this cause adde, to remoue and seperate it from oeconomicall and ciuill workes. For domesticall workes, are profitable to gouerne a family, and ciuil workes serue for the administration of a publicque wealthe. But sacrifice is a religious action, bycause it pertayneth to the worshipping of god and was by hym instituted, that we should offre our things vnto hym, and that to this ende, that he might be honoured, and therby (as
Augustine sayeth in hys 10.
Augustine. booke
de ciuitate Dei the 7. chap:) to cleaue vnto hym with an holy societye. And hereby may we see in what sorte a Sacrifice (if we speake of it as it is properly) differeth from a Sacrament,
The difference betwene a sacrifice and a Sacrament. whiche is also a voluntarye and religious worke, and also instituted by God, that by it the promises and good giftes of God should be sealed and exhibited, bycause ther we offer nothing vnto God, but he offereth signes, and amplifieth his giftes vnto vs, when as those thinges which are offred, ar receaued with a sound saith.
The definition of a Sacrifice.But that the thing may be made more plain, let vs in a summe gather the definition of a sacrifice. And that is thus: A sacrifice is a voluntary and religious action, instituted of God, to offer vnto him our thinges, vnto his glory, and that thereby we may with a strayghter bond be coupled vnto hym in holy societye.
To this definitiō of sacrifices, must be added a participation.
A deuision of sacrifices. Certein sacrifices ar propitiatory, & others ar of thankes geuyng. By the first kinde God is made mercifull vnto vs, by the power & iuste merite therof.
Sacrifice propitiatory is onely one. But of this sorte we haue but onely one, for as much as onely by the death of Christ the eternall father is reconciled vnto vs, and by the merite of this one only oblation the sinnes of the elect are forgeuen. But in the other kinde of sacrifice we geue thankes vnto God, we celebrate his name, and to our power we obey his will. Agayne,
A sacrifice hath an outwarde part and an inward part. wee must know that this kinde of sacrifice consisteth of two partes, whereof the one is an inward part, namely whereby we freely and without compulsion referre vnto God our own wil and our selues wholy, and all that wee haue receaued, and we make them subiect vnto him, and consecrate them vnto his name. The other is an outward part, wherby by some gift, and that visible and sensible, we do as it were by some token and signe, testify what we haue in our hart, and we offer vnto him somwhat of those things, which he himself hath geuen vnto vs. So they in the old time offered first fruites, tenthes, and sacrifices. In whych thinges they dyd not onelye shadowe Christ,
The outwarde sacrifice with out y
e inwarde pleaseth not god. the most acceptable sacrifice vnto God, but they testified also, what loue they them selues bare vnto God. By these thinges it appeareth, that the outward oblation or sacrifice is nothing acceptable vnto God, except it haue the inward part annexed with it, which maye testefy it to be in vs in very dede, for bicause they which do make any such oblation do most filthyly lye vnto God. For to testifye that which is not so, pertayneth to deceite, and seing that a lye is vituperable in all thinges, & euery wher, much more pernicious & detestable is it, if it be vsed before God.
Why y
e sacrifices of the Iewes wer some tymes vnacceptable vnto God Hereof it came that god often times said by his Prophets, that the sacrifices of the Iewes wer not acceptable vnto him, and chiefely for this cause, namely bicause they dissembled to honour him with lyps and outward signes, when as they wer farre from him in hart. He requireth therfore the inward part by it selfe, but as for the outward part, he hath no otherwise commaunded, but so that it be offered with the inward part ioyned together with it: otherwise if it be naked & alone, it is both vnacceptable, and also highly displeaseth him.
If thou wilt aske, what be those outward works,
The outwarde sacrifices of the Hebrews. wherby we may testify the inward sacrifice? I could rehearse a great many, the killing of beastes, the oblations of first fruites and tenthes, which the fathers had, whilest they were vnder the law. To them are added outward wordes, wherin we geue thankes vnto god, we celebrate his praises, and we make our praiers. To these must be added duties of charity toward our neighbours,
Outward kind of sacrifices cō mon to vs & to the fathers. mortification of the affections of the fleshe, and obedience vnto the commaundementes of god. All these latter kinde of sacrifices are as well common vnto vs, as to the fathers. These thinges we geue vnto god, to beare witnes of our faith, and obeysaunce towarde hym. And seing that it is not to be doubted of those first, which wer offred in the time of the law, but that they were in their time sacrifices, least there should be anye ambiguitye had of the other which wee mencioned in the latter place, whether they ought to be counted in the place of sacrifices, we wil confirme it by testimonies of the scriptures. It is written in the .50. psalme: Offer vnto god the sacrifice of praise. And in the .51. psalme: A sacrifice vnto god is a troubled and a broken hart. &c. In the .12. to the
Romanes: I desire you for the mercy of god, that ye would set foorth your bodies a liuely sacrifice, holy. &c.
Micheas saith in the .vi. chap. I will tell thee O man, what god requireth of thee: Doo iudgement, loue mercy, walke reuerently and modestly before God.
Isay also, and the rest of the Prophetes haue in many places confirmed this sentence.
Neither is it to be passed ouer,
An order or certayne degres amonge outward sacrifices that among these outward thinges which are offered as sacrifices vnto god, there are certaine degrees and an order appoynted. For god himselfe testifieth, that he farre aboue the other preferreth mercye and charity toward our neighbours. Wherefore in
Mathew the .9. is thys place
[Page] brought out of the Prophet
Hosea: I will mercy and not sacrifice. Moreouer, it is written in the .1. of
Samuel: Obedience is better than sacrifices. These words teache vs, that among outward oblations, the kylling of beastes, and tenthes, and fruites in the old time held the last place. But the principall part was geuen to the obedience which was shewed vnto the woord of God, to charity towarde our brethren, to thankes geuing and to praiers.
The end of sacrifices.Neither is the end of sacrifices lightly to be passed ouer, but with diligence to be cōsidered, especially as
Augustine hath expressed it, namely that we might with an holy fellowship cleaue vnto God. For without it our workes thoughe they be neuer so excellent,
Why the death of Christ so much pleased God. can be no sacrifices. Yea and the death it self of Christ which was the chiefe and onely sacrifice pleased god for this cause especially, bicause Christ to no other end offred himselfe, but to fulfill the will of his father, and to obey him as it was meete. But to these thinges which I haue sayd I will adde an other thing which
Augustine writeth in his Epistle
ad Deo gratias the 3.
Augustine. Two thinges ar required in euery secrifice. question. Namely that in euery sacrifice god requireth twoo certaine thinges. First that our oblations be made vnto the true god: from which intent for as much as Idolatrers do wander fro, whatsoeuer they do in their rites, turneth to their own destruction: The other thing is, that the manner of the oblations consist of the doctrine of the holy scriptures, and come not of our owne inuentions and fayninges.
Whither the selfe same thing may be both a sacrament and a sacrifice.Here ariseth a doubt, bicause we haue put a difference betwene a sacrament and a sacrifice: and yet if the elders in their oblations and sacrifices had the self same thing, that we haue when we celebrate the supper of the Lorde, whych no man doubteth but to be a sacrament: How shall that be true that we said before that there is a difference betwene a sacrifice and a sacrament, seing that of necessity the sacrifices of the Elders must also be Sacraments? To this I answer that the reasons of these thinges ar diuers, and yet that letteth not but that one thing may be both a Sacrament and a Sacrifice. For no man doubteth but that philosophy and strength of the body are diuers thinges, which neuertheles may be sene both in one mā: So also it happeneth here, that one thing may be both a sacrifice & a sacrament,
The supper of the lord is both a sacrament & a sacrifice. although the reason of a sacrament and a sacrifice be diuers. When the supper of the Lorde is celebrated, in that the body and bloud of Christ are by faith & spirit geuen vnto vs to be receaued, and the promise of that coniunction which we haue with Christ, is sealed, so that we are the members of his bodye, in this respect I say, it is a sacrament, and also so called, bicause in that action god geueth hys gyftes vnto vs. But in that by the same action we do celebrate the memory of the death of Christ, we render thankes vnto him for the giftes which we haue receaued, we consecrate & offer our selues vnto god, it is,
The kylling of sacrifices were both sacramēts and also sacrifices. & may be called a iust sacrifice, wherby we geue most acceptable oblations vnto god himself. This self same thing may we se in the killing of the sacrifices which wer in the old time done before god: for they wer both sacraments, wher in Christ was geuen to the men in the old time to be receaued of them by faith, & by which they cōmunicated before the Lord in eating & drinking together. Al these things I say pertained to the reasō of a sacramēt. And yet the same wer also sacrifices, whē as ther thei did both consecrate theirs & them selues vnto god.
But to retourne to the history, when as very many kinde of sacrifices were commaunded in the law, namely for synnes and for faultes, peaceofferings also and burntofferings, it is vncertain which of these the Israelites vsed at this present: for the history declareth it not. But by as much as maye be coniectured by those thinges which are spoken, he should not erre in my iudgement, whiche should affirme that they sacrificed for synne. For to this ende pertaineth both the sermon that was preached, and also the weeping of the people, namelye to haue forgeuenes of their synnes, and to retourne againe into fauour with god.
But some peraduenture wyl maruayle, why they durst sacrifice there where
[Page 65] the tabernacle of God was not fixed, when as in
Deuter. it was most manifestly forbidden by a law, that the people should not Sacrifice in anye other place.
Whether it were lawfull to sacrifice there where the tabernacle of God was not. But as touching that law we must vnderstand, that it was not of efficacye till such time as the Arke and Tabernacle of the Lord had a fixed and firme place. Which came not to passe before
Salomon had built the most noble Temple at
Ierusalem. Wherfore before that time, we reade that they sacrificed in wandering and vncertain places, namely whersoeuer any occasion of religion was geuen. Furthermore they which thinke that this man of God which preached this sermon was
Phineas, do say that it is not to be maruailed, that sacrifices wer offered here at
Bochim as the history teacheth. For it might easely be that the selfe same man which preached the sermon, offered sacrifice in the name of the whole people for synne, for that he exercised the office of priesthoode. For he succeeded
Eleazer his parent, according to the promise of God.
And by these things which haue ben intreated of in this place,
What thinges ought to be obserued in an holy assembly. we may gather what thinges ought chiefly to be obserued in an holy assembly. The word of god before al thinges must be preached vnto the people, therby to allure the hearers to repentance, namely to acknowledge the sinnes which they haue committed, and to repent them therof. Then must they procede to the administration of the Sacramentes, wher the faithful may be made more assured that their sinnes ar by Christ forgeuen them, they may also geue thankes vnto God, and with many and sundry praises celebrate and cal vpon him.
6 And when Iosua had sent the people away, the children of Israel went euery man into his inheritance, to possesse the lande.
7 And the people serued the Lord al the dayes of Iosuah, and all the daies of the Elders, that outliued Iosua, which had sene al the great woorkes of the Lord, that he dyd for Israel.
This narration is therefore put in, to declare how long the Israelites kept the sincere and true woorshipping of God. And it is sayde, that when they were come into the land of
Chanaan, they did their duty wel as long as
Iosua lyued, & as long as the Elders wer remaining, which had sene the wonderful workes of God, which he had wrought for the Israelites sake. And vndoubtedlye it had bene vnaptly if this history should haue declared the transgression of the Chyldren of Israel, and should not haue noted the tyme wherein it happened. Aptlye therfore is the death of
Iosua and the Elders which lyued in his tyme, repeated in this place, and afterwarde is mencioned that an other age of men succeeded, which knew not God, neither had they sene his workes. Wherefore the Israelites easely fel from the lawful worshipping of God.
We gather by this place that the repentaunce of the Hebrues before declared (which happened after the death of
Iosua,
The profite of the repentance before mentioned of y
e people. when the publike wealth was gouerned by a Senate, and the enemies wer by manye battailes destroyed, & compelled to paye tribute vnto the Israelites whiche had conquered them) brydled and restrained the people a long time, from falling into more grieuous synnes. They had sinned in dede, as we haue now heard, in sparing the
Chananites, and not abolishing their wicked idolatry. But afterward when they had desired and obtained pardon of so great a crime, they abstained a long time from the woorshipping of Idols, and the repentaunce now mencioned brought forth his fruit.
Some peraduenture will maruayle, howe chaunce,
Why the Isralites after their repentance
[...]o not breake the league ma
[...]e with the Chananites. that they styll kept the league which was wickedlye made with the
Chananites, & ouerthrew not their detestable worshippinges, Temples and Idols. Vndoubtedly if theyr repētance had bene true and perfect, they ought faythfully to haue amended that wherein they synned: for among other thinges those ar counted the iust fruites of repentaunce. I haue nothing els to answer here, but that I thinke they dyd not thys,
[Page] bicause they wanted force,
God forgeueth sinnes but he doth not by & by restore the good thinges taken away. luckelye to fight against those nations. For God, to punish the transgression and violating of his law, had nowe withdrawen theyr strength and audacity. And although they repented, yet he did not by and by restore vnto them their old strengthes. For he vseth in deede straightwaye to receaue repentaunt synners into fauour, but he doth not by and by restore those thinges which he by his iust iudgement hath for sinnes taken away. This maye we easely see in the fal of our first Parentes. For the euils therby comming vnto mankinde, wer not taken away of God. Yea and those commodities & most quiet state, whiche they had in Paradise, men neuer afterwarde recouered, although God hath reconciled vnto himselfe those that beleue in Christ. For
Dauid had woord brought him by
Nathan the prophet, that his sinne was forgeuen him, yet he could not escape, but that his sonne which was borne vnto him, perished, and he himselfe fel into grieuous miseries. So God woorketh somtimes, partly to keepe discipline, and partly to make manifest vnto men, how much he detesteth sinnes. Againe more and more to stirre vp repentaunce, and that an earnest repentaunce of wicked actes committed in suche as are renued. But let vs returne vnto the history, wherin certain thinges, which happened vnder
Iosua are more fully repeated.
Now (saith he)
He had let the people go, and euery man went into his inheritaunce,
Iosua sent away the people twice from hym.
to possesse the land. The Israelites were twice thus sent away by
Iosua. First when the land of
Chanaan was deuided by lottes. For at that time euery Tribe went to possesse those places which fel vnto them by lot.
Iosua also sent away the people when he should dye. For he had called together vnto him the whole multitude of the Israelites, by his last sermon to admonish and exhort them. Which he preached in such sorte, as it is described in his booke the .24. chap. And as it is most likely, we ought to vnderstande that sending away in this place, to be the same which was done last. Seing that it is written in the place now alledged, that when the people had heard the words of
Iosua, & renued the couenante of god, they wer sent awaye, and euerie one went to his owne possession. After that is mencioned the deathe of
Iosuah euen with as many wordes, as it is now repeated.
Iosua when he should dye executed the office of a good prince.Here let vs note, that
Iosua being almost at the poynt of death executeth the office of a good Prince, in exhorting y
e people openly, & that with many words, not to depart from the sincere religion. In which thing he with a godly and holy study imitated
Moyses, whom he succeded, who (as we reade toward the end of
Deut.) behaued himselfe after the sawe sort.
Iacob also the most holye Patriarche, euen now ready to dye, called vnto him al his children, and seriously, and with great holines preached vnto them. And that Princes and Kinges shoulde cōmodiously do the same, it is prescribed vnto them in
Deuter. that they should be most studious in the law of God. For by that meanes were they made apt to admonish the people, and to exhort them faithfully to obserue the commaundementes of the Lord. The Israelites when they wer sent away by
Iosua, ar sayd to haue gone to possesse the land, bicause as yet ther remained very many places for euery Tribe not yet conquered. Of which places when
Iosua was dead, and in the time of the Elders they obtained certain, when as they got the victories in battailes, as we haue heard frō the beginning. After which victories the first transgression folowed, vnto which succeded the repentaunce before mencioned. But they abstained from idolatry as long as
Iosua lyued, and all the time of the Elders, which wer equall with him, and ouerlyued him, who also had seene the wonderfull workes of the Lord. For at that time sound doctrine, and the woord of the Lord testified by notable victories, wer of great force.
That good Magistrate by whom the publike wealthe was then gouerned, had had experience of the wonderfull power of the woord of God, and therefore he continually laboured openly to inculcate & vrge it vnto the people of
Israel,
[Page 66] which thing could not want iust fruit. Experiēce declareth,
People frame them selues to the example of their princes that almost in euery age, the people frame them selues to the example of their Magistrates. For if the Princes be zelous both of religion and godlines, their subiectes also wil embrace godlinesse and religion. But cōtrarywise if Princes liue vngodly and dissolutely, the people wil likewyse despise religion and lyue filthily. Moreouer, let the Magistrate as long as he is in authority, chiefly haue a care to thys, that the holy ministery be perfect, and that it teache and administer sound doctrine, and pure rites, and that he suffer not supersticious or wycked opinions to bee thrust into the church. But euen as he prouideth that other Artificers abuse not their sciences: so let him diligently beware y
t the Ministers of the church do not either corrupt the godly rites, or falsify y
e holy doctrine. We see that somtimes it happeneth, that the ministery in the Church is very laudable and pure. But yf an vngodly, and wicked Magistrate obtaine the chief rule of thinges,
It profiteth much to y
e Ecclesiasticall ministery to haue the magistrate a helper. that holy ministery is easely despised of the people, Wherfore it is made of lesse efficacy, than it would haue bene if it myght haue had the Magistrate a furtherer of it. Wherfore we must with most feruent praiers desire, that seing the church hath now by the benefit of God in many places recouered godly doctrine and sincere Ministers, that it would please God to geue vnto it Magistrates which may be most zelous of godlines and religion.
If a man should aske whether the people may be good and godly, although the Magistrate and Minister of the Church be corrupt. I answer, that somtyme they may be, as touching some: as we see to happen in the Papacy, where some godly and holy men are euery wher found, which neuertheles lyue vnder wicked, corrupt, and vngodly ciuyl Magistrates and Ministers of the church. Howbeit publike exercises of sound religion and godlynes, can not vniuersally be had wythout them.
8 And Iosua the Sonne of Nun, the seruaunt of the Lorde, dyed, when he was an hundred and ten yeares olde.
9 And they buryed him in the border of hys inheritance, in Thimnath-Heres in mount Ephraim, on the North syde of the hyl Gaas.
10 And euen so also all that generation were put vnto their fathers and ther arose an other generation after them, which neither knew the Lord, nor yet the woorke which he had done for Israel.
Iosua lyued not so long tyme as dyd
Moyses,
Iosua lyued not so long as Moyses. whom he by the commaundement of the Lord succeded, for
Moyses was an .120. yeares old whē he dyed. But the same thinges which we reade in this place concerning the death and buriall of
Iosua, are by as many wordes expressed in his own booke the .24. chap. The place wher they buryed him namely in mount
Ephraim was his owne possession. For of that Tribe came
Iosua.
The Elders had sepulchers in theyr owne possessions. And the Elders prouided to haue Funeralles and Sepulchres in their owne possessions. For which cause it is written in the booke of
Iosua towarde the ende, that the bones of
Ioseph, which the Israelites brought with them out of
Egipt, were buryed in
Sichem, in that fielde I saye, which
Iacob had assigned as proper vnto
Ioseph. And it followeth:
Eleazer also the sonne of
Aaron dyed, whom they buryed in a hyll that pertayned to
Phinehes his sonne, which hil was geuen him in mount
Ephraim. But as touchyng the name of the Citye, in that it is here called
Thimnath-Haeres,
R. Selomoh. Why y
e figure of the sun was set vpon the sepulchre of Iosua.
Rabi Selomoh toward the end of the booke of
Iosua wryteth that
Thimnath is as much as
Temunath, which is an Image. And for so much as
Chaeres signifieth the Sunne, it declareth that the Chyldren of
Israel placed the Image of the Sunne vpon the Sepulchre of
Iosua, that it myghte remayne as a monument of the myracle by hym wrought. For he commaunded the Sunne and the Moone to stande styll,
[Page] vntil he had finished the battaile. That therfore so noble a worke might not be had in obliuion, he supposeth that his tombe was adourned with those tokens. That this woord
Chaeres signifieth the Sunne,
Esay the .19. chap. and
Iob the .9. doo testifye. Howbeit, this is to be considered in the booke of
Iosua, that the name of this place doth vary. For in the booke of
Iosua it is wrytten
Timuna Serech,
D. Kimhi. which yet
R. D. Kimhi thinketh to be al one, the letters beyng somwhat transposed, which is a familiar and a thing much vsed in the hebrewe toung, as they that are learned in the same wel know.
It is lawfull to set foorth the benefites of god by certain tokens and outwarde signes.Neither was it absurdly or wickedly done of the Israelites so to adourne the tombe of
Iosua. For it is meete that the benefites of God be set forth by tokens and certain monumentes. They had not at that tyme the aboundaunce and vse of bookes, which we haue. And therfore they vsed certain outwarde Symboles and tokens to helpe and to renewe their memorye.
Iacob erected a stone in the place where he had sene God.
Moyses dyd set vp twelue pyllers there, where he made a league betwene God and the people. The same was done also, when the people were passed ouer
Iordane: for they gathered twelue stones out of the chanell of the riuer, which should be a token to their posteritye, that God had by a great miracle dried vp the waters of
Iordan, when they passed ouer it. For by reason of our naturall ingratitude we do easely forgette the benifites of god, wherfore yf the figure of the sunne were set vpon the tombe of
Iosua to testifye the miracle, wherin god at the prayers of
Iosuah had cōmaunded it to stand that therby the hebrewes might by his conduicte and leading obtayne a perfect and noble victorie, this I say semeth not to be done ether vngodly or absurdely for y
e Image of the Sunne was not therfore put ther, to bee worshipped, neither wer there any holly assemblyes in that place,
A godly magistrate wonderfully profiteth the safety of the people. wherin yt was. Hereby it appeareth how a good and godly magistrate may wonderfully profite the healthe of the people. For the Israelites departed not frō the worshipping of god, so long as
Iosua and the wyse and godly senatours lyued. Aptly therfore is it wrytten in y
e Prouerbes the .29. chap: When the vngodly beare rule, the people mourne. And in the same booke .20. chap: a wyse king destroyeth the wicked, And in the 29. a iuste king setteth vp the land. Reason also sheweth that it is so, for the people do therfore endeuour them selues to please their princes, to fynd the more fauour at their handes: and therefore they frame them selues to their maners and fashions. And also bicause the people is by lawes and decrees compelled to obey the will and sentence of the princes.
They which dye ar sayde to be adioyned vnto the fathers.
They wer put vnto their fathers. It is a kind of speche much vsed in the scriptures, that they which do dye, ar sayed to be adioyned to their fathers. For as touching the bodye they ar buried with them, and as concerning y
e soule they ar adioyned vnto them. For if they haue lyued godly, they lyue with their holy elders, but yf vngodly, they ar tormēted with their wicked progenitours, if thei haue had any suche.
Howe some are sayde not to knowe the lord
And there arose an other generation after them, which knew not the lorde. Not vndoubtedlye that any of them wer so rude, that altogether they knew not god. For the constante administration of the world & the vndisturbed order of thynges do testifie & crye that ther is a god. But this knowledge, wherof the history now speaketh, is vnderstand to be that which hath annexed with it allowing,
Augustine. fayth and obedience. And they are thus sayd to be ignorant of god, bycause they obeyed him not, they did not put their hope and confidence in hym, nether wer they zelouse to worshippe hym purelye and sincerely.
Augustine in his questions vpon this booke the 15. question affirmeth that it is playnely expressed in what sort the Israelites knew not god, namely in those excellent and wonderful workes, by which their elders came vnto the knowledge of the lord. We rede also of
Pharao, y
t he (as it is writtē in
Exodus) answered vnto
Moyses,
[Page 67] that he knewe not the God of the Hebrues and the Lord, eyther bicause he was not minded to hearken vnto his commaundements, or els, though after a sorte he knewe him, yet he knewe not by certaine proofe that he was the God of the Hebrewes.
11 And the children of Israel dyd euyll in the syght of the Lorde, and serued Baalim.
12 And they forsooke the Lorde, the God of their Fathers, whych brought them out of the land of Egipt: & followed straunge Gods, euen the Gods of the nations that wer round about them, & bowed them selues vnto them. Wherefore they angred the Lord.
13 They forsooke, I say, the Lorde, and serued Baal & Astharoth.
Vnder those vngodlye Princes which succeeded the good, the people grieuously fell. Not bicause that they before had not also transgressed: for that (as we haue shewed) they grieuously synned in sparing of the
Chananites, but nowe they began to contaminate and defile them selues with the superstitions and idolatry of those Nations.
R. Leui demaundeth in this place, how it could be, that none of those should be on lyue, which had sene the woorkes of God which hee hadde done for
Israel, when as from their comming out of
Egipt to this present time there were but 67. yeares passed. He answereth, that there might easely be some found, which had sene those woorkes: yea all men confesse that
Phinches lyued at that tyme, but there were but fewe suche, and there were not many wise men, and whych could rightly and with authority instruct the young of those things,
All y
e Israelites became not idolatrers. which they had sene. And it might be that the scripture spake not these woordes of al y
e people, but onely of the new Magistrates which succeded. Neither ought we hereby to vnderstand that all the Israelites were become Idolatrers, but the moste part of them, and which was more haynous, they openly professed wicked worshippinges, when as neuerthelesse some, although but few, and peraduenture secretly, claue vnto the true God.
Neither maye wee gather hereby,
Miracles are not sufficient to persuade godlines. that myracles of them selues haue the power to be sufficient, either to bring in, or to retaine godlynes. For
Chore, Dathan, and
Abiram, Zimri, Achan, and the ten spies were without dout at the doing of the myracles which were done as well in
Egipt as in the wildernes: and yet neuerthelesse they fell from God, and defiled them selues wyth moste grieuous wicked actes. Moreouer they whiche when
Moyses was absent, woorshypped the golden Calfe, and were consecrated to
Baal-Peor the God of the
Moabites, they I say vndoubtedly beheld the wonders, whereby God defended the people from their enemies, and helped them in diuers necessities, and yet for al that they became Idolatrers, & committed wicked worshippings. Euen so came it to passe of the Scribes and Phariseys: for the history of the gospell declareth that they saw the wonderful workes of Christ,
They which sawe not y
e miracles in the old tyme, are not therfore excused from infidelitie. and yet they wonderfullye contemned and maliciouslye despised him. Wherefore we must thinke that this is not now rehersed of our history as a lawful excuse of the transgressiō which afterward happened. For if by that meanes the act of the Hebrewes coulde be defended, then might the superstitious & Idolatrers of our time defend their cause: for they might say, miracles haue now ceased, and those thinges which Christe or his Apostels did, are not in our time sene.
But we in this sort answer to them which doo thus excuse their infidelitye,
The miracles which wer don in the old tyme profite vs also. namely that the miracles of Christ & the Apostles which were done once, ought also to suffice vs: for for our sakes were they put in writing, that wee readyng them, myght receaue fruite by them, beyng assured that they were ministred, not onely to them which lyued at that tyme, but also vnto vs.
So might it be aunswered to the Hebrewes, of whom we nowe entreate: what though ye haue not sene the miracles which wer done in the time of your Fathers? Haue not
Moyses and
Iosua faithfullye written all those thinges whych God hath done for your nations sake? Yea, and your Fathers which were present and saw them, haue trulye declared them vnto you, when ye were yet lytle ones. The scripture therfore doth not so speake at this presēt, to excuse that new generation. But to declare what pretence they made, when they departed from the woorshipping of the God of their Fathers, and what occasion they tooke, and also to set foorth that they were of a corrupt and naughtye nature, which when their good Maisters and Magistrates were dead, became vnmindfull of all true godlynes. For it is very likely, that they as they were impudent so also openly they boasted abroade those or such lyke woordes. We ar in doubt neither do we easely beleue that the Lord did so many miracles as our Fathers haue both written and also shewed vs. Who can tell whether they were so or no? we vndoubtedlye know not whether the Lorde or anye other God hath for our saluation sake caused such or so great thinges to be done. And so they leauing faith and forsaking the true God
dyd euyll in the syght of the Lorde.
How thinges in the scripture ar called good or euell in the sight of the lord By this hebrewe phrase it is declared that God was maruellouslye offended wyth thys their transgression. As contrarywise they are called good thinges in the sight of the Lord which doo excedingly please him. This is the common and receaued exposition.
Howbeit if we more narrowly marke this kinde of speeche, we shall easylye perceaue that it declareth some other thing vnto vs. Namely that those thinges which the Iewes dyd, were allowed by mans iudgement, and peraduenture had a goodly shew, but yet in Gods iudgement, they were most detestable. And withoute doubte that people synned a great deale more haynouslye in thys last transgression, than they did in the first. For there they onelye omitted the ouerthrowing of ymages and aultares, but here they woorship straunge Gods. Neither durst they do this onely, but they forsooke also the worshipping of the true God. Wherein vndoubtedly they were to be counted muche more corrupt than were the
Samaritanes. For they although they woorshipped their Idoles, yet therwithall they ioyned the worshipping of the true God as it is declared in the second booke of Kinges. And in how euyll part God taketh it thus to bee reiected, he hath expressed by
Ieremy the Prophet in the .2. chapter: Where hee commaunded the Hebrewes to go and looke vpon other Nations,
An amplifieng of the idolatrye of y
e Hebrewes and see whether they haue so vnconstantly chaunged the Gods of their Fathers. Whiche Nations if they were knowen constantlye to haue retayned their old woorshippings although they were vngodly,
Israel might thereby learne not to abiect their old rites and customes of their Fathers. This wycked acte moreouer was for thys cause much more detestable, bicause they had newly receaued the benefit of their deliuery out of Egipt, and had also made a couenaunt with god, first by
Moses, and afterward by
Iosua, when he was euen at the point of death. Furthermore bicause they began to worship the gods of those nations, which they had nowe eyther driuen oute of the lande of
Chanaan, or els made tributaries vnto them selues. What a diuelish madnes was this to count those gods for true goddes, which could not vndoubtedly against the Lord, helpe euen those whyche woorshypped them.
An outwarde signe of worshipping.And in this hebrew woord
Veiischtechou is properly noted, that they threwe them selues to the ground, & prostrated them selues before those idoles: by which outward signe is declared the adoration. For as the bodye prostrateth it selfe, so also the soule is declared to be subiect vnto the Idole. And this woorde
Bealim is expressed in the plurall nomber. But the Hebrewes sometymes take it for the syngular number. And althoughe by the strengthe of the woorde it shoulde bee translated Lordes, yet wee muste in many places tourne it Lord. For thys
[Page 68] woorde
Baal signifieth a Lorde, a Husbande, a Patrone, and suche like.
What Baal & Bealim signifi.
Astharoth. Thys woord
Astharoth is lykewise spoken in the plurall number. And the Idole is so called, bicause it stoode to be woorshipped in fourme of a Sheepe, for a Sheepe in hebrew is called
Aschtor. And as it appeareth by the first booke of Kynges, it was an Idole of the
Zidonians,
Iupiter Ammō was expressed by the figure of a Ramme.
Augustine. wherunto
Salomon by the instigation of his wyues buylded sometimes a Chappell. But what God the Ethnikes woorshypped in the fourme of a Sheepe, I do not very well knowe. How be it this I am sure of, that
Iupiter Ammon was figured like a Ramme. And
Augustine who being of
Affrica, had the Affricke speche perfectly, which (as we haue taught in an other place) differeth not much from the hebrew toung,
Virgil. What Baal & Astharoth wer with the Affricians. for they of
Affricke are
Phenitians, for they came from
Tyre and
Sydon. Wherefore
Virgil called
Dido a
Sidonian. Augustine (I say) writeth that the
Affricians called
Iupiter by the name of
Baal, as the Lord of all. And by this name
Astharoth are signified
Iunos, bicause that
Asther in that toung signifieth
Iuno. But why that woorde was spoken in the plurall number, he thincketh it was therefore done, bicause there were very many ymages of that Goddesse. And I wyll adde, bicause those gods had obtayned sundry properties and reasons, as well by their offices appointed vnto them, as by the places where they woorshypped. For
Iupiter was called
Ammon, Stator, Pheretrius, and
Hospitalis, Iuno also was called
Lucina, Argiua, Samia. &c.
I thinke we may gather by this history,
Religiō nedeth continually to be purged. that the nature of man is so frayle and weake, that it can not long abyde in the sincere and pure woorshipping of God. Wherby it commeth, that religion hath continually nede of repairing and purging. For the Israelites, as soone as their good Prince and godlye Magistrate was dead, fell straight way from true godlynes. Moreouer, the same oftentimes happened vnder their kinges: yea and in our Churche it happeneth after the same sort. For we haue seene, and we haue with great griefe had experience, that the Apostles being taken away, yea, and when they were yet lyuyng, ther sprang foorth many and sundry errours. Which vndoubtedlye is no maruaile, when as Christ hath foretolde vs, that after the good seede was sowen, straight way the enuious man came, which sowed tares therwithall.
¶Of Idolatry.
BVt bycause we haue now heard of the transgression of the Hebrewes how they polluted them selues with Idolatry, I thinke it good to speake a fewe wordes of thys detestable synne.
The woord is a greeke woord, and is compounded of
[...] and
[...] and it is nothing els but the worshipping of Idoles.
The Etimologye of Idolatry.
What an Idol is And
[...] is deriued of this woord
[...], which signifieth a fourme, or as you woulde saye a shape. But an Idole is (as wee nowe speake of it) euerye fourme or shape whyche menne haue inuented vnto them selues to signifye or expresse God. And as there are found many and sundry matters of these fourmes, so also are ther diuers kindes of Idoles. Wherfore whether they be stones, wood, or mettals,
A diuision of Idoles by matters. by which God is outwardly expressed there to be worshipped, these are grosse and most manyfest Idoles. There may be also a spiritual matter: which then happeneth, when those formes and images are nothing els but the conceauinges of the hart and minde, which men make for them selues to represent God,
An Idole visible & inuisible. not as the Scripture declareth him, but rashly, and according to their own fantasy. Wherfore according to the conditions of the matter an Idole is deuided into two kindes,
Two partes of religious worshipping. y
e one is outward & visible, which runneth into the senses of man, and the other is inward, that is, wrought in the inward partes of the mynde. There are also twoo partes of religious woorshipping. The one is inwarde,
Of what thinges inwarde woorshipping consisteth. wherein wee beleue in God hymselfe, wee put our confidence in him, wee geue him thankes, wee submyt our selues and ours vnto hym, and religiouslye by prayers call vpon hym. Of these actions vndoubtedly the inwarde adoration consisteth.
Of what thinges outward worshipping cō sisteth.But the other part hath outward notes, whereby we expresse our hart, in prostrating the body, in bowing the knee, in vncouering the head, in speaking and in exercising rites and ceremonies instituted by God. And this is an outwarde woorshipping or adoration.
Outward sygnes of adoratiō are also geuen vnto Princes But wee must note that suche outwarde signes of bowing the body or knees, and suche other lyke are also geuen vnto creatures, to Princes I saye and Kinges which doo in earth represent vnto men the authority of God, and are his Vicars in the administration of thinges. And without doubt they are then to bee esteemed nothing els, but certaine sure testimonies, by which as many as are Subiectes, doo trulye and from the hart confesse, that they in the name of God wyll be subiect and obey such powers, as much as shalbe by godlynes and the woord of God lawfull.
But we must there take heede, least in our inward iudgement we attribute more vnto them than is meete,
What we must beware of whē we geue vnto Princes signes of adoration. or looke for greater thinges at theyr handes than their power and might is able to perfourme. Otherwise we should not auoyde idolatrye. Wherefore if a man in bowing him selfe to his Prince, would testifye that his Prince coulde not erre, and that it were lawfull for him to doo any thing, and as he lust him selfe to commaunde whatsoeuer pleased him, that man vodoubtedly should be counted an Idolatrer, and should commit the same both inwardly and outwardlye.
The Papistes commit Idolatrye towarde their Pope. And whether the hirelinges of the Pope vse this, we may hereby easely gather, bicause they do so throw them selues downe at his feete, that there testify that they wyll be subiect vnto him as to the onely Vicar of Christ in earth, as to the vniuersall Bishoppe of the Church, as to him which cannot erre in decreing doctrine of fayth, and finally, to whom onelye it is lawfull to discerne as hee lyst him selfe of religion and Christian discipline. Wherefore let this be euery where a sure and firme rule,
Note a certain sure rule. that these outwarde submissions of the body doo then pertayne vnto Idolatry, when as they are testimonies of the mynd, attributing more vnto a creature than is mete, or which are onely proper vnto God. For they are not referred vnto God him selfe, or to the obedience of his commaundementes, but to vayne formes & shewes, which we haue fayned vnto our selues, and conceaued in our mynde.
Hereby may we also gather, that the inuocations of Saintes which the Papistes vse,
Inuocatiōs of the dead pertayne to idolatry. are Idolatrous. For they geue vnto sayntes that which longeth onely vnto God, namelye that they being absent shoulde heare our praiers, or that they can be present at one time, either euery wher, or els in many places, therby to succour those which call vpon their names in diuers partes of the worlde.
Augustine in his Epistle to
Dardanus durst not affirme that,
Augustine. A creature can not be in many places at one tyme. no not euen of the soule of Christ, namely that at one time it might be in many places Wherfore that which Christ said vnto the theefe: This daye shalt thou be with me in Paradise, he expoundeth the same to be vnderstand as touching his diuine nature, for that the bodye of Christ should the same daye be layde in the sepulchre, and his soule should be in hell.
Basilius. Didimus. Neither coulde that soule be both in Paradise and in hell at one time
Basilius also
de spiritu sancto, & also
Didimus would not graunt this vnto the Angels, that they can at one time be in diuers places, affirming that that soly is to be graunted vnto the onely nature of God. But they which do cal vpon saintes, they beleue that they doo heare them, and that they are present with them, which without doubt is to attribute more vnto them than the strength and order of a nature created can suffer.
But here they trifle and say, that they doo not thinke so, but that God hym selfe which heareth their prayers doth open vnto the Sayntes, what is required of them. But thus I aunswer, that they deceaue both them selues, and also others. For they knowe not whether God wyll shewe vnto the Sayntes their vowes or prayers. Wherfore the praiers which they poure out cannot leane vnto faith, which ought to be certaine and without doubt.
They bryng also a fayned lye of the glasse (as they say) of the deuine essense,
[Page 69] wherein the Sainctes beholde all thynges.
A fayned lie of the papists of a glasse of the deuine essence. But this theyr fayning hath no foundation in the holy Scriptures. Furthermore, seing they will needes haue it so, admitte it were as they fayne it to bee. Yet shoulde they bee compelled to graunte that that theyr glasse hath not a naturall representyng but a voluntarye, so that there the Sainctes can see that onely which GOD will haue sene: Otherwise withoute any exception the Sainctes myghte there see all thynges: whiche is both false, and also moste manifestlye resisteth the holy Scriptures. Bycause, of that daye (sayeth the Lorde) neyther doe the Aungelles knowe, whiche yet doe see the face of the Father. Moreouer the Papistes doe not after thys manner call vppon Sainctes: for if they did they shoulde saye thus, Cause O God that thys or that Saincte maye knowe those thinges whiche I desire of hym, and that he maye bee with me, and graunte me that whiche I desire. But they doe cleane contrarilye, O Saincte Peter (saye they) Sainct Paule pray for me, bryng thys or that to passe for me. Wherfore they thinke that the saincts do altogether heare & vnderstand their voyces, whiche thing if they thoughte not, then were their doinges vtterly folyshe.
They declare also by their titles & additions which they ascribe vnto y
e blessed virgine, to the crosse, and other creatures,
The Papistes attribute more vnto creatures than is conuenient. how far more worthy they esteme and iudge of them, than their nature can suffer. Neither are they affeard (as I haue before declared, when I entreated of the heresyes of the Papistes) to lyghte vp lyghtes, Waxe tapers and Lampes vnto creatures, to cense them, and to doe other thyngs, which the Ethnikes,
An alter is not to be erected but only vnto God. and also the Iewes in the olde law were wont to geue vnto God only. What more? Do they not builde alters vnto Images of Sainctes? But vnto whom alters are builte, the same are confyrmed by a sure testimonye to be powers of God, or ells Gods.
Augustine in hys x. Tome & .vi. Sermon writeth thus: An alter is,
Augustine. which testifyeth y
t to be counted for God to whom it is erected. For they, namely the Ethnikes, what GOD they haue, and y
t they take that Image for a god the alter doth testifie. What should the alter do there if they counted not y
t for a god? Let no mā say vnto me: It is not y
e power of god, it is not god. But I haue already sayd: I would to god they knew this so wel as all we know it. But what they count it, or what they make of it, that alter testifyeth.
But say the aduersaries: we therfore do these things,
Of miracles which are done at the alters of saintes. bicause we haue by experience proued y
t they please god: for as much as he there worketh miracles. I know in dede that god hath sometimes wrought miracles by sainctes, and such as were dead.
God hath some times wrought miracles by dead bodyes & corpses of dead saintes. For the bones of
Elizeus by the touche of them restoreh one being dead to lyfe. And the same
Elizeus vsed the cloke of
Elias to deuide the waters of the riuers, that he myght make the more expedition on his iourney. But god doeth therefore woorke these thinges sometymes, that the doctrine of the Prophetes and the Apostles whiche was the very woorde of god might bee confyrmed. And yet the Scripture declareth not that there was any inuocation made eyther vnto
Elias or
Elizeus when those miracles were done. But for as muche as the Papistes by these their inuocations seeke not the confyrmation of the doctrine of the Gospell,
Miracles which are done at the inuocations of the dead are to be referred vnto Sathan. but rather are diligente aboute this, to establyshe superstitions, those miracles whiche they boaste of, are to be referred rather vnto the deuill than to God. For
Sathan seeketh for nothyng so much, as to leade men awaye from the sincere worshippyng of GOD. This vndoubtedlye was assayed by the enchaunters of
Pharao, and that suche thinges shoulde sometime happen vnto vs by Antichriste,
Why God suffreth such miracles to be wrought by the deuill.
Paule hath faythfully admonished the
Thessalonians. But thou wilte saye that the deuill can not doe these thynges vnlesse God will and permitte. I graunte that. And why it is hys will so, there are two causes sette forthe in the Scriptures.
Of the which the one is gathered out of
Deutr. namely bicause he would tempt vs, wherby might euidently appeare how much we esteme his word, and whether we will suffer our selues to be plucked from him by suche illusions: the seconde cause is to punyshe the vnbeleuers. For so doth
Paule teache vs to the
Thessalonians bycause (sayeth he) they haue not receaued the loue of the truth therefore they are deliuered to be deluded with inchantementes and deuelishe miracles.
But there are two places in the Scriptures whiche are diligentlye to bee weyghed and considered, that the doctrine now in hande may bee the more confyrmed. The fyrste is written in the Actes of the Apostles the tenth Chapiter. Of
Cornelius the Centurion,
Cornelius caste himself down at the feete of Peter. to whom when
Peter came he caste himselfe at his feete. But
Peter woulde not suffer that, yea he reprehended hym, and aunswered in thys manner. Doe not so, ryse vp, for I also am a man. We read also in the Apocalipse,
Iohn fel downe at the feete of the Angell. that Iohn fell downe before the Aungell, but he admonished hym that he shoulde not so doe: I am (sayeth he) thy fellowe seruaunt. These two places maye thus bee vnderstande, that
Peter and the Aungell condemned these actes, as in a manner Idolatrous, as thoughe the Centurion and
Iohn shoulde attribute any deuine nature,
Neither Cornelius nor Iohn would worship creatures. the one to
Peter, the other to the Aungell, and shoulde haue geuen vnto them more honoure than was conueniente for creatures. But it seemeth that thys can not be easelye thoughte of eyther of these. The Scripture testifyeth that the Centurion feared and worshipped God. How should we therefore beleue that he coulde be led, to beleue that
Peter was God or at the leaste to attribute deuine honoures vnto a creature? And it is not very likely that
Iohn whiche was either an Apostle or ells a notable deuine (as some call hym) coulde not discerne an Aungell from God. If so bee that neyther of these woulde worship a creature in stead of the Creator, thys remaineth, that it is not lawfull to geue vnto creatures this kind of outward reuerence. Wherfore we shall seme not to haue sayd well before, in saying that these thynges may be geuen vnto Princes and Kinges. To thys I aunswere, there muste be a difference obserued betwene a ciuile and a worldelye honoure and a deuine and religious woorshipping, as we haue before expounded.
The Centuriō & Iohn sinned in excesse but they can not be accused of Idolatrye. Furthermore we muste knowe that these two men,
Cornelius I say and
Iohn intended not by thys their worshipping to transferre the honour of God vnto creatures. Howbeit it may easely bee, that they fell to an vnmeasurable signe of reuerence, and so in that excesse they somewhat committed sinne.
But as touching Kinges and Princes, we are in much lesse daunger of falling, than toward Angels or ministers of Christ. For these bycause they exercise the spiritual office, the honor which is geuen vnto thē draweth nighe to a religious adoration. Wherfore in those places eyther the bowing of the knee or of the bodye are not by themselues condemned. But in as muche as they are geuen for Religion sake. Moderate honoures therefore maye bee geuen especially when they are geuen for Religion sake. And thus muche at this presente as concerning thys thyng. But let vs remember that whiche I haue also before admonyshed, that thys also belongeth to Idolatrye, when we woorship the true God by other wayes and rytes,
They which worship God otherwise thā he hath instituted, are Idolatrers. than he hath willed vs, and prescribed vnto vs. If we shall doe otherwyse, we shall woorship an Idole accordyng to that seconde forme before described, in fayning to oure selues in oure mynde or harte any God, whiche delighteth in a woorshippyng inuented by men: and there is none suche. Wherfore we shall not honoure and worship the true God, but an Idole whiche we haue conceaued in our mynde.
And vndoubtedlye so oughte we to vnderstande
Paule, when he sayeth to the
Corrinthians in the fyrste Epistle: we knowe that an Idole is nothyng in the worlde.
Paule teacheth not that an Idole is nothyng as touchyng the
[Page 70] shape and outwarde forme. For no man doubteth but that those Idoles haue place either in the outwarde matter or ells in oure hartes. By an Idole there fore he vnderstoode not the signe it selfe, but the thing whereunto it is referred. And he meant that the thing it selfe whiche is signified by Idoles, is nothing, for as much as there is no where a God which may be represented, or els deliteth in such Images.
14 And the wrathe of the Lorde waxed hotte agaynste Israell, and he deliuered them into the handes of raueners, that spoyled them and solde them into the handes of theyr enemyes round about them: Neither had they any power any longer to stande before their enemyes.
15 Whether so euer they went, the hand of the Lord was agaynst them with euil lucke, euen as the Lord promised them, and euen as the Lord sware vnto them. And he punyshed them sore.
The punishment imposed by God for Idolatry is now set forth to be diligently considered by vs. There are two thinges, which are declared.
Fyrst is described that the anger of God was kindled agaynst the Israelites.
How we shuld vnderstand god to be angry and to repent. Secondly how he punished the guiltye. God therefore bycause of so grieuous a wicked crime of the Hebrewes waxed hotte agaynst them: which is not so to be vnderstande, as though God had any affections, for that pertaineth only vnto men. But according to the common and receaued exposition of these places, we fele that god is like vnto men that are angry, after which selfe same reason it is written that he sometime repenteth. Wherfore, God eyther to repent or to be angry, is nothing ells, but that he doth those thinges, which men repenting and men angrye vse to do. For the one do eyther alter or ells ouerthrowe that which before they had done: and the other take vengeaunce of iniuries done vnto thē.
Ambrose in his booke of
Noe and the Arke, the fourth Chapter,
Ambrose. speaketh otherwise of the anger of God. For neither doth God (sayth he) thinke as men do, as though some contrary sentence should come vnto him, neither is he angrye, as though he were mutable, but therfore these thinges are beleued, to expresse the bitternesse of our sinnes, which hath deserued the wrath of God, and to declare that the faulte hath so much and so farre encreased, that euen God also (whiche naturally is not moued eyther by anger, or hatred, or any passion) semeth to be prouoked vnto wrath, &c. And aptely is there mencion made of the anger, before the punishment is rehearsed. For mē vse fyrst to be angry, before they reuenge:
What anger is. Neyther is anger any other thyng ells (if we may beleue
Aristotell in hys Rhetorikes) but a desire of reuengement bicause of contentempte. For they which perceaue themselues to be despised and contemned, do straightway thinke, how they may be reuenged, and they diligently meditate howe by some punishment they may requite the iniurye or despite done vnto them.
Two kindes of punyshments are mencioned in thys place,
Two kynds of punishmentes. the taking away of goodes and seruitude: of the which the one is grieuouser than the other. For it is far more grieuous to be brought into bondage, than to be spoyled of goods. But God vseth so to do to punyshe by certayne degrees, those which haue deserued euill. For he doth not by and by punyshe most greuously. And as touching the woordes we must note that
Schis and
Schisch signifye one thing, for
Shin and
Samech haue great affinitie the one with the other, which
D. Kimhi hath also noted in thys place. Moreouer where it is sayd,
whether soeuer they wente oute, the same interpreter addeth,
to fyghte: And in deede it is very lykely, although I am not ignoraunte that that sentence may be more largely taken,
[Page] namely to vnderstande that whatsoeuer they tooke in hande to do, or to what thinges so euer they applyed themselues vnto, all those thynges happened vnluckely vnto them.
By this place is gathered, that no mans goodes are taken awaye, neyther are any brought into bondage, excepte God himselfe both will and also bryng to passe the same. For it is sayd here that he gaue them into the handes of raueners, and sold them into the handes of their enemyes round aboute them.
Dauid in hys .xliiii. Psalme grieuously complayneth of this plague, and saith that God had solde hys withoute any price:
Augustine. which place
Augustine consideryng, he sayeth that at the fyrst sighte it semeth absurde, that any shoulde be solde, when no price is geuen. But thus he aunswereth, as touching the enemies, which solde the Israelites, there was a price geuen by the byers. But as touching God, which was the principall cause of the selling, he tooke no price. For what could those Idolatrous, violent, and rauenous men, vnto whom y
e Iewes were deliuered to be sold, geue vnto him? Vndoubtedly they neither bought nor deserued those commodities with any reward. Or ells we may thynke, that the price of the Hebrewe bondmen, was so small and vile, that it was counted for nothyng,
The wicked sell themselues to sinnes without any price. and so by thys figure of speach they were sayd to be sold without any price. Wherefore
Esaye in hys .lii. Chapter, writeth: Ye are solde for nought.
And this phrase serueth very well for those, which do binde thēselues to sinnes and wickednesse, when as therby, they shall get no commoditie at all. And how hard this bondage was which the Hebrewes serued when they were so solde by their enemies, it is manifestly expressed in
Deuteronomye, for there it is sayde: Thou shalt serue thine enemye, whom the Lord shall send vppon thee, in Hunger, in thurst, and in nakednesse, and also in al penurye, and he shal put an yron yoke vppon thy necke, till he shall destroye thee. Moreouer by these examples we are also taughte, what Christians euery where deserue for their daylye transgressions and innumerable superstitions and also Idolatrous woorshippynges. Neyther is it to bee doubted but that a heape of euelles are at hande excepte Christ by fayth deliuer vs from those curses of the lawe.
The hand of y
e Lord is alwayes present in all our actions.
VVhether soeuer they went, the hand of the Lord was agaynst thē with euell lucke. In all our actions the hande of the Lorde is continually presente, for withoute hys myghte and power, we can not so muche as moue oure selues. Wherefore both good successes and euell are to bee ascribed vnto hym.
Neyther had they any power any longer to stande before theyr enemyes. And no meruayle, for by reason their goods were spoyled, and their number diminished, bicause of those which wer brought into bondage they wer so impayred and weakened, that they could by no meanes match with their aduersaries. Vndoubtedly, if we diligently consider the histories from that time, wherin superstition began to reygne in y
e church, we shal fynde that our princes haue had either no good successe at al, or els very smalin their expeditiōs against y
e enemies of y
e fayth.
The cause of the vnluckye battels against the Turkes. We haue fought and y
e oftentimes against y
e Turkes and Sarazens, but for the moste part vnluckely: Neither do the gouernours both of the publicque wealth and also of the Churche feele that the hand of the Lord is agaynst them with euill lucke, and that that is the cause why they can not stand before their enemyes.
Agayne let vs note, that the Scripture doth here most manifestly testifye, that God him selfe deliuered the Israelites into the handes of rauenors, & solde them into bondage, for that that thinges were done by hys motion. And this doth
Ezechiel the Prophete euidentlye shewe, where he describeth, how
Nabuchad-nezar standyng in the ende of two wayes, and in a maner determining to directe his host one way, was of God chaunged, and after a sorte forced to turne
[Page 71] his armye agaynst
Ierusalem. And yet must we not vnderstand these thinges so,
How god may be sayde to worke euyll workes in the wicked. as thoughe we should thinke that God doth instille a new malice into y
e heartes of the wicked. For they nede it not. For of what sorte soeuer they be, they are framed of malice and synnes, but GOD, seyng he is a strength and workyng of most efficacy, driueth them as he doth all other thyngs to be moued & to worke. Wherfore they whiche are altogether corrupte, and voyde, and destitute of the grace and fauour of God, can do nothyng but onely worke euill. But God,
God vseth the sinnes of the wicked. by whose motion they are stirred vp to worke, directeth their euill doynges, cruelties, spoylinges, lustes and tyrannies, to what end so euer it shall seme good to his iustice and most highe prouidence. Moreouer let vs here consider,
It is most vnhappy to haue God angrye. how miserable and wretched a thing it is for a man to haue God angry. Wherfore let vs most diligently take hede, that in all our affayres that we take in hande, we first of all reconcile him vnto vs, by an vpright faith in Christ: for he beyng angry & agaynst vs, nothyng can prosperously go forward.
These thynges did the Lorde as he had spoken and sworne. Threatninges are set forth here and there in the lawe of GOD and especially in
Deut. But we neuer read (that I can tell of) that an othe was in that place ioyned with the threatnyngs. Howbeit we must beleue,
Whether an othe be ioyned to the threatninges put in the scriptures. that God when he made lawes did somtymes also adde to an othe. For the Scripture in this place testifieth vnto vs that he sware, whiche is sufficient, thoughe it be not found in any other place. Moreouer let vs call to memory, that the latter causes,
The secōd causes are not to be so much cō sidered as the first cause. whiche commonly are called the second causes are much to be considered in the successe of thynges, as well prosperous as vnfortunate: but yet we must much more haue a regarde vnto the first and chiefe cause, namely vnto God hym selfe. So that then when thynges prosper not with vs, we must be angry with our selues, bycause we are alienated from God. And that this is true, this place manifestly proueth. For the Israelites were the same men which they were before, and their enemyes also the same men whiche they were before. Wherfore if the Iewes had had God now as fauorable vnto them as they had before, vndoubtedly they should haue obteyned the selfe same victoryes. Therfore they ought to ascribe all that vnluckynesse vnto them selues. For vnlesse god had bene angry with them, for the Idolatry whiche they had committed, they should with as good lucke haue ouer comed their enemyes now as they did before. Therfore the Prophetes whē they lamented for the miseries of their people, testified that iustice, honour, and also goodnesse are to be ascribed vnto GOD, but confusion and ignominye vnto them selues.
16 Neuerthelesse the Lord raysed vp iudges, whiche deliuered thē out of the handes of their oppressors.
17 And yet for all that they would not harcken vnto their iudges but went a whoryng after straunge Gods, and bowed them selues vnto them. They turned quickly out of the waye, whiche their Fathers walked in, obeying the commaundementes of the Lord, But they did not so.
Now is briefly declared vnto y
e readers, what conditiōs & alteratiōs y
e Israelites had in al y
e tyme, which was betwene y
e paines & punishmētes now described, wherwith they were for their Idolatry punished, & y
e first king, whom they chose vnto thē selues, reiecting
Samuel. When they were grieuously oppressed, they sighed & groned, & repenting thē selues, turned vnto god, & desired ayde of him. And God as he is gentle & merciful, despised not their mournings & inuocations but sent them some one iudge, by whose leadyng and conduicte they were deliuered from their oppressors. But they when they were deliuered, and set at libertie, they lyued at pleasure & fell agayne into their olde wickednesse. Wherfore
[Page] God accordyng to his iustice punished them agayne, and they agayne when they were grieuously oppressed, groned, & continually prayed vnto god, whiche yet agayne by an other iudge deliuered them from misery and calamitie.
The whole tyme of the iudges is deuided into three differences.Wherfore the whole time of the iudges may be aptely distributed into thre differences. First he Hebrues were iustly punished for their synnes and wickednesse. Secondly they beyng oppressed, wept, prayed, and implored helpe at gods hande. Lastly god by some iudge deliuered them. Moreouer this is to be marked,
The people lyued better vnder the iudges than they dyd whē they were dead. that the Iewes, althoughe they did not wholly obey the iudges, yet for all that they lyued somewhat better as longe as those iudges remayned on lyue.
Wherfore as touchyng outward thinges that publicque wealth had somewhat better successe vnder iudges, and the people myght as long as they lyued, be at rest from oppressions, and liue at liberty. But they were no soner deade, but they returned to their old fashions. Whiche thyng euidently declareth, how they did in vayne before pretend, that they had not sene the workes, which god had done in deliuering their elders out of Egypt. As thoughe they should haue sayd, if so be that we were sure of those so noble workes, we would not now haue forsakē the ceremonies of our fathers and chosen new rites. These alterations & chaungynges (I say) manifestly testifye that that pretence was vayne. For euery age sawe the wonderfull workes of god, when as oftentymes he did by iudges set at liberty the people beyng oppressed. And yet thoughe they had sene these thinges they could not kepe them selues, but that whē their iudge was deade they fell agayne into the same wicked crimes.
The fruicte of y
e punishmētes whiche GOD imposed.This is also to be noted, that it is here written that god vsed to be moued at the sighyng and teares of the Israelites. For this was the fruite of the paynes & punishmentes, namely that they might repente, & beyng admonished by miseries might vnderstand whether they should flye vnto. And god in hearing of thē when they cried, had onely a respecte vnto hys promises, goodnesse and name. Furthermore let those whiche delyghte in oppressyng and doyng iniury to the poore, note here that the tyme will come at the lengthe, that god will take in hand the causes of the afflicted. For althoughe they be euill, and haue worthily fallen into calamities and miseries: yet bycause he hath promised that he will reuenge the violence and cruelty done agaynst the poore, therfore he will one day deliuer and reuenge them, euen for this cause, namely, bycause he neyther can nor will fayle his office and promise.
God hath also sometymes cō passion of euill men whē they are oppressed. And in delyuering those whiche were euill from present miseryes, he graunteth vnto them occasion and tyme of repenting that except they truly and vnfainedly repent, they may be altogether in excusable. Moreouer this goodnesse of God, whiche he vseth also towardes the euill, beareth most manifest witnesse of the most perfect fayth and truth of god. For althoughe men do filthyly fall from that couenaunt which they haue made with god, yet he forgetteth not his goodnesse and promises.
18 And when the Lord raysed vp vnto thē Iudges, the Lord was with the Iudge, and deliuered them out of the handes of their enemyes, all the dayes of the Iudge. For the Lorde repented at theyr sorrowinges whiche they had, by reason of them, that oppressed and vexed them.
The iudges were before of the cōmon sort and vulgare estate.Still is declared after what sorte God behaued himself toward the Israelits in the tyme of the Iudges. Neither doth this speche, when he saith.
And God raysed vp Iudges, want an emphasis. For it is expressed that they wer before of the common sorte and vulgare state but god so chaunged them by his spirite, that he inspired them with couragious hartes, strength, and moste wyse Counsels. This vndoubtedly was that stirring vp, which is now declared. For God vseth, when he appoynteth any man to any office, to geue him strength &
[Page 72] abilitie to performe the same. Whiche thing we read did come to passe in
Saul & also in
Dauid, and before them in
Moses, who beyng before shepheardes & horsekepers, when they came to beare rule, did by the power of the spirite of GOD worke maruelous thinges, and proued noble men. For GOD (as the scripture now speaketh) raysed them vp. And not cōtent with this, but he fully persuaded them, and with inwarde feelyng made them assured, that they were now elected by God, to deliuer the Israelites and to set them at libertie. And without doubt vnlesse they had ben fully persuaded of this, it had not ben lawfull for them to haue fought agaynst their Lordes, or to rebelle: for so much as it is not the office of priuate men to fight with his enemies. Wherfore
Cato,
An example of
Cato. whose ciuile iustice is meruelously commended, gaue his sonne charge, y
t when he was dismissed from warre, and no more bounde by an othe of warre, he should not fight against the enemyes of the publicque wealth. Knowyng this right well, that it is lawful for no man, to drawe weapon against any, excepte it be by publicque authoritie, I haue now expounded what this meaneth that God raysed vp Iugdes: Now let vs see for what cause God did the same.
Bicause (sayeth the historye)
he repented.
God is not reconciled vnto vs by the outward workes whiche we do. What is the receaued exposition of these kindes of speache we haue before declared. But now we must marke what this meaneth whiche followeth:
At their sorowinges. We may not thincke that God was reconciled or made fauorable vnto them by the strength and dignitye of the worke. For that do men obteyne onely by fayth in our mediatour
Iesus Christ, to whiche fayth in these and such lyke kynde of speaches we must continually haue a respect vnto, therby to loke vpon the roote from whence y
e fruites of true repentaunce, and also sighinges and teares are deriued. Neither do we for all that denye,
God rewardeth good workes. but that good workes springyng from faith are so acceptable vnto GOD, that he rewardeth them with excellent giftes, as well outward, as also spirituall, whiche commeth of his goodnesse. So sayd
Daniel vnto the kyng of
Babilon: By almes redeme thy sinnes. That is, dryue awaye the paynes and punishementes, wherewith otherwise thou shalt be punished.
But if thou shalt demaunde what is to be thought,
Of morall workes done without faith. of those ciuill and morall good workes, whiche are done without fayth. I aunswere, that for so much as they procede from a viciate and corrupt nature, they are therfore sinnes. And for that cause they deserue dampnation and hell fyre. Howbeit God, to the end that the ordre and iust disposition of thinges in the worlde might be kept, and to defend assemblyes of humane kinde, fellowshippes and publicque wealthes, causeth that such actions haue many rewardes, not for the worthynes and dignitie of those actiōs, but by reason of a certain connexion, wherwith god would these thinges to be knitte together. Wherfore it commeth to passe, that when as hypocrites do worke outward workes, sometymes goodly to the shew, therby they obtayne notable prayse. And they whiche are rulers as longe as they honestly behaue them selues, in doyng iustice, either in warlike affaires, or elles in honest conuersation (as the
Romanes in the olde tyme did) may obteyne a moste large Empyre. For so would god haue discipline kept, the world and publicque wealthes preserued. God did therfore repēt at the sorrowyngs of the Israelites, bycause thorough the faith, from whence sorrowinges and groninges proceded, he was made mercifull and fauorable vnto them.
But peraduenture some man will doubte, whether god, when he repented,
God doth not so repente that he is chaunged were in any poynt chaunged? All the godly confesse in a maner with one mouth, that god can by no meanes be chaunged, for as much as that is a certaine signe both of imperfection and also of inconstancy. But this variety which here happeneth is not to be ascribed vnto god, but vnto vs. Of this thing I haue spokē som what before, but this semeth to be added at this presente. If a man will say, that god without controuersy ceassed to fauour the
Chananites agaynst y
e Israelites, whom he had before so strengthened, that he would haue them to oppresse the Iewes: and agayne afterward to helpe the Hebrues, whom before he semed that
[Page] hys will was to haue them oppressed by the
Chananites. No man can deny, but that these thinges haue variety. How can we therfore defend the will of god frō chaunging?
Variety is the effectes, & not in God. I answere, that by the 28. chap: of
Ieremy, it manifestly appeareth, y
e there is a diuersitie in the effectes, when as for all y
e god in very dede, continually retayneth the selfe same will. For it is thus written there in his name: When as I shall speake agaynst a kyngdome or nation, to destroye, roote out, and ouer throwe it, if they shall repente, I will also repente. And contrarywise when as I shal speake good of a kingdome or nation, to builde and to plant, and that nation or kingdome shall do euill in my sight, I will then also repente me of the good, that I had decreed to bestowe on them. These wordes declare, that god in these kindes of threatninges and promises is therfore not chaunged, bycause he speaketh not absolutely & simply, but vpon condition. But the accomplishing or makyng voyde of the conditions, is to be considered toward vs. And therfore the chaunge is not to be attributed vnto him, but vnto vs. But if thou shalt aske me, whether god doth before know and decree, what shall come to passe as touching these conditions? I will graunt that he doth. For he euen from without begynnyng doth not only know of thyngs that shal come to passe, but also hath decreed what shallbe. But bycause the hid priuitye of his will as touching these thinges, is not opened vnto vs in the holy Scriptures, therfore ought we to follow that rule, whiche (as we haue declared) is pronounced by
Ieremy. This rule did the
Niniuites and also
Ezechias the kyng consider and beholde beyng, not yet set forth.
God when he threateneth things whyche come not passe, lyeth not. For although destruction was threatned them in the name of god, yet for al that by repentaunce and prayers they escaped it. Neither is there any cause why we should suspect that god doth lye in any thyng, when he so threatneth or promiseth any thinges, whiche afterwarde come not to passe. For as touching
Ezechias, he could no way escape death, if we should looke vpon the natural causes, whiche are commonly called the second causes. Wherfore the sentēce beyng pronounced accordyng to those causes, he coulde not be accused of a lye. And the
Niniuites, if god had done vnto them, as their sinnes deserued, they should vtterly haue perished. And god commaunded
Ionas to preache according to their merites. Furthermore a lye can not be so takē, in an oration which hath a supposition or condition ioyned with it, as it may be in absolute and simple sentences, when as the successe depēdeth of the kepyng or violatyng of the condition. More ouer in these wordes of the history is expressed the cause why the Israelites sorowed and sighed, namely bycause they were oppressed and afflicted, and that with those kindes of calamityes whiche are before mencioned, namely bycause they were spoyled, sold, and losyng their liberty and goods, they were no longer able to stande before their enemyes.
19 Yet for all that as soone as the Iudge was dead, they turned and did worse than their fathers, in following straunge gods, and in seruing them and bowing them selues vnto them, and ceased not from the Actes of them, and from their hard waye.
When the Hebrues in the tyme of the Iudge that was raysed vp had a restyng tyme, and came to a tollerable estate, that iudge beyng dead, they fell agayne worse than they did before, and committed much more grieuous things than did their elders. Whereby is founde true, that whiche we before haue sayde, namely that the infirmitye of our nature is so great, that we can not longe abyde in pure religion and sincere worshipping of God. And in that it is sayde that they whiche came after were a great deale worse than their fathers, is declared that GOD not without reason and iuste cause was the more prouoked vnto anger so that wheras he had longe tyme spared their elders, nowe at the last he would not forgeue those that came after. And this is it whiche is
[Page 73] often sayde,
Howe the iniquities of the fathers are visited in the children & childrēs children. that he doth visite the iniquities of the fathers vpon the children euen to the third and fourth generation, whiche is not so to be vnderstand, as thoughe he should punishe the posteritie more than they haue deserued. But bycause God, as he hath spared the fathers, would so also haue forgeuen the children, vnlesse they had so much followed the iniquities of their fathers, that also they went farther in those mischieuous Actes, then did their fathers. God is patient, and before the poureth out hys wrath and punishementes, he vseth to tary for the thirde or fourth generation. But howe these of whom we intreate were more corrupt than their fathers, the history manifestly declareth: for they committed more wicked Actes than did their fathers, And of all those, whiche their fathers perpetrated, they forsooke none, or left none vndone.
But of this kynde of speache, wherein it is sayde:
It is not in mans power to auoyde sinne.
Neither ceased they from their endeuours, we may not conclude that it lyeth in our strength & power to auoyde synnes, or to wrappe our selues out of them. Wherfore they greatly erre, which of the preceptes of the law of GOD do gather the strength and power of our free will. For by the commaundementes the Scripture testifyeth, what thynges they he whiche are required of men.
The power of free will is not to be gathered of the commaū dementes. But the same Scripture manifestlye in an other place admonisheth, that it lieth not in our power to fulfill them. As
Paul also writeth in hys latter Epistle to
Timothe: that there are in a great house not onely vesselles of golde and siluer, but also vesselles of wood and vesselles of claye. And he whiche shall purge hym selfe from them, shalbe a vessell sanctified to honour, profitable to the Lorde and prepared to all good workes. Neither for all that can we therby conclude, that it is in our owne strength, to purge our selues from synnes, althoughe the same be required at our handes, for as much as that is to be looked for onely of God. Wherefore the same Apostle in the same Epistle, when he had admonished the Minister of the Churche so be gentle, ready to teache, pacient to suffre euilles,
It is GOD whiche geueth repentaunce & amendement. but so for all that to confute them whiche resiste, addeth. If peraduenture God shall geue them repentaunce to the knowledge of hys truth. By these wordes we are taughte, that repentaunce from synnes, whiche is commaunded commeth not of our selues, but is louyngly and gently geuen of God.
The waye of synners is rightlye and worthily called harde,
The waye of sinners is hard and it is a metaphor elegantly taken of roughe and stonye places, for stones and rockes for that they haue thicke and vnequall partes, they hurte, pricke and rente the tendre fleshe of theyr feete whiche trauayle vpon them. So are the manners of the wicked, they wounde theyr consciences, and at the laste bryng them into extreme miseries, which happeneth not without the great goodnesse of God for y
e god at the length by that meanes calleth vnto him very many sinners. And the sawe hath
Hoseas the Prophete very well described in hys ii. chap: when he sayeth: And she sayde, I will go after my louers whiche haue geuen me golde, siluer, wooll, flaxe, &c. But I will hedge in thy wayes with thornes, and will take awaye my gold, my siluer, my wooll and my flaxe. And she shall say: I will returne vnto my first husband, for then was it better with me, than it is now.
20 Wherfore the wrath of the Lorde was kyndled agaynst Israel, and he sayd: Bycause thys people hath transgressed myne appoyntment, whiche I commaunded their Fathers, and haue not hearkened vnto my voyce.
21 I also will hence forth not cast out before them one man of the nations whiche Iosua left when he dyed.
22 That thoroughe them I maye proue Israell, whether they wyll kepe the waye of the Lorde, and walke therein, as their Fathers dyd, or not.
[Page]23 And so the Lord left those nations, and droue them not out immediatly, neither deliuered them into the handes of Iosua.
The cause being before declared, namely the contempte, wherby the Israelites contempned GOD, now is set forth the effect thereof whiche is the kindlyng of the wrath of GOD. For this worde
Chara in the Hebrue tongue, is to waxe hotte, or to be kyndeled with anger. Whereby the property and nature of angry is properly and elegantely expressed. For if angry should be defyned accordyng to the matter thereof, it is a certayne inflamation of bloud about the hearte.
What is the matter of āger Neither do I speake it as thoughe that can be applied vnto GOD, who vtterly is without heate and bloud. But all these thynges (as I haue allready oftentymes sayde) are by a certaine translation applied vnto hym.
¶Of a League.
BVt bycause God complayneth for that the league was broken, whiche he had made with them, I thincke it good somewhat to speake briefly of a league whiche is in Latine called
Faedus. And that worde is deriued of the verbe
Ferio, whiche is to staye bycause that the ambassadours of eche partie kylled a hogge: from whiche Etimologye peraduenture the Hebrue worde
Berith, differeth not much, with whiche outwarde signe also they wished by prayer the destruction to that parte whiche should violate the league, as we may gather out of
Lyui the first booke
Ab vrbe condita.
Thre kyndes of leagues. And as the same authour writteth in his iiii. booke
de bello Macedonico, there are thre kyndes of leagues. The first kynde is, when
1 the conquerours set lawes to those whom they haue conquered, in punishyng them and commaundyng them, what they will haue them afterwarde to do.
2 The second kinde is when thinges being yet sound and neither part ouercome, they commen together, that thynges taken from eche partie may be restored and couenauntes of peace may be established. The thirde kinde is when there is no
3 warre betwene the parties and certayne princes or cities are ioyned together by some couenauntes either to lyue the more peaceably, or elles to take in hande some common affaires. And nowe that we haue thus declared these thinges let vs shewe what a league is.
A league is that bonde betwen men, wherby enterchaungeably they testifye both by wordes & signes,
What a league is. that they are boūde to performe certayn things, so that they handle together with good fayth. And if that it be a bonde, and pertayneth to relation, it is grounded vpon humane actions, & is referred to those thinges whiche the partyes confederated ought to performe the one to the other. It is expressed by wordes,
Leagues are expressed both by wordes and signes. and for the most parte signes are added. God when after the floud he made a league with mankynd, he did not onely declare the forme of the obligation by wordes, but also he put the raynebowe in the cloudes as a witnesse. And in the league whiche he made with
Abraham he put the signe of circumcision. Furthermore in that whiche was made by
Moses at the mount
Sinay, there were twelue pillers erected, & the people was sprinckled with bloud.
Iosua also when he should dye, erected vp a very great stone, therby to seale the league renewed betwene the people and God.
What thinges are promised in the league of god made with men.And what the promises were which should be kept of eche partyes the Scripture oftentymes teacheth. For God promised, that he would be the god of hys people, namely whiche would be with them to helpe them, to deliuer them, and by all meanes as touching all kind of good thinges to adorne them.
Christe is the mediatour in makyng the league. The people agayne promised that they would counte the Lord
Iehouah for their God in beleuing, worshipping, and obeyng him. And
Christ was in the league as the mediatour betwene eche partye. This is the exposition and nature of the league made betwene god and men.
Howe a league is deuided into a new league & an olde.
A league is deuided into the new league and the olde, whiche deuision is not of a generall thing into speciall thinges, but of the subiecte into accidences, for
[Page 74] so much as in either league the thing it selfe and substaunce was vtterly one and the selfe same & onely certain qualities did vary. For the olde league was made with one onely nation of the Iewes, and had certayn additions, the possession (I say) of the lande of
Chanaan, the kingdome of the Iewes, and the priesthode of
Aaron, & also the promise of the
Messias, accordyng to the natiuitie of the fleshe, and the ministery of his owne person. Moreouer it had very many signes of ceremonyes and sacrifices very mete for that age. There wer also in it misteries of saluation, and promises of eternall life althoughe farre more obscure, than they were afterwarde geuen vnto vs. And contrarywise in the new league, there are proprietyes in a manner contrary. For it pertayneth not to any one certayn nation, but to all nations, how farre soeuer the worlde extende. Neither is there any peculiar ciuile administration adioyned vnto it. Furthermore there are but very fewe ceremonies & outward signes (and they very plaine and simple) added vnto it. And lastely all thinges are contayned more openly, playnely & manifestly in the new testamēt, than they are in the old.
The thing and substaunce of the olde league and newe is all one. By these qualities doth the new league and the old differ one from an other, howbeit the thyng it selfe and the substaunce abydeth one and the same. For as the Lord would then be the God of the Hebrues, so now hath he decreed to be the god of the Christians. And that also whiche they at that tyme promised, namely y
t they would beleue in the true god, & obey and worshyp him as he hath prescribed, we also ought to performe: Christ cōmeth betwen both parties as a mediatour, and forgeuenesse of sinnes, and also eternall lyfe is by hym promised. And the lawes of manners remayne the same now whiche then were.
Paul in the xi. chap: to the
Romanes hath very wel declared that the league of the elders & ours is all one, when he compareth the Church with the tree, which hath Christ as the roote. Then he addeth that from such a tree certayne brāches were cut of, namely the Hebrues whiche beleued not. And we whiche were gē tils were planted in their place: that is put in the same league wherin they were comprehended. The same tree he affirmeth to remayne, into whiche some are by fayth grafted in, and from the whiche other some bycause of incredulitie are cut of. Wherfore eche league contayneth both the law and the gospel.
In either of y
e testamētes are the selfe same sacramentes. And there are in either of the Testamentes the selfe same Sacramentes as it is declared in the first Epistle to the
Cor. the x. chap: For the fathers were al vnder the cloude, and were baptized in the sea, and did eate the same spiritual meate, and dranke of the spirituall rocke followyng them, and the rocke was
Christ. Farther we graunt, that as touching outward signes, there is some variety in their Sacramētes and ours, which yet as concerning the things signified by the Sacramentes is found to be nothing at al. Otherwise the argument of
Paul should not haue persuaded the
Corin. that they should be subiect vnto the same punishmentes that the Hebrues were. For they might haue sayd, that they had farre better sacramētes thā had the Hebrues, & therfore they nede not so much to be affeard lest they should suffre the like: for as much as the excellency of the sacraments may auoyde those misfortunes, from whiche the Hebrues could not be deliuered by the sacramētes of the law. Wherfore the Apostle tooke away from them this shift, and maketh our sacramentes and theirs equall and a like as touching the thinges. He writeth also to the
Rom. the first chap: of the gospel, that it was in the old tyme promised by the Prophetes in the holy scriptures. And in the third chap: he speaketh after this sorte: but now is the righteousnesse of god made manifest, being testified by the lawe and the Prophetes.
Neither canst thou say vnto me, that these in dede were promysed in the holy Scriptures of the olde Testament, but not that they were performed vnto the men whiche lyued at that tyme. Bycause the Apostle doth moste warely aunswere to this obiection, when he sayeth that euerye lawe doth speake to those men whiche do lyue vnder it. And it is not to be doubted, but that the
[Page] fathers were iustified after the same sorte that we are now at this present.
The fathers were iustified onely by fayth, as we are. For they were no lesse iustified onely by fayth in
Christ, than we. Wherefore it is written in the booke of
Genesis of
Abraham, that he beleued, and it was counted vnto hym for righteousnesse.
Iohn also testifieth that
Christ sayde of
Abraham that he had sene his day, and therfore reioysed. The Epistle to the
Hebrues the xiii. chap: affirmeth that
Christ was yesterdaye, and to daye, and remayneth for euer. Wherfore euen as we are sayd now to be saued, not by workes, but by the true mercy of GOD by fayth in
Christ, so was it with the fathers at that tyme: For they were iustified by no merites, but onely by fayth in
Christ. Furthermore what obedience soeuer the fathers had towarde the commaundementes of God, and also fayth in the promises, they were not deriued from their owne strengthe and power, but (euen as it also happeneth vnto vs) they came vnto them by the grace of God and
Christ.
A place of Ieremi & of the epistle to the Hebrues is expoū ded.It is true in dede that
Ieremy in the 31. chap: writeth, as it is also alleged to the
Hebrues the viii. chap. that there muste be another league made in the name of GOD, not as it was made in the olde tyme with the fathers. And among other thynges he sayeth, that GOD woulde geue hys lawes in the heartes and bowelles of men, so that none should nede any more to teache hys neyghboure, bycause all, from the least to the greatest should haue the knowledge of GOD. And farther it is sayde in the persone of God, I wyll be mercifull vnto their synnes, and will no more remember their iniquities, &c. As touching these wordes both of
Ieremye, and also of the Epistle to the
Hebrues, we must vnderstande, that those wordes proue not that there is any difference betwene the testamentes as touchyng the thyng and substaunce it selfe, but as concernyng the propertyes and qualities, as we haue before sayde. Neither muste we thincke that the olde fathers whiche in obeyeng the commaundementes of God, and in right fayth worshypped hym purely, coulde performe these thynges of theyr owne strengthe or naturall powre. For vnlesse they had had the lawes and promises of God written in their heartes and myndes by the holy Ghost, and also a will by the grace of God ready to obey hys commaundement they had neuer ben able to haue performed such things. They wanted not therfore the lyght of God which shined before them to cause thē to beleue. Yea and their synnes wer forgeuen them by
Christ. Wherfore they also had the fruition of those thynges, whiche God promised to geue in the newe league. The difference was onely in this thyng as touchyng largenesse and perspicuitye for at that tyme those gyftes were distributed to very few,
The error of them which in the olde league acknowledge onely temporal thynges. but now they are euery where communicated to the gentiles. They were somewhat darke at that age, but to vs they are made euidēt and cleare, so that we haue no more nede of the old discipline. Hereby it manifestly appeareth, howe they erre from the truth, whiche will haue the old league to haue had promises onely for possessing of the lande of
Chanaan and for worldly felicity. And that the people of the
Hebrues were bounde onely to an outward obseruation of certayne rites and workes, and not to shewe forth good and ryght motions of the minde toward God. The Prophetes declare not the thyng after that sorte, yea rather they denye that GOD any thyng estemeth outwarde workes without inwarde godlynesse. And they euery where cry out, that ceremonyes without fayth, and voyde of the feare of GOD are a moste grieuous burthen and so troublesome that GOD can not suffre them. Yea and the lawe it selfe maketh mencion expressedly of the circumcision of the hearte: and GOD euery where requireth, that we should heare hys voyce, whiche vndoubtedly is nothyng elles,
God would not fully those chynges that are chaunged. than by fayth to haue to do with hym. Wherefore fayth of the promises and commaundementes of GOD, ought alwayes to be counted as the roote and foundation, whiche alwayes abydeth, when as outwarde Sacrifices and visible rites should at the length be chaunged.
[Page 75] Wherfore it is very manifest, that god would not haue them for their own sakes. Howbeit they endured so long as men were endewed with a childish spirite (as
Paule speaketh to the
Galathians) whilest they liued yet vnder tutors, & differed yet very litle frō seruaunts. But when they receaued a more ful growē spirite, then were the sacramentes and childyshe rites (as
Augustine sayeth) taken awaye. It is manifest therefore that the difference betweene the two leagues is not to bee taken of the thing or substaunce, but of the qualityes and proprieties.
Let them therfore cease so much to erre, which thinke that god in the old lawe promised only earthly thinges, as though at that time he prouided onely for the bodyes and not for the soules, as doe Shepeheardes, Plowmen, and Swyneherdes, whiche haue a care onely for the bodyes and carkases of theyr Sheepe, Swine and Oxen, neyther laboure they for any other thyng, but to make those beastes strong and fat. We must not so imagine of God, who so made a league with the Elders, that he promised them the chiefe felicitie,
God promised the old fathers the chiefest felicitie. which cheiflye pertayneth vnto the soule. Wherefore it is written in the 144 Psalme. Blessed are the people which haue the Lorde for their God. In
Deutronomye also God toke vpon him to bring to passe, that they should walke in his cōmaundements. But what more? Our sauiour, out of y
e words of the old league hath most aptely taught the resurrection of the dead. For when the Lorde sayd that he was the God of
Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, and they were then dead,
Christ inferred that they were not dead but that they still liued, and that their bodyes should be receaued, namely in the blessed resurrection. Hitherto pertayneth that that God affirmed to
Abraham, that he himselfe woulde be his rewarde, whiche thyng plainely teacheth vs,
The end of political gouernement. that in that couenaunte were not promised onely carnall and earthly good thyngs. Vndoubtedly it were a great shame euen for Kyngs and Princes, whiche being compared with GOD are but fleshe and bloud, if they shoulde bee counted to gouerne the publicque wealthes, onely as touching the bodyes of the subiectes: for as muche as they professe that therefore they prouide for their Citizens outwarde commodityes, quietnesse and peace namely that they might liue happily and vertuouslye. Wherefore if Princes seeke for goodes of the minde for their Citizens,
The worshipping of god consisteth not only in outward. rites. is it not meete that God hymselfe prouided farre more noble thinges for the publicque wealthe of the Israelites whiche he faythfully gouerned. Furthermore I do not speake, howe foolyshe it is to beleue that the old fathers by the league bound themselues only to outward rites and visible ceremonies, whereby to worship God: when as euen the Ethnikes were not ignoraunt, yea they haue most manifestly testifyed,
Plautus. that the worshipping of God consisteth not in those things. For
Plautus in Rudente writeth thus: They thinke that they please God with giftes and sacrifices: but they lose both their laboure and coste. I will not declare those thinges whiche
Plato in his
Alchibiade hath written as concerning this thing.
Plato. Yea (as I haue now before taught) the lawe it self and the Prophets declare that the thing was farre otherwise.
But now at the length to returne to the woordes of the historye, God complayneth that the Hebrues had broken their couenant which he had made with their fathers. For they wer departed from the true fayth and inward godlynesse Neither ceassed they only dulye and rightly to sacrifice vnto the true God, but they most filthily turned aside to straunge Gods & worshipping of Idoles. And for these things was God angry with them, and especially for this,
The rote of falling from god. bicause they harkened not vnto his voyce. This vndoubtedly was the roote and the fyrst beginning of falling, namely not to beleue in god.
The elders made a league with god for their posteritie.
Let vs here also note that the Fathers made a league with GOD not onely for themselues, but also for their posteritie. As God agayne for hys parte promised them, that he woulde bee the GOD not onely of them, but
[Page] also of their sede and posteritie.
The elders made a league with God for their posteritye It was lawfull to circumcise y
e litle ones in the old time, & it is lawfull at thys day to baptise them. Wherfore it was lawfull for them to circumcise their children, being yet infantes. And in like manner it is lawfull for vs to baptise oure little ones being yet infantes, for as muche as they also are comprehended in the league. For they which haue now the thyng it selfe, there is nothing can let, but that they may receaue the signe. It is manifestlye written in the .xxix. Chapiter of
Deutronomye that the league was made not only with them which were present, but also with them which were absent, and not yet borne.
But some doubte, whyther the posteritie may be bounde by their Elders. We aunswere,
Whether they which come after may be bound by theyr elders. wee muste looke whyther the thinges whiche were promised by oure Elders were iuste and honeste. Then muste we consider whyther those promyses pertayne to ciuill thynges, or to Godlynesse. When they are made for ciuill matters, the bonde is sure, bycause it is not lawfull for the posteritye to infrindge the contractes of their Elders, as are byinges, sellinges, bargaynes and such like, prouided that they contayne nothyng, that is filthy, vnhonest and vniuste. But if the couenauntes and obligations belong to godlinesse or to true fayth, the obligation is then strong, for that we are all bounde to true godlinesse and a perfecte fayth, although there were no league therunto. But if the Elders haue bound themselues and their posteritye to filthy and vngodly thinges, it is no bonde. But for God to abase himselfe to make a league with men, it commeth of his mere beneuolence and mercy, wherby we might be more and more stirred vp to performe those things which we ought otherwise to do of dutye.
I also will not caste them oute. When he sayeth, that he will not hence forth caste oute any one of those Nations, whiche remayned in the Lande of
Chanaan after the time of the death of
Iosua, he declareth the punishemente, wherewith he woulde nowe punyshe the Hebrewes. And this must we vnderstand condicionally, that is, excepte they repented: or bycause God was so offended by reason of theyr Idolatrye, that he woulde not so soone caste forth those Nations, as he would otherwise haue done, if they had faythfully continued in their office. And the very woordes of the historye doe strayghtwaies expresse thys latter interpretation. But bycause a man myghte doubte why he expelled not the
Chananites,
Why all the Chananites were not expelled in the time of Iosua. while
Iosua was yet aliue (who vprightlye behaued hymselfe towarde God) in this place he aunswereth vnto it and sayeth that he had therefore suffered those Nations to remaine, that by them he myght proue the Israelites, whyther they woulde woorship him purely and sincerely as their Fathers had done vnder
Iosua or not. For as much as I haue at large before spoken of this kinde of temptation, I will now speake thereof no more. This onely I shall admonyshe you, that where as there is mencion made in this place of the Fathers, the same is to bee vnderstande onely of those which were good and godlye: otherwise euen in the tyme of
Moyses there wanted no vngodly ones and rebelles, which fell from the true God. Furthermore we must considre that these thinges were spoken, when the Hebrewes after the death of the Iudges tell to vngodlynesse. For the thinges which are here mencioned of the fallinges and conuersions of the Hebrewes whiche followed one after an other, are spoken generally and summarilie. Otherwise God (as we shall heare) expelled some of the enemyes oute of the lande of
Chanaan vnder euery Iudge. Wherefore in that now he being angrye sayeth that he will not caste forth the reste of the Nations, we muste vnderstande it, that he will not so quickely doe it, and vnlesse they tourne agayne vnto the ryghte waye. After which manner
Ieremye hath taught vs that the threatnynges of God are to be vnderstand.
The thyrde Chapter.
THese are the Nations, which the Lorde left, that he myghte proue Israell by them euen as many of Israell as had not knowen all the warres of Chanaan.
2 Only for the learning of the generation of the children of Israell that he also might teach them warre, in as much as they which wer before them knewe nothing thereof.
THis is a very common and receaued exposition of this place, that God in leauing diuerse Nations in the land which was promised to the Israelites, did it not only to trie the Israelites, but also bycause he woulde haue them exercised in warlike artes, leaste they should become slouthfull. For if the enemyes should straightway at the beginnyng haue bene expelled, that people would easely haue bene loste with idlenesse and slouth. Which interpretation if we allow, therby will plainly followe, that iuste warres are altogether lawfull.
War is a thing lawfull. For if GOD would teache the Israelites the arte of warrefare, then iudged he not that arte vnlawfull. And to thys purpose serueth that which
Dauid sayd: Blessed be god which teacheth my handes to warre, and my fyngers to battayle. But thys question, whyther it be lawfull to make iuste warres, is not nowe to be entreated of: for as muche as it is most euident, and that by the holy Scriptures, that it is lawfull. And we shall haue occasion in an other place, to speake at large of that matter. Wherfore I will declare what the Hebrewe expositours iudge of thys place.
R. Salamon, R. Dauid Kimhi, and also
R. Leui ben Gerson write, that God, when he had tempted the Hebrewes and detected theyr vngodlinesse and Idolatrye, withdrewe from them their strength and ayde. Wherby when they attempted to make warres by their owne power and to fight by their owne strength they learned what it was to make warre.
When God fought for the Israelits, they knew not what it was to make warre. Whereas before when God himselfe fought for them, they were ignoraunt of it. For he endued them with strength, he draue a feare into their enemyes, dissolued their strength, and gaue the Hebrewes a prosperous successe in theyr enterprises. One dyd then pursue a thousand, and two ten thousand. It is therfore aptlye sayd that the Israelites, when he had not yet broken the league, and god fought for them, were ignoraunte of warlyke feates.
How our fyrste parentes after sinne knew both good and euell. Euen as the fyrst parentes of mankinde when they had eaten of the forbidden tree, beganne to know both good and euill. For before when they were nourished with the grace of GOD, they were touched with the feeling of no euil. And we commonlye say of children, when their parentes are taken from them, that they shall nowe fele what it is to gette theyr own liuyng, which before they had not learned, when they had their parentes liuing. Christe also vsed the same kinde of speche, when he sayd vnto the Apostles: When I sent you without bagge or scrippe, vndoubtedly you wanted nothyng. But now bicause I shall be taken from you, let him which hath no sweard, bye him one: for hereafter the times shall be harde and paynefull vnto you, so that ye shall proue and haue experience of those thinges which hitherto ye haue not felte. And this is the meaning at this present, that the Hebrewes were brought of necessitye now at the length to knowe and feele,
God commaū ded nothing in the lawe for the learning of the art of warfare. what it was to make warre with enemyes stronger than themselues. They had not experience of that, before GOD taught them it in taking awaye their strength and ayde. Neither is it founde in the whole lawe that he ordained any thyng for the learning of the arte of warrefare. In
Deutronomye the xx. Chapiter: he
[Page] made certaine lawes for making of warre, but they pertayne nothing to the attayning of knowledge in the arte of warrefare. And I, in my iudgemente, doe allowe the interpretation of the Hebrewes, rather than that which was fyrst assigned.
3 Of those whom he left, there were fyue Lordes of the Philistians and all the Chananites, and Sidonites, and the Heuites that dwelled in Mount Libanon, euen from Mount Baal Hermon vnto the entrance of Hamath.
4 Those (I say) remayned to proue Israell by, and to wete whether they would obey the preceptes of the Lord, which he commaunded their fathers by the hand of Moyses.
5 The children of Israell therefore dwelt among the Chananites, Hethites, Amorites, Pherezites, Heuites, and Iebusites.
That which is in the Hebrewe
Sirni, Ierome sometimes translateth rulers, and sometimes Lordes. And we may call them Princes, or Presidentes, or ells Gouernours.
Satrapes. Those woordes the Grecians call,
[...] But yet they are deriued of the Persians, yea & the Latines sometimes vsed thē.
Terence in his comedie
Heautontim:
Terence. writeth. If
Satrapes (y
t is a Lord) be a louer, he shal not be able to abide the charge.
Dauid Kimhi.
Dauid Kimhi thinketh these words in the text,
Fyue lords of the Philistians, to be a figuratiue kinde of speche, y
t by the fyue Lords,
The names of the Lordships of Palestine. we might vnderstand those fiue places, which they were lords ouer, that is fiue Lordships of the Philistians. And those places be named in the booke of
Iosua the 13 chap.
Gaza, Asdod, Ascalon, Ackron &
Geth. Of euery one of these cities they toke vnto thē the name of the lordship. And vndoubtedly there is manifest mencion made of them in the fyrst booke of
Samuell, for of ech of thē there were gifts gathered wherwith the arke of the couenaunt was adorned to be sent agayne to the Israelites.
Howbeit this may seme to be strange how these cities should now be sayd not to be conquered by the Israelits. When as in this booke the first chap.
Gaza, Ascalon, & Aekron are declared to be wonne in that battaile, which was made by the tribes of
Iuda and
Simeon. Whereunto we aunswere, y
t in dede those cities were taken at y
e time, when as for all that they were not fully conquered by the leading and conduct of
Iosua, as it is written in his boke. Howbeit at this time. as the history now testifyeth, they were not in the power of the Iewes. For by reason of the sinnes of the Hebrues, the strength of the
Philistians was confyrmed, & other nations of y
e land of
Chanaan waxed euery day strōger & stronger, but the Israelites on the contrary side were feabled. Wherfore it was an easye matter for these places to fall againe into the power of the Philistians. For they were very skilful in feates of warre, and they had yron and hooked Chariottes. Neither did God fight for the Israelites. Wherefore they might without any great trauaile (by reason of the sinnes of the Iewes) recouer againe the places which they had loste.
In that it is written
And al the Chananites we must not vnderstand it absolutely and simplie, but only of those which inhabited y
e places here mencioned. Farther we must note, that in the boke of
Iosua there were also
Chananites and
Zidonites rehearsed which were not at that time destroyed. And as touching the Mount
Libanon,
The Mounte Libanon. some write, y
t it was so called of frankencense which the Grecians call
[...]. Yea and the Hebrues call frankencense
Libona. And Mount
Hermon (as the boke of
Deut. teacheth) was called of the
Amorrites, Naschir, & of the
Sirians Scherion. Wherof peraduēture the prouince of
Siria had his name.
6 And they tooke the Daughters of them to be their wyues, and gaue their own daughters to their sonnes: and serued their Gods.
7 Wherefore the children of Israel did wickedly in the sight of the Lord, and forgot the Lorde their God, & serued Baalim, & groues.
The Israelites synned three times against God. First, bicause (as it is already
1 shewed) they dwelled peaceably and quietly among the
Chananites,
Thre synnes of the Hebrues. and contrary to the commaundement of God made those nations tributaries vnto them. Secondly bicause they contracted matrimonies with that people. And
2 that had God prohibited to be done, as the law in many places witnesseth. Yea and in the booke of
Esdras the last chap. we reade of a grieuous complaynt bycause the Iewes in their captiustye in
Babilon had taken straungers to wyues. And
Esdras there decreed that such wiues should be put away,
God forbyddeth vnlyke maryages. & that those matrimonies should be counted voide, which wer contracted betwene persons prohibited by God. And why God would not haue matrimonies so contracted, this reason is chiefly alledged, bicause by such vnlike matrimonies the worshipping of God is wonderfully empaired. For godly husbandes or wiues are by the vngodly parties oftentimes alienated from the true god. Neither doth the Scripture onely teache vs this, but also experience both in the olde time, and also in our time testifieth it. For as much as
Salomon (as it is written in the first boke of the kinges the .xi. chap.) was both corrupted, and also builded Temples for Idoles, by the entisement of straunge women, whom he most inordinatelye loued, and more than was cōuenient. Wherfore he miserably incurred the wrath of god. The Iewes also (as our historye nowe declareth) had experience of the same. And we in our time see great hinderaunce to come vnto the beleuers, bycause very many of them contract matrimony with Papistes. The third synne
3 of the Hebrewes was, bicause they worshipped Idoles: and that was most of all against the league which they had long before made with god, for they sayd: we will serue the Lord our god.
Further it is added:
And they woorshipped trees or groues. Thys woorde
Aschera with the Hebrues is a tree, and being in the plural number
Ascheroth as it is in this place, it signifieth trees, and of some it is translated groues. For it is a most common maner among the Idolatrers,
Gods wer worshipped in groues. to woorship their goddes in groues. In Oken groues they sacrificed vnto
Iupiter, and the Oke of
Dodome, was in the old time most famous, by reason of the answers which it gaue. In woods of bay trees was
Apollo woorshipped.
Daphne also is notable wher the Temple of
Apollo was built.
Minerua also was wont to haue a temple among Oliue trees. And lastly we may marke both in the Poetes, and also in histories, that shadowy woods, most large riuers, & mountaines of exceding great height wer counted of the men in the old time places most apt for sacrifices to be done vnto Idoles. Bicause such places driue into men no smal admiration. Wherefore they thought that such notable places had the power of god present. Yea, and
Abraham also,
Isaac and
Iacob, and the old Fathers,
From whence the maner of sacrificing in hy
[...] moūtains came offered sacrifices vnto the true god vpon the high mountaines, which custome was tyll such time vsed as god by a law ordained that they should not do sacrifice euerye where, but in that place onely which he himselfe had chosen.
8 Therfore the Lord was angry with Israel, and sold them into the handes of Chusan Riseathaim Kyng of Aram-Naharaim: & the children of Israel serued Chusan Riseathaim eyght yeares.
Now is particularly mencioned the punishment wherwith god being angry punished the Hebrewes. For when they so fel from him, that they forgot hym, he deliuered them to
Chusan King of
Mesopotamia. And this is the first bondage
[Page] that the children of Israel were in. And that which the Grecians cal
[...],
Mesopotamia. the Hebrues name
Aram-naharaim. Nahar signifieth with them a Ryuer. It is therfore put in the dual number, bicause that part
Siria, or
Aram is enclosed with two riuers
Euphrates (I say) and
Tigris.
Of y
e surname of Chusan. Wherfore as touching the signification of the woord the Grecians haue followed the Hebrues. But why
Chusan was called
Riseathaim, it is darke. Although
D. Kimhi thinketh that y
e surname was geuen him of some certain place, as we se to chaūce to Princes of our time, which receiue their surname of y
t places, frō whēce their Elders had their beginning. But other some thinke that this king was therefore so called, bicause he was very wicked and vngodly. For with the Hebrues
Resehaha signifieth wickednes and vngodlines. Wherfore they wil haue it to be as much as if one should say,
Chusan of vngodlines, or vngodly
Chusan. It is the dual number, to declare that he was corrupted not with any simple wickednes or vngodlines, but with a doubt, that is with a principal and absolute wyckednes or vngodlines. And ther wer some of the Hebrues which went about to expresse the double vngodlines of the kings of
Mesopotamia. For they say that
Balaam was hired from thence to curse the Israelites. Farther, and this (say they) was the other wickednes, wherwith this
Chusan oppressed the Iewes, which by no right pertained to his dominion or Lordship. But these ought rather to be called diuinations and coniectures, than iust interpretations.
They serued hym eyght yeares. Vndoubtedly a very long time, which I suppose was so much the painfuller vnto them,
Why the Chaldeans and Sirians went about to gouern the Iewes. bicause from their commyng out of
Egipt hitherto, they had serued none. But vnder what pretence this Kyng subdued vnto him the Hebrues it is not declared. Peraduenture he thought that the Iewes wer a part of his people sent abroade to inhabite. For
Abraham was called out of
Chaldea, and came first into
Mesopotamia. From whence by the commaundement of God he went into the land of
Chanaan. Furthermore in that place
Iacobs children were borne, which wer the Princes of the twelue Tribes. This peraduenture wer the titles, wherby the
Chaldeans and
Sirians endeuoured them selues often times to be Lords ouer the Hebrues, which thing yet they did vniustly. For ther wer no people sent from the
Chaldeans or from the
Sirians by the common wyll and consent of the Princes and Magistrates, whyche should go and inhabite in some place of the land of
Chanaan, Wherfore they did wrongfullye oppresse the Iewes and were styrred vp thereunto by couetousnes and ambition to enlarge their dominions. This is also vncertayn whether this
Chusan did together with the Iewes oppresse the
Chananites. And it maye be, that he was not troublesome to the
Chananites as to his friendes, but onely afflicted the Hebrues. Neither wer it absurde to thinke, that this king was called by the
Chananites to oppresse the Hebrues their common enemies.
9 And the children of Israel cryed vnto the Lord: and the Lord styrred vp a Sauiour to the children of Israel, and saued them, one Othoniel the sonne of Chenez, Calebs yonger sonne.
10 And the spirit of the Lord was vpon him, and he iudged Israel, and he went out to warre, and the Lord deliuered Chusan Riseathaim kyng of Aram into his hande: and hys hande preuayled agaynst Chusan Riseathaun.
11 And the lande had rest .40. yeares: And Othoniel the Sonne of Chenez dyed.
Israel cryed vnto the Lord, bicause they wer euil vexed, and most grieuously oppressed of the
Sirians. They acknowledged now after their great hurt that straunge Gods profited them nothing, yea rather they brought vpon them the
[Page 78] miseries wherwith they were vrged. When they vnderstoode that mans helpe was on euery side cut of, they conuerting them selues vnto the true God, called vpon him. This is the fruite of miseries as touching the elect, or rather the fruit of the goodnes of God, which by troubles calleth againe vnto him, those which are hys. Of
Othoniel we haue spoken inough before. Now he is called a Sauiour, bicause he brought health vnto the Israelites as y
e other Iudges dyd,
Othoniel was called a sauiour and a redemer. which wer also called Sauiours, he was a shadow of Christ. But the Chaldey paraphrast calleth him
Porken, that is a Redemer. Which surname also rightly agreeth with
Othoniel: bicause before it is sayd that God sold the Israelites: and when bondmen are sold, they haue nede of one to redeme them.
For as much as before it was said y
e God raised vp Iudges,
After what maner God raised vp Iudges. now is declared the maner & forme how he raysed them vp. For it is written:
And the spirite of the Lord was vpon hym. For by the holy ghost wer not onelye geuen vnto hym strength, political wisdome and warlyke artes, but also he was made the more certain of his calling. The Chaldey paraphrast vnderstandeth by the Spirit of God the power of prophecy.
Dauid Kimhi. But
Dauid Kimhi interpreteth it the gift of force & strength. But I thinke that either interpretacion is to be allowed. For besydes the strength and power which was geuen the Iudges, they had also the iudgement and feeling of the wil of God, which pertained vnto prophecy.
He iudged Israel. That is, he set them at liberty and was their Gouernour as touching ciuil thinges, and restored the pure worshipping of God. In that it is aboue written that God sold Israel to the king of
Mesopotamia. And nowe again it is declared y
t he deliuered the same king vnto
Othoniel, we may gather y
t victories ar geuē at y
e pleasure of God, which also we haue often noted before.
R. Leui ben gerson thinketh that in that supputation of .40.
R. Leui ben gerischon. yeares wherein the Iewes lyued peaceably vnder
Othoniel were comprehended also the eyght yeares of seruitude which went before. But of this thing we wil speake aboundantly in the history of
Iiphtah.
God is also to be called vpon of synners. This place teacheth that men must call vpon God, though they haue synned: which I therfore thought good to note, bycause sinnes vse much to feare away men from the inuocation of the name of God for this is the nature of synnes to alienate vs frō God, vnto whom we yet by praiers come againe. Wherfore seing these thinges are contrary, namely to be alienated from God, and to come vnto him, it is wonder how they can be applyed to one, and the selfe same man.
Augustine. And this maketh with it also which is written in the gospel: God heareth not sinners. Although
Augustine wryte of that sentēce, that it is found in dede in the holy scriptures, but it was spoken by hym whych was borne blynde, when his hart was not yet illustrate. Wherefore he iudgeth that that sentence is not to be taken as a firme and certaine rule.
A distinction of synners. But I would rather make a distinction betwene synners, for there are some, which when they cry vnto the Lord, do repent, and from their hartes are sory, for the euils which they haue committed. But ther are other which continue stil in their mynd and purpose to synne, and haue a very great delite therin. Farther I am not afeard to affirme, that god heareth those synners which being repentant cry vnto him with faith: wher as those are repulsed which being hardened in their sinnes and wāting faith do call vpon god. Wherfore it appeareth that those sinners which come to god, and those that depart from god are not sinners of one sort, bicause they which after they haue synned cal vpon god by faith, & repent them of theyr synnes, are deuided from those which stubbornly without repentaunce perseuer in their synnes. For they although by wordes they cry vnto god, yet in hart and mynde they are farre from him, so farre are they for to be ioyned vnto him, or to come vnto him by fayth and prayers.
¶ Whether God be the cause of synne.
BVt in these thinges which are sayd, there ariseth a question which is not to be left vnspoken of. For it is writtē that god sold the Israelites to the king
[Page] of
Mesopotamia. Wherfore it semeth that he holpe a wicked man, & aided hym to satisfy his tyranny and ambition. For he had neither a iust cause, nor yet an honest title, to clayme vnto him the dominion of the Hebrues. What shall wee saye therefore? Shall we affirme that God is the cause of this sinne? Ther happeneth in this booke and in other places of the holye Scriptures suche kynde of speeche, and that often times very plaine, and therefore it semeth good to be expounded once for all.
Whether by y
e word
permissiō this question may be dissolued.Some, yea and that with no euyl minde labour to excuse God, and say that he doth not these euyl thinges, but onely permitteth them, And they thinke that in doubtful places, that interpretation is to be applied, which altogether wanteth fault and daunger of vngodlines. Vndoubtedly this their saying wer to be
1 praised, if that we could se their exposition to be allowed in the scriptures. But there it is farre otherwise sayd,
It is proued by good reasons that besides permission god worketh somewhat whē sins ar cōmitted. namely that God doth stirre vp wycked men to their wicked actes, that he seduceth, delyuereth, commaundeth, hardeneth, and deceaueth them, and bringeth to passe those sinnes which are grieuous. Suche kindes of speeche do manifestly teach vs, that God after a sorte woorketh euyll thinges, not onely in permitting, but also in doing in vs. Without doubt al we are said both to haue our being, and also our mouing in him: For he is in suche sort the first cause of all thinges, that without him we can do nothing. For how should we moue our selues, vnlesse by his power we wer both moued and also
2 driuen? Farther, how farre his gouernment extendeth, we may reade in the .xi. chap. of
Mathew: for two Sparowes (saith the Lord) are sold for a farthing, and yet one of them falleth not to the ground without the wyll of the father. And
3 that was as much to say as without the counsell of God nothing be it neuer so
4 smal is done in the world. Moreouer that permission wherby certaine go about to make plaine this question, at the length is called againe to the will. For who soeuer can let and prohibite any thing that is euil, and doth it not, it is manyfest that after a sort he is willing therunto. Besides that, he permitteth it not against his wyll,
God doth not idlelye beholde those thinges whych are done o
[...] men, but worketh together with them
Esay. 5. but willinglye. Wherefore a wyll without doubt is contayned in that permission.
But now must we shew, that God, when sinnes are committed, doth not ydely looke on, yea he woorketh somwhat there. For
Esay in the .v. chap. saythe, that God would geue a token, and with his hissing cal a nation from the vtmost partes of the earth, which should ouerthrow the kingdome of the Hebrues, as their synnes had deserued. By which it manifestly appeareth, that God stirreth vp Tyrannes and outward nations to these vniust warres.
Esay. 10. Also in the .x. chap. the same Prophet pronounceth that king to be wicked, which in that expedition was in the hand of God as a saw, a staffe, and an axe. There is no man ignoraunt but that al these thinges do so woorke and moue, that they be first moued. Yea and that proud king is therfore reprehended, bicause he so exalted himselfe as though he wer God, who had by him brought such and so great thinges to passe.
Gen: 45.
Ioseph also in the booke of
Genesis said vnto his brethren which had by a wicked cōspiracy sold him: It was not you but god that sent me into
Egipt. In the first booke of the kinges also,
1. kinges. 22. and the .xxii. chap:
Sathan, who was readye to deceaue
Achab, was commaunded by God to do it, & to preuaile. Which words declare that God himselfe commaundeth and also stirreth vp to deceaue. Further it is written in the Prouerbes the .xxi. chap.
Prouerbes. 21. The hart of the king is in the hand of God, he shal incline it whether soeuer he wyl. The scripture saith also of
Pharao,
Exodus 9.10.11 Rom. 9. kinges seme free from humayne lawes, but God boweth them whether he wyll, (which place
Paul alledgeth) that his hart was hardened by God. Neither maketh this anye thing against it,
Pharao was hardened both of god & of hym self. if thou shalt say that it is written in the .viii. chap. of
Exodus, that
Pharao hardened himselfe, for as muche as bothe sayinges are true. For God doth no violence to the wyll of man, seing that nothing is more contrarye vnto it than to make it to doo any thing vnwillingly,
[Page 79] or by compulsion. Howbeit it is chaunged and bowed of God so softly and pleasantly, that it willinglye & without violence inclineth to whatsoeuer pleaseth God.
Augustine. And it often times happeneth (as
Augustine in diuers places hath taught) that God punisheth former sinnes by latter synnes. And the holye scriptures before
Augustines time testified the same, & especiallye
Paule, in his Epistle to the
Roma. the first chap. Wherfore God hath in his hand the affections of our hart, which he loseth or restraineth as shal seeme good to his most wise prouidence, & turneth them whithersoeuer it shal please him. And so great is his power,
God worketh more as touching sinnes than is expressed by the worde permission. 2.
Thess 2. y
t we must beleue that he worketh much more, than may be expressed by the woord of permission. For
Paul feared not thus to write vnto the
Thessalonians: bycause they haue not receaued the loue of the truth, therfore shal God send on them an error, so that they shal beleue lyes, & al they shalbe iudged which haue not beleued the truth, but allowed vnrighteousnes. These wordes manifestly testifye, y
t God did cast error vpon them, to punish their former sinne, namelye vpon those which despised the truth offered them.
Dauid also semeth to tend to this, when in the .2. booke of
Samuel the .16. chap. he said of
Simeck: Suffer him,
2. Sam: 16. for God hath cōmaunded him to curse me. Also in the same booke the .12. chap. God by
Nathan the Prophet saith of
Dauid which had grieuously fallen:
2. Sam: 12. behold I wyll stirre vp euil against thee, & wil take thy wiues, & geue them vnto thy neighbour, who shal sleepe with them: this diddest thou secretly, but I wil do this thing openly, in the eyes of the Sunne and of all Israel.
If the matter be so (thou wilt say) they which sinne shall easily be excused:
The sinnes of men are not excused by the working of god for they may sone say, y
t they wer by God moued & stirred vp to sin. Not so. For mē ar not so deliuered by God vnto sins, as though they wer them selues pure & innocent. For they which ar so stirred vp to naughtines, haue worthily deserued the same. And the same men are not driuen against their wil, but they wonderfully delite themselues in those transgressions and sinnes. Wherefore their excuse is foolishe, or rather none.
But this semeth to be agaynst the things before said,
Whither God do together both hate & wil sinnes. bicause in the Psalmes it is wrytten that God is such a one, as willeth no iniquity, and hateth synnes. And vndoubtedly he is so in dede: For vnles he hated sinnes, why should he punish them? for thinges that are allowed, are not wont to be punished. Farther, he hath most seuerely prohibited them by his lawes. But as touching this,
A distinction of y
e wyll of God. thus must we decree of the wil of god, that it is in nature and very dede one, whych yet may be deuided for diuers and sundry respectes. For as it is set foorth in the scriptures & the law, he condemneth sinnes, he prohibiteth them, and threatneth most grieuous punishments vnto them. Howbeit bicause he directeth the same sinnes whithersoeuer he wil, & vseth them to his counsels and decrees, neyther when he may, letteth them, it is therfore sayd that after a sort he wylleth them. Neither is it meete to deny that such sundry respectes are in the wyl of god. For god would before al beginninges, haue his sonne sacrificed vnto him for a most swete sacrifice: who yet himself said in the law: Thou shalt not kil, & thou shalt not shed innocent bloud. God also forbad, that any shoulde be deceaued, who for all that would haue
Achab to be deceaued of
Sathan,
Christ was killed by the will of God. as we haue a lyttle before mencioned. And least any man should doubt that Christ was put to death by the wyl of God, we may se in the actes of the Apostles that it is most manifestly said that the Iewes did those things which God by his counsel had before ordained.
What then? Shal we say that god is the cause of synne? Not so,
God if we speake properli is not the cause of sinne. for if we wil speake properly: and that it may the more manifestly appeare, we must marke, that one selfe acte as it is deriued from vs, is verye synne: but in respecte that it commeth from God, it is both good, iust, and holy. For punishment is by God imposed to wycked men. And to punishe synnes, no man is ignoraunt but that it partayneth to iustice. Wherfore God in withdrawing his grace from the vngodly, and ministring some occasions, which might moue to good things, if they
[Page] happened to right & iust mindes, and which he knoweth the wicked wyll turne to euil, may after a sort, although not properly, be said to be the cause of sinne. And vndoubtedly that act,
A
[...]militude. in that it passeth through vs, is sinne, but not as it cō meth from God. For in that it cōmeth frō God, it is most perfect iustice. It happeneth somtimes, that the self same wine being poured into a corrupt vessell, is lost, and made paide: which wine as it was brought by the husbandmā & put into the vessel is both swete and good. Neither is it hard to vnderstand how one & the selfe same act may as touching one, be vicious: & in respect of an other, iust. For when a murtherer & hangman do kill a man, the act as touching the matter or subiect, without doubt is al one, namelye the death of a man. And yet the murtherer doth it most vniustly, & the hangman by law and iustice.
Iob also did wel vnderstand that when he said: The Lord gaue, & the Lord hath taken away as it hath pleased him, so is it done. He did not by those wordes praise the
Chaldians, Sabines, & the Deuil, which wer vessels of iniquity, & most vicious: but he with great godlines allowed those euils, as they were gouerned & ruled by the prouidence of God, namely for this cause, bicause they pleased God. It is also written in the .2. booke of
Samuel the .24. chap. of
Dauid, who vnaduisedly wold haue the people numbred, & how God was angry with
Israel, & therfore he styrred vp
Dauid to do that. And in the booke of
Paral. it is writtē that
Sathan was the doer of it. For God doth those thinges which he wil haue done by Angels, as wel good as euil. Wherfore that numbring of the people as it proceeded of
Dauid or the Deuil, was in dede vicious; but in that it came from God, who intended to punish the Israelites, it pertayned excedingly to the setting foorth of hys iustice.
Howbeit
Iames sayth, that God tempteth none to euyll, but euery one of vs is allured by our own concupiscence.
Augustine. Whyther God tempt or no.
Augustine wryting of thys thyng in hys booke
de consensa Euangelistarum, saith that there are two kyndes of temptacion, the one of trial, the other of deceite. And in dede as touching tryal he denyeth not but that God tempteth, for that the scriptures do confesse it. But with that kinde of temptation which deceaueth, whereof
Iames wrote, he sayth that God tempteth no man. But the scriptures teache not so, as we haue declared a litle before of
Dauid, and before him of
Achab. Yea, and in
Ezechiel the .14. chap. god saith that he had deceaued the Prophet. And the same
Augustine writeth not after the same maner in other places, as it manifestly appeareth in hys bookes
de Praedest. Sanctorum de Cerrept. & Gratia ad Valent. and in hys .5. booke and .3. chap.
contra Iulianum. Wherfore the true interpretatiō of this place is, that euery man is therfore tempted of his own concupiscence, bicause al men haue their natural disease, which is corruption, and vicious lusts, which ar together borne with them, & do also grow and increase in them. Wherefore God instylleth no malice of his, for we haue inough at home. Therefore he cannot bee accused, for as much as the beginning of vngodlines & wickednes commeth not from hym,
God when he wyl bringeth to lyght our frowaconesse of mynde. but lieth hid in vs. He ought not therefore to bee counted to geue the cause and fault, who yet when it semeth good vnto him, wil for iust causes haue our lusts & wickednes brought to light, and rule & gouerne our wicked acts, therby more and more to illustrate his iustice and glorye, & to aduaunce the saluation of the godly. Wherfore his singular goodnes and prouidence is very much to be praised, which can so iustly and wisely vse so wycked meanes.
Whence the variety of pronenesse to synne commeth.But if a man wil aske, how it happeneth, that some are more prone to sinnes than others, if (as it is sayd) malice & wyckednes ar rooted into vs al from our byrth, neither is it nede that any new or latter malice should be instilled in vs frō God. And seyng that we ar al brought forth of one & the selfe same lumpe, and that lumpe likewise is altogether viciated, it shoulde seeme that all also ought to be of a like disposition and inclination to wickednes. But thys is diligently to be weighed, that besides thys disposition ther happen naturall malices,
[Page 80] maners, customes, wicked qualities, fellowshippes, temperatures of bodies, sundry parentes, diuers countries, and manifold causes, wherby some are made more or lesse prone vnto sins, which pronenesse of ours God according to his iustice, goodnes, and wisdome vseth and stirreth it vp, gouerneth and ruleth it. And this is not to be forgotten, that none of vs haue so in our selues the beginninges of good actes, which truely please God, as wee euen from the verye birth haue within vs the beginninges of sins. For they ar inspired in vs by the holy ghost, and we continuallye receaue them of God, neither burst they foorth out of the corrupt beginninges of our nature.
Now resteth to see from whence after the synne of
Adam, that frowardnes and corruption came,
Whether the first corruption after the synne of Adam were deriued frō god or no. and whither it wer deriued from God to punish the wicked act which was committed. I answer, that we maye not so thynke: for man was for the fault which he had committed allenated from god, wherfore he iustly withrew from him his giftes, fauour and grace. And our nature being left vnto it self, falleth and declineth to woorse and woorse, yea it cōmeth to nothyng, from whence it was brought forth at the beginning.
Wherefore we must seke for no other efficiēt cause of that corruption. Wherefore by that wythdrawing of giftes and grace, and departure from God, which is the fountain of al good thinges, nature is by it self throwen headlong into vice and corruption. But now let vs returne to the history.
12 Againe the children of Israel dyd euill in the syght of the Lord. And the Lord strengthened Eglon king of Moab, against Israel: bicause that they had done euyl in the sight of the Lord.
13 And this (Eglon) gathered vnto him the Chyldren of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel: and they possessed the city of Palme trees.
14 And the childrē of Israel serued Eglon king of Moab .18. yeres
The history declareth first the sinne which the Israelites committed: then it sheweth the punishment wherwith for the same they wer punished. As soone as their good Prince was dead, the people fel againe to their olde wyckednes, neyther did they onely commit those sinnes which before they had committed, but to them they added some sinnes more grieuous.
The last fallinges wer for the most parte more grieuous than the first. Seruitude is against the nature of man. For the last falinges were for the most part greuouser than they which wer past: for at the least thei added this, in that they more & more became ingrate for the benefites past, when they againe fel from God, with whom they were before reconciled into fauour. Their punishment was bondage, wherin they wer bound & serued the
Moabites. Without doubt a grieuous kinde of punishment: bicause it is marueylouslye agaynst the state and nature of man. For al men by nature ar borne free. And bondage, as euen the Lawyers also do confesse,
Seruitude was brought in by cause of sinne. was brought in by a commō law among men agreing to natural reason. But it may more truly be said y
t it was brought in bicause of sinne. Enemies when they wer ouercome in warre, wer somtimes saued, & compelled to serue them which ouercame them: and ther can be no iust warres taken in hand, vnles it be to reuenge some facinorous acte. Wherefore we said wel, that seruitude was deriued of sinne: & is therfore a grieuous punishment, bicause it is against the nature of man.
Certaine subiections are natural. I graunt in deede that this is natural, for the children to be obedient vnto the parentes, the subiect vnto the Magistrates, the vnlearned & vnskilful vnto the wiser, & the weake ones must apply themselues to the mightier. But this kinde of obedience and seruice, namely toward them whych are fauourable vnto vs, and seeke for our profyt, is voluntary. Wherefore it very much differeth from the seruitude, wherof we now intreate. For that voluntarye kynde of obedience myght haue bene vsed when men were in perfecte state: but thys whyche was brought in for synne coulde not bee there. And bondmen are compelled to serue not suche as are their friendes, but straungers and enemyes, and that in thynges vnprofitable vnto
[Page] them,
Which is the more greuous bondage. yea and often tymes thynges hurtfull and vnhonest.
Seruitude also is then far more grieuous, when people are subiect vnto those enemies which once wer ouercome by them, and whom before they ruled. These euyls happened vnto the Israelites.
The Moabits were enemyes to the Iewes from the begining. For the Moabites were enemies vnto the Hebrues, euen from the beginning, and they hired
Balaam to curse them, and in the wildernes they abandoned their women vnto them, for the which the people was afterward grieuously plagued. Farther, the Iewes ouercame the Moabites by warre, and punished them sore, as we reade in the booke of Numbers. Besides that, the Moabites wer a filthy and an infamed people: for their father was
Moab, the sonne of
Loth, who begat him by incest. Nether would God suffer, that they should be admitted into his church. For these causes therfore, was this bondage most hard, and especially vnto the Hebrues, which were alreadye before by god set at liberty both from the
Egiptians and also from the
Sirians, and by wonderfull woorkes from them redeemed.
God strengthned Aeglon, namely in geuing him courage and strength, making him prompt, and styrring him vp also by some certaine occasions.
And adioyned vnto hym Ammon and Amalek. This may be vnderstand twoo wayes, either that
Eglon adioyned vnto him selfe such confederates, or that god caused this league to be made betwene these nations. And vndoubtedlye both significations are true: for that which they dyd, they coulde not haue executed without the wyll and ayde of god.
Let vs note in this place, that the vngodly, which otherwise agree not verye wel among them selues,
The vngodly do easilye conspire agaynst the people of god. do easely conspire against the people of god. Wherfore these three nations being ioyned together, did easely ouercome the Israelites, which wer forsaken of god.
And they possessed the city of Palme trees, which is
Iericho, as it appeareth in
Deut. and as it is before declared. But in that it is said that they tooke
possession of it, it signifieth that they did not spoyle it, and leaue it voyde: for they claimed it vnto them selues, making the landes and possessions therof proper vnto them selues. Neither is it vnlykelye, but that they put in it a garison of soldiors, for to oppresse the Hebrues more grieuously. And yet I do not thinke, that they restored again the city vnto them, for that came to passe afterward in the time of
Achab, as it is declared in the booke of Kynges.
Why god punisheth his people by vngodly ones.But this peraduenture may seeme maruellous vnto some, that god vsed to punish his people by other nations farre woorse than they wer: for as muche as the
Ammonites, Amalekites, and
Moabites wer Idolatrers, & nations that were ouerwhelmed in all kinde of wickednes. To this I wil answer, that it was the prouidence of god, which (as I haue before declared) doth in y
e sorte punish syns with synnes, and in such maner chasten the vngodly, by others that are vngodly.
Whi god soner punisheth his owne than he doth strangers. Farther, by it he declareth, that these things though they be euyll, yet they can not escape, but that some way they shal serue his wil. But whi he differeth to punysh nations, which otherwise are wicked, and his own he straight ways punisheth, this is the cause: bicause they pertaining to god, do synne against his law which they know. Wherfore ther is no cause why the Turkes and Papists though they somtimes preuayle against vs, to punish our sinnes, should flatter them selues therby,
God wyll not easeli suffer his worde beynge knowen & receiued to be despised. as though they were much better than we are, or as though their supersticions were better than our religion. For if the
Moabites, Chananites, and
Assirians were not counted better than the Iewes, whom they ouercame: no more shall the Turkes or Papistes obtayne the same, thoughe sometymes by the wyl of God they afflict the Gospellers. Wherfore god doth quickly punish his, for his woord sake, which is among them published: hee wyll not easely suffer, that his woord being receaued and knowen should be despised and escape vnpunished. There were vndoubtedly very many lyers and false men at Ierusalem, and yet god suffered them, where as he strayght waye destroyed
Ananias and
Saphira. For he would adorne & set forth y
e gospel & holy ministery.
[Page 81] And now that the Ethnikes do see, how seuerely God punisheth vs, they maye easelye coniecture what hangeth ouer their heades, according to the saying of Christ: If this be done in the grene tree, what shall be done in the drye tree. And if by reason of their blindnesse they vnderstand not this, we ought diligently to remember it to our great consolation. We rede in Ieremye the .xlix. Chapiter that the people of God dranke of the cup of the Lord, which semed not so muche to deserue it: Wherfore the Edomites ought much more to loke, to be one day punished with punishmentes appointed for them. In
Ezechiel also the .ix. Chap. god exhorteth nations against the Hebrues, to kil and spare none, but fyrst they should begyn at his sanctuary.
Peter also in his .i. Epistle the .4. chap. The time is (saith he) that iudgement must begin at the house of God. But why he sayth that nowe is the tyme, I thinke this is the cause, bicause he sawe that all those thinges which the Prophetes had forespoken of the chastising of the people of Israell before other nations, should chieflye of al take place among the Christians. For those thinges which happened vnto the Iewes in a figure or shadowe, do chiefly belong vnto vs. Wherefore Christ being made manifeste, & his fayth being spred abroade throughout the worlde,
Peter thought that it shoulde be very soone accomplished, that iudgement should beginne at the Christians whiche are the house of God.
Furthermore there are in the fellowship of the people of god alwaies some holy men still founde, which when sharpe affliction cōmeth are proued, & as golde in fyer are made more bright, which the heauenly father will chieflye and spedely to be done. The electe also, which haue fallen, being admonished by chastisementes and aduersities, do vse to returne againe into the right way. And that the same may come to passe, God, who loueth them excedingly, doth of his louing care prouide. But such as are vncureable, his wil is that they should quickly be broken, least they might longer than is mete, hurt and with their contagiousnesse destroy other. These vndoubtedly are the causes, why God doth sooner correcte his own than straungers. It is not to be attributed to hatred but to most feruent loue. For the deuine oracles declare vnder the person of God. Whom I loue I correct and chastise. Also a good housholder not regarding straungers, beginneth seuere discipline at his own, when they sinne.
The Israelites serued the Kyng of Moab .xviii. yeares. Thys with out doubt was a long tyme of bondage. And not without desert, bicause y
e Hebrewes had augmented their sinne, either in y
t they cōmitted thinges more greuous, or els bycause when they were reprehended and deliuered, they fel agayne to their old wickednesse. This latter seruitude was twice so long as was that wherein they serued the king of
Mesopotamia.
15 And the children of Israell cryed vnto the Lorde: and the Lord stirred them vp a Sauioure Ehud the sonne of Gera, the sonne of Iemini, a man hauing an impedimente in hys ryght hande, and by hym the children of Israell sente a presente vnto Eglon the Kyng of Moab.
The kindnesse and mercy of God is farre greater than the kindnesse and mercy of men. For if any through their own default fal into any miseryes,
The kindnesse of God is farre greater thā the mercye of men. men for the moste parte haue no compassion on them. Which manifestly appeareth in y
e
Romane lawes, in the Digestes
de deposito vel contra. In the lawe,
bona fides, it is ordayned that a pledge shoulde not bee restored, but shoulde bee geuen to the treasorye, when he whiche owed the pledge doth so offende, that he deserueth banishemente, bycause that he suffred it thorough hys owne default, and therefore is it meete that he shoulde bee punyshed with pouertye. A woman also, if she committe aduoutrye, dyd not only loose her dowery, but also she cā clayme none of her husbands goods, bicause through her own default
[Page] she falleth into that misery: which is also written in
Decretalibus, title
de consuetudine, chap.
Ex parte. But god is so merciful and long suffring that he saith in
Ieremy: I will do that, which none of you wil do. No husband would receaue againe a wife which he hath repudiated, especially for adultery sake. But I, so that thou wilte returne, will take thee againe, although thou hast most filthilye played the harlot with thy louers. This goodnesse of god ought we also to follow not only to haue cōpassion on those,
It is not lawful by violence to deliuer those which ar alredy fallen into the power of the Magistrate. which w
tout their own fault are thrust into miseries but of those also which for their faults are chastised. Wherefore we ought to be gentle towardes them, but yet so farre as good lawes wil suffer: which I therfore adde, lest hereupon any should thinke that such as are condemned to death or are captiues for wicked actes whiche they haue committed might be deliuered against the wil of the Magistrates. Christ commaunded, that we should forgeue the repentant sinner, not once nor seuen tymes, but seuenty times seuen times: this doth he himself toward his people: thei fal in dede oftentimes, and most filthily sinne, and yet when they retourne the heauenly Father both receaueth and also deliuereth them.
He raysed them vp a Iudge, Ehud the sonne of Gera. The cōmon translation hath
Aioth.
Why the Latin & Greke translation haue corrupted propre names. But that is meruaile, for both in the Greeke and also the Latin translation, very many propre names are corrupted. As
Isaac, Ezechiell, Ezechias, Nabuchodonosor, &c, for both those Nations abhorring from hard kinde of speaking haue leuifyed and mitigated the Hebrue woordes after the forme of their own speche. And this man of whom we entreate, came (as the holy history declareth) of the tribe of
Beniamin. For the familye of
Iemini, whereof he was borne, belonged vnto the tribe of
Beniamin.
Hauing an impediment in hys ryght hand. The common Latine edition hath turned it
Ambidextrum, that is, one which vseth both handes a like, which interpretation the Hebrewe phrase suffreth not, whiche is thus:
Ater iad lamino,
Why some are lefthanded. that is, shut or taken in his right hande. And in the Latin also we saye
claudum, quasi clausum, that is, lame. And there are two causes alledged, why some are lefthanded. For eyther it commeth of custome from their childhode, or ells by some impediment in the right part. But I would thinke that y
e custome of vsing the left hand from a childe commeth of some impediment, bycause peraduenture some pores of y
e body are shut or stopped, by which y
e spirites whiche are instrumentes of mouing, can not easlye haue their course to the sinowes and to the brawnes of the right hand. Otherwise children should of their own accord be prone to vse the right hand, for as much as in creatures, by order of nature, y
e right part is much stronger thā y
e left. Neither do Iat this present speake of those which do of purpose practise to vse the left hand, that therby whē nede requireth they may haue both handes ready. For that serueth little to oure matter, for the history by expresse wordes declareth that this
Ehud had an impedimente in hys right hand. Yet let vs remember, y
t god for the executing of noble dedes & enterprises for the most part choseth the weake & vnapt ones, as the first epistle to the
Corin. testifieth: Brethren, see to your calling: how y
t not many noble men, not many wise men, not many mighty men, are chosen, but God hath chosen the folishe things of the world, to put to shame the wise, & he hath chosen the weake things, to ouerthrow things y
t are mighty, & also vile things, and thinges of no reputation hath God chosē to confound things of reputation, y
t no flesh should be glorified in his sight, &c. For as much as the glorye of God shoulde easlye bee darkened by the power & wisedome of men. Wherfore y
t that glory might excel, he hath elected the folyshenesse of preaching, he hath also chosen vnto himselfe rude Apostles, and weake and feable men, by whom he myghte shewe forth hys wonderfull workes. Howbeit bycause that which was now done by
Ehud seemeth to be done by crafte, subtilitye and guile, it is declared what occasion God gaue of this noble dede.
And by him the children of Israell sent a present vnto Eglon. God would therfore haue this messanger chosē, that he might the easlier come to the presence of the King. And I suppose that the present which they sent vnto Eglon was not the ordinary tribute which they payd, but some honorable gift, ther by to make the King more fauourable towards thē, or els to obtayne somewhat at his hands. For tribute is called by an other woord of the Hebrewes than by this word
Minchah. For that word is deriued of this verbe
Nachah,
Minchah. which is to bring, or to offre. Wherfore
Minchah signified not only an oblation, which was appointed for sacrifices, but also a present, and gift presented vnto noble men. And for that cause in the booke of
Genesis, those thinges whiche
Iacob as a gifte sent vnto his brother
Esau, before he came vnto him, are called by y
e same name. And when
Ehud saw, that he was called to a weighty and perilous enterpryse, although he nothing doubted of the successe thereof, yet he diligentlye weyghed with himselfe the daungers to the end he myght the more prudently auoyde them. The callyng of GOD causeth vs to haue a sure confidence, but yet it nothyng letteth, but that we maye meditate howe we maye warely, and wysely execute it.
Ehud therefore reuoluing with himselfe the thynges that were to be done, caused that thyng to bee made for him, whiche the holy historye by these wordes declareth.
16 And Ehud made him a sword with two edges, of a cubite lēgth, and he girded it vnder his raymente, vpon his right thigh.
17 He presented the present vnto Eglon King of Moab. And Eglon was a very fatte man.
18 And when he had presented the presente, he sent away the people that bare the present.
19 But he himself returned agayne from the quarry of stones that was in Gilgal, and sayd: I haue a secret errand vnto thee O King: whoe aunswered: Kepe silence. And all they that stoode neere went forth.
Ehud made him a two edged sworde, whiche hauing a most sharpe edge on both sides, mighte both easlye pearse and cutte, and also quickely strike through the bodye. He caused it also to be made but a Cubite in length that he might the easlier hide it.
What is the stature of Pigmeians. Neyther is this woorde
Gamar any other thing with the Hebrewes than
Amah. Wherefore the
Pigmeians in
Ezechiell the .xxvii. Chapiter are called
Gamerim, and therfore so called, bicause they are but a Cubite in stature. And such a short sworde the Latines call
Sica that is, a scayne. He hidde it vnder his garments: for if he had worne hys sworde openlye, eyther he shoulde haue bene compelled to laye awaye his sworde, or elles he shoulde haue had no accesse vnto the Kyng. For Tirannes will not easely admitte armed men priuately to talke with them. Furthermore if it had bene marked that at hys departure when he had killed the King, he caryed not hys sworde with hym as he broughte it, hys enterprise woulde easelye haue beene suspected.
He gyrded the shorte sworde vppon hys ryghte thye, that he myght handsomly take it with his left hand, which only he was able to vse.
Eglon was a very grosse man It is no straunge thing that Princes are troubled with ouermuch fatnesse. For they liue delicately, they eate and drinke aboundauntly, and very litle exercise theyr minde and bodye. Agag the Kyng of Amalek, is in the fyrste booke of Samuell described to haue beene suche an other.
And he sent the people awaye, namely those whiche broughte the gifte
[Page]
And returned from the place of grauen Images which were by Gilgall. Those men which
Ehud sent away, were eyther fellowes of the message or they which bare the gift that should be offred vnto the king. By good aduise he sent those away frō him, bicause he would talke with the king alone & without any arbiterers. And he saw that whē he had finished his purpose he should by flying away a great deale better saue himself being alone, thā he shuld do if he had many ioyned with him,
Conspiracies cōmunicated to many haue seldome good successe. bycause then he should not haue bene carefull onely howe to saue himself, but also how to saue others. Farther conspiracies whē they are communicated to many, haue very seldome good successe. Peraduenture also he woulde endaunger but himselfe only, and not bring others into daunger with him. Wherefore he sent them awaye that if any daunger shoulde peraduenture happen, they might be in safetye. And the place fro whence he retourned is called
Pesilim of this verbe
Pasall, which is to cut or graue, bycause peraduenture there were in that place eyther a quarrey of stones, or elles some Idoles of late set vp by
Eglon. For
Gilgal was among the Iewes counted a religious place.
For the arke of the couenaunt remayned there a while, and we read that the Israelites after they were passed ouer Iordane rested first in that place, and celebrated a general circumcision there. Wherfore it might easlye come to passe y
e
Eglon in contempte of the Hebrewes, had there placed images and idoles.
Ehud when he had there sent away his fellowes, returned againe alone vnto the king, to whom he sayd,
I haue a secret businesse to tell thee O Kyng. As touching the propre signification of his talke, he tolde the truth as it was. For
Dabar signifieth with the Hebrewes not only a word, but also a thing and businesse. But bicause
Eglon was thereby deceaued, and he spake these thinges to deceaue, he made a lye also. The King when he heard thys
answered, Holde thy peace. Beckening vnto him to tell it him secretly & not to speake it before all them which stoode then by.
20 And Ehud came vnto him, and he sat in a sommer parler alone, and Ehud said: I haue a message vnto thee from God. And he arose out of his seate.
21 Then Ehud put forth his left hand, and toke the sworde frō hys right side, and thrust it into his bellye.
22 And the haft went after the blade, and the fat closed the hafte, so y
t he could not draw the sword out of hys belly, & the dirte came out.
As soone as they vnderstoode the will of the King they went all forth, and
Ehud was lefte alone with the King. And he satte in a colde parler, that is, as they translate it, in a sommer parler. The Hebrew interpreters do say that that place was therfore the colder, bicause it had very many windowes, so that the ayre did the eassier come into it. When
Ehud sayd:
I haue a message vnto the from God, he sayde not a message from
Iehouah but from
Elohim whiche is a general name and is also attributed vnto idoles, he lieth againe although he depart not from the signification of the wordes. He deceaued the king, and that he might the better beguile him he spake after this sorte.
Eglon when mentiō was made of the worde of God,
he rose vp & honoured it. And as it is to be thoughte, the manner was so at that time in those regions. And in oure daies we see oftentymes, that very many Princes whiche otherwyse are farre from religion, yet to fayne themselues most religious, will vncouer their hed at the name of God and of Christ, and come to holy seruices shewing greate reuerence vnto suche rites rather of hipocrisye, thereby to deceaue the common people and where as they are vngodlye they woulde bee counted verye Godlye. Thys dyd
Eglon as farre as I suppose: althoughe I knowe that the Hebrew
Rabines haue far otherwise fayned. For they say that bycause of this honor which
[Page 83] he gaue vnto the name of God, it came afterwardes to passe,
A lye of
[...] bin
[...]. that the daughter of
Eglon Ruth I say, was conuerted to the Iewishe religion, and was the great grandmother of
Dauid. That is altogether a fayned thing, bycause it hath no testimony out of the holy Scriptures. And yet I speake not this,
God bes
[...]oweth benefi
[...] s vpon men for kep
[...]g outw
[...]rd
[...] pline. as though I knewe not that God geueth vnto men aboundant benefites for obseruyng of outward discipline. Farther I marke y
t
Ehud got thre cōmodityes by y
e things whiche he thus did. First, as a Prophet he spake vnto the king standyng, wheras otherwise he ought to haue spoken with him either prostrate or elles knelyng. Secondly the kyng myght easelyer be striken to death standyng than syttyng. Lastly whilest he was rysing he could not so well marke
Ehud plucking out his shorte sworde. And the stroken was so vehement that not onely the sworde, but also the
haft persed into the body of the kyng. Yea & the whole skayn was so closed in with fat or greace that he was not able to plucke it out. And the king was killed with the selfe same stroke. It is added also that dyrte came frō him, which thinges is wont to happen to those whiche dye violently.
23 And Ehud got him out thorough the porche, and shut the dores of the parler about him, and locked them.
24 When he was gone out, his seruauntes came, and looked and beholde the dores of the parler were locked. Then they sayd: Surely he couereth his feete in his sommer chamber.
25 And they taryed till they were ashamed, and beholde he opened not the doores of the parler. Wherefore they toke a kay and opened thē. And behold their Lord was fallen down dead on the earth.
Ehud when he went forth plucked the doores after hym and locked them: for there is a certayn kynd of lockes made in such sort, y
t w
tout a kay, of a mā plucke the dores after him, they wil straightway locke.
Augustine. And
Augustine writyng of this place, sayth that they are in Affrike euery where called
Verudata. The seruaunts of Egl n when Ehud was come forth, suspected no euill, bycause as it is most lykely, he neuer chaunged his countenance when he went forth but went hys way fayre and softly as thoughe he had committed no wicked acte. And they thought that the king had shut
Thedores, bycause peraduenture he would ease him selfe. And that is ment by the Hebrew phrase wherin they say.
He peraduē ture couereth his feete. For in that worke men vsed to couer their feete with garmentes like a tabernacle or tente. And whilest the seruauntes of
Eglon taryed and wayted,
Ehud had good leasure to flye. But at the length when they were ashamed, they tooke a kay and opened the doores. They vse in courtes to haue many kayes of the kinges chamber, whiche the chamberlaynes diligently kepe: and that is it whiche is here sayde that they tooke a kaye. But when they sawe their king so vily and miserably slayne, we must beleue that they were amased, so that they could not well tell what was to be doone. The thing was so straūge whiche had happened. Peraduenture also they a while mourned and lamented or elles prouided to saue them selues by flyght, bycause they had not well kepte the kyng.
26 And Ehud escaped whilest they taryed, and was passed ouer the quarrey of stones (or place of grauen images) and escaped into Seirath.
27 And when he was come to hys, he blewe a trompet in mount Ephraim. And the children of Israell went downe with him from the hill and he went before them.
28 And he sayd vnto them: Follow me, for the Lord hath deliuered
[Page] your enemies the Moabites into your handes: and they descended after him and tooke the passages of Iordan towarde Moab, and suffred not a man to passe ouer.
This place
Seirath, whiche is here mencioned, is not the mount
Seir in
Idumea, but is a place not farre from mount
Ephraim, as the wordes which follow do manifestly declare. And
Ehud beyng of a noble courage when he had slayne the tyranne, left not his matters halfe done and halfe vndone, as did
Brutus and
Cassius long sins when they had slayne
Cesar, with a trumpet he called together the
Ephraites, whiche were men very expert in warres, and those by his authoritie he exhorted to battayle, makyng them assured y
e God had graunted him the victory. They therfore stopped y
e
passages of Iordane, that y
e
Moabites, which were in the kyngdome of y
e Israelites, & had gotten part of it as it is already declared, should not flye away. And lest others of the coūtrey of
Moab should passe ouer the riuer, to succor their owne men, whiche were among the Hebrues.
29 And they slewe of the Moabites the same tyme, aboute a ten thousande men whiche were all fat, and all strong men, and there escaped not a man.
30 So Moab was subdued that day vnder the hande of Israell: and the land had rest lxxx. yeares.
Whē they had stopped the passages of y
e riuer of
Iordane, they slew x. thousād
Moabites, which at y
e tyme dwelt in y
e dominiōs of the Hebrues. And they which were slayne were no common men, but in our history, are called
Fattemen, not that they were fat in body but in richesse.
For they were riche and very strōg. For by their myght and warlike power the Israelites were brought into bondage. Wherfore it is very aptly a litle afterward sayd, that y
e Hebrues when they had gotten this victory, were in quiet a very lōg tyme after: for the
Moabites wer so cōsumed and worne away, by reason their notable and excellent captaynes wer lost,
Augustine. What peace of the Romanes was lōger thē other. that they were not able to renew warre agayne. And therfore it is sayde,
That Moab was subdued vnder the hand of Israell. Augustine diligently consideryng, that the lād was at rest lxxx. yeares, hath learnedly noted, y
t the
Romanes had neuer peace aboue the space of xl. yeares, which they had in y
e tyme of
Numa Pompilius. For y
e king setting aside the study of making warre, applied himself wholy to institute ceremonies. Wherfore therby he concludeth y
t the affaires of the Israelites were longer in quiet, thā were y
e affaires of y
e
Romanes. Howbeit the Hebrues thinke, that in that sūme of lxxx. yeres are cōprehended those xviii yeares, wherin the Hebrues serued the kyng of
Moab, that the supputation of the tyme might agree more iustly.
There are two thinges whiche are to be marked in this place. First y
e
Ehud was of a valeant, strong, & noble courage, whereunto was adioyned a singular prudēce. And of those giftes, faith was the principall foūdatiō, for vnlesse he had effectually beleued god whē he called him & also his promise he wold neuer haue put his life & goods into so great ieopardies. The second thing is, y
t all thinges had therfore happy successe, bycause god neuer faileth those, which obey him, followyng their vocation, wherby they feele that by him they are called to accomplishe any thyng.
But now that we haue briefly touched y
e history, there are thre places or questiōs offred vnto vs whiche may not by any meanes be left vnspokē of. For foras much as
Ehud (as we haue heard) vsed guile, & y
e euill guile, made also a lye, & drew hys sworde agaynst hys prince, me thinketh it is worthy to be declared, whether it be lawfull for Christiā & godly mē to vse guile. Secondly whether it be lawful to lye, lastly, whether y
e subiectes may inuade their prīce for any cause.
¶Of Guile.
NOw let vs speake of the first. That whiche the Latines call
Dolus (that is guile) the Grecians call
[...], so that their worde and the Latines, is almost all one. But the Hebrues call it
Mirmah or
Rimiah. Then we must know this, that guile is there vsed, where any thing lyeth secret whiche is hidden,
Plautus. lest the guile should appeare or easely be sene. Wherfore
Plautus sayd, Guiles vnlesse they be couered by craft, they are no guiles. Thus much as touching the name. Now let vs come to the definition.
In the digestes
de dolo malo lege. 1.
The definition of guile.
Seruius.
Seruius an interpreter of the lawe hath thus defined euil guile, namely to be a subtile inuention or deuise for to deceaue another by, when as one thing is done and an other thing dissembled. Wheresoeuer therfore is guile, there is deceate by some dissimulation.
Labeo. It is true in dede y
t
Labeo an interpretor of the law reproued the definitiō which
Seruius brought and that by two argumentes. Whereof the one is, that some may be beguiled without dissimulation or euill guile. Wherefore the difinition is more strayte and narrowe than that whiche is defined, whiche all men counte to be an error. The other argument is, bycause some sometymes by dissimulation do saue and defend their owne, or elles other mens thinges, and yet thereby they beguyle no man, neither do they hurte any man. Wherfore the definition is applyed vnto other thinges besides that whiche is defined:
An other definition of guile.
Vlpianu
[...]. whiche thing also is reproued as a faulte. Wherfore he thus defineth it: Noughty guile, is all craft, disceate and subtility inuented to beguile, delude, and deceaue an other.
Vlpianus in the same place alloweth the opinion of
Labeo. Sauyng the authoritie of suche a man I would say that
Labeo did not well in remouing dissimulation from the definitiō of deceate. And as touching the first argument whiche he hath, I deny, namely that men may be beguiled without dissimulation, bycause vnlesse they should be together without sense, they would not easely, be brought to receaue & to take that which they manifestly see wilbe hurtefull vnto them. Wherfore it is necessary, that there be some shewe and colour added, whiche can by no meanes be done without dissimulation. Then, where as he saith that there are very many, whiche by dissimulation may defend either their owne thinges or elles thynges of other mens: I graunt that, but yet I affirme that the same is guile, although it be good guile, as afterward we shal more manifestly shew. Wherfore as touching the definition of guile, it semeth that fayning or dissimulation is alwayes to be added. And for that cause the definitiō of
Seruius pleaseth me better, which definition for all that I my selfe would rather apply vnto guile in generall, thā vnto euill guile as he did. Beyng by this meanes peraduenture moued, bycause he vnderstode by deceate that deceate whiche should be hurtefull.
Cicero in his first booke of offices affirmeth that dissimulation or fayning,
Cicero. pertayne chiefly vnto the nature of guile. For he writeth that
Aquilius his familiar frende beyng demaunded what guile was, he answered, where one thyng is doone and an other thyng dissembled. To this sentence
Augustine assenteth,
Augustine. who (in his 7. treatise vpon Iohn expoundyng these wordes whiche Christ pronounced of
Nathaniel, Beholde a true Israelite in whō is no guile) sayth: Thē it is guile, whē one thing is done and an other thing fayned, &c. And to speake this by the waye, by this place is easely gathered,
Augustine pre
[...] ched vnto the people in
[...] ti
[...]e. that
Augustine preached his Sermons vnto y
e people in Latine, bicause y
e
Affricians vsed the
Romane tongue, although it were not pure, but in some wordes corrupt. For there
Augustine admonished the people, that
Dolus which is guile, signified not
Dolor that is pain as many corruptly spake, saying
Dolus illū torquet, that is as they meant. He is troubled with payne, when as in that place they should haue said
Dolor and not
Dolus: to take awaye therfore the ambiguitie of the worde, he sayeth, that
Dolus whiche is guile, signifieth fayning and dissimulation. And in the same place, to expresse what fayning beguilyng signifieth, he addeth,
Guile cōmeth of doublenesse of heart. that it commeth of doublenesse of the hearte. He allegeth th
[...] 12. Psalme, where when mention is made of guilefull men,
Dauid sayth that they speake in hart and in harts, that is, as hee
[Page] interpreteth, in one parte of their heart they do se the truth, & perceaue how the thing is: & in the other part they go about dissimulation & disceate. But in those (saith he) is no guile, which whē they se thēselues to be sinners, do also coūt thē selues for such, nether do they dissēble or boast of righteousnesse, as did y
e Pharisey, whē he prayed by y
e publican, & as other hipocrites also do.
Nathaniel had no guile in him, but not vniuersally, bycause euery mā is a lyer: & as
Paul writeth, there dwelleth no good thing in our flesh, for as much as it is altogether guilefull and disceatfull. It could be onely sayd of Christ in vniuersall, that he wanted guile. But yet they are blessed (as
Dauid sayth) to whom the Lord hath not imputed sinne, and in whose spirite there is no guile. For in as much as they are regenerate especially as touching the spirite that whiche they do they do it vprightly and simply: and such a one Christ affirmeth
Nathaniell to haue ben.
Augustine.The same
Augustine in the 10
Tome and his booke of 50. Homelies the first Homely, expoundeth this, whiche is writtē in the 33. Psalme of
Dauid what mā is he, which would lyue, & loueth to se good dayes? Refrayne thy tōgue frō euil, and thy lippes that they speake no guile, then (saith he) it is guile, when nothing is close and secret in the heart, and an other thing is expressed, either in word or dede,
Flatterers. as flatterers vse to do, which cōmēd some contrary to y
e which they think, therby either to eat their meat & drinke their drinke, or els to get some other benefite at their hāds. And y
t which he speaketh of flatterers, may also be vnderstād of enemies & backbyters. But y
t it is conueniēt y
t men should do y
t which they do vprightly & simply,
[...]omere. y
e very Ethnikes saw. Wherfore
Achilles in
Homere saith, that he doth no lesse thā death, hate those mē, which speake otherwise than they thinke. Wherfore we thinke y
t it is not ill to affirme a subtile inuention to deceaue a mā, when as one thing is done and an other thyng dissembled is set for the generall worde in the definition of guile.
Good guile & euill guile.But after this definition we must adde a distinctiō. For some guile is good & other some is euill, we call y
e good, which is not hurtfull: & when as it hurteth none, but somtimes profiteth. But euil guile is hurtful, & euer hurteth somebody. These mēbres may easely be made playne by exāples. Nurces do cōtinually vse good guile toward their litle ones, therby to please & still thē: for with them they dissēble & fayne very many thinges. Phisitiās also do after y
e same sorte deceaue them y
t are sicke, bycause they would heale them. Yea and
Chrisostome in his first boke
de Sacerdotio, writeth, y
t a certaine Phisitiā so beguiled one y
t was sicke of an agew, y
t in drinking water, he thought he dronke wine. And the same
Chrisostome in the same place affirmeth,
Chrisostome. y
t he himselfe vsed a good guile, to beguile
Basilius to take vpō him a bishopricke, whē y
t he in no case was minded that way.
Dauid by this kind of guile, escaped the handes of the king of the
Philistiās. For he fayned himself to be a foole, so y
t the king iudged him vnworthy to be punished. But of euil guile there are very many exāples in y
e holy scriptures amō gest which this act of
Ehud which we now interpret, is one. And y
t is an other also which y
e Hebrues did, whē they wēt forth of
Egipt, who desired to borow both of their neighbours & also of their frendes precious garmētes, goldē & siluer vessels, & yet they minded vtterly to robbe thē of thē. To this kind also belongeth, that whiche
Chusai the
Arachite did in deceauing
Absolon. This acte also may be counted among them, which
Simeō and
Leui perpetrated against
Emor & the
Sichemites. I could bryng a great many mo exāples, if I would nedelesse stande longe about a thing that is manifest.
Of y
e first kind of guile, which is called good & vnhurtful, no mā wil cōtēd, but y
t it is lawfull to vse it. But of y
e other kind there is a doubt. Wherof if I shuld be demāded,
Euill guile is not prohibited to be vsed against enemies I wold thinke this answere shuld be made. That we may not vse euil guile wyth our frendes, but agaynst our enemies it is not prohibited, bycause it is as it were armor. Wherfore if it be lawfull to make warres against thē iustly with armor, guiles also are to be admitted according to the saying of the Poete:
VVhether it be guile or power, who can require in an enemy?
Howbeit this is to be obserued,
Who bee the true enemyes. that we speake only of those enemyes which either God him selfe, or the publicque wealth, or a iust Magistrate declareth to be enemyes, and not those whiche euery priuate man hateth. Farther I doubt not, but that seyng it is lawfull to repell violence by violence, when there is no other waye to escape, it is also lawfull to vse guiles agaynst guiles. For he whiche repelleth violence by violence, as the lawes do permitte, the same man is not to be counted a priuate man, for as muche as he is armed by the Magistrate. Wherfore it is manifest that he doth not agaynst the lawe, but with the lawe. So he that is sodenly oppressed, may lawfully escape by euill guile if he can. Moreouer the Scriptures teache that this kinde of guile is iust.
Ierome. For
Ierome sayth, and it is written in the decrees .22. question 2. chap:
Vtilem. That
Iehu did very well dissemble with the Priestes of
Baal, bycause he could not haue kylled them all, if he had begon to put some of them to death. Wherfore to gather them all together, he fayned hymselfe to be much more studious to worship
Baal than was
Achab, and by that meane he slewe euery one of them.
But this is to be taken heede of, that they whiche are so destroyed by guile,
An acte of the king of Denmarke.. be very worthy of punishment, & as they are cōmonly called, notorious offenders, & such as can not be punished by an ordinary waye. For whiche cause the kyng of
Dēmarke of some is cōmēded, which by guile destroyed most pernicious thieues, which he could not take. For he fayned a warre, and made a proclamation that as many as would come should receaue wages of hym, and promised vnto the thieues pardon for their wicked actes whiche they had hitherto committed. But I (as I shall afterward declare) do not so fully allowe such examples.
Augustine (as it is found in the 14. question the 5. chap:
Dixit,
Augustine. & it is a place in his questions vpō
Exodus) sheweth that the Israelites deceaued y
e Egyptians, when they borowed of thē golden & siluer vessels, & yet it was not to be counted a faulte in thē, when as for al y
e no man doubted, but y
t they did it by euill guile. The same 23. question .2.
Dominus which is takē out of his questiōs vpon y
e boke of
Iosua, rehearseth y
e place, wherin it is sayd y
e God cōmaūded the Hebrues, to fight against the citie of
Hay by wiles, which without doubt belong to guile.
Ierome vpon the 17. chap: of
Ezechiel, bringeth this sentence as a worldly sentēce:
Ierome. namely,
VVhether it be guile or power, who can require in an enemy?
Howbeit he assenteth vnto it, althoughe he denieth y
t it can take place where an othe is made. But I will strayt waye expounde that.
Ambrose in the 14.
Ambrose. question the 4. permitteth guile, or gainefull fraud against enemies, & after this maner he interpreteth a place of
Deut. where God gaue the Iewes liberty to put their money to vsury to straungers, namely, y
t where the warre is iust, there also may vsury take place. For the goods of the enemies ar ours, & they may lawfully be taken away from them. And it skill not, whither it be done either by violence or by guile. There are which alledge that which is written in the latter Epistle to y
e
Corinthians the xii. chap: When I was crafty, I tooke you by guile. But y
t maketh nothing to the purpose, when as it is most manifest y
t he spake it in mockage. For hee fayned, as though he had receaued money of the
Corinthians by other mē, which by himself he refused to receaue, which thing he strait way putteth away. But those examples which we brought firste, do manifestly proue that it is lawfull to vse guile, yea & euill guile against enemyes, namely in keping close our Counsels & doinges, & vsyng coulorable workes & wordes.
The ciuile lawes permite guile against enemies. Nether do y
e ciuil lawes otherwise teach. In y
e Code
de cōmerciis et mercatoribus Lege. Non solū. The emperor decreed not only y
e no gold should be caried vnto y
e barbarous nacions y
t were enemies of y
e pub. wealth, but also y
t by subtile guile or pollicy y
e gold which they had, shuld be taken frō thē. Also in y
e digestes
de captiuis postliminio reuersis. Lege. Nihil interest, it is decreed, y
e captiues howe soeuer they returned into their coūtrey againe, should recouer agayne their owne goods, & old state, whether they were sent home againe, or whether they escaped by violēce, or by guile. Although afterward in
Lege postliminio Paragrapho captiuis,
[Page] y
t be restrained, if y
t they returne w
t a mind to tary at home. For if they shuld either promise or sweare vnto their enemies to returne, they should not enioy y
e right of returnīg.
Attilius Regulus. Wherfore
Attiliꝰ Regulꝰ enioyed not y
e benefit, bicause he was sēt to Rome to persuade y
e senate for y
e chāgīg of captiues. Wherfore for as much as he promised & was minded to returne, he might not by y
e lawes vse euill guile.
A diuisiō of an other.By this also appeareth y
t to be true, whiche a litle before was said, namely y
t we may not vse euil guile against our enemy, if ther be an othe made. And y
t this may the playnlyer be vnderstand, we must deuide an othe as y
e lawyers do, so y
t one kinde of othe is called an approuing or an affirming of a thing, & an other a promising of a thing, or as thei speake, y
e one affectiue, & y
e other promissory. For whē we swere, either we do affirme or els deny some thing to be or to haue ben, which we ought neuer to do with euil guile, if we adde therunto an othe. Or els we promise to performe somthing, & for as much as faith is to be kept euē with our enemy, y
e same faith also is not to be broken with euill guile. Wherefore if those things which we haue sworne vnto our enemy to kepe & obserue, are temporal goods, as are money, honours, & life of the body, for these things the name of God is not to be prophaned. Wherfore
Dauid in his .15.
Psal. sayth: He y
t sweareth to do euill, & changeth not. In Hebrew it is thus written
Nischoah Leharah Velo Iamid,
Kimhi. which place I know
Kimhi expoundeth of those, which vowe vnto God certaine hard & sharpe things, which serue to y
e subduyng of the fleshe, neyther do ther chaūge y
e which they haue promised. But y
e sentence me thinketh semeth more simple, if it haue a larger sense, namely of an othe hurtful vnto vs, which a good & godly man will not abrogate or chaunge.
Ierome.
Ierome also vpon
Ezechiell the 17. chap. is of this opinion. For there y
e Lord saith y
t he was very angry against
Zedechias, bycause he had broken y
e othe which he had made vnto
Nebuchad-nezar king of
Babilon. For although the Iewes counted him as an enemy, yet as
Ierome teacheth, he was now as a frende, when he had by an othe promised his faith vnto
Zedechias. For y
e belōgeth vnto friends one to be faithful vnto the other.
Ambrose. Wherfore euil guile ought there to take no place. And
Augustine in y
e 33. questiō y
e 1. chap:
Noli existimare, writing vnto
Bonifacius admonisheth him to kepe faith w
t his enemy also.
Augustine.
Ambrose also in y
e 28. questiō y
e 4. chap.
Innocēs, admonisheth the same, & hath y
e same sentence in his boke
de officiis, where he bringeth the example of
Iosua toward the
Gabaonites, who althoughe he might haue made the othe voyde & of no force, yet by y
e consent of God he caused it to be kept & ratified. Neither suffered be the
Gabaonites to be slayne, whō for all y
t he punished bicause of y
e guile which they vsed.
An othe for an vniust thing is to be broken. But if y
e othe be geuē for an vniust or vngodly thing, it is vtterly to be made frustrate, bycause an othe ought not to be a bond of iniquitie. Neither is it of necessitie, y
t a mā to be absolued of these kindes othes should come before some iudge. Which I therfore speake, bycause y
e Pope claimeth this right vnto himself, namely to release a bond in such kind of othes, & as they commōly say, to dispense with them, as it appeareth in the 15. question the 6.
The Pope dissolued both lawfull & vnlawful wher
Nicholaus absolueth one
Treuerensis. And his pride & arrogācy hath so farre now at the length extended his ryght or power, that he absolueth not onely vnlawful othes, but he abrogateth also iust and lawful othes when it semeth good vnto himselfe. So
Zacharias losed the frenche men of an othe, wherein they were bound vnto their kyng, and he put the kyng from his kyngdome, and substituted
Peppine in his place. But that is not to be meruayled at, when as it is a common saying in the courte of Rome at this daye:
A prouerbe of the courte of Rome.
Non est regum & magnatū, sed mercatorum stare iuramentis, that is: It is not mete for kynges and noble men, but for merchantes to keepe their othes.
Wherefore if there be an othe made, guile is not to be vsed vnles peraduenture the one partye to whom the othe is made, shall go from the condicions and couenauntes, for then the common saying muste take place, he that breaketh faith,
Ierome. let faith also be brokē vnto him. Wherfore
Ierome ad Nepotianū
[Page 86] cōmendeth this saying of
Domitius y
e Orator vnto
Phillip, when thou countest not me for a senator, I also wil not count thee for a Consul. But hereof we haue testimonies also in the holy scriptures: for
Paul in y
e first to the
Corinth: the .7. chap: writeth, as touching faith geuē in matrimony, If y
e vnfaithfull depart let him depart. A brother or a sister is not in subiection vnto such, but God hath called vs in peace. And those thinges which are alledged of an othe, I vnderstād also to be of the same efficacy in promises & couenants. In which promises & couenants I affirme, y
e godly & iust men ought both to vse playne & simple wordes, & also faithfully to fulfil them.
Sophisticall reasons of the Thracians. Wherfore y
e
Thrasians are iustly & worthily condemned who after y
e truce was made for 30. dayes, robbed & spoiled by night, excusing their act, for y
t their truce was made for y
e day & not for y
e night. Neither did y
e legat of y
e
Romaines vprightly, yea he Sophostically dealt with
Antiochus,
The guile of the Legate of the Romanes against
Anthiochus. who when he had decreed y
t the one halfe of the ships should be geuen vnto the
Romaines & the other halfe to y
e kyng, cōmaunded them al to be deuided & cut in sonder in very dede. But he did it that the king should be vtterly destitute of a warrelike Nauy. Wherfore what soeuer a godly man shall promise, he ought before deepely to weygh with hym selfe, whether he be able to stande by hys wordes and promises. Wherefore
Ierome hath written vnto
Celautia:
Ierome. thynges whiche thou shalt say, thinke thou swearest them.
As touching the ende of the question, y
t the thing may be the more manifest, ther remaine certain doubts to be examined. First if a mā promise vnto any mā armor and helpe & that for the space of thre or foure yeares: & in the meane tyme y
e same man becōmeth a traitor to hys contrey, & maketh warre against it, whether in this case he ought to performe his fayth, or els by euill guile to breake it? I answere, y
t neither in this case, nor in the like, is faith to be kept: bycause,
When an othe is made of a lawfull othe an vnlawfull othe is not to be kept. as it is manifest, a mischieuous acte hapeneth in y
e meane time whiche with a safe cōscience we may not helpe. Neither in very dede is either euill guile or els periury here cōmitted. For he which hath sworne is not changed, but he to whom the othe was made. For othes can plucke awaye or diminishe nothing of those bondes which went before.
An othe dissolueth not former bondes. Wherfore for as much as euery man is bound vnto the word of god & to y
e health of his cōtrey, before he swereth any thing, y
e which is afterward sworne must be vnderstād, so y
t the first bondes be kept vnbroken. The same also must take place in vowes which are vowed. For although a man vow sole life, for somuch as he before was bound vnto y
e word of God, wherein it is sayd, y
t it is better to mary thā to burne, & they which cā not kepe thē selues chast let thē mary:
No othe or vow taketh away the bonde vnto the commaundements of God. he doth not by reason of the vow which followed take away the first bond. Wherfore if he can not kepe hym selfe chaste, or if he burne, he ought by the commaundement of God to mary: neither can any othe or vowe that is made, take away the power & strength of the commaundement of God.
There ariseth also an other doubt, of those princes, which haue geuē their publique faith or safeconduict vnto heretikes for to come vnto Coūsels or to communications, whether they ought to stande by their promise,
Whether faith is to be kepte with heretikes or violating theyr othe to kepe still the heretikes and to punish them. I aunswere, that they ought to kepe whole and pure the promise made vnto them.
But say they, we will easly graūt y
t it is then sinne, when we geue promise of a naughty thing. But if after we haue promised, we kepe & stand to our promises, we fall into an other grieuous sinne. For we execute not the office cōmitted vnto vs, neither do we obey God. For it is our part accordyng as God hath cō maunded, to punishe and to correcte Heretikes, that they wast not the Church, and go forwarde to defende theyr pestiferous doctrine amonge the godly. Neither doth any man doubt but that Magistrates ought to defende the Churches. Wherefore it semeth that Heretikes are not to be let goo, when we haue them once in our handes. I aunswere, that this in dede is the office of kynges, to punish and to correct heretikes, but yet then when they haue them in their power.
[Page] But if they geue them a saueconduct to come vnto them,
They whiche by a saueconduct come vnto kinges & princes, are not in their power. Of Iehu. then can they not say that they haue them in their power. For they came vnder a promise & an othe to go & come harmeles, otherwise they would not haue come. Wherfore if there be a promise made, it is not lawful to breake it. And this is the cause, why I before said, y
t I cā not easly allow y
e acte of the king of
Denmarke. Neither also would I iudge
Iehu to be without sinne, when he promised y
t he would worship
Baal, therby to get all
Baalites together: except peraduenture he manifestly knew, that he was by God stirred vp to do it. But of thys thing we will intreat in an other place. Let them therfore, which defend the Counsayle of
Constantia, cease to lay for their pretence, that
Iohn Husse with a safe conscience could not be let go, bicause it is a heinous sinne in all princes, if they suffre heretikes to wandre at liberty: for bycause that which they say is so farforth true, as they shalbe in their power. But when they come by a saueconducte geuen them, then are they at liberty, neither are they sayd to be in the power of the princes, which call them.
Whether faith is to be kepte with thieues.Other are in doubt, whether it be lawfull to vse euill guile against thieues, so that if a man fall into their handes, & by an othe be made vnto them, is suffred to go home vpon this condicion, there to gather money to redeme himselfe, whether (I say) he ought to returne vnto thē with the money, or w
tout it, if he cā not get it, as he hoped to haue done, especially if in a manner he were assured, either to liue in perpetual seruitude, or els to be put to a most cruel death. I aunswere, that in my iudgemēt he ought to returne vnto them, for as much as in this case there is no daunger, but as touching goods of this world, of money (I say) liberty, & life of the body, whiche are not so muche to be estemed, that for their sakes an othe, or the name of GOD should be violated. And the verse of
Dauid before brought serueth aptly for this purpose. And this sentence is so firme & true that euen an Ethnike,
Attilius Regulus.
Marcus Attilius Regulus I say, knew it. For he returned to
Carthago, where he knew certaynly, that either he should be in perpetual seruitude, or els lose his life, and that most cruelly. Neither canst thou aunswere me, that he did foolishly therin: bycause the
Romayne lawes (as we haue before said)
de captiuis, & postliminio reuersis, in lege postliminiū Paragrapho Captiuus, do ordeyne and holyly decree that he should not be counted to enioy the benefite of the law
postliminius, which had promised to returne agayn. Farther the nature of man persuadeth the selfe same thing, for it is ciuile & delighteth in society.
Wherefore next to God and godlines towarde him, there is nothing whiche ought more to esteme, then fayth, whiche wonderfully helpeth humane fellowship. For without it, it is not possible for men to liue together. Farther who will not say, that the money, liberty, and life of one man is rather to be lost, then the money, libertyes, and liues of innumerable men? For if couenantes and promyses be not kept with those thieues, henceforth they will geue credet to no man that they shall take, they would sende home none to their owne house to fetche their raunsome, but as many as they take, either they will kill them, or els kepe them with them in miserable and perpetuall bondage.
Lastly, this I thinke good to admonishe you of, that in othes let signes of vniuersality trouble no man. As, if a man promise and swere vnto hys frende that he wil be an helper vnto him in all thinges, or if a man promise and sweare vnto a Scoole or vnto the Churche, that he will do and obserue all thynges whiche it shall decree.
How it is lawfull to sweare certain thyngs vniuersally. For all suche kynde of speaches (as it appeareth by that whiche we haue sayde) are to be vnderstande, so that the obedience of the worde of God be kepte. And vndoutedly, althoughe that clause be by the nature of another vnderstād alwayes to be added, yet for al y
t it is the duty of godly mē to expresse it, when they are receaued into any vniuersity, College, office, corporatiō, or felowship, & according to the custome are cōpelled to sweare for to obserue statutes, lawes & decrees. It is the sure way (I say) by expresse wordes to testifie, y
t they wil obserue all those things, vnles they shal finde y
t any of y
e same ar against
[Page 87] y
e word of god. And as touching this matter I think I haue spokē sufficiēt now. Our
Ehud vsed euill guile. I graunt: but yet agaynst hys enemy. Neither doth the scripture make mencion of any othe that was made betwene him &
Eglon y
e kyng. And though there had ben an othe, yet he had ben quitte of it, for as much as y
e stirring vp of god, wherby god opened vnto him his will, had abrogated it.
¶Of Truth and of a Lye.
NOw resteth to intreate of the second question, namely.
Of Truth. Whether it be lawfull for a good & godly mā to lye. But first before I entreat of a lye. I thinke it good somwhat to speake of truth, whiche vndoubtedly is an excellent vertue.
Truth (as saith
Tullius de Inuentione) is, wherby things which are,
Tullius. whiche haue ben, & which shalbe are spoken vnaltered. Wherin we first note, that it cō sisteth in wordes: for (saith he) they are spokē, not y
t I am ignoraūt, y
t both dumbe men, & also other mē speake somtime by signes,
Augustine. but bycause (as saith
Augustine in his first boke
de doctrina Christiana) wordes among other signes are y
e principall & most playne. Farther we are hereby taught, that truth is not only to be considered as touching one difference of time, but as concerning thre differēces, for he saith, both those thinges which are, and whiche haue ben, & which shalbe. These things vndoubtedly are then spoken truly, when they are set forth vnaltered, that is, euen as they are, & by speaking made neither more ample nor lesse than they are.
Augustine. This selfe same thing almost hath
Augustine sayd in his booke
de vera Religione chap: 36. where he writeth, that the truth is, whereby y
e whiche is, is signified.
Truth is a vertue. And it is a vertue bycause by it men are made prone & redy to speake that which is true. The generall worde of it is equalitie,
The generall of vertue is equalitie. wherunto is ioyned in steade of difference, this voyce, namely, of wordes, to the thinges which are signified. And as it is well knowen of all men, all vertues leuel vnto the middest, & flye frō extremities.
Two faultes in speaches. Wherfore in kinde of speches thou shalt find two faultes namely if thou shalt speake more than the thing is, or els lesse than the thing is. Neyther is vertue content with the middest only: for we must adde also circumstances, which vse continually to followe it. Wherfore the truth is not alway to be spokē to euery man, neither at all times, nor yet of euery thing, & yet we must not lye: but it is wisedome sometimes to kepe close those thinges which we wil not for iust occasiō haue knowen. He which should vaunt abrode euery where & vnto all mē the gifts of God geuen him, he should be counted foolish & vnwise: as cōtrary, he which should boast of a crime,
What truth requireth. wherinto by humane weaknesse he hath fallen, should rightly, and worthely be reproued. Truth therfore requireth this, that those things which we haue within vs as touching our sense or wil, be signified of vs as it is, prudētly & rarely. Farther the vertue, wherof we speake, hath chiefly simplicitie ioyned vnto it, & it is very much contrary vnto doublenesse. Besides this it is a part of iustice. For it rēdreth vnto things their wordes and to a neighbour the truth which of duty longeth vnto him, without whiche truth humane fellowship can not consiste. For if a mā should cōtinually suspect him selfe to be deceaued by any man, he would neuer beleue him in any thyng.
Aristotle. Whē an Irony is lawfull. Wherby amongest men al trades and societies perishe.
Aristotle in his Ethikes affirmeth that truth declineth sometimes to defection: especially when any man speaketh of himselfe. For y
e wisedome requireth, that a mā boast not of himselfe. Wherfore
Paul in his second Epistle to the
Corinthians the 12: chap. writeth: If I will boast of my selfe, I shall not be vnwise: but I will not, any man shoulde thynke of me, more than he seeth in me, or that he heareth of me. By these wordes, he reproueth those as foolishe and vnwise whiche do boast & glory euen of those good things which they haue. And he saith that he wil abstaine from it.
He which speaketh lesse of hī selfe than it is, lyeth not. Neither (sayth he) do I require, y
t any mā should thinke more of me, thā he either seeth in me or heareth of me. Neither is he which speaketh lesse of him selfe than it is, straightway to be accused as a lyer. For y
t whiche is more cōprehēdeth and
[Page] containeth in it selfe y
t which is lesse. For whosoeuer hath fifty, he may say truly y
t he hath twenty, althoughe he speaketh not all that he hath. Howbeit the same man,
We may not lye for humilicyes sake. if he should affirme that he had but onely .xx. or els should deny that he had any thing, without doubt he should lye: which is not to be committed, either for modesty sake, or els (as they say) bycause of humilitie.
And as for testimonies of the holy scriptures which do stirre vs vp to speake y
e truth, I could vndoubtedly bring a great many: but a few shal suffice. It is written in y
e x. cōmaundements: Thou shalt not beare false witnesse, which cōmaū dement is not only to be obserued in iudgement, but in all things whiche in our talke we testifie to be either true or false. Farther, God is set before vs of vs to be followed, whom the scriptures euery where pronounce to be true. Wherfore we also ought to be most feruent louers of the truth. And for that cause in
Exodus the 18. chap:
Iethro counselled
Moises, y
t he shuld make rulers ouer y
e people, such men as feared god, strong men, louers of the truth, & which hated couetousnesse.
Dauid saith also: Behold thou hast loued truth, & therfore thou hast made me to vnderstand wisedome in the inward & secret partes of my minde. These wordes sufficiently declare, y
t we are for y
e cause taught of god both by inwarde inspiraciō, & also by outward doctrine: bycause he is a louer of the truth, neither doth he easely suffre, y
t his children should either erre, or be deceaued by lyes. In
Zacharie the viii. chap. it is writtē: Speake ye the truth euery man to his neyghbour, which selfe same sentence
Paul vseth to the
Ephesians & he cōmaundeth the same vnto the
Collos. But to y
e
Corinth. the latter Epistle he saith of himselfe & of the other Apostles, y
t they cā haue nothing against y
e truth. Yea & the Scribes & Phariseys beyng ioyned with the
Herodians, after this sorte flattered Christ, whom they went about to entrappe in his speache. Master, we knowe y
t thou acceptest no persons, yea thou teachest y
e way of god in truth. Hereby they declared y
t it is a singular vertue for a noble & notable mā, to preferre the truth before all things. But let these testimonies of the holy scriptures be sufficiēt at this time. Now resteth to intreat of a lye.
Of a lye.
Augustine.
Augustine (who wrot of it to
Cosētius) affirmeth a lye to be a false significatiō of a word. And vndoubtedly all those things which before are declared of truth, we may by the contrarity affirme of this vice. And chiefly it is cōtrary to y
t that
Marcus Tullius affirmed of truth, namely that to be truth, wherby things which are, which haue ben, & which shalbe, are spokē vnaltered. And a lye is y
t, wherby is y
e signified which is not: for
Augustine cōtrarywise spake of y
e truth. This vice is so hurtful, y
t it maketh a mā which is infected with it,
In equally is the generall worde of a lye. to reioyce & to be glad in false thinges. The generall word of truth was equalitie, & of the vice y
e generall worde shalbe inequalitie. And as y
e vertue was very nye ioyned w
t simplicity: so belōgeth a lye to doublenes. Truth is a part of iustice. But a lye is a part of vniustice. By truth humane fellowship is kept, but by a lye it is hurte & ouerthrowen.
Augustine. But to returne to
Augustine who writeth, y
t he is sayd to lye, which w
t a wil to deceaue speaketh y
t which is false, & that to lye is nothing els, than to speake against the minde: for liers speake otherwise than they haue in their heart. But the desire to deceaue, is vtterly against iustice, loue & amitie,
Three thinges ioyned with a lye. which we mutually owe one vnto an other. There are thre things therfore in a lye: first to speake that which is false: secondly his will in speaking: and thirdly a desire to deceaue. The first parte longeth to the matter of a lye: the other two partes pertayne vnto the forme.
A diuision of a lye.A lye is deuided into a Seruiceable lye, a Sportfull lye, & a Pernitious lye. And this deuision commeth of no other thyng but of the effectes, or of the endes. For this is euermore true, that the endes them selues, may haue the nature both of the cause and of the effecte. For lyes do either profyte, or delyte, or elles hurte. The ende of a pernitious lye, is to hurte. The ende of a Sportefull lye is to delyte: and the ende of a Seruiseable lye is to profyte. But
Aristotle, bycause in vertue he chiefly considereth the meane,
Aristotle. therefore if in speakyng thou
[Page 88] excede that meane, he calleth that boasting: but if thou want of the meane, he nameth it
Irony. And in that euyl this is chiefly hurtful, bicause an euyl or false opinion is ingendred in the minde of our neighbour.
A lye is both euyll and also to be auoyded. For the which cause the same
Aristotle semeth to haue sayd wel, that a lye is both euyll, and also it is to be auoyded. Which thing we may also proue by testimonies of the holy Scriptures. For to this belong al those thinges which we before brought to styrre vs vp to speake the truth. And very many places are here and there set forth, which detest lyes.
Dauid saith: Thou wilt destroy al those which speake lyes.
In a lye is an abuse of signes. Ther are reasons also which persuade vs the same: whereof one is, in a lye is an abuse of signes. And for as muche as it is not lawful to abuse the giftes of God, a lye is vnderstand also to be prohibited. Farther (as it is before said) a lye is contrarye vnto humane fellowship, for in lying the conceauinges of the minde ar not cō municated vnto our brethren, but lyes. Wherfore seing man is by nature made vnto fellowship, and communication, when he speaketh false thinges, he fyghteth with his own nature. And as
Augustine saith: Faith is therin hurt,
Augustine. for hee which heareth, beleueth those thinges which are spoken. Wherfore that fayth, which he geueth vnto other mens woordes, is made frustrate. And so great a thing cannot be hurt without blame. And lastly euery man by lying, leeseth hys own credite: for being taken in a lye, he shal euer after be suspected. Wherefore though he would, he shall not bee able by admonition or correction to helpe hys neighbour. For the which cause the fault which is in a lye, pertaineth not onely to the hurt and losse of our neighbour, but it is in it by the general woord, as by that which we haue already said manifestly appeareth. But among lies,
What kinde of lye is most grieuous. that lye semeth to be most grieuous, which is cōmitted in religion, doctrine, and godlynes, bicause in no other thing can guile be more hurtful & pernicious. For there if we shal erre, we are thrust from the eternal felicity.
Augustine. Wherefore
Augustine in his
Encheridion the .18. chap. hath very wel wrytten that they in dede doo synne grieuously, which deceaue trauelyng men, shewing them a contrary waye: but they are much more detestable, which as touching godlynes by lying, doo bryng men into errours.
If the three kinde of lyes should be compared together, I meane a pernitious lye, a sportefull lye, and a seruiceable lye: A pernitious lye,
Two euyls in a pernitious lie should rightfullye be counted more detestable, bicause in it are two euyls. One is the abuse of signes: the other is, the hurt of our neighbour. And that both of the minde which deceiueth (which thing is common vnto all lyes) and also of the thing whych is lost. But as for other lyes, although they are not without fault, yet is that not a litle diminished by the good added vnto it, either of delectacion, or of helpe. And in dede a sportefull lye, hath in it but a smal and sclender nature of a lye:
A sporteful lye. for as much as the falsehood is straightway founde out, neither can it be long hydden from the hearers.
Augustine. Yea
Augustine wryteth that suche lyes are not to be counted for lyes. But as touching a seruiceable lye, the iudgement of it is more darke & hard. For some deny it to be synne: for they say it hath a consideration to thys,
Whyther a seruiceable lye bee synne. to helpe our neighbour, whom we ought in woordes and dedes to relieue as much as we can. Wherfore they thinke, that therby commeth no abuse of signes, for as much as al our thinges ought to haue a respect to the commodity of our brethren. Neither do they thinke that in it is sinne committed against humane societie, when as by this kinde of lye men are made safe, and kept harmlesse. Farther, they say, that where as it is in the holy scriptures written, that God wyll destroy al those which speake lyes: the same is not to be vnderstand of euery kind of lye, but onely of a pernicious lye. Which thing
Augustine also in hys
Encheridion the .18. chap. seemeth to graunt.
Plato. They bryng also the opinion of
Plato in his booke
de Repub, who although he feared away the people from lyes, yet he gaue Magistrates libertye to lye, especiallye in making of lawes. But in my iudgement, the thing is farre otherwyse, neither wyl I easily graunt that a seruiceable
[Page] lye wanteth the abuse of signes.
Aristotle. For
Aristotle in his booke
[...], defining woordes, saith that they are notes of those affections which we haue in our minde. Wherby it followeth, that al they abuse wordes, which signify thinges to be otherwise, than they thinke in their minde. Farther, that reason which they bring of loue, is a very weake reason. For we ought to help our neighbours: but yet by iust and honest meanes, otherwise let vs permit thefts, to be bestowed in almes geuing. But the sentence of the Apostle must abyde firme and stable, which is, that euil thinges must not be done, that therby good thinges may come to passe. Neither do I thinke that true, that by those kinde of lyes humane fellowship is not hurt, for as much as take awaye fayth, and there remaineth almost no trafficke among men.
But as touching that sentence of the holy scriptures, wherin it is said: Thou shalt destroy al them that speake lyes. We graunt with
Augustine, that that sentence is not vniuersally spoken, for as long as the power and coniunction of faith abideth with Christ, so long those sinnes ar not imputed, which otherwise of their own nature should be our destruction. And this also wil I easily graunt of seruiceable and sportful lyes, bicause they are not so much against charity, as are pernicious lyes. But this can no man deny, that in making a lye, we doo against faith. And we must vtterly graunt, that he which lyeth, looseth thereby his own credite, so that afterward he cannot profitably admonishe, reprooue, or with fruite geue counsel, as he ought to do. For they which heare him, will easily beleue that he seruiceably lyeth, to cal them againe into the way, & not that the thing is so in very dede.
A contentiō betwene Ierome & Augustine. This vndoubtedlye was the cause that
Augustine was against
Ierome, who in a maner attributed a seruiceable lye vnto the holy scriptures. If this (saith he) should be so, the authority of the holy scriptures wold soone decay. For the Readers of them would easily say, that the thing is not so, but that it is so written,
An error of Plato. to keepe men in doing their duty. Nether ought the authority of
Plato much to moue vs, for as much as in that place he very much erred, graunting that in thinges pertayning vnto God, they might fayne fables, which might serue to bring foorth and keepe a good opinion of them. Wythout doubt we may not mocke in matters touching God. Farther, the law of God is equal, and the selfe same, as it wyl not haue the people to lye: so also it prohibiteth the same vnto the Magistrates.
Who are to bee excused of a lie.Howbeit they cannot iustly be accused of a lye, which in their talke, ar farre from doublenes. For somtimes it cōmeth to passe that some speake that whych is false, and yet they thought the same to be true. With which men they also ar excused, which haue geuen their promise to do a thing, which afterward they are not able to performe. Bicause at the beginning when they promised it, they wer fully mynded to doo that which they had promised: and therefore they haue not lyed. If so be that afterward they doo not accomplish those thinges whiche they haue said, the same happeneth by some other meanes. And sometimes it happeneth, that he which deliuereth his sword to some man to kepe, falleth afterward mad: wherfore he ought not to restore the swoorde vnto him, which hath left it with him: bicause a new case (as the Lawyers say) requireth a new helpe. After which selfe same sort
Paule is excused, who sayd that he would go into Spaine, when as for al that he went not thither.
Paule also promised the
Corrinthians to come vnto them, which he perfourmed not: but yet he lyed not: bicause when he spake those wordes, he was determined so to do, but God had otherwise appointed the thing, as
Gelasius hath wel wrytten, as it is found in the .22. question the 2. chap.
Beatus. Vndoubtedly the disposition of God dissolueth and breaketh all bondes, as it is written in the .19. question, the .2. chap.
duae sunt.
Hiperbole per
[...]ne
[...] not al
[...]yes
[...].But what shal we say to Hiperbolical places which are in the holye Scriptures, which at the first sight seeme lyes? I answer, although there the sentēces in signifieng, hold not the meane, as touching quantitye, yet as touching the
[Page 89] substaunce it keepeth it. For those Hiperbolis or excessiue speches amplifye a thing, for their nature is not onely to set forth the thing, but also to bryng men into admiration of them, which thing by that maner of speche is most aptly attriued vnto. Neither haue lyes there any place, forasmuch as they breede not in the myndes of the hearers and readers any froward or false sence. A meane therfore is there to be kept, not vndoubtedly of the thing, but of the substance. The Euangelistes also are not to be accused of a lye, when as they setting foorth the actes of Christ, do not al vse the selfe same woordes. For vnto the truth it is sufficient that a thing be set forth as it was: but it is not required that it be expressed by the selfe same woordes. Yea it is often times done through the goodnes of the holye ghost, that the forme of the narration shoulde varye. For by that meanes those thinges which are not sufficientlye expressed in the one, are more amply declared by an other.
But they vse to obiect the Midwiues of the Hebrues,
Of the mydwyfes of y
e Hebrewes and of Rahab.
Augustine. which although they lyed, yet God rewarded them: The same also happened to
Rahab the Harlot, or a table keeper.
Augustine answereth, that in the Midwiues the lye pleased not the Lord, but the faith and feare which they had towards God, and the mercy which they shewed vnto the Israelites. And the same doth the holy history by expresse wordes testify. And no otherwyse must we thinke of
Rahab.
Gregory. But
Gregories opinion I neuer like, who saith, that for the lye which they made, their eternall reward was turned into a temporal reward, bicause for the celestial blessednes it is said that God builded them houses. But I iudge, that by reason of the true faith, which was strong in them, so that it brought foorth loue and the feare of God, which are iust and lawful fruites thereof, although of infirmity they lyed, yet were not they therefore bereued of eternal felicity.
Abraham also is obiected, who said y
t
Sara was hys syster.
Augustine. Whether Abraham made a lye of Sara. But therin (as
Augustine teacheth) he lyed not: he told that which was true, but yet he spake not al the truth. And that is of no man required, to vtter all that is true, which he knoweth. He did not tel that she was his wife: yet bicause she was his kinswomā, he might according to the maner of the Hebrues truly say that she was hys syster. But he seemeth not to be vtterly excused: for although he lied not in calling her sister, yet it seemeth that therein he fel, bicause in not opening that she was hys wife, he put her in daunger of leesing her chastity. For he left her naked of that ayde, whereby onely she might haue bene defended from comming into straunge loues. Neither is it necessary that I should labour vtterly to defende
Abraham:
Augustine. For he was a man, and by ouer much feare he might easily fall. Howbeit
Augustine mencioneth, that
Abraham was then in daunger two maner of waies: one was least he should be kylled himselfe, the other was the adulterye of his wyfe. The first daunger he might auoyde by calling her sister: but the other, namelye, least she should be defiled, he was not able to repell, for althoughe he had sayde that he was her husband, that woulde not haue serued to haue deliuered her frō the filthy lustes of the Egiptians. Wherefore hee committed vnto God that, which he himselfe could not turne from hym. And in that which hee had in hys own power he woulde not tempt God. This seemeth to be
Augustines iudgement. But what I iudge, I haue before declared.
But did not the same
Abraham lye, when he said vnto his seruauntes: Tary here, and we wyl returne vnto you: when as for al that he was mynded to sacrifice hys sonne: which if he had done, he shoulde not then haue returned together with his sonne, but alone?
Iacob also by expresse woordes lyed, when he said vnto his father: I am
Esau thy sonne.
Paule likewise (as it is written in the Actes) sayth that he knew not that he was the chiefe priest, which commaunded him to be stricken: when as yet (as
Augustine testifieth in his Sermon
de puero Centurionis, and as it is wrytten in the .23. Question the .1. chap.
Paratus) he knew him well ynoughe.
Paule (sayth he) was brought vp among the Iewes, he had learned
[Page] the law at the feete of
Gamaliel, wherfore he knew very wel the chief priest from other men.
Iehu also manifestly lyed, when he said that he would worship
Baal.
Augustine. Two kindes of men.
Augustine writeth that there are two kindes of men mencioned in the holye scriptures. For hereby it is manifest that some wer by God made so perfect, that although they were not without synne, yet we may not rashly iudge euyl of them, but rather see how we may defend those thinges, which in their works haue a shew of synne. They oftentimes were so moued by the holye ghost, that God by their wordes and actes would make open certaine secretes. Wherefore we must beleue that oftentimes they both spake and also dyd certaine thinges by prophecy. So
Abraham, when he saide: we wyl returne vnto you, prophesied vnwares, that which should be. For with
Isaac in safetye he returned from the mountaine. And
Iacob in saying: I am
Esau thy sonne, woulde declare nothyng els, but that hee was the man, to whom the degree, blessing and dignitye was due, which thinges semed to pertaine vnto
Esau that was first borne.
Paule also prophecied what should at the length become of the high Priest, namelye thys, that he should be destroied like a wall that is plucked downe and as a thyng altogether fained and hipocritical. Farther (saith
Augustine) there wer other men not so perfect, but wicked, which in the olde Testament are mencioned either to haue lyed, or els to haue done somthing which semeth synne. Of those men hee thinketh, we may not so labour for to defend a good fame and opinion of them. Of this sorte of men was
Iehu: for although that murther pleased God, whiche he executed vpon
Achab and his familye, and also his weeding out of
Baal, and the worshippers therof, yet for al that he was a wycked king, neyther departed he from the woorshipping of golden Calues. Wherefore it is lawfull for vs to graunt, that in lying he synned.
A distinctiō to be noted.And (as I thinke, and before admonished) by this onely distinction, we maye easily dissolue this doubt. Namely, that those men were styrred vp to lye, either by the spirite of man, or by the motion of God. When they dyd it as men, wee will not denye but that they synned: but when they spake so by the inspiration God, we will maruaile at their sayinges and doinges, but let vs not take example by them, or follow them.
¶Of dissimulation.
Dissimulacion is of two kindes.BVt what shal we affirme of dissimulatiō? I answer, that it is of two kindes. One is, which hath a respect onely to deceaue. And that forasmuch as it differeth not much from a lye, it is vndoubtedlye synne. If one being wicked, doo fayne himselfe to be good and holy, the same man without doubt is an hipocrite: and in that he dissembleth, he haynously sinneth. Whosoeuer also hauing a malitious and enuious hart against anye man, doth flatter the same man, and dissembleth to be his friend, he is not without synne, yea he is infected with a detestable dissimulation. But ther is an other kinde of dissimulation, which tendeth not to deceaue any man, but serueth onely to kepe counsels secrete that they bee not hindred. And this dissimulation is not to be repudiated, or to be condemned as a syn, forasmuch (as we haue alredy declared) that it is not alwaies required, that we shoulde open what soeuer truth wee knowe.
What Christ mēt by his dissimulation. So Christe being most innocent, tooke vpon him the flesh of syn, & hid his innocency & diuine nature. And that not to deceiue mortal men, but that he might suffer for the saluatiō of mēt For if he had bene knowen to haue bene the Lord of glory, thei would neuer (as saith the Apostle) haue crucified him. The same Christ fained also before two of his Disciples that he would go farther. He did not that to deceiue them, but hee therfore a while opened not himself vnto them, to reprooue them of their incredulity, and to instruct them by testimonies of the scriptures. Therewithall also he signified how farre he was from their hartes. Or as
Augustine interprereth it, he shaddowed vnto them his departure into heauen. Wherefore it manifestly
[Page 90] appeareth, that in those dissimulations there was no lye, seing his woordes did well agree wyth the thyng signified.
And
Dauid when hee fell into a most great daunger before
Achin Kyng of
Geth, chaunged his countenaunce and fained himselfe a foole,
Of the dissimulatiō of Dauid. and for that hee seemed suche a one, he escaped. Here some say that he cōmitted no dissimulation, but that God, to deliuer him, strake such a feare in him, that his senses might be taken from him, and so did these thinges whych are rehearsed of him in the fyrst booke of
Samuel. Wherefore in his Psalme which beginneth:
Psal. 34. I wyl alway geue thankes vnto the Lorde, he gaue thankes vnto God for so great a benefite. And therwithal in his act by the inspiratiō of God, he shadowed what Christ should suffer for our sakes, namely that he should be counted as a foole and a mad mā. Either els we answer, that
Dauid is not altogether to be excused of synne, if as a man being more afeard than was mete, he sought for this kinde of helpe. But if he by the mocion of God did it wittingly and with knowledge, we wil not accuse him of synne, although we may not follow his example. Neither is it lawful, that any man should fayne himselfe to haue committed any crime, which he hath not perpetrated,
Gregory.
Augustine. although
Gregory saith that good myndes wyll there acknowledge a fault wher none is.
Augustine writeth more truly and soundly of that thing in his .29. Sermon
de verbis Apostoli. For he writeth: In so faining, if before thou wast not a sinner, thou shalt be made a sinner, namely in saying y
t thou hast cōmitted that yl which thou hast not perpetrated. It is lawful in dede for euery man to confesse himself to be a synner in vniuersall. But this or that crime in special no man ought to receaue in himself, which he hath not in verye deede committed. Farther, we must note, that this is true, that it is not required of vs, that we should open the truth euery where, and in all places to speake al that we know: but yet in iudgement the same is not to bee permitted. For when two of vs are examined as witnesses, there we are bounde to testifye that whych we know serueth for the thing, whereof at that time we be demaunded.
¶Whither it be lawful to lye to preserue the lyfe of our Neyghbours.
BVt there ariseth a more hard doubt, namely, whether it be lawfull to lye for to preserue the life of our neighbour.
Augustine of a lye to
Consentius saith:
Augustine. If a man should be in verye great daunger of death, & the same man also should know that his sonne also wer in the like extreme daunger, which happeneth to dye, and thou knowest of his death: when the Parent shal aske thee, lyueth my sonne or no? and thou art sure that he also wil dye, if thou shalt tel him that hys sonne is deceased: what wouldest thou do in this case? whyther thou sayest, he liueth: or whither thou saiest, I cannot tel, thou lyest. But if thou shall answer, that he is dead, al men wyll cry out vpon thee, as though thou haddest cōmitted manslaughter, and as though by thy heauy newes thou haddest bene the occasiō of the death of this father being sycke and lying at the poynt of death.
Augustine graunteth that it is a hard case, neither denieth he but that as a man he shoulde be moued, & peraduenture it might so happen, that affections woulde not suffer him to speake that which is iust & right. But al the length he concludeth that he should not lye. And he addeth moreouer,
A similitude. that if thou knowest that any vnchaste woman loueth thee inordinately, which also threateneth to kyl her selfe, yea and wil do it in very dede, vnles thou wylt graunt to her wicked lust, whether therfore thou oughtest to be entised to commit any filthye thing against chastitye? I think not. So also saith he, thou oughtest not for y
e sauing of thy neighbours life to offend against the truth. And moreouer what a window shuld be made open to lyes, if we shoulde otherwise iudge of thys. For that which one shall thincke to be lawful for life, an other wil iudge that he may do the same for money, an other for estimation, or for defending of lands & possessions. And so shal it come
[Page] to passe that there wil be no measure or end of lyes. We maye not suffer (sayth
Augustine) that any man should kil his own soule, for the corporall lyfe of an oother man. Yea and he affirmeth that we must not lye for the saluation of anye mans soule. Euery lye (sayth
Iohn) is not of God: but wee ought not to speake those thinges which are not of God.
What if murtherers should persecute a man to kil him, & thou knowest y
t he lyeth ther hiddē wher thou presently art, & they demaūd of thee if thou knowest whither he be there or no? He answereth, that if thou be of a valiant courage, & as it becōmeth a Christiā, y
u must say: wher he is I know, but I wil not vtter it, do ye what ye wil. But whē the matter cōmeth to this point, y
t for the safety of any mans life thou must make a lie, know thou that thou oughtest to cōmit the thing vnto God, & that thou hast nothing there more to doo. Either thou must answer, that thou wilt not betray him, or els thou must hold thy peace. But by thy silence the murtherer wil suspect that he is in thy house, and then thou shalt seme to haue geuen occasion of his taking. But in verye deede thou hast not so done. For thou canst not let him to thinke what he wil. Wherfore the matter is rather to be cōmitted vnto God, than that thou shouldest make a lye. Howbeit thou must very wel weigh with thy self, namely, to speake so, that thou say not al, and yet speake not falsly. For in these cases I thyncke it is not forbidden, yea I iudge it is most lawful to speake doubtfullye. And as touching this question, thys is sufficient.
As I deny not but that our
Ehud manifestly lied, so wil I also say that he was stirred vp of God so to speake. Those wordes vndoubtedly, although they deceiued
Eglon, yet without controuersy they declared that, which was in very deede true, namely the word of God, & that he had a secret thing to do with the kyng.
¶Whither it be lawful for Subiectes to ryse agaynst their Princes.
BVt leauing these thinges, let vs come vnto the third question, wherof for as much as I haue somwhat before spoken, I thinke not to speake of it aboundantly in this place, least I should be more ful of wordes than is needeful.
Let vs deuide subiects, as we haue before deuided them, so that some of them are mere priuate men, & others are in such sort inferiors, that the superiour power in a maner dependeth of them, as among the
Lacedemonians wer the
[...], and at Rome the
Tribunes of the people. Those which onely are subiect, & counted altogether priuate, ought not to rise against their Princes & Lordes, to dysplace them of their dignity or degree. The two Apostles
Peter &
Paul haue commaunded the same, namely that seruants should obey their Lordes, how rough & hard soeuer they be. Farther, the sword (as it is written to the
Romanes) is geuen onely to the powers. And they which resist the power, are sayde to resist the ordinance of god. God would that the Iewes should obey
Nabuchad-nezar, & he was angry with
Zedechias the king, bicause he fell from hym. Yea, &
Ieremy by the cōmaundement of God admonished and exhorted the people to pray for the health of the king of
Babilon. Dauid also would not stretch forth his hād against the anointed of the Lord: when he might haue done it with out any difficulty, & to his great cōmodity. The godly soldiours of
Iulianus the
Apostata, obeyed the same
Iulianus in fighting and pitching their campes: nether did they at any time (being also armed) rebel against that most cruel tyran.
Phocas whē he had slaine
Mauricius, possessed the Empire by great violence & vniustice, & wrote to
Rome to
Gregory, who obeyed him as his Prince, and gaue vnto him great reuerence.
But ther are in publike weales other, which in place & dignity are lower than Princes, & yet in very dede they elect the superior power, & by certaine lawes do gouern the publike wealth, as at this day we see in done by the Electors of the Empire, and peraduenture the same also is done in other kingdomes. To these
[Page 91] vndoubtedly (if the Prince performe not his couenants & promises) it is lawfull to constrain & to bring him into order, & by force to compel him to fulfil the conditions & couenants whiche he had promised, and that by warre when it cā not otherwise be done. By this meanes the
Romanes somtimes compelled the
Consul, whom they themselues had created, to go out of their offices. The
Danes in our time did put down their king, & held him long in prison.
Polidorus. Virgilius.
Polidorus Virgilius writeth, y
t the Englishmen somtimes cōpelled their kings to render accompt of the mony which they had noughtely consumed. Neither are we ignoraunt that
Tarquinius the proud,
Of Brutus and Cassius. was by the
Romanes for his ouermuch cruelty & arrogancy put out of his kingdome. I wil not speake of
Brutus &
Cassius, which slew
Caesar: but whether they did it iustly or otherwise, most graue mē vary in the opinions. And I in examining their enterprise by the rule of the scriptures, do not allow it. Bicause they gaue not vnto him the tyranny or Empire of
Rome, but he vsurped it himself by violence and power. And God (as
Daniel testifieth) transferreth Empires & kingdoms. And although it be lawful to resist tirānes which inuade a kingdome, yet when they haue obtayned the Empire, and that they do gouerne, it semeth not to belong to priuate men to put them downe. Wherfore forasmuch as the kingdome of the Iewes was suche a kingdome, that in it al men depended of the king (for they were not chosen by the noble men, but by succession the posterity of that family gouerned, which God had also cōmaūded) & therfore in the lawes in
Deut. & in the .1. booke of
Sam. wherein the ryght of a king is constituted, ther is no liberty graunted to any to resist them. Yea & somtimes it happeneth that some of them wer killed. But yet we neuer reade y
e god allowed the murther of them: yea he punished the murtherers. When God at any time would trouble the kings of
Iuda: he did it by the
Babilonians, Assirians, &
Egiptians, but not the Iewes. He onely armed
Iehu against his Lorde: whyche thing as it was peculiar, so also must not wee take example by it. Hee destroyed
Saul also by the handes of the Philistians, and not by
Dauid.
Neither am I ignorant how manye thinges are decreed of this matter in the Code, & in the digest in y
e law
Iuliā maiestatis. But I studieng to be brief do of purpose ouerpasse these things. And although I know right wel y
t the Ethniks in the old time appointed rewardes for such as killed Tirannes, yet I haue answered that godlines & the holy scriptures do not allow the same. Vndoubtedly if it be lawful for the people to put down kings that raigne vniustly, no kinges or Princes should at any time be in safety. For although they raygne iustly and holily, yet they cannot satisfy the people. And so much of this question.
31 After him was Sangar the sonne of Anath: and he smote of the Philistians .600. men w
t the goade of an oxe: & he also saued Israel.
What this
Sangar was, or of what tribe or family, the holy scripture doth not declare. But this coniecture is very likely, y
t when the Hebrues had a long tyme liued in peace vnder
Ehud, as sone as he was dead, the Philistiās began to vexe them. Wherfore
Sangar being stirred vp by God, defended the people from cō ming again into subiection vnder the Philistians. And among other victories, of the which I think ther wer very many, this is chiefly mēcioned as a miraculous & wonderful victory. The Hebrues think that this notable act of this
Sangar happened in the time of the oppression vnder
Iabin. But thei bring no reasons why they should so thinke. Farther,
Iosephus. by the holy scriptures it appeareth not how many yeres the Hebrues wer kept by this Iudge: yet by
Iosephus we may know, y
t he fought for the Israelites but onely one yere. That which we translate
wyth the goade of an Oxe, the
Grecians cal
[...], that is, with the foote or staffe of a plow. The comon translation in latin hath with the plow share.
Augustine.
Augustine (as it appeareth by his questions on this place) redeth, beside calues of the kyne. Which clause semeth to haue no sense in it. And he iudgeth y
t this
Sangar in this murther of y
e Philistians slew peraduēture many oxen, which ar called calues.
[Page] And he addeth that y
e Egiptians vsed in his time to call all kind of oxen of what age soeuer they wer, by y
e name of calues. As we (saith he) cal Chickens, all vniuersally as many as ar cōprehended vnder the kind of hens, with out any difference of yeares and age. In the meane time he confesseth that it is not so in the Hebrue, & he hath saide truly: for in y
e Hebrue bibles we read
Melamed. Which woord is deriued of this verbe
Lamad. And that verbe, in the cōiugation
Kal, is to learn, but in the cōiugation
Pihel, it is to teach. Wherfore
Melamed might be turned a teacher of Oxen,
Kimhi. namely to be y
t instrumēt wherby Oxen in plowing ar guided. And least we should doubt what it is,
Kimhi writeth y
t it is a rod or a staffe, in y
e end or top wherof ther is fastened a prick. And y
e Chaldey paraphrast testifieth the same, which in steede of y
e word hath put this word
Perasch: & that word signifieth to prick. Wherfore it is an instrumēt whereby oxen in plowing ar pricked. Wherfore the word
Peraschim signifieth horsmen, of spurres, wherby horses are by the riders vpon them, pricked. And thus much by the way.
The old writers thinke that in this place is vsed the figure
Synechdoche, as though
Sangar did not alone kil so great a number of Philistians, but that hee wyth other rusticall men fought agaynste them, whyche rusticall men were armed with no other kinde of weapons than with goades of Oxen. In deede I know that the holy scriptures many times do admit chaūge of numbers, which whither in this place it be to be receaued, I do very much doubt. Yea (if I should speake the truth as it is) I thinke the contrary: forasmuch as in this present hystory me thinketh no vulgare acte is set foorth, but rather a wonder or myracle. But howsoeuer it be, this I thinke is godlily and profitablye to be noted: That any thing may serue vs for weapons, when the woord of God is added. A slyng and stones of a ryuer furnished
Dauid nobly. The iaw bone also of an Asse was a weapon to
Samson, and a naile to
Iahel, wherwith she slew
Sisera. And contrariwise, what kind of weapōs of fence so euer we deuise, vnles it be strengthened by the word of God, it shalbe vtterly vnprofitable and serue to no purpose. The walles of
Iericho, which otherwise were wel fenced, fell downe of their own accord:
Psal. xxxiii. and the great sword of
Goliah the Giant was made to cut the throte of hys own maister. Wherfore it is most truly said in the Psalmes: A king is not saued by much strength, and a horse is a vayne thing to saue a man. But what doo we speake of weapons, when as the same happeneth vnto al creatures? For so long euery one of them is and abideth, as the woorde of God caryeth and vpholdeth them. For althings whatsoeuer they be, do by y
t onely both abide & consist. Yea and the Sacramentes themselues, taking away the woord of God, are vtterlye nothing. For what do we thinke bread, wyne, or water to haue by themselues, which may be profitable for our saluation,
Augustine. or serue to stirre vp or to strengthen faith? Vndoubtedly nothing. Wherefore
Augustine hath right well sayde: The word cōmeth vnto the element, & it is made a sacrament. Wherfore in that .vi. hundred Philistians were kylled with an Oxe goade, wee must beleue that the same came to passe by the cōmaundement of God, & by the power of his woord.
¶The .iiii. Chapter.
1.
ANd the children of Israel began againe to do wickedly in the sight of the Lord, when Ehud was dead.
2 And the Lord sold them into the hand of Iabin king of Chanaan, which raygned in Hazor, whose captain of warre was called Sisera, which dwelt in Hazoreth of the Gentyles.
The cause of the oppression of the Israelites is mencioned, namely, bicause when
Ehud was dead, they began to do euil, that is, to sinne. They abused therfore the quietnes and tranquillity of the foure score yeares, in which they lyued
[Page 92] peaceably, vnder their Iudge, neither declined they onely from the right waye, but also they increased in syn. This is the nature of carnal men, that by prosperytie they are not made the better, but farrs woorser.
VVhen Ehud was dead. It cannot be told how easily the people fal from the right way, when as holy Princes are also remoued from the same. Wherefore that is not vnworthely to be counted a most grieuous plague when the pyllers both of the Church and also of the publike wealth are taken awaye.
There is no mention made of the death of Sanger. But what should be the cause, why there is no mention made of the death of
Sangar, wee cannot easily tel. The Hebrue interpreters saye, that it therefore happened, bycause he continued but a litle time, and for that cause is scarcely coūted among the Iudges: nether was the deliuery which by him happened, perfect, which is in the next chapter by expresse wordes declared. Farther, it is in dede sayd of hym, that he saued Israel: but it is not added as it is of
Othoniel and
Ehud, that the land was any yeares at rest vnder hym.
And God sold them. When al thinges seme vnto the vngodly to be in quiet and at rest, and that they thinke that on no syde anye hurt or euyll can happen vnto them, God euen then vseth by a certayne wonderfull manner to styrre vp great miseries and calamities out of ashes and sparckels, which wer thought to haue bene long time quenched.
Iabin the king of
Chanaan was kylled by
Iosua (as it is written in his booke the .xi. chap.) and
Hazor his kingly City destroied and burnt with fire. Wherfore none would haue looked that war shoulde haue bene renued againe on that part. But an other
Iabin, the sonne or sonnes sonne of him that was killed, tooke courage againe, and inuaded and oppressed the Israelites. But least al that should be ascribed vnto his strength, it is added that God intermedled in the matter, when hee solde the Hebrues vnto him, that is, graunted vnto him to vse them as he thought good hymselfe, euen to all most vile seruices, and that as most abiect bondslaues. And this calamity is amplified by many names. First, by the longnesse of the tyme: for it continued .xx. yeares, when as before
Othoniels time they were afflicted onely .viii. yeares. And before
Ehud was stirred vp, they serued .xviii. yeares. It is declared that this seruitude was very cruell, bicause
Iabin oppressed the Hebrues by strength and violence. And
Iosephus writeth that it was in such sort, that they durst not so much as to lift vp their head. And the cause of his so great crueltye was,
Why Iabin was so cruel vnto y
e Hebrues. bicause he remembred that the Iewes in the time of
Iosua had killed his Father or Grandfather. And had ouerthrowen the kingly City
Hazor, in wasting and burning it wyth sword and fyre. Farther, the violence and power of his tyranny is by this declared, in that he had so great a number of yron or hooked chariots, and (if we may beleue
Iosephus) he went a warfare with three hundred thousand footemen,
Iosephus. ten thousand horsemen, and three thousand chariotes, among which .ix. hundred of them were of yron. Neither for al his great host had he ben able to haue brought the Hebrues vnder subiection, vnles God (as we haue before said) had solde thē. And vndoubtedly, it is to be thought that
Iabin vsed these .ix. hundred chariots, which the history speaketh of by name, to afflict the region of the Iewes, which he had now conquered, and to the end they should not fal from him.
And he dwelt in Hazoreth. Howe raigned this man in
Hazor, whē as in the time of
Iosua y
e City was ouerthrowen? To this we answer, first y
t after y
e ouerthrow which happened vnder
Iosua, y
e rest of y
e
Chananites fled into a very huge wood which is called
Of the Gentiles, & ther bi litle & litle they so increased their power, y
t thei set ouer thēselues a king, which was of y
e surname of y
e first king, namely his sonne, or els his sonnes sōne, which is therfore said to haue raigned in
Hazor, bicause he stil retained y
e title of y
e place, as very many kings do at this day, which keping y
e title of certain places do cal thēselues kings of the same places, wherin in very dede they haue no possessiō at all. But the Hebrue interpreters think y
e
Hazoreth was a large & huge wood, which cōtained in it many cities
[Page] & Castels. Vnto which sense the Chaldey paraphrast leaneth, which turneth that worde,
munition of Castels. This day also in Germany, there is the wood of
Hercinia, wherin are both Cities and very many Castels. And it is called,
Of the Gentiles, either bicause a great number of diuers people resorted thither, or bicause those places were built and fenced by the labour of manye
Gentiles. We might otherwise also answer, & that much more likely to be true: namely, y
t the citi of
Hazor was after
Iosua, recouered & reedefied by the
Chananites, so that it was the kingly city agayne, wher (
Iabin either the sonne or els y
e sonnes sōne of y
e first
Iabin) raigned. And to this reedefieng the times serued very aptly. For from the burning of
Hazor there wer passed .150. yeares more or lesse, y
t is, eight yeares of bondage, which happened vnder the king of
Mesopotamia .40. yeares of
Othoniel .18. yeres of seruitude vnder
Eglon king of
Mesopotamia .80. yeres, wherin
Ehud peaceably iudged the Israelites, and .20. yeres this
Iabin afflicted the Hebrues. Wherfore he might easily reigne in
Hazor being againe reedified, and this maketh with it, bicause it is not writtē of this
Iabin that he dwelled in the wood, but that
Sisara his captayne dwelt there. For kinges vse not to kepe an house in their kingly citye, but rather to haue them in their borders or in the fieldes, wher they may be prompt and redy to accomplysh thinges to be done.
3 And the children of Israel cried vnto the Lord, for he had .900. chariottes of yron, and .20. yeares he opressed Israel very sore.
4 And Deborha, a Prophetesse, the wife of Lappidoth, iudged Israel the same tyme.
Both by the thinges before declared, & also by these which are now spoken of, we may vnderstand the frowardnes of mans nature: for vnles it be by troubles and aduersities brused and broken,
Men in desperate thinges call vpon God. it regardeth not God, yea as long as there is any hope of other helpes, it neglecteth God and vseth them. But whē thinges ar past all hope and do seperat, then god is required, as a certayne holy ankerhold. Wherfore it is no maruayle, though the Hebrues deferred their repētance 20. yeares long. Surely I am persuaded, that they did oftentimes grone and cry. But bicause they lamented not that they had offended god, and wickedly committed sinnes, but only desired him to take a way the payne & long punishment, and paraduenture murmured against God, therfore wer not their praiers heard. But now at the last at the .20. yeares ende, when with fayth and godlynes they prayed vnto God,
Though God deferre his help yet wee muste not dispaire. he heard their prayer, and graunted them their requestes. By this example let vs learne y
t we must neuer dispaire of the help of god, although it be deferred. We all in deede desire to be strayghtwaye deliuered of our troubles: but god in his counsel thinketh not good so soone to take away his punishments. Wherfore that which he hath decreed we also must pacientlye suffer.
Deborah a Prophetesse. God which before to deliuer Israel had chosen
Ehud, which had an impediment in his right hande: and then
Sangar, a husbandman armed onely with the goade of an Oxe: nowe choseth a woman, by whose conduct the Iewes might be deliuered from a most grieuous enemy.
God vseth both stronge and weake a lyke. Wherefore by these examples he aboundantly sheweth that his power is not bounde vnto noble men and to strong men, but hee can easilye vse the weake and feable ones. Yea and he sheweth forth his power rather in these, than in the other. Howbeit to declare, that it is all one vnto him, as touching both kynde of instrumentes, sometimes he vseth the strong ones, and other sometimes the weake ones. And when hee taketh the weake ones, he straight waye endueth and adorneth them with his grace and gyftes. For as muche therefore as he had vnto thys ministerye chosen
Deborah, beyng weake in kynde, hee strayght waye endewed and adorned her wyth the spirite of prophecye. By whyche grace, and peraduenture manye other moe myracles, she was by God constituted, and by myracles confirmed, as she that was elected vnto so great an office.
Neyther onely this woman was endewed with the sprite of prophesy:
We comen prophetesses did openly instruct the people. for in the holy scriptures we reade of other women which were likewise inspired by the holy Ghost,
Mary the sister of
Moses, Hanna the Mother of
Samuel, Holda in the time of
Iosias the king were Prophetesses. And in the new testament
Marye the Virgin,
Elizabeth the mother of
Iohn, and
Anna the wife of
Phanuel, the daughters also of
Phillip the Deacon (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) were prophetesses. Neyther do I thinke that we maye denye, that some of those weomen endewed with the sprite of prophesy, did openly teach the people, in declarynge those thynges vnto them whiche God had shewed vnto them. Forasmuch as the giftes of God are not therfore geuen, that they shoulde lye hidden, but to aduaunce the common edifying of the church.
And yet hereby it followeth not, that that which God doth by some peculiar priuiledge, we should by and by draw it for an example, because according to the rule of the Apostle we are bound vnto an ordinary law, whereby both in the Epistle to
Timothy, and in the first Epistle to the
Corrinthians,
Why wemen are commounded to kepe silence in the church. he commaundeth that a woman should kepe silence in the church. And he assigneth causes of this silence so commaunded, namely because they ought to be subiect vnto theyr husbandes. But the office of a teacher hath a certayne authority ouer those whiche are taught, which is not to be attributed vnto a womā ouer men. For she was made for the man, whome she ought alwayes to haue a regarde to obey, whiche thing is also appoynted her by the sentence of God, wherby after synne committed he sayd vnto the woman: Thy lust shal pertayne vnto thy husband. Farther the Apostle geueth an other reason, drawne from the fyrste faute, bicause, as he sayth,
Eua was seduced, and not
Adam, wherfore if women should ordinarily be admitted vnto the holy ministery of the Church, men might easely suspecte, that the deuill by his accustomed instrument would deceaue the people, and for that cause they would the lesse regard the Ecclesiasticall function, if women should be beleued. It ought therfore to be committed onely to men, & that by ordinary right and the Apostles rule. And though God do sometimes otherwyse, yet can he not be iustly accused, forasmuch as all lawes are in his power. Wherefore if sometimes he send any prophetesse, and adorne her with heauenly giftes, if the same woman speake in the church, vndoubtedly she is to be hearde: but in suche sort, that she forgette not her owne estate.
Twoo places of Paule conceliated. Wherefore these two testimonies of
Paule which seme to be contrary one to an other, may easelye be conciliated. To
Timothe the fyrst Epistle he writeth, that a woman ought in the church to kepe silence: which thinge toward the ende of the first Epistle to the
Corinth. he most manifestly confirmeth. And in the same epistle he commaundeth, that a man prophesieng or praying should haue his hed vncouered, but a woman when she prophesieth should haue it couered: whereby vndoubtedly he teacheth that it is lawfull for a woman both to speak and also to prophesy in the church. For he would not haue commaūded, that in this doing she should couer her head, if she should vtterly kepe silence in the holy assembly. The thinge is in this manner to be taken, that we should vnderstande the precept of silence to be a generall precepte, but the other which is for the couering of the head when they pray or prophesy, pertained onely to those which wer prophetesses. They vndoubtedly are not forbidden to prophesy, for the common edification of the church,
Why women prophetesses were commaū ded to haue theyr heds couered. but to the ende by reason of theyr office extraordinarely committed vnto them, they should not forget theyr owne estate and waxe proude, they are commaūded to haue their head couered: whereby they myght vnderstande that yet they haue the power of man aboue them. Farther whereas to
Titus the ii. chap. it is commaunded that the elder women should admonish the yonger women of temperance, and that they should loue theyr husbandes and children, and diligently looke to theyr famely, this is not to be vnderstand of publike doctrine or ecclesiasticall sermons, but of priuate exhortacions, which it is meete, that the elders haue to the yongers.
5 And the same Deborah dwelt vnder a Palme tree, betwene Ramath and Bethell, in mount Ephraim. And the children of Israell ascended vp to her for iudgement.
How Deborah iudged the people.The word of iudging (as we haue admonished) in this booke oftentimes signifieth to reuenge, and to set at liberty. Which signification if we now follow, we shall se that
Deborah was appoynted vnto the same, namelye to deliuer the Israelites. And as soone as they by the inspiraciō of God vnderstode that, they ascēded to her, to heare of her what they should do, to attayne vnto liberty. But if any man wil haue the word of iudgemēt to signify to set lawes, or to geue sentence of controuersies. I wil not be much against it. For so great peraduenture was the oppression of
Iabin, that now the Israelites could not vse ordinary iudges. They therfore being taken away, whē they saw that
Deborah was endewed with the spirite of God, they had rather be iudged by her, than by the Chananites.
Iosephus. But
Iosephus inclineth more vnto the first interpretation, and he saythe that they beinge oppressed by their enemies came vnto
Deborah, whome they knew to be a most holy woman and endewed with the sprite of god, and desired her to pray vnto God for them, which she both did and was heard.
As touching the ministery of the churche, how women may be preferred, & in what sort they are not apt, we haue before declared. And this we ad now, y
t whē churches, ar newly planted, when ther want men to preach the Gospel, a womā may at the beginning be admitted to teach, but in such sorte, that when she hath taught a while, some one mā of y
e faithful to be ordeyned, which afterward may minister the sacramēts, teach & faithfully execute y
e office of a pastor. But bicause
Deborah was not onely a Prophetesse, but also in setting at liberty, gouerned ciuil things, I might therfore demaund, whether a womā may be appoynted to gouern a pub: wealth. But I haue determined to entreat of this question in an other place, namely whē I come to y
e history of Athalia in the bokes of the kings.
The wife of Lappidoth. What this man was we can not by the holy scripture certainly know. The Hebrewes thinke that he was
Barak: but this is onelye the reason why they thinke so, bicause the signification of these names haue great affinity one with an other. For
Barac signifieth lightninge, and
Lapidh is a lampe,
A fained tale the Rabbines. whose plurall number is aswell
Lapidim as
Lapidoth. And lampes or torches and lightninges are very lyke. Other thinke that thys woman was so called of her handye crafte, for that shee made matches for the candles of the sanctuarye. But that the Rabbines fayned as thoughe God doth neuer bestowe freely hys grace or giftes. For they signify by their fable that she by desert became a prophetesse and a iudge, bicause her woorkes serued for the tabernacle & that very religiously. Others also write that she was so called, bicause in that howre, wherin she was endewed with the sprite of prophecy, her face was made shininge, casting forth beames, as the holy history writeth of the countenaunce of
Moses. But all these thinges are trifles, and leane onely vnto the interpretacion of the words, neither ar they by any meanes proued by the holye scriptures. But there is a certayn coniecture that
Barac was not the husband of
Deborah, bycause she dwelled in mount
Ephraim and he in
Kades of
Nepthalim. And it is not agreable that the wife and the husband did dwell one so far distant from the other. Vnles y
u wilt say y
t
Deborah went thē onely to mount
Ephraim when the people should come vnto her. And if we graūt this, thē wil it be meruelous, why her husband went not thither together with the other Israelits. Wherfore that way semeth to be the plainer, namely to say y
t she was the wife of
Lappidoth: but therfore she gaue not thys gouernance vnto her husband. For that thing should be gouerned by mans reason, but she did folow the counsel of God as she ought.
Of the mariage of ministers.
God despyseth not those which are maried.THis is also very worthye to be noted, that maried folkes are not contemned of God. For of them certain hath he chosen to be Prophetes and those notable
[Page 94] prophetes. For
Esay is cōmaunded to go vnto a Prophetesse, which both conceiued & also bare to him childrē.
Ezechiel also was maried. Wherfore that Romane
Sircius & his like ar not to be herd,
Sircius is not to be heard. whē they forbid the vse of the ministration of holy things to such which are maried: & this godly reason forsooth bring they for it, namely bicause
Paule writeth, that they which are in the flesh cannot please God, and in the old law it is in this manner commaunded, be ye holy, for I am holy: and agayn sayth
Paule, ye are the temple of God, or of the holy ghost. But these testimonies now alleged, if they should serue any thinge to theyr sentence, then vndoubtedly should they declare, that no men whiche are maried can please god, neither that anye are to be counted holye, excepte they be chaste. The temple also of God or of the holy Ghoste shoulde be drawne onely to the clergye. But howe vayne these thinges are, all men so well vnderstande, that they neede none of my labour to expresse them. For who seeth not that the sentences nowe alleged are not spoken vnto this man or to that man alone,
The manner of the Ethnykes as touching virginity or sole lyfe. but preached vnto all the faythful? It was the manner of the Ethnickes, to haue theyr prophetesses eyther Virgines or such as were of sole life, as it is written of the Sibils. They also appoynted certayne priesthodes vnto womē, but yet only to virgines, namely the holy thinges of
Vesta, and also of her that was called
Bona dea.
Neyther must we beleue, those maried folkes,
They which were maried & called to the holye ministerye, did not forsake theyr wyues. which were by God taken to the office of prophecying or to the holy ministery, did streightway forsake theyr wyues, for neyther God nor yet Christ were authors that any man shoulde deuource himselfe from his wife. We know in deede that Paule permitteth them which are maried sometimes to be a sunder, whereby they mighte more expediently geue them selues to fastinges and prayers: but he permitteth not that vnles they be both agreed therunto, and that for a short time, and he commaundeth them to returne to their old estate, lest by the temptacion of Sathan they should be ouerthrowne. Wherfore this sentence which they bryng, is not sufficient to proue the necessitye of sole life for ministers, forasmuche as the aduersaries gather more out of it than can be gathered. For the Apostle sayth that sometimes it is lawfull to abstaine from accompanieng. But these men take it to be a commaundement to all sortes of ministers, euer to be vnmaried. Which argument is both weake and vnprofitable, as the art of Logike manifestly sheweth. For we graunt, that it is mete for ministers sometimes to conteyne themselues, and that oftner than other men, but not continually. This they obiect, if other men moderate themselues, makinge their prayers but sometimes, what shoulde they do, whose duty is alwayes to apply themselues vnto prayers & to the administration of the sacramentes? I aunswere. First, that we much marueile at those which allege these thinges, when as the clergy for the most part neuer almost teach, & distribute the sacraments very seldom, & celebrate that their most fylthy & abhominable masse scarce once or twise in a whole yeare. But in y
e mean time play y
e whoremōgers & pollute thēselues with adulteries. And they cauile that they cānot mary, bicause of y
e ecclesiastical degree which they haue takē vpō thē. Vndoubtedly the reasons which they bring do nothing defend this kind of men.
Farther we must marke, that the wordes which
Paul there speaketh,
A distinction of prayers and fastinges.
Sometimes fastinges & publike prayers ar commaunded. belong not to cōmon fasting, or to cōmon & vsual prayers: otherwise it were lauful for none ether to mary or to haue a wyfe, for as much as al mē ar cōmaūded to pray with out ceassing. And there ar sometime certayn solemne praiers and fastings appointed, ether for y
e auoyding of iminente calamities, or for the chosing of ministers of the Churche, and for such lyke necessytyes, in whiche wee muste with the prophet & the Apostle councel & exhorte the husband not to depart out of the bedchāber, & the bride out of her bed. Howbeit I would gladly hear of these new masters & most seuere cēsors, what they did in y
e old time in the church of Rome,
At Rome they did cōmunicate dayly. which they so much alow aboue all other worship, what I say was done when christians did cōmunicate as
Ierome &
Augustine write was done in their time.
[Page] They indeede communicated, and yet had they wiues.
Of the highe priest of the old Testament. Moreouer what did the high priest
Aaron and his successors in the old testament, whose office was both morning and euening perpetually to minister at the tabernacle? For as thē wer not the courses of the priests distributed by
Dauid, Salomon, and
Ezechias. Vsed they not their wiues? Vndoubtedly they broughte forth children. But they say, that then it ought to haue bene done, forasmuch as the successiō of the priest hode was by carnall propagation, neither might the priestes he taken out of any other tribe, then out of the tribe of
Leui. But nowe that we are losed from that law, and that we may euery where haue ministers of the church, it is mete that they be without wiues. I wil aske these men, who was the author, that the high priests & the priests in the old time should be continued by carnal propagation? It is meruelous if they graūt not that God was the author. I wil therfore conclude that they make thēselues wiser then god, who is most wise, who also suffred & willed prists to vse matrimony. He might haue taken priests out of euery tribe and commaunded continency. But he would not do it. But these men dare do more then he hath commaunded. Farther let them tel vs whether there were ministers in the primatiue church or no?
The ministers of y
e primitiue churche had wiues and vsed them. Canons of the Apostles. vndoubtedly there were, yea and those had wyues, & yet for all that they perpetually both taught and ministred. That they had wiues, the histories declare, the Canons do testifye, & these Canons in especiall which ar of the Apostles, whervnto our aduersaries thinke we must so much leane vnto. For there we reade, that he is accursed, which teacheth that a priest ought to despise his wife.
I am not ignoraunt, that there are certayne wily heades, whiche by triflinge wordes do so auoyde the place alledged, as though it were onely to be vnderstād as touching meate and drinke and clothing: for which thinges, they say a prieste ought to prouide for his wife when he is seperated from her. As thoughe a wyfe is not more dyspysed, from whome the due beneuolence is taken awaye, then if she should be neglected as touching meat and drinke and clothing. The councel also of
Gangrensis decreed,
Concilium Congrente. that he is accursed which putteth difference betwen the oblation of a maried priest from others. Here also (least they should be counted dum) they say that a maried prieste, is taken for him whiche was once before maried, and not he whyche is presentlye maried: whiche they thinke happeneth, when eyther the wife is deade, or elles if they be seperated the one from the other.
Who maryed folkes are. But graunt which of these two wayes thou wilt, yet one of the clergy can not be called a maried man. For they are maried folkes, whiche both loue together, and are not seperated one from an other. And that the ministers in the primitiue church had wiues, and vsed them, the history of
Nicolaus the Deacon sufficiently declareth. And it is hereby also easely proued, bicause if ministers accō panied not with their wiues,
Sircius, Pelagius, and other Romayn Popes should not haue neded to haue made so many prohibicions, that it should not frō thence forth be done, for these tyrans cōplained that it was so done, & therfore to theire power by decrees ordināces, & threatnings they forbad y
e vse of matrimony to ecclesiastical mē: which they should not nede to haue don, if such matrimonies had not then bene in vse. At the length they deny not but y
t so it was, but they fly to thys, that we must haue a respect vnto the times, & attribute somwhat to necessity. For in the primityue church (as they say) was there a great wāt of ministers, wherfore they wer fayne to chose them out of euery state of men, & therfore ther were very many of them which wer maried at y
e time. But now that the church is encreased, we are not vrged with that necessity, wherefore iustly it is decreed that onely vnmaried folkes should be chosen.
The primitiue church had greate aboundance of ministers.But I would haue these mē to remember with themselues, that in that first tyme, when the heat of the holy Ghost did so much abound, there were a greate many mo whych were mete for the ministery, thē now ar, by reason of the great aboundance of grace & spiritual giftes. Besides that the church when it was extended
[Page 95] and increased, it then neded many more ministers. Farther an other necessitie oppresseth vs more grieuously,
Men are
[...] weaker. bycause men at this day are more weake than they were then, which their Popes also deny not. For in the dist. 34. chap:
Fraternitatis, Pelagius iudgeth that a certaine Deacon which was to be promoted (whiche had cōmitted whoredome, and yet hauing a wife of his own) should be more gently intreated bycause in these dayes not onely bodies are febled, but also vertue and maners. If they be not ignoraunt of this weakenes of our times, which is farre greater than it was in the olde tyme, they ought not from thence to take away the remedy where they perceaue a greater necessitie. Neither is it mete, that they should dissemble the necessitie of this age, whiche obiecting vnto vs the maner of the old Churche, dare lay against vs the necessitie therof. There is on either side necessitie, and therfore if there be a consideration had of the one let there be also a consideration had of the other.
There are some amongst them, which say,
Whether it be lawfull to mary a wife after orders receaued. that ministers in the old tyme had wiues, and somtimes vsed them: but they deny that after they had taken orders it was at any tyme lawfull to mary wiues. Vndoubtedly they erre: For in the sinode of
Ancyrana (as it is written in the decrees the 28. dist: chap.
Diaconi) it is decreed, that if a Deacon while he is in ordering,
Synodus Ancyrana. shal deny when the state of cō tinency is required of him and shall testifie that he wil not lyue without a wife, if the same Deacon after he is ordeyned do contract matrimony, he may not be hindred but may frely execute his ministery. By which place we are manifestly taught, that it was lawfull to cōtract matrimony after orders receaued.
☜ Gratianus. Which
Gratianus sawe well ynough, and therfore he writeth, that as touching that Synode a consideration ought to be had both to the time & place. For it is obserued in the east Church, which in promotions of ministers admitte not the promise of continency, but as touching time he addeth, that as yet this continency of Ministers was not then brought into the Churche: but if thou shalt aske, when that counsell was had, we answere, as it also appeareth by y
e same decrees vnder
Syricius and
Innocentius, which liued in the time of
Ierome and
Augustine.
But it is a wonder to see, how Tyranny hath increased,
Howe punishments agaynst y
e clergy which mary haue dayly increased.
Conciliū Neocaesariensis. and impiety by litle and litle taken depe rootes. At the begynnyng, y
e Ministers of the Church which contracted matrimonies, were not altogether so seuerely handled. For the counsell of
Neocaesariensis (as it is recited in the dist .28. chap.
Presbiter) cōmaūded such to be put onely out of their office, and not from their benefice: for they were still norished, and receaued their stipendes from the Churche. Neither in the meane tyme will I ouerpasse, that y
e coūsel did cast out of y
e Church such Priests as wer adulterers and whoremongers, namely, in excommunicating them which was very mete and iust, when as our men now a dayes do altogether winke at those sinnes. After that they began not onely to put them out of their offices, but also (as they speake) to remoue them from their benefices, as it is written in the 33. dist. chap.
Eos & chap.
Decreuerunt yea and those which so maried, they banished either into a monastery, or into some straight place to do penāce, but in our tyme they burne many of them. And afterwarde they raged also against the women, with whom the Ministers had maried, as it is founde in the dist. 81.
Concilium Toletanum. out of a certaine counsell holden at
Toledo, chap:
Quidam, where it is commaunded that the women should be sold. And in the dist. 34. chap.
Eos, they are appointed to be seruauntes of that Church, wherin the Priest was, which hath contracted with them into seruitude, and if peraduenture the Byshop could not bring them into seruitude, he should commit it vnto the prince or lay Magistrat. They banished them also sometimes into a monastery to do penance, as it is read in the 34. dist. chap:
Fraternitatis. Neither were they content with this cruelty, but the children also whiche were by such matrimonies borne, would they haue to be seruauntes of that Church, wherin their father had ben, & they depriued them of al their fathers inheritaūce. And that is written, in the 15. question the last chap:
Cū multae.
[Page] They do so not punish their adulterous sacrificers and whoremongers, neither their harlottes, nor yet their bastard children: they onely exercise their cruell tyranny vpon the wifes of Priestes and their lawfull children.
At the laste, when they haue almost no other thyng to bring, they flye vnto theyr vowe as to a holy anchor. They crye out that that must vtterly be kepte, and therefore it is not any more lawfull for Ministers to mary, bycause when they are ordeyned they do vowe sole lyfe.
Vow of vniust thinges are of no force. As thoughe it were not both by the holy Scriptures and also by humane lawes commaunded, that a vowe, promise, or othe shoulde be of no force, if it compell vs to an vniust or vnhonest thyng.
And who seeth not, that it is a thyng very filthy, and agaynst the lawe of God that he whiche burneth in filthy luste, yea and so burneth that he dayly defileth hymselfe with harlottes, adulterers and vnlawfull
Vsu veneris, should be forbidden matrimonye? Vndoubtedly the holy Ghost hath commaunded matrimony to all such as can not kepe themselues chaste, yea and the fathers (which in this matter are more enemyes to vs than they should) sawe this. Wherefore
Ciprian as touchyng holy virgines,
Cyprian. whiche had vnchastly behaued themselues, sayeth: If either they will not or can not kepe themselues chast, let them mary.
Ierome. Epiphanius.
Ierome also feared not to wryte the same vnto
Demetrius, Epiphanius also agaynste the
Catharis, sayeth: It is better those whiche can not kepe themselues chast to mary wyues, and sinne onely once, than dayly to wounde their myndes with vnpure actions. But the opinion of this father I do not in this thyng allowe, bycause he affirmeth that those do sinne, whiche when they haue made a vowe of chastitye do contracte matrimonye, for as longe as they do obeye the voyce of GOD, they charge not themselues with sinne. Neither do I allowe that his reason, wherein he sayth, that one sinne is to be committed, to auoyde a greater, onely this I meane to shewe by his wordes, that matrimony is very necessary to suche as can not kepe themselues chaste. But I will entreate no more of this thing at this present for I haue aboundantly spoken of all this question in my booke of Vowes.
And the children of Israel ascended vp to her for iudgement. Some affirme that this was done at certayne appoynted dayes, so that the Israelites shoulde come to her house, as to a certayne oracle, and to an interpretor of the lawes of God. Or els then they ascended vnto her, when he was inspired with the spirite of Prophesye. And vndoutedly it is very lykely, that she then called the people together, when she had any thyng to shewe vnto the Israelites in the name of God. And they are sayd properly to ascende, bycause in passing ouer the mount
Ephraim they came vnto her.
6 And she sent, and called Barac, the sonne of Abinoam, out of Cedes Nephthalim: and she sayd vnto hym: Hath not the Lord God of Israel commaunded thee to go, and leade vnto mount Thabor, and take with the ten thousand men of thee childrē of Nephthalim, and of the sonnes of Zebulon.
7 And I wil bring vnto thee, vnto the riuer Kison, Sisera the captayne of the host of Iabin, with his chariots, and his people, and I will deliuer him into thine handes.
8 And Barac sayd vnto her, If thou wilt go with me, I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, I will not go.
9 Who answered, I will surely go with thee, but this iorney that thou takest shall not be for thine honour: for the Lord shall delyuer Sisera into the hand of a woman, So Deborah rose vp, and went with Barac into Cedes.
Deborah vseth the authoritie of a prince, when she citeth
Barac vnto her and commaunded him to be called in her owne name. he came from the Citie of
Cedes. That was a Citie of the Priestes in the tribe of
Nepthalim, and also a Citie of refuge as it is read in
Iosuah the 19. chap.
Hath not the Lorde God commaunded thee. She vseth an interrogatiue speache: for that very muche profiteth to stirre vp mindes, and earnestly to commaunded any thyng. Some thinke that
Deborah had more than once yea often tymes admonished
Barac in the name of god to accomplishe this office and he for feare lingered it. Wherefore she at the last openly and before the Israelites reproueth them. And it is as muche, as if she should haue sayde, In very dede it is God whiche hath commaunded thee these thynges. That whiche I speake is not myne inuention, I tell thee this thou must take in hande by the counsell and will of God.
To preceptes are ioyned promises. And in these wordes of the Prophetesse may be obserued a maner much vsed in the holy Scriptures, which when they geue any precepte, do straight way ioyne therunto a promise. When children are commaunded to obey their parentes, length of life is straight waye promised.
Deborah also declareth, that she exercised y
e office of a Prophet amōg the people, when as she Prophecieth what shall become of
Sisera, and foretelleth a notable victorye, whiche God had decreed vnto
Barac. Mount Thabor,
Mount Thabor is called Ithabyrius. whiche is here mencioned, of the Ethnike writers is called
Ithabirius: It is nighe vnto the
Assirians; Nepthalites and
Sabulonites. There the Lorde Iesus Christ, our Sauiour, was transfigured before three of his Disciples, as it is declared in the history of the Gospell. This mount hath by it the riuer
Kyson,
The riuer Kison. whiche by the destruction of the
Baalites is made notable: for there
Helias the Prophete slewe the Priestes of
Baal.
Drawe, and take with thee ten thousand men. This semeth to be a new kynde of speache: but vnto the thing whiche is in hande it is moste propre. For this Hebrew worde
Maschach, is not in this place to drawe by violence to, but (as all the
Rabbines almost do interpretate) with presuasion to leade, that is, with faire and pleasaunt wordes to allure them. For without doubt it was a great and perillous worke wherunto they wer called, & for as much as they lyued vnder a Tyraunt, their souldiers could not by publique authority be mustered or gathered together, but must of necessitie by faire meanes be allured, to conspire against a Tyraunt. By this place we are taught that good and eloquent speaches are very profytable in warrelyke affaires;
Rethoricke is profitable in warlike affaires. and that the arte of Rethorike by the lawe of God is not forbidden, but may in hys place profitably serue for holy men. Farther this is not to be left vnspoken of, that those two tribes, namely
Nepthalim and
Zabulon, were not warrelike tribes but the weakest of all the tribes among the Israelites.
The tribes of Nepthalim & Zabulon were of lesse estimation thā the other tribes. And yet God commaundeth to chose out souldiers out of them, wherby we learne that it is a lyke to hym to vse either weake souldiers or stronge warriers agaynst his enemies.
Some man peraduenture will doubte, by what argumentes or reasons
Barac could be persuaded, to beleue the wordes of
Deborah. To whome we aunswere, that he weyghed with hymselfe, that those thinges whiche
Deborah promised, did very well agree with the wordes and promises of God. For he, as he had threatened, that the Israelites when they sinned should by his commaundement and will be afflicted by outwarde nations: so agayne had he promised, that he would deliuer them out of the handes of their enemyes, if they faythfully repented them of their wickednes committed, and faythfully from the heart called vpon him. He promised that he would fight for them, neither should their weaknes or fewenesse in nomber be a let,
The wordes of Deborah were agreable with the holy Scriptures. but that they shuld get the victory ouer their enemies. Wherfore for as much as
Deborah prophecied that those things should come to passe, whiche the Lord had promised vnto the people of the Hebrues, it was conuenient, that
Barac should receaue those wordes for true and faythfull
Farther the authoritie of the speaker helped thereunto. For
Deborah was by
[Page] God constituted in the ministery, not vndoubtedly by an ordinary prerogatiue, but by a certayn singular and principall prerogatiue. And if we should looke vppon the Etimology of her name,
Deborah signifieth a bee. we shall thinke that her orations were verye sweete. For
Deborah with the Hebrues is a bee, which beast we know is a diligent artificer in makyng of hony. And yet all these thinges had not ben sufficiēt, to make
Barac to beleue her, vnles the power of the holy Ghost had persuaded in his mynde those things which were commaunded. For fayth is onely the worke of the holy Ghost, whiche he can worke in the heartes of men without any outward instrument, but he hath decreed for the most part to vse them, I meane the worde and the ministery, not as though he were bound vnto them, but to shew vnto vs, how much we ought to make of these two instrumentes. Neither do I thinke that it is to be doubted, but that this holy woman, was both by miracles, and also by prophesieng of things to come, declared to be the Minister of the true God and the most healthfull Iudge of the Israelites. We therefore ought hereby to learne, that we must altogether heare the Ministers of God, when they set forth vnto vs, his wordes, promises, and also threatninges out of the holy scriptures neither is there any authority in the worlde, whiche ought to be preferred before the ministery of the Church and word of God.
They were heard thynges whiche Deborah commaunded. Wherfore iustly ought
Barac to beleue the thinges whiche
Deborah commaunded, althoughe they semed both greuous and heard. For she commaunded hym, to moue sedition and tumulte, to rebell agaynst his prince, a priuate man to gather an hoste, and that a litle one agaynst a most mighty king.
Whether Barak were without faith.
And Barac sayde vnto her, If thou wilte goo with me, I wyll go. In this place it semeth might be demaunded, whether
Barac were doubtful, and beleued not at the beginning (as he ought to haue done) the wordes of
Deborah. And that semeth to some absurde, when as in the Epistle to the Hebrues the 11. chap:
Barac is reckened with
Sampson, Gedeon Iephthe and others, which by fayth ouercame kyngdomes. And therefore it semeth that his fayth beyng praysed by the testimony of God, ought not by our iudgement to be empared. Wherfore they affirme that he would haue
Deborah to go with him, not bycause he beleued not the promise of God, but that he myght haue a Prophetesse ready and ac hande, whose Counsell he might vse in orderyng his warre, in pitching hys Campes, and other chaunces whiche are wonte to happen in warres. And I am not ignoraunt,
Augustine. that
Augustine readeth it, after this manner. Bycause I can not tell in what day the Lorde will prosper his aungell with me, &c. As thoughe he should haue sayd, I wyll therefore haue thee with me, bycause thou beyng endewed with the spirite of Prophesy (whiche hath not happened vnto me) shalte easly knowe, in what daye the aungell of the Lorde will luckely fyght for vs.
But I do thinke that
Barac did somewhat doubt: for
Deborah Prophecied in the name of God that bycause of thys aunswere he should be punished.
And more ouer (sayeth she)
thy glory shalbe taken awaye from thee, and the Lord will sel Sysara into the hand of a woman.
Iosephus. And as
Iosephus testifyeth she spake these wordes beyng somewhat moued. And a Prophetesse woulde not haue ben angry, neither would GOD haue diminished the glorye of
Barac without a faulte. And it appeareth not that he fell into any other sinne besides infidelity howbeit that incredulitye was afterwarde taken awaye by the spirite and grace of God & when at the length he beleued the wordes of
Deborah,
Men although they be godly do not straight way beleue. and obeyed her, and by fayth (as it is written to the Hebrues) he obtayned the victorye. And how often that happeneth vnto men,
It is profitable for Captaynes to haue ministers of the worde in their Campes. althoughe they be godly, namely, to doubt at the begynnyng, by reason of the dregges of the olde
Adam, there is none whiche hath not experience of it in hymselfe. Afterwarde when they are strengthened with the spirite, there succedeth a great assurednes of faith. And I do not deny that which the first interpretation sayeth, namely that it is very expedient for Captaynes, to
[Page 97] haue Prophetes and Ministers of the worde of God with them in their warres. For as muche as the lawe of God in Deut. so commaundeth and in the 2. booke of kynges it is written, that
Helizeus the Prophete was in the campe, when the kyng of
Israell, the kyng of
Iudah, and the kyng of
Edom went to fight agaynst the kyng of
Moab. Wherfore Christian princes, when they take any iust warres in hande,
The presēce of Deborah was profitable in y
e Campe. do ryghtly and orderly if they haue Preachers and Ministers of the word of God with them in theyr expedition. Farther an other commodity came by the presence of
Deborah: for thereby godly men vnderstoode, that it was no rashe warre, or taken in hand by humane reason, but enterprised by the commaundement of God, and Counsell of his Prophetesse.
But in that it is written that the glory should be taken from
Barac, and
Sisera deliuered into the hande of a woman, it may be expounded two manner of wayes: either, bycause this victory should not nowe be ascribed vnto
Barac, but to
Deborah, namely, bicause she should haue the prayse to haue iudged
Israel, and to haue set them at liberty, and
Barac should not be counted amonge the number of the Iudges. Or els bycause
Barac should not kyll
Sysera with his owne hande, but
Iahell the wife of the
Kenite should do it, as it shall afterwarde be declared. And in dede this latter interpretacion semeth to me more naturall and propre.
Of these thynges whiche we haue nowe brought forth, are some most worthy to be noted. The first is, that God might haue deliuered this people the Israelites without the helpe or hoste of ten thousand men, whom yet he therefore chosed to teach vs, that he dissaloweth not iust warrefarre. Farther that humane helpes, when they are present, are not to be despised. Moreouer he accordyng to his wisedome vsed the gathering together of these souldiers thereby to prouoke
Sisera, that he agayne might gathered an host, and come and ouerthrow
Barac.
And in that God sayth he will draw
Sisera vnto mount
Thabor,
The drawyng of God serueth both to good thinges and to euill. he teacheth vs, that his drawyng is of force, not onely to good things, but also to euill, in respect that they are paynes and iust punishementes. No man can doubte, but that
Sisera sinned in this, bycause with a great violence he contented to oppresse the Israelites, and that vniustly. And yet GOD promised to drawe him to it. Neuerthelesse we must marke,
The maner of the drawing of God is not a like as touchīg good thinges and enui. that the maner of the drawing of GOD is not a like as touching good thyngs and euill: bycause to good thynges we can not be drawen, execept God do heale our vnderstandyng, and geue vs a good mynd. For by nature we are the children of wrath and vtterly corrupte, but when we are induced to euill GOD nedeth not to instill, any new malice in vs, for as much as we alwayes of our selues haue it ready and prompte to do euill: but onely the doyng of GOD, directeth them to what ende he will, and he so gouerneth them, to make open his glory as he hath decreed. After this sorte vndoubtedly was
Pharao hardened, and
Sisera now drawen to destruction.
God drew both the men of Barac and also Sisera but by diuers meanes. God also drewe those ten thousandmen after
Barac, for otherwise they would not haue followed him, but this drawyng was after an other maner: for here he vsed the speache of this man, whiche he made to be of efficacy in the heartes of his souldiers: but there to moue and prouoke
Sisera he appointed both falling awaye of
Barac, and the host gathered by him.
This is also to be considered, that by this place is proued,
Glorye maye lawfully be desyred. that glory is a certayne good thing, whiche iuste and good men may desire: otherwise
Barac, to be punished for his incredulitie, shuld not haue ben depriued of glory. And glory is certayne noblenesse comming of thynges well done.
What glory is For those thynges whiche good men do very excellently of their own accord, do brede a noble name or glory.
The matter & end of glory. Wherfore the matter wherin it cōsisteth are opinions & talkes of iust & wise mē. But y
e end wherunto glory ought to be directed, is y
e settyng forth of y
e name of God, & also an exāple which is set forth for our neighbours to follow. And as y
e brightnes of y
e name of god, & y
e edifieng of others, ar very excellēt & good things
[Page] so also is it manifest y
t the glory which serueth vnto thē is a good thyng. Wherfore although glory for it selfe is not to be desired as the last ende, yet for those thinges whiche we haue mencioned,
God can do many thynges whiche he will not do. ought it not to be neglected. Farther we must note that God can bryng certayne thynges to passe, whiche yet he will not performe, excepte thynges be done of vs. For he could (as it appeareth by thys place) haue geuen the glory of this victorye and health of Israell onely vnto
Barac: whiche he would not do, bycause he refused to go alone to that expedicion.
Helizeus also (as it is written in the 2. booke of kyngs) when he was sore sicke, and commaunded the kyng of Israel which stode by him, to strike the earth with and arrowe, and he did strike it onely three tymes, the Prophete was grieuously angry with hym, and sayde: If thou haddest striken sixe or seuen tymes, thou shouldest vtterly haue destroyed
Syria. But nowe thou shalte onely thrice vex
[...] and molest it. This maketh agaynst those, whiche thinke that the power of God differeth not from hys will, as thoughe he can not do those thynges, whiche he will not,
A destructiō of an absolut power & of an ordinary power. when as for all that Christ sayde, that he could haue xi. legions of aungels of hys Father, to defende hym from the Iewes that they should not take hym. GOD therefore could haue done that whiche he dyd not. Wherfore they seme not to thinke euill, whiche referre thinges to an absolute power and not to an ordinary, or definite power.
But how it is sayde that
Sisera should be solde into the hande of a woman, we shal not nede nowe by many wordes to declare, and for as much as we haue before hearde this selfe same worde, and howe ryghtly it agreeth with God is there expounded. This onely will I adde, that he was nowe solde of GOD to him, to whome before God had solde the Israelites, and it is sayd that he shalbe solde into the hande of a woman, whiche should haue power and myght to kyll him: for he was killed by
Iael, as a litle afterward shalbe declared.
10 And Barac gathered together Zebulon, and Nepthalim in Kedes, and he went vpon his feete with ten thousand men. Deborah also went vp with him.
11 Nowe Heber the Kenite, whiche was of the children of Hobab the Father in lawe of Moses, was departed from Cain, and pitched hys tente euen to Elon in Zaananuin, whiche is in Kedes.
12 And they shewed Sisera, that Barac y
e sonne of Abinoam was gone vp to mount Thabor.
13 And Sisera gathered together all hys chariots, euen nine hundreth chariots of yron, and all the people that were with hym from Harozeth of the gentles, vnto the riuer Kisyn.
It is before shewed by what meanes
Barac gathered his men together, namely by an oration of much likelyhood and of muche efficacy whiche was of so great strength with these tribes,
The counsels of men are so efficacy as the predestinacion of God hath or deyned. that there came of them ten thousand men vnto him, neither would God (as it appeareth by the wordes of
Deborah) haue any more. Hereby we see that the Counsels and wordes of men are so farreforth fruitfull, as the predestination or will of GOD hath before appoynted. Wherefore
Luke in the Actes of the Apostles feared not to write: And they beleued as many as were ordeyned to euerlastyng lyfe. Some translate this Hebrew worde
Bergeliu, footemen, and others,
after hym. But as for that matter we wyll not muche contend: bycause if they followed the feete of
Barac, it is a token, that they also were footemen, neyther were the Israelites wonte to be of any great force on horsebacke, for as they were by GOD forbidden to kepe any greate number of Horses. And when they should go vp the mounte, thoughe they
[Page 98] had ben horsemen, they could not haue ben so apte in those places. Farther this also maketh with it, for strayght way is vsed the same kynde of speach, when
Sisera lept out of his chariot, & would haue fled away on foote. But therof we will speake in his place.
Deborah also went vp with hym. It was before sayde that she went with
Barac vnto
Kades: but bycause he should lede hys host from
Kades to the mount, it is properly sayd that she nowe also went vp together with the Souldiers that were collected. And there was no small fayth both in the Captaynes and also in the Souldiers, whiche durste take suche enterprises in hande, beyng so weake and fewe in number. But fayth seeth those thynges which appeare not to the eyes of the body.
Helizeus the Prophete once prayed, that the eyes of the lad whiche was with hym myght be opened, to see the wonderfull number of aungels, whiche very valiantly fought for hym agaynst hys enemyes. And therfore as many of vs as do beleue in Christ, when we are in daungers, ought by constant fayth to take holde of that helpe whiche God hath prepared for vs, althoughe with our eyes we see it not.
The thynges whiche are nowe by a Parenthesis declared of the
Kenite, are therefore in the history by anticipation set forth, that those thynges maye the easiyer be vnderstand, which afterward shalbe spoken of
Sisara that was killed by
Iahell.
This
Heber the husband of
Iahell was of the posteritie of
Hobab the father in lawe of
Moses, of whome we haue aboundantly spoken before.
Why the family of Iethro were called Kenites. But of this place we learne why they were called
Kenites. For
Cain was the name of their famely: but thys
Heber dwelled a parte from hys kynsemen, neither remayned he any longer amonge them. For the rest (as it is wrytten in the 1. chap: of thys booke) departed from the Citie of
Iericho, followed
Othoniell, and lyued in the desert together with the children of
Israell.
Why Heber departed from his kinsfolkes. But
Heber of whome it is nowe written, went to the borders of
Zabulon and
Nepthalim, and pitched his tente nere to
Cedes. But what was the cause of hys departure from hys brethren, it is not presently wrytten. But we knowe that
Loth and
Abraham by reason of the aboundance of cattell and want of Pastor, departed one from an other: and seyng the same myght easly happen vnto the
Kenites, it is not vnlykely, but that they were vpon the lyke occasion separated. Thys worde
Tseenim, (if we maye beleue the
Chaldey Paraprhast) signifieth ditches full of water,
The Rechabites were Kenites. with whiche that place peraduenture abounded. It is no meruayle that the family whiche that place peraduenture abounded. It is no meruayle that the family of the
Kenites dwelled in tentes: for so muche as the
Rechabites whiche came of them, had no where any fyrme abydyng places, and that was wont to be the manner almost of all shepeheardes, to followe Pastors that be plentyfull, in what place so euer they be. And thys worde
Acilun signifieth sometymes an oke, and sometymes a playnefielde. The
Chaldey Paraphrast turneth, it a playnefielde: but it myght be, that there was some notable oke or groue of okes in it.
It was shewed vnto
Sisera onely howe
Barac had gathered together an host and tolde hym that
Deborah the Prophetesse of God was there, bycause that all men had a respecte vnto them at whiche was the Captayne of the hoste. And though a woman were theyr firste counseller, of this enterprise yet there is nothyng shewed hym of her, for the thynges whiche are done by women, are wont for the moste parte to be referred vnto men. Neither had the Ethnikes peraduenture any regarde to the gyfte of Prophesye wherewith
Deborah was endewed. What number of Souldiers
Sisera had it is not in thys place expressed: onely there is mention made of nyne hundreth Chariottes of yron.
Iosephus. But
Iosephus testifyeth (as we haue before sayde) that the
Chananites had 300000. footemen. 10000. horsemen, and lastly 3000. Charlottes. And in that the historye
[Page] now maketh mencion onely of 900.
Augustine. it is to be vnderstande, of hooked and yron chariots, which interpretaciō
Augustine in his questiōs on this place followeth. Farther
Iosephus addeth that this
Sisera by the commaundement of
Iabin hys kyng directed this host vnto mount
Thabor or
Ithabyrius.
14 Thē Deborah said vnto Barac: vp, for this is the day, wherin y
e Lord hath deliuered Sisera into thine hand. Is not the Lord gone out before thee? So Barac went downe from mount Thabor, and ten thousand men after hym.
15 And the Lord destroyed Sisera, and all his chariots, and al his host with y
e edge of the sworde, before Barac. So that Sisera lighted downe of his chariot, and fled away on his feete.
Barac is made strong by the wordes of
Deborah, and forced to ioyne battail with his enemyes. For that is the power of fayth, to strengthen the weakenesse yea if the exhortation of
Deborah had not bene,
Iosephus.
Barak (if we may beleue
Iosephus) by the sight of his enemies was so feared and troubled, that he would haue gotten hym to the stronger fensed places of the hill, but she called hym backe agayne, and by her wordes draue hym to fyght. Beyng therefore strengthened, and confirmed, he forsooke the well fensed partes of mount
Thabor, and came downe to fight with
Sisera. This is (sayeth she)
the day. As thoughe she should haue sayd, no humane power, or warlike might can let y
e victory, which the predestination of God hath this day decreed vnto thee. But a man will aske howe it is nowe sayd that
Sisera should be deliuered into the handes of
Barac, when as before it was foretold, that he shoulde be solde into the hande of a woman? I aunswere that it is therfore bycause that the host should be destroyed by
Barac, and
Sisera should be so made to flye, that the matter was begonne by the conduct of
Deborah, and finished by
Iahell, but the flyght and slaughter was accomplished by
Barac. Wherfore in the hystory there can not iustly be noted any contrariety or diuersitie.
Is not the Lorde? The interrogation whiche the Prophete vseth, doth not onely stirre vp and encourage the heart of
Barac, but also vehemently commaundeth hym, as the Latine Poete also hath sayde: Shall not armure dispatche the matter, and shall they not followe me through the whole Citie? But here may somewhat be doubted, in that our text hath, that the Lorde went forth before
Barac, when as the
Chaldey paraphrast turneth it, an aungell. For it sayeth, Shall not the aungell of the Lorde prosper thee? And vndoubtedly this paraphrasis sheweth,
Augustine. what was the cause why
Augustine read (as we haue before admonished), that
Barac sayde vnto
Deborah go with me, bycause I knowe not in what day GOD shall prosper hys aungell & me. Wherfore we must thinke, that the Greke interpretors had these wordes of the
Chaldey paraphrast, which afterwarde crepte into the texte, but yet out of place. But as touchyng the matter,
Christ was the aungell which defended the Iewes. eyther is true, both that GOD and hys aungell were present and fought on the Hebrues side. And vndoubtedly Christ was that aungell whiche defended the Iewes and fought for them. Of
Malachie the Prophete he is called the Aungell: and in
Exodus God promised both, that he himselfe woulde come with his people, and also send his aungell, for our Christ both is GOD and also had euer with hym aungels as Ministers defending the Hebrues.
And the Lorde destroyed Sisera. Thys Hebrew worde
Ieham maye haue for hys roote or grounde thys worde
Hamam, whiche signifieth to make afeard or to trouble. And then shall the sense be, God made him afeard, but the same worde signifieth also, to breake, or to destroy, althoughe as
Kimhi writeth,
[Page 99] his rote may be this word
Hom and
Him which almost signifieth the same thinge. And in dede God did both, he terrified the hartes of the Chananites, and stroke and brake their host.
How this slaughter happened, or by what singuler ayde of God the Israelits ouercame, it is not in this place written. But
Iosephus affirmeth that a greate violence of tempeste and hayle was caste from heauen into the eyes of the aduersaries, wherewith the Chananites were so hindred in the battayle,
Iosephus. that they were not able to defend thēselues, & therefore they were miserablye slayne, whē as yet y
e misery nothing at al hurted the Iewes. For y
e hayle was onely on their backe, and therfore theyr violence against theyr enemies was in nothing letted.
VVith the edge of the sword. It is sayd that God slew them, for he made them afeard, and wonderfully troubled them with the tempest or hayle. Howbeit the victory was so obteyned, that the Israelits also fought: for it is written y
t the enemies perished by y
e edge of the sword, by which kind of speach vndoubtedly is declared that they were slayne. This I haue for this cause noted,
God somtimes destroyeth hys enemies without the helpe of men. bicause God somtimes so maketh afeard his enemies & graunteth victory ouer them, that his people whome he deliuereth, do nothing at all: as it came to passe in the red sea, when
Pharao perished there with his host: and when the host of
Senacherib was wonderfully destroyed in one night by the aungell.
16 But Barak pursued after the Chariotes, and after the host euē vnto Harozeth of the gentiles: & al the hoste of Sisera fell vpon the edge of the sword. And there was not a man left.
17 Howbeit Sisera fled away on his fete to the tent of Iahell the wife of Heber the Kenite. For there was peace betwene Iabin the king of Hazor, and the family of Heber the Kenite.
Againe in this place we haue this worde
Bergeliu that is, on his feete. And in dede it appereth y
t it signifieth nothing els but a footeman. For
Sisera thought he could not in that battell be saued in hys chariote: wherfore he determined priuely to flye amonge the raschall souldiours. He now therefore forsaketh and abiecteth his chariot which was prepared vnto him for a defence and ayd. And assuredly whē God taketh away audacity and strength, the things which before wer weapons, are then made burthens and lettes. Miserable
Sisara flyeth, but he escapeth not. He made hast vnto the place, wher god had prepared a snare for him. For the other Cananits fled to
Hazoreth of the gentils, namely vnto the place from whēce they came. But
Sisera turned his iourny an other way from the rest of the souldiers, neither fled he the right way as the other did. He knew the shortest way, & he gat him to the tent of the
Kenits: which he knew was nigh home, and not far from the place wher the battayle was fought. And there he hoped to haue lurked, till the rage of the warre should haue bene pacified.
In that they were all destroyed, it is a token of a perfecte victory. But as concerninge the peace betweene
Iabin and the
Kenites, in what sorte or manner it was, we haue no certainty. Wherfore to affirme any thinge of it for certaine, it should be rashly done. For it mighte be that
Hebor payed somewhat vnto
Iabin for the pastors which he occupied, and contrariwise that the kinge promised him security and safety for his flockes, cattel, and family. There may be also very many other things thought & those very likely, but not to be affirmed for certaine.
Whither it be lawful for the godly to haue peace wyth the vngodly.
THis questiō is now to be discussed and defined, whether it be lawful for godly mē to make peace & to kepe it with vngodly. And me thinketh we may saye
[Page] that it is lawful, especially if it be concluded for y
e peaceable defending & keping of the bondes or borders on ether syde.
Paul saith, as much as lyeth in you, haue peace with all men. So did the most Christian princes with the barbarous infidles, in making peace somtimes with thē. So Iacob in y
e old tyme made a legue with
Laban. So also did the children of Israel, with their other neighbours, excepting the seuen nations, for God cōmaunded them not to make war with all those nations that dwelled about them.
But if thou shalte demaunde, whether it be lawfull for the godlye when they take a common expedition in hand, to ioyne their army and power with the vngodly.
An example of Iosaphat. That semeth to be denied. For
Iosaphat had euill successe whē in making warre against
Ramoth Gilead, he ioyned him self with the king of Israel. Neither sped the same king luckely when he sent shippes together with the king of Israels shippes into
Tharsis. For there arose a tempest in
Aschou-Gaber wherby hapned a shipwracke and so he lost his Nauy. And as it is written in the latter booke of Paralip. God by the mouthe of his prophete reproued
Iosaphat, bycause he had ioyned himself with an vngodly king. The Machabites also made league w
t the Romaines,
An example of y
e Machabits. The questiō is confirmed by reasons. & Lacedemoniās, but what displesure they had therby, theyr history declareth. But now that we haue manyfested the thinge by examples, let vs confirme it also by reasōs. This no mā can deny, that in such hosts, namely consisting of the vngodly & the godly together, the sincere religion and idolatry are mingled together: wherbye it easelye commeth to passe (suche is the weaknes of our nature) that the vnpure do infecte the holy ones. And it seldome happeneth but that some impiety cleaueth vnto the childrē of God. Farther whē they come to handy strokes they muste call vpon God, and when the victory is obtayned, they muste also geue thankes vnto God. And in doinge these thinges, what inuocation I pray you, what sacrifices, what thankes geuinge shall there be? The true god shalbe mingled with
Belial, idolatrous rites with lawful rites, and true piety with superstition. These things vndoubtedly displease God. For if he would haue thinges after this sort mingled together, why chosed he a peculiar people vnto himself? Vndoubtedlye he did it, that the faythfull mighte liue purely by themselues, and worship the true god sincerely. And seing the matter is so, it is not lawful cōfusedly to haue to do with the vngodly: otherwise the order which god hath appoynted should be troubled.
Of the league of Abraham with the Chananites.A man might peraduenture say, that Abraham made league with
Abuer, Eschol, and
Mambre, and with theyr ayd toke in hand an expedicion, wherin he deliuered
Loth his kinsman, which was led away captiue. But they which obiect this example, where find they that these men wer idolatrers? I vndoubtedly do not see that it can be gathered by the holy scriptures. But rather I suppose that they were worshippers of the true God. For God saide vnto
Abraham, that he would not straightway geue vnto him the lande of the Cananites, bicause the sinnes of that nation were not yet full. Wherfore it is not absurde to saye, that these three men were yet there, & did worship the true God simply. For asmuch as we know assuredly that
Melchizedech also was in those regions, who blessed
Abraham, and was the priest of the most high God. But graunt y
t they wer idolatres as these men wil haue them: Shall that which was by a certayn singuler progatiue lawfull vnto
Abraham, be strayghtway counted lawful vnto al men to do it iustly and without punishmente, I thinke not. Farthermore we muste mark, y
t the common wealth of the Iewes was not yet ordained. And
Abraham alone could not dwel among the Cananites without some couenāts or leagues made with them. Wherunto thou maiste adde that God had not yet geuen the law, wherin he peculiarly forbad any thinge as touching this matter.
Whither it be lawful for christians to seeke for helpe of infidels.But if a prince, or Christian pub: wealth (as sometimes it chaunceth) should be in daunger, maye they desire helpe at infidels handes? They cannot. For if Paule will haue vs rather to suffer wronge and hurt, than that we shoulde go
[Page 100] to the iudgement seats of the infidels when we are in controuersy with our brethren: How much lesse is it lawfull to vse the helpe of the vngodly, to deliuer vs from other Christianes, which vniustlye oppresse vs.
I know that
Asa king of
Iudah sente money, golde and siluer,
An example of Asa the kinge. vnto
Benhadab king of
Siria, to make warre against the king of Samaria, that therby he mighte be deliuered from him whiche in a manner oppressed him: Howebeit I doe not thinke that the acte of this kinge (though it had good successe) is to be followed. For he was reproued of God for it. And though it be not expressed in the boke of kinges, yet in Paralip: it is manifestly described. For there we reade that the prophet was purposedly sent of God vnto
Asa the king to reproue him greuouslye for this his acte.
An example of Amasia. Yea and there is an other notable example of like sorte written in the same boke, namely that
Amasia did hier agaynst the Edomits. C. thousād Israelites: which the prophet in the name of God grieuouslye reprehended, and commaunded that he should put away the Israelitish souldiours from his hoste, because that the will and good pleasure of God was vtterly from thē. The kinge aunswered vnto the Prophete: But nowe I haue geuen them an C. talentes for theyr stipend. The man of God aunswered, that the Lord could aptly and easely repay him as many talentes, and that for so small a losse he should not suffer Idolatrers which were hated of god to be in his campes.
I will not tel how often the Iewes were forbidden by the prophets, that they shoulde not require helpe of the Egiptians, or of the Assirians.
But to returne to the matter from which we haue somewhat decreased: This
Heber the knighte, if he had peace with
Iabin, for his limites or borders, or for some pencion agreed with him for pastor for his cattle, it cannot be discommended. Forasmuch as godly men seke not to dwel out of the world, & they ought according to the Apostles commaundement to haue peace with al men as much as in thē lieth. But if he had peace, to take in hand any cōmō expeditiō, it was vniust, neither ought it to abide ratified. But the thinge whiche we haue in hande was don by
Iahel, and not by
Hebor her husbād. For he ether was not at home, or elles if he were at he home was sick: Wherfore he could not execute this notable acte.
18 And Iahell went out to mete Sisera, and said vnto him, Turn on my Lorde, turne in to me feare not. And he turned in vnto her tente. And she couered hym with a coueringe.
19 And he sayde vnto her, geue me I praye thee, a little water to drinke for I am thirstye, and she opened a bottle of milke and gaue him drinke and couered him.
20 Agayne he sayd vnto her, stande in the dore of the tent and when anye man doth come and inquire of thee, saying: is anye man here? thou shalt say, nay.
21 Then Iahel Hebers wife toke a nayle of the tente, and toke an hammer in her hād, and went priuely vnto him, and smote the naile into his temples, and fastned it vnto the grounde. For he was faste on slepe and wery: and so he died.
Iahel vsed guile and that euel guile: but agaynst her enemy, not her own enemy, but one alredy reiected of God and an oppressor of the people of God. And in what sorte it is lawful to vse euel guile against such enemies, we haue before declared. The couering wherwith she couered him, it is vncertayne what manner of one it was, and the opinions of the interpretors do muche differ therein. For some affirm that it was of silk and fine, and other some that it was a thick wollen garment full of heares and lockes hanging in both sides. But the matter is
[Page] of no greate importance, and consisteth wholy in coniectures.
The cause of the drought of Sisera.That Sisera was oppressed with thirst we ought not to merueile, when as he had traueled so farre on foote, and was pressed with so great grief, for both they which are weary and also they that are heauy for the most parte are wonte to be thirsty. For both labor and the affection of sorow, haue a power of drying.
The woman gaue him milke. Paraduenture shee didde it of purpose, to cause him to fall on slepe. Neither was it any hard thing for her to geue him milke to drinke, for she had it in hand, when as she & her whole family excercised the arte of graffinge of cattle. And in that it is said, that she
opened a bottle, it declareth that she had no smal store of milke, but greate aboundaunce therof. But
Sisera when he had wel dronke, forgat not yet his owne safety, but diligently admonisheth the woman, what she shoulde aunswere, if any body came to aske for him. And that none should haue occasion to entre into the tente, he willeth her to abide at the dore, to aunswere such as should go by, to the ende that if they soughte for him, they should sone departe from thence.
A nayle of the tente I take to be that which they vse to fasten into the ground to cause the tente being bound vnto it to abide spreade abroade. And in that the woman vsed a hammer and a nayle, this I gather thereby, that the Israelites whilest they serued the Chananites, had theyr weapons taken away from them by the Chananites that they should haue neither sword nor dagger mete to kill a man withall. This holy woman vndoubtedly was gouerned by God, whiche durst accomplish so great an enterprise. For the strengthe of wemen is not able to atchiue these thinges.
The cause of Sisaras slepe.
Sisera being on sleepe, died. The causes of his sleepe are now sufficiently expressed, namely that he was weary by reason of his iourney, he dronke a greate deale of milke, and lay well couered: He was oppressed with heauines: and it is possible, that he slept but a little the night before.
The woman came softly or priuely, to se whither he were throughly on sleepe and when she saw that he was so, with a stout and valiant courage she gaue him a stroke.
Sisera died, and that with ignominy. For God for this cause suffred him for a time to flye, that he might not be killed in battayle amonge men, but being on slepe be slayne by the hand of a woman.
22 And behold Barak pursued after Sisara, and Iahell came out to mete him, and sayd vnto him, Come, & I will shew thee the man whome thou seekest. And he came in vnto her. And beholde Sisara lay on the ground deade, and the nayle in his temple.
23 So god brought downe Iabin the kinge of Chanaan that daye before the children of Israell.
24 And the hande of the children of Israell prospered, and preuayled against Iabin the king of Chanaan, vntill they had destroyed the same Iabin king of Chanaan.
Iahel meeteth
Barak and shee therefore sheweth him his enemy killed, that he shoulde no more trauayle in seekinge of him.
Sisera was not deceaued when he thought that
Barak would come to the tent of
Iahel, for he came thither in dede, for pursuinge the Chananites euen vnto
Hazoreth of the gentiles, he sawe not
Sisera among them which fell: wherfore he iudged he lurked somwhere, and suspected that he had without any more a doe fledde vnto the tente of the Leuites, bicause of the league and peace which he had with them. God therfore broughte downe
Iabin, yea if ye maye beleue
Iosephus, the Israelites destroyed his citye with sword and fire.
Whither Iahel in violating the laws of hospitality did well, or no.But it semeth that
Iahel in this her enterprise and notable act did violate the lawes of hospitalitye and league, and therefore nowe resteth, either to condemne her or to quitte her.
But bicause al controuersye, not a litle dependeth
[...],
What maner of mē the Kenites were. that is of the circumstance of the persons, let vs therfore set her before our eyes, and consider with our selues what maner of men the
Kenites wer. They assuredly in bloude wer ioyned with the Israelites. For it is written that they wer the posteritye of
Hobab the father in law of
Moyses. Farther, in the study of piety and the lawe of God they most purely consented with the Hebrues. Neither was theyr faythe ydle, but of efficacy and working. For they leauing their country, followed the Israelites, and God which was their guide thorowe the deserte places. Wherefore at the length when the landes were distributed, they obtayned inheritance together with them in the lande of
Chanaan. For these causes, if
Iahel went about to set the Iewes at libertye, she did but her dutye, neyther tooke she vpon her any other mans office.
On the contrary part let vs thus thinke of
Sisera.
What Sisera was. He was an oppresser of the people of God, and nowe killed by the power of God, and vtterlye confounded, neyther appeared there in him any token of repentance, but rather would therfore hyde himselfe, that escaping this so present a daunger, he might againe gather a new host against the Israelites. In deede after a sorte hee was in league with
Heber the
Kenite: but (as it is to be thought) not with a pure hart, but onelye to plucke him awaye from the rest of the Iewes, whereby he might haue the fewer enemies, & not be compelled to fight with so many enemies at one tyme. Or els to get of him a great tribute, or some other commoditye which he looked for. Farthermore in this his vnluckye chaunce, he calleth vpon no God, he imploreth not the prayers of others, but onely seketh hiding places, wher he might hide himselfe tyl such time, as the rage and brute of the Conquerers were somewhat staked: and onely trusted in humane aydes and leagues. By these thinges it easilye followeth, that both
Iahel dyd her dutye, and that
Sisera deserued so to be kylled.
But as touching the lawes of hospitality,
Lawes of hospitality ought ordinarilye to bee kepte vnuiolated. we also do iudge that they by them selues and of their own nature ought to be kept sacred and vnuiolated. Thys vnderstoode
Loth, when he would haue abandoned his daughters to the fylthy lustes of the wanton
Sodomites, to the end they should doo no iniury vnto them which had turned in vnto him. Neither departed that olde man from his example, which receaued the
Leuite with his wife as straungers, as it shal be more at large declared in this historye of the Iudges. Whose counsell in betraying hys daughters, although I allow not, yet I do very much commend the defending of the straungers. Yea, and the
Gentiles worshipped
Iupiter hospitalis, knowing by the light of nature, that God had a singular care ouer straungers and gestes.
Pythagoras.
Pythagoras also discommendeth the Swallowes, namelye for this, bicause they dayly lodge vnder the couering of mens houses, and yet will neuer be made familiar or tame vnto their hostes.
Mischieuous houses. There were also somtime certain mischeuous houses, in which no man might anye more inhabite (as probable authors haue written) and that bicause in them the lawes of hospitalitye had bene violated. And contrarywise wher hospitality hath bene wel and faithfully kept, not onely Angels, but God himselfe also somtimes hath bene an acceptable gest. Christ also at the end of the world wil say: I was a straunger and ye lodged me, commending his in the sight of the whole world, for the vertue of hospitalitye. And it is manifest, that men in the old time decreed that betwene the gest & the host ther should be great frendship. Lastly God in the law commaūded, that the Hebrues should not despise the Egiptians, or vtterly expel them from them, & that namely for this, bicause at the beginning they shewed hospitality vnto their elders. Wherfore we must affirme that by the vniuersal and ordinary lawe,
When God cō maundeth, all lawes of friendshyp are to bee broken. the lawes of hospitality ought to be kept inuiolated. And this ought also to he firm, that in lawes, no friendships, are so honest and so iust, but they are to be broken if God commaund otherwise. For al these thinges ought so long to be of force,
[Page] as the wil of God shal allow them. Wherfore, forasmuch as God had nowe reiected
Sisera and the
Chananites, and would haue them destroyed, no couenants could iustlye be kept with them. For we must rather obey God than mans reasons. And of this wil of God
Deborah was both a prophecier and an interpreter. She had declared that
Sisera was now reiected of God, and had openly foretold that he should be sold into the hand of a woman.
After this maner the
Leuites when they had slaine their friendes & kinsfolkes followed
Moyses: to whom
Moyses in the name of God said, ye haue consecrated your handes, so farre was it of that they were reproued for violating the bondes of kinred.
Ieremy also, when by the commaundement of God hee had pronounced that the
Moabites shoulde be kylled, he cursed those which had withdrawen themselues from that murther. He is cursed (said he) which doth the woorke of the Lord deceatefully. In the lawe also it is commaunded, that none shoulde be spared which entised any to idolatry, no not the Father, nor the Mother, no nor he or she which sleepeth in thy bosome. Who seeth not here that most strayghte bondes of kinred are to be contemned, if the wil and woord of God be against it
[...]
Abraham was commaunded to kyl his sonne, and that his onely sonne, as touching whom he had receaued a most large promise. The promise of God and fatherly kindnes seemed to be against his precept, and yet against these thynges, the woord of God vrging him, he ought to haue kylled his sonne. So must we think, that al men, although they be night of kyn vnto vs, ar sacrifices vnto god, as many as he commaundeth to be slayne. Wherefore in
Esay the .xxxiiii. chap. it is written:
What happeneth vnto them that be preposterously gentle. The Lord hath a sacrifice in
Bozra. But they which wyth a preposterous clemency wyl against the woord of God be merciful, let them remember what happened vnto the king of
Samaria. He, when he had spared
Benadab the king of
Siria, contrary to the commaundement of god, he was in this maner reprehended in the name of god by the Prophet. Thy soule shalbe for his soule.
Wherfore
Iahel in this place is not to be blamed, forasmuch as she obeyed the counsel of god, and was excellently commended in the song of
Deborah, as wee shal straightway see. And vndoubtedly this her worke came of a great fayth and singular obedience. I know that some thinke, that the act of
Iahel is to be commended, in that she killed
Sisera, and had so ready a mynde to set at libertye the Israelites: but yet they condemne the lye which she made, and the promise wher in she promised that she would hide and defend him. For she said: turn in to me, turne in to me, I pray thee my Lord, be not afeard. By which kinde of spech she seemed to promise him not to betray him to his enemies. I also woulde affirme the same, but that I see that god was the gouernour of this whole enterprise. I haue before taught, that it is lawful to vse guile, and that euil guile against our enemies, and that certaine proditions are iust. But I added, that there shoulde be mingled no promises nor lyes, nor othes with them. But al these thinges are to be vnderstand by the common law. But if god shal styrre vs vp to doo otherwise, there shalbe no blame layde in vs, if we obey him: so that we be very assured that god will haue it so to be done. And this is not to be left out, that some thinke, that
Iahel at the beginning, when she called
Sisera vnto her, thought of no guile or fraude towardes him: but that she was minded to keepe hym safe, as she had promised: but afterward she chaūged her purpose, bicause god had shewed her, that she should otherwyse woorke.
¶The .v. Chapter.
1.
THen sang Deborah, and Barak the sonne of Abimam the same day, saying:
2 Prayse ye the Lorde for the auenging of Israel, and for the people that offred them selues wyllingly.
The ditty or song which is here written, belongeth to a demonstratiue kind of oration: for it comprehendeth both prayses and dispraises. Prayses chiefely of god, which was the principal author of this victory: for in ouercomming
Sisera, it is mencioned that he vsed the ayde of the Starres of heauen, and of the tempest.
Deborah also and
Barak are praysed, lykewyse
Iahel, and also these fewe weake and vnarmed men of the tribe of
Zabulon and
Nephthalim, which obeied the Oracle of god. On the contrary part
Sisera is dispraised as a most cruel enemy of the people of god: & they are sharpely rebuked, which beleued not the word of god, but despised the commaundementes of
Barak and woordes of
Deborah: & hauing a regarde to their own weakenes, and not so much esteeming the goodnes and promises of god as they should haue done, they refused the battayle appoynted them of God.
¶Of Musicke and Songes.
THis song is a song of victory,
A song of victorye. such a one as
Moyses sang when
Pharao was drowned: and as
Hanna the mother of
Samuel made by the inspiratiō of the holy ghost, when she had brought forth
Samuel: and such a one as the Maydens of the Iewes openly sang in companies of players and dauncers after the victory of
Dauid against
Goliah. And in lyke maner in the newe Testament,
Mary, Zacharias, and
Simeon gaue thankes to god in their songes. The Ethnikes also when they had obtayned victories, were wont to appoynt supplications for certayne dayes, which in deede was nothing els, than to geue thankes vnto God. Wherefore being moued with the occasion of this place, I thinke it good somewhat to speake of Songes and Musicke, as much as belongeth to piety. Fyrste, from whence they had their beginning, and to what ende they were instituted. Secondlye, whither they may be kept in the Churches. Lastlye, what kinde of songes and measures are profitable and healthful.
As touching the first, we must vnderstand that the men of the olde tyme were wont with common vowes to sing certain solemn ditties, both when they gaue thankes to god, and also when they endeuoured to obtayne anye thyng of hym. Wherefore
Orpheus, Linus, Pindatus, and
Horace,
Poetes vsyng the harpe.
Sallij. and such like Poetes which vsed the Harpe, wrote most part of their hymnes for these vses. And in the
Romane publike wealth, the Priests of
Mars, which wer called
Salii, caryed shields, and sang their verses throughe the Citye. Furthermore, it was the maner, that Musicke and verses were had, when the prayses of noble men were celebrated, chiefly at feastes: whereby they which stoode by, might be admonished to to imitate their noble actes, and to detest suche vices, which were contrary vnto theyr vertues. Moreouer, they vsed them to recreate the myndes, and to comfort suche as wer pensiue for the dead. For in burials they sang Epitaphes.
Epitaphes. And contrariwise, when anye great cause of ioye happened, it was expressed by Musicke and Songes. Wherefore in weddinges they wer wont to syng wedding songes.
[...], Al these thinges, if they be done moderatelye and in due time, maye be both borne withal, and also commended. For Musicke and Songes contayne three kyndes of good thinges, honest (I say) profyte, and pleasantnes. For although synging of it selfe delighteth the myndes of men, yet when woordes are ioyned vnto it, which are of a iust number, and bound by certaine feete (as we see verses are) it is then made much more pleasaunt. And vndoubtedlye Poetry had hereof hys beginning, and I cannot deny but it is a gyft of god:
Poetry a gyfte of God. Againste wanton songes. but I woulde wyshe thys that it be kept pure and chaste among men. And that I for this cause say, bicause certayne vncleane and vnpure men haue most filthily defiled it, applying songs and verses to wantonnesse, wicked lusts, and euery filthy thing. Whose verses, although they be eloquent and good latine, yet they are vtterly vnwoorthye for Christian eares, neither ought they by any meanes to be taught vnto yong mē, who being themselues prone inough to vices, neede no new fyres or mocions to
[Page] moue and enflame them. Verses of this kinde, may iustly be called the
Sirenes of tender mindes: wherwith yong men being infected, it is scarce possible, but that they shal suffer shipwracke.
The godlye much vsed holy songes.But holy songes the people of God muche vsed. For the Hebrues in
Moyses time, when they tooke vp the Arke of the couenaunt, in their remouing of theyr tentes, sang this song: Let God arise and destroy his enemies. Neither did they set it downe without some godlye song, as it is wrytten in the booke of
Numb. Furthermore, in the Tabernacle & in the Temple which was built by
Salomō, the
Leuites at houres appointed wer present & sang holy himnes before y
e Lorde in the hearing of the people, & whē they gaue thanks vnto God, they most swetelye celebrated certayne notable benefites which he had bestowed on his people, and they adioyned prayers and added sentences to the information of the manners and lyfe of godly men. Householders also, when they sat down in their houses, or rose from a feast, did sing certain himnes, whē they kept solemne daies among their household, according to the cōmaundement of God: & so in geuyng thankes to God, they deliuered ouer in maner by hand, his notable woorkes to their posterity. Which laudable custome our Lord Iesus Christ semeth to haue followed, when after the Paschal supper, in the night wherin he was betrayed, he went out together with his Disciples into the mount Oliuet, when thei had said an himne.
An example of Helizeus. And of what force holye musicke is to pacifye the affectes of the mynde,
Helizeus testifieth, who being in minde somewhat moued agaynste the king of Israel, cōmaunded one that plaied on an instrument to be brought vnto him.
Dauid also in playing before
Saul, brideled the violence of the euyll spirite wherewith
Saul was oppressed.
But why Musicke seemeth so to rapte men in a maner wholye, the reason is plaine.
Musike doth in a maner rauishe y
e whole man. For there are certain pleasures, which onely fyl the outward senses, and there are others also, which pertain onely to the minde or reason. But musick is a delectation so put in the myddest, that both by the sweetenes of the soundes it moueth the senses, and by the artificialnes of the number, and proportions, it delighteth reason it selfe.
Pithagoras. And that happeneth then chiefly, when such wordes are added vnto it, whose sense is both excellent & learned.
Pythagoras opinion was, that they which studied his doctrine, should be brought on sleepe with a Harpe, and by the accordes thereof also wakened, wherby they might quietly enioy the time both of sleeping and waking.
Cicero. And it is a common saying (as
Cicero affirmeth) that rockes and wildernesses do geue a sound, and cruel beasts by singing are asswaged and made to stand stil. I wyll not speake, howe the Poetes fable, that when the walles of
Thebes the Citye were built, the stones of their owne motion came together with the sound of the Harpe. And no man is ignoraunt, what the same Poetes haue written of
Arion and
Orpheus. And who knoweth not how much
Dauid here & ther in his Psalmes praiseth both Musick & songes.
Tertulian. And among Christian men
Tertulian in his Apology teacheth that the faithfull did very often make suppers, wherin after they had moderatly and honestly refreshed the body, they recreated themselues with godly songes. And in an other place, when he commendeth Matrimony, that is of one and the selfe same religion, he sayth: that Christian couples doo mutually prouoke them selues tosing prayses vnto God.
Whether singinge may be receaued in the Church. The east churche.
Plini.But now that we haue sene the nature, beginning and vse of songes and musicke: ther resteth to inquire, whither it may be vsed in Churches. In the East part the holy assemblies, euen from the beginning, vsed singing, which we maye easily vnderstand by a testimony of
Plini in a certain Epistle to
Traian the Emperor: where he writeth that Christians vsed to syng hymnes before daye vnto their Christ. And this is not to be left out, that these words wer written in that time that
Iohn the Euangelist lyued, for he was a liue vnto the time of
Traian. Wherfore if a man shal say, that in the time of the Apostles there was syngyng
[Page 103] in holy assemblies. He shal not stray from the truth.
Paule, who was before these times, vnto the
Ephesians saith: Be not filled wyth wyne, wherein is wantonnes, but be ye filled with the spirit, speaking to your selues in Psalmes, Himnes and spiritual songes, singing in your hart, geuing thankes alwaies vnto God, for all thinges, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ. To wyne the Apostle setteth the spirite as contrarye: and forbiddeth the pleasure of the senses, when in steede of wyne he wil haue Christians filled with the spirite. For in wine (as he saith) is wantonnes: but in the spirite is both a true and a perfect ioy. Drounckerdes speake more than inough, but yet foolish and vayne thinges: Speake ye (saith he) but yet spirituall thinges, and that not onely in voyce, but also in hart: for the voyce soundeth in vaine, where the minde is not affected. They which be filled with wine, do speake foolish, filthy, and blasphemous thinges: but geue ye thankes to God, alwaies (I say) and for all thinges.
To this ende vndoubtedly ought Ecclesiastical songes to tend vnto. To the
Colossians also are written certaine thinges not disagreing from these. Let the woord of the Lord (sayth the Apostle) abound plentifully in you: teache and admonish ye one another in Psalmes, Hymnes, and spirituall songes, singing in your hartes with grace. By these woordes
Paule expresseth two thinges. Fyrst, that our songes be the woord of God, which must abound plentifully in vs, and they must not serue onely to geuing of thankes, but also to teache and to admonish. And then it is added, with grace, which is thus to vnderstand, as though he should haue said, aptly and properly both to the senses, and to measure, and also vnto the voyces. Let them not syng rude and rusticall thinges, neither let it be immoderatly, as doo the Tauernhunters. To the
Corrinthians the firste Epistle the .xiiii. chapter where he entreateth of an holy assemblye, the same Apostle writeth after this maner: When ye assemble together, according as euerye one of you hath a Psalme, or hath doctrine, or hath a toung, or hath reuelacion, or hath interpretation, let al thinges be done vnto edifieng. By which woordes is declared that Syngers of songes and Psalmes had their place in the Church.
The west Church.
Augustine.
But the west Churches more lately receaued the maner of singing: for
Augustine, in his .ix. booke of Confessions testifieth that it happened in the tyme of
Ambrose. For when that holy man together with the people watched euen in the Church, least he should haue bene betrayed vnto the
Arrians, he brought in singing to auoyde tediousnes, and to driue away the time.
But as touching the measure and nature of the song which ought to be retained in Musicke in the Church, these thinges are woorthy to be noted.
What maner of measure the ecclesiastical song ought to be.
Augustine.
Augustine in the same bookes of Confession, both confesseth, and also is sory, that hee had sometimes fallen, bicause he had geuen more attentiue heede vnto the measures and cordes of musicke, than to the woordes whiche were vnder them spoken. Which thing hereby he proueth to be synne, bicause measures and singing were brought in for the wordes sake, and not wordes for Musicke.
The manner of the churche of Alexandria. And he so repented him of his fault, that he execeedingly allowed the manner of the Church of
Alexandria vsed vnder
Athanasius, for hee commaunded the Reader, that when he sang, he should but lytle alter his voyce, so that he shoulde bee lyke rather vnto one that readeth, than vnto one that syngeth. Howbeit on the contrary, when he considered, how at the beginning of his conuersion he was inwardly moued with these songes, namely in suche sorte, that for the zeale of pietye he burst forth into teares, for this cause I say, he consented that Musicke should be retained in the Churche, but yet in suche maner, that hee saide he was readye to chaunge his sentence, if a better reason could be assigned. And he addeth y
t those do synne deadly, as they wer wont to speake, which geue greater hede vnto musicke, than vnto the woordes of God:
Ierome. Gregory. To which sentence vndoubtedlye
Ierome assenteth, as he hath noted vpon the Epistle to the
Ephesians. Gregory also of
Rome, in the Synode of
Rome was of the same opinion. And both their wordes
[Page] are wrytten in the Decrees,
Dist. 92. in the chap.
Cantantes, and in the chapter,
In sancta Romana. In which place are read in the glose two verses, not in dede so eloquent, but yet godly.
Non vox, sed votum, non cordula musica, sed vox
Non clamans, sed amans, cantat in aure Dei.
That is: Not the voice, but the desire: not the plesantnes of musick, but the voyce Not crying, but louing, syngeth in the eare of God.
And in the wordes of
Gregory, this is not slightlye to be passed ouer, in that hee saith: Whilest the swetenes of the voyce is sought for, the life is neglected: and when wicked maners prouoke God, the people is rauished by the pleasauntnesse of the voyce.
The abuses of Ecclesiasticall Musicke.But now let vs declare the cautions which are to bee obserued, to the ende we maye lawfully and fruitfully vse singing in the Church. The first is: That
1 in Musicke be not put the whole summe & effect of godlines, and of the worshipping of God. For among the Papists they do almost euery where thinke y
t they haue in the churches fully worshipped God, whē they haue long & much soong
2 and bleated. Farther, we must take hede that in it be not put merite or remissiō of synnes. For there are very many Priestes and Monkes, which for this cause do thinke they haue very wel deserued of God, bicause they haue soong very many Psalmes. Yea and the Pope also, Cardinals, Bishops & Abbots, when they haue heard songes of Masses and Euensonges, do oftentimes pronounce vnto
3 the people indulgences of synnes. This vice also is to be taken away, that singing be not so much occupied in the Churche, that there bee no time in a maner left for to preach the woord of God and holy doctrine, as they doo almost euerye wher. For they so chaunt all thinges with synging and piping, that there is no part of the time reserued for preaching. Wherby it cōmeth to passe, that the people depart out of the Church ful of Musick and harmony, but yet hungerstoruen
4 and fasting as touching heauenly doctrine. Moreouer, so riche & large stipendes are appointed for Musicians, that either very litle, or in a maner nothing is prouided for the Ministers which labor in the woord of God. Neither may that broken
5 & quauering Musicke be lawfully retayned, wherewith the standers by are so letted, that they cannot vnderstand the wordes, no though they woulde. We
6 must also take heede, that in the Church nothing be soong without choyse, but onely those thinges which are contained in the holy scriptures, or which are by iust reasons gathered out of them, and do exactly agree with the woord of God. For if there should be a wyndow opened vnto the inuentions of men, it wer to be feared, least Ecclesiastical Musicke should at the last be chaunged into trifles and fables. Yea, we already see, that there are brought into the assemblye verye many foolish Sequences (as they call them) and fayned Hymnes, and manye other thinges also which doo styrre vp vnto the hearers rather a laughter and a wearynes,
Hymnes of Ambrose. than a true fayth. Neither doo I speake these thinges as thoughe I would disprayse the Hymnes of
Ambrose, and other whiche are of that kynde, forasmuch as by them I iudge that the faythful maye be both instructed, and also admonished.
The Symbole of Athanasius. The Psalmes of Augustine. The Psalmes of Chrisostome. The Symbole of
Athanasius seemeth also to bee allowed, and the Psalmes of
Augustine against the
Donatistes: and also the Psalmes of
Chrisostome (of which the Ecclesiasticall history of
Eusebius maketh mention in the .7. booke) if they were remayning. For whatsoeuer thinges were written in them, we must beleue that they agree with the holy scriptures, and that they doo aduaunce the edification of the faithfull in the Churche.
The Psalmes of Valentine. But contrarywyse the Psalmes of
Valentine (of which
Tertulian maketh mencion) ar aboue al things to be condemned.
Psalmes in the honour of Samosatenus. And with them the most corrupt Psalmes whych were soong in the Temple in the honour of
Paulus Samosatenus, as the history of
Sozomenus declareth.
But now to conclude the matter, I affirme that godly & religious songes maye be retained in the Churche: and yet I confesse that there is no precept geuen in the new Testament of that thing. Wherfore if ther be any Church,
Ther is no precepte geuen for the hauing of Musicke in the Churche. which vpon iust causes vseth it not, the same Church cannot iustly be condemned, so that it defend not that the thing it selfe of his own nature, or by the cōmaundement of God is vnlawful, and that it do not for the same cause reproue other Churches, which vse singing & Musicke, or els exclude them from the fellowship of Christ. For the Church of
Alexandria (as it is before said) vsed either very litle singing, or els almost none at al. For they saw the infirmity of the people to be so great, that they gaue more heede to the harmony, than they did to the wordes. Wherefore if in these daies we shal perceaue, that the Christian people do runne vnto the Churches as to a stage play, where they may be delighted with piping & singing, in this case we must rather abstaine from a thing not necessarye, than to suffer their pleasures to be cockered with the destruction of their soules. But now I thinke it good to returne vnto the history.
Then sang Deborah and Barak.
Who made this song. It seemeth that
Deborah alone made thys ditty: for the spirite of prophecy had persed her, and not
Barak. Howbeit hee is ioyned with her, bicause euen as in the battayle he was the Captaine, so also among the singers, and those which gaue thankes vnto God, he was the chiefe.
In that day. We may thus enterprise, that in the selfe same day of victorye, this song of victory was both made and also song: which lyketh me verye well, that we might hereby learne straightwaye to geue thankes for the benefites receaued. For to deferre it, as some do,
It is vicious to defer thanks geuing. it can scarcely be defended from the vyce of ingratitude. Neither can the maner of certaine men be commended, which to obtayne anye thing at Gods handes cease not wyth moste importunate vowes to pray vnto him, but when they haue obtayned their request, they scarce returne vnto God, to geue him thankes sometymes at the last.
The Ethnikes (as we gather by good authors writers of histories) when they had gotten the victory, did strayghtway syng hymnes in praises of their Gods:
Cōquerers did straightwaye syng Hymnes vnto their gods & if they with so great a study gratified their false Gods, howe muche more ought we for the benefites which we haue receaued, without any tarying to offer thankes vnto the true and liuely God, whom we woorship.
Prayse ye the Lord for the auenging of Israel. Bicause thys Hebrue woorde
Perag is doubtful, therfore the sense therof may be taken diuers waies. Fyrst, it signifieth to make naked & to spoyle, as it is put in
Exodus, when
Aaron tooke golden ornamentes of the Israelites, to make the molten Calfe. For he was reproued of
Moyses, bicause he had with ignominy made naked the people. Wherfore according to this signification the sense of the dittye is: Geue thankes vnto God, which first made you naked both of strength and of his ayde, when we wer geuen ouer vnto the
Chananites. Furthermore, geue hym thankes, bicause he hath afterward made you prompt both to take in hand warre, and also to recouer your liberty. Eche of these actions of God is to bee praysed,
To the elect
[...] is profitable both to be
[...] c
[...]st down, &
[...] be deliue
[...] We must
[...] thankes o
[...] God for pro
[...] rity & aduersit
[...] for they turned to good to his people. For the deiection calleth them backe to repentaunce, and the deliuery deliuereth them from a grieuous yoke. Let god therefore be praysed, which both leadeth to hel, and bringeth from hel. Neither must we geue hym thankes onely for prosperous thinges, but also for aduersity. Also thys woorde
Perag signifieth to reuenge: and by this meanes forasmuch as reuengemēt may be referred to two thinges, the sense of it also may be taken twoo wayes.
The first is: That god in oppressing the Israelites, and deliuering them to the
Chananites, reuenged the iniury that was done vnto himselfe, wherein they dyd grieuously offende hym, when they fel to impietye and Idolatrye. Neyther doth thys latter sentence vary any thyng from the fyrst. Forasmuch as by thys way also
Deborah commaundeth to geue thankes vnto god for the former afflictions. For to the godly aduersitye also turneth to good.
For the Saintes when they haue fallen, are wont by scourges wherewith they are punished to be called backe againe to repentaunce, which repentaunce God poureth in them by diuers and many vexations. The third sense is, which is euery where, and almost receaued of al men: That they should geue thankes vnto God, which at the last had reuenged the iniuries of the Israelites. For they were before long time, & that grieuously oppressed by the
Chananites. And then by the spirite of God they were made willing and prompt, which before were such abiectes and cowardes. Two thinges therfore are expressed, namely, that God confounded the
Chananites, in reuenging the euyls whyche they had done vnto the Iewes, and also that he strengthened them in the battaile. If God reuenged them,
We do not ask those things of God whiche ar in our own power. they by them selues coulde not reuenge themselues. If he made them willing, they themselues were not such. Wherfore free wyl is put down, and the goodnes of god commended. For euen as we doo not aske of god those thinges which we haue in our own hands and power: so for these things when they happen vnto vs, we geue him no thankes.
3 Heare ye Kinges, hearken ye Princes: I, euen I wyll syng vnto the Lord, I wyl syng prayse vnto the Lord God of Israel.
Why she calleth Kynges in special, there maye be manye reasons alledged. The first is, bicause all the Iewes were called in a manner Kynges. For God made that nation both a kingdome and a priesthoode vnto himselfe. They were all therefore so called, euen as we of Christ are called Christians, or anoynted, of our onely head Christ, whych was chiefly annoynted wyth the oyle of righteousnes and grace.
An admonitiō to MagistratsFarther, he maketh an
Apostrophe to kinges, bycause that shee song these wordes not onelye for her time, but also hauing a regarde to the tyme to come: wherefore by her, all Princes and Magistrates are in especiall admonished, bycause they being puffed vp with pride and ryches, both thinke and also affirme that the people should looke for safety at their handes. But now they ar taught by the woord of God, that it is he which defendeth and keepeth, although sometimes therunto he vseth the helpe of them that are preserued. Lastly,
Deborah speaketh to straunge kynges, whiche had determined wyth them selues to destroye the Israelites, and exhorteth them diligently to weigh wyth themselues the thinges which God hath done, and to marke howe hee knoweth to auenge hys people in due tyme.
I, euen I (sayth she) wyll syng. The repeating of the pronowne of the first person, is not onely vsed of Poetes, but also of Orators: nether doth it onely adorn the oration,
Virgil. Cicero. but also moue the affections, and stirreth vp men vnto admiration.
Virgil saith: I, euen I am present which did it, turne your weapon against me.
Cicero also saith: Ah I miserable man the goodes, the goodes I saye of
Gnaius Pompeius, were most cruelly by the voyce of the cryer. &c. This nowe is, as if
Deborah should haue sayde: I althoughe a woman, yet a Prophet. I although a woman, yet a sauiour of Israel wyl syng vnto my God.
They vse to put a certayne difference betwene these two latin wordes
canere that is, to syng, and
psallere which is also to syng: but bycause that difference is not alwaies obserued, yea, one is taken oftentymes for an other, therfore I willingly ouerpasse it.
4 Lord, when thou wentest out of Seir, whē thou departedst out of the fielde of Edom, the earth trembled, the cloudes also dropped water.
5 The mountaynes melted before the Lord, as did that Sinai before the Lord God of Israel.
In the ditties and periodes of songs and of the prophets this is a common vse, that the latter part differeth not from the fyrst, as touching sence,
Why in the periodes of the holy scriptures one sentence is repeated. but cōtayneth the same thing, the wordes being somewhat chaunged: which thinge also in the Prouerbes of Salomon is easy to marke. And I doubt not that the same is done vpon iust causes. Forasmuch as of the holy ghost nothing is done rashly or vnprofitably. The sentences also which are entreated of in those bookes, are verye graue, and therfore by that tarying in them, our dulnes is holpen. For it quickly passeth ouer the sence of the firste parte: therfore the latter parte being all one with the fyrst, maketh vs to geue more attentiue heede. Farthermore our hardenes is so greate, that to one stroke it vseth not to geue place. Wherefore it is no merueyle if God strike it with a double stroke. And when the wordes are chaunged, the efficacy and wayght of the sentence alredye spoken, is more and more expressed. The want of humayne speache is holpen, whiche want is suche, that at one speaking, the whole signification of a wayghty sentence can not be opened. Wherfore by that repititiō, that which is not expressed by the fyrst words, is expounded by other woordes which serue for the same thing.
God therefore, by whose conducte this victorye was obteyned, is to bee praysed: whych is by very good reason done, forasmuch as his beneuolence towardes Israel is proued to be no strange or new beneuolence. Wherefore
Deborah celebrateth him as an old and auncient patrone of the Iewes.
From the time (sayth she)
wherin the Israelites at thy cōmaundement, walked .38. yeres by diuers writers (as it is written in the .2. of Deutronomy) about mount
Seir, and then at the length by thy will departing from thence, they went forward to the land of Chanaan, thou nobly takest in hande theyr cause. For thou goyng with vs in a piller of fyre, and of a cloud, so fearedst the Chananites our enemies, that they wer not able to resist vs, which were otherwise weake and feble. Before when we went aboute the mountayne, they liued in securitye, and stoutlye contemned vs. But when thou leddest vs out of those places, such a feare came vpon them,
that euen the earth seemed to tremble, and the heauens and cloudes caste downe great tempestes and showres. And it was so greate as though
the mountaines should roule down greate heapes of water, to the inferior valleis. By these alligories
Deborah discribeth the feare that was driuen into the Amorites and Chananits. And it is no maruayle (saith she) if at thy sight they wer so troubled, whē as this
Sina was not able to abide y
e discēding down vpō it, whē in old time thou gauest y
e law, for it was altogether shaken, & it wōderfully trembled. Let the prudēt reader mark that there wanteth this particle
Caph. Whiche is a note of a similitude, whiche should be here put.
This Sinai is written simply: whē as we must vnderstand euē as this
Sina in the old time was moued, so they at our cōming were sore afrayd & trembled. To mount
Seir or
Edom, which is now mentioned, in the .30. chap. of Deutronomy (where almost the same thing is written) is
Pharan added, namely a mountayn lying hard by it, and the like thing is red in the Psalme. The Rabbines of the Hebrewes do bring trifles,
A farned thyng of the Rabines and say that God did therfore come from
Seir when he would geue the law, because he would firste haue geuen the lawe vnto the Edomites: which when they refused, he went vnto mounte
Sina to the Hebrewes, which receaued the law, with a willing and glad hart. But these fables are not drawen out of the holy scriptures, but spring out of theyr own inuē tion, which immoderatly cōmend their own nation, as though they by their own iudgement & vpright wil, had deserued to receaue the law of God. But others thinke, that God when he came to
Sinai, was sene to haue descended from those mountaynes of the Edomites, as though he should beginne to goe from thence vnto the Israelites. This also is but a weake reason. The fyrste interpretation fitteth best, for as touching the hystory, when God caused the Israelites to passe ouer beyond the mountayne, then were the Chananites sore afearde, especially when
Og, and
Sihon the kinges were slayne.
6 In the dayes of Sangar the sonne of Anath, in the dayes of Iahel the highe wayes were vnoccupied, and the trauaylers walked thorough bywayes.
7 The townes of Israell were not inhabited, they decayed, vntill I Deborah rose vp, which rose vp a mother in Israell.
Hetherto is God commended as the auncient defendour of the Israelites, but now is set forth this present victory. And is handled by comparison bicause it is declared that God had now graunted farre greater things than before he had geuen, when
Deborah was not yet stirred vppe. For
Sangar (of whome we before entreated) althoughe he obteined some victorye ouer his enemies, and did somewhat for the safety of the people, yet he did not perfectly set the Hebrewes at liberty. Neither performed
Iahel a full deliuery. For in their time y
e high ways also were not then safe, and men were compelled, eyther not to go forwarde, or els to trauaile throughe bywayes and vnknowen places. And thinges were come to that poynte, that villages, and townes whiche were not fenced and inclosed with walles, were cleane forsaken. Wherfore marchandise, husbandrye, & iudgementes were hindred, and the Iewes were compelled to kepe themselues in cities well fenced, except they would haue ben made prayes vnto the Chananits. And this misery indured frō the oppressiō of
Iabin to the dominion of
Deborah.
But it may seme merueilous, why he maketh mention of
Sangar &
Iahel both together. Some thinke that she iudged Israell after
Sangar. But for asmuche as the holye scriptures write not so, I dare not affirm it. I thincke rather that shee was named with
Sangar for honours sake: as though she should haue sayde: Althoughe GOD hath by her nowe killed euen
Sisera, and that hytherto GOD hath loued her, yet as longe as shee hath liued vnto this presente daye, the calamity of Israell hath endured, neither was it taken away. This Hebrew worde
Perzon in the singular number signifieth, villages, and townes without walles and fenses: and therefore it is construed with a verbe of the plurall number, namely
Chadelu.
Virgill. Farther we must note that this verbe
Chadelu is twise repeated, for it is put both in the beginninge and in the ende of the sentence, as in that verse of
Virgil: He demaunded many things of
Priam, & many things of
Hector.
She sayth that she
rose vp as a mother in Israel, bicause she was stirred vp not to raigne as a tirant. Certayn do somtimes fight for theyr country, and do seme as though they would set it at liberty,
Cesar. but afterward the same men doe oppresse it no lesse than enemies.
Cesar semed to haue deliuered the frenchemen and the
Germaines from the yoke of the
Romaines,
[...]arius Silla. but he vtterlye oppressed the publike wealth, that is, the liberty of the people. The same thing went
Marius and
Silla aboute.
What is the property of a lawfull prince.And here is touched the duty of a lawful and good prince. And that is to haue a fatherly minde toward his people. Wherfore Senatours were called fathers, and they wer named
Patres conscripti. That is, appoynted fathers, whose familyes also wer called
Patritiae. And assuredly in the old time it was counted an excellent and a most noble title to be called a father of his countrey, for
Tulli estemed it to be so honorable vnto him, that he sayd: The city of Rome called
Cicero the father of the country.
8 When he chosed new Gods, then was ther warre in the gates, if there were a shield or speare sene among .40000. of Iraell.
These wordes are expounded two manner of wayes, and that not vnaptlye. First, it may be sayde, that warre did then strayghtway oppresse the Iewes, and that the enemy also beseged theyr gates and cities, when they declined vnto Idolatry. According to which interpretaciō the election is referred vnto Israel, and
[Page 106] this worde
Elohim, shalbe the accusatiue case, so that there is a reason shewed of the misery wherewith the Hebrues were afflicted. Vndoubtedly they were therfore brused and made afeard, and also not one of many thousandes which durste take a shield, or shake a speare, bicause they had polluted themselues with idolatry. And
Deborah testifieth this to be so true, that she may confirme it euen with an othe. Which this particle (If) which is here put declareth moreouer we maye in this sorte interpreate it: I
Deborah after that I was stirred vppe of God, there was warre in the gates, either of the tentes, or els bicause the Hebrew souldiors which before kept themselues within, wer now gone forth of the gates: bycause god hath now chosen new thinges, that is, he hath broughte in a new shewe and forme of thinges longinge vnto the Israelites. Oure menne durst do nothing hetherto, which now burst forth and assayle theyr enemies. It is god therefore, whiche hath chosen newe thinges: And this word
Elohim in that sense shalbe the nominatiue case. The things which god hath now wrought, are not vnworthely called new thinges: For it is a rare and an vnaccustomed thinge, that armed souldiours should be vanquished of vnarmed mē. And the Hebrues were so with out weapons, y
t not among xl. C. men was foūd so much as one shield or speare.
This Hebrewe word
Aim is a particle of one that sweareth, and is very much vsed in the holy scriptures. I haue sworne in mine anger, if they shal enter into my rest. Also: Lorde if I haue done this, or if there be iniquitye in my handes &c. The reason of this kinde of speach is, bycause they which do so sweare, doo begin an execration, and sometimes they performe it not. If, say they, they should adde. I do it, let this or that happen vnto me, let me perysh, let me dye, let me suffer cruell punishment, and such like. But sometimes they fully expresse it.
9 My darte is set on the gouerners of Israell, and on them that ar willing amonge the people, prayse ye the Lorde.
10 Speake ye that ryde on white asses, ye that dwell by Middin, and that walke by the way.
Deborah by an eloquent distribution turneth herself to diuers kinds of men, & exhorteth euery one of them to prayse the Lord. She maketh mention of princes before the other, and sayth that her harte is set on them, namely bicause she feruently desireth them to be thankful vnto God, and to prayse him for the benefite which they haue receaued. She calleth them
Hokekei, bicause to them pertained to make both decrees and lawes. Afterwarde she speaketh of all those, whiche of theyr owne will and accord had offred themselues vnto the battayle.
Ye which ride on white trim asses. Almost al interpretours vnderstand this to be spoken of merchantes, which ryde to and fro to fayres and marketes.
Asses are vsed in Siria. And indeede asses are very much vsed in
Siria: for there the asses be stronge, and mighty and of a good bigge stature, and do go pleasauntly.
VVhiche dwell by Middin, Some vnderstande it thus, that they whiche are iudges shoulde be prouoked to prayse GOD. For (saye they) as shee had before stirred vp marchants and rich men to prayse God, so now she calleth vpon iudges to do the same. For as before marchants were hindred from their trades, also were iudges letted from exercising iudgementes. For they being oppressed of theyr enemies could not minister iustice. But it is better that by this word
Middin be expressed some certayne place, which paraduenture was grieuouslier oppressed by the enemies thā other places wer. Or els bicause theyr marchandises wer wont to be much occupied, which being now set at liberty & in safety, the inhabiters of that place are peculiarly stirred vp to prayse God, And lastly this semeth to pertayne to the common people.
VVhich walke by the way. Namely on fote. For other, either they did ryde, or wer caried vpon asses, for that they were
[Page] rich and noble men. All ye (sayth she)
Schichu, that is tel, and shew. But bicause that verbe signifieth also to meditate, we will thus expound it: with a redye and an attentiue minde tell or shew. Or els it is sayd,
Ye which walke by the way, to declare a certayne cause why they ought to geue thankes: as though shee should haue sayd: All ye, which I haue mentioned, therfore geue thankes vnto God, bicause nowe ye may walke by the way freely.
11 For the noyse of the archers appaised in the places wher water is drawen, there shall they reherse the righteousnes of the Lorde, hys righteousnes of his townes in Israell, thē did the people of the lord go downe to the gates.
When she had nowe praysed God, because he had restored the common highe wayes free vnto the Hebrewes, she addeth now an other benefite which he had bestowed on them,
Water is a verye necessarye thing in Syria namely in that thei might with out feare draw water, which before was in a maner wholy letted them. This thing vndoubtedly, althoughe in other places it seemeth to be of no greate value, yet in
Siria where is wonderfull greate scarecety of water, it ought to be counted for an excellent gifte. The welles or fountaynes whiche were without the cities by the streates and highe wayes, could stande the Iewes in no steade, by reason of the Chananites whiche kept away al thinges. For the horsemen which were archers, hidde them selues priuely neare such waters, and assayled those which came forth to draw water there. Many of them they led away captiues, and with theyr noyse and cry, they feared away in a manner all from drawinge of water. Ye haue nowe escaped (sayth
Deborah) the horrible and barbarous noises and cries of horsemē, which were archers vsed to crye with an horrible voyce when they assayle theyr enemies, Ieremy in the .4. chap. testifieth. And the whole city (sayth he) fled away at the cry of the horsemen, which they made whilest they bended theyr bowes.
After that is setforth an other singular benefite, namely that y
e little townes and villages, which wanted fences, and were not inclosed with walles, and seemed to be desolate and emptye by reason of the enemies whiche besieged them, ar now by the help of God reedefied and restored. Wherfore she concludeth that for this cause also, god must worthely be praised. Lastly is added, y
t the people of god might now assemble at the gates of y
e cities,
Why thei geue iudgements in the gates. frō the which before they were altogether prohibited. The iudgement place in the old time was wonte to be in the gates wher thei executed lawes. But by reason of warres and oppressions it seemeth that iudgements ceased, which thing how great a misery it bringeth to the publike wealth, they do manifestly vnderstand, which are not ignorant that in iudgementes in a manner the whole power of the publike wealth is contayned. But why the Hebrewes executed these thinges in the gates, thys seemeth to me to be the cause, bicause they thought those places most meete to be chosen, vnto which not onely the citizens, but also the rusticall and husband men might easely come. And y
e vndoubtedly could not be better done in any other place, then in the very gates of the cityes. Geue thankes therfore vnto God, sayth
Deborah, bycause all these thinges by his ayde haue nowe recouered theyr olde forme and order.
12 Arise, arise Deborah, arise, arise, singe a songe. Vp Barak, and leade thy captiuity captyue, thou sonne of Abinoam.
Forasmucch as
Deborah studied to inflame all the Israelites to geue thanks vnto god, by an eloquēt figure she now stirreth vp herself, y
t therby others might
[Page 107] be pricked forward, and endeuour themselues by her example to prayse God.
Go to, Go to, Deborah, go to, go to sing a songe. This without doubt, is, the manner of sainctes in their Psalmes and songes that they neuer satisfie themselues in praysing God, they alwayes thinke that they are to colde, and for that cause euery where they vse suche stirringes vp of themselues. Here
R.
Salomon doteth,
A fayned
[...] sition of R.
[...] lomon. when he writeth, that
Deborah did to much boast of her selfe, and therfore when her spirite began to waxe faynte, she endeuored her selfe by such stirryng vp to kindle it agayne. If these thinges are spoken by the spirite, as in very dede they are, there can no sinne be in them without a great faulte. Wherfore let
Salomon go whether he will with his fables.
Leade thy captiuitie captiue. She exhorteth
Barac to triumphe & with a certaine pompe to boast of his captiues. For by that meanes it semed that the honor and name of God should more and more be illustrated, when all men vnderstoode, that the
Chananites were now captiues vnto the Hebrues who before thought that they would either vtterly destroy the Hebrues or els take them prisoners. This is the punishement of the iust lawe called the law of the like, that they should iustly suffer those things, which they vniustly went about to do vnto others. Farthermore the
Rabbines haue here noted that the songe is peculiarly ascribed vnto
Deborah, bycause she was a Prophetesse: but the triumphe was geuen vnto
Barac, bycause in the battayle he had fought agaynst his enemies.
13 Then they that remayne haue dominion ouer the myghty of the people: the Lord hath geuen me dominion ouer the string.
Agayne the victory is by a comparison amplified, not as it was before, with the euils and discommodities wherwith the Israelites were oppressed, but the conquerers are very aptly copared with thē which were ouercome. They which were ouercome wer vndoubtedly of great renowme, valeant, expert in warres, & noble, but our men seme to be like remnants, for fewe came vnto the battayle and those fewe were of fewe tribes. Besides that those few whiche came were men despised and of no reputation. For that commonly suche are remnātes, namely to be both small in number, and also vile and abiecte, if it be compared with other, whose remnant they are. Howbeit these remnantes, what maner of men so euer they were, they had the dominion, and were gouerners ouer the noble men.
The Lord hath geuē me dominion. This is added by correction, lest any man should thinke that any thing in this battayle is attributed vnto mans strength. It is the Lord himselfe whiche ouercommeth and hath dominion. Neuerthelesse hath done this by me. That worde
Li may be thus vnderstand, as though she should say thorough me: or as God would ouercome by her: or the ioy, approbation and pleasure is noted whiche she conceaued in mynde of thys greate honour of God.
14 Out of Ephraim was there a roote of them agayne Amalek, & after thee Beniamin agaynst thy people, out of Machir came rulers, and of Zebulon they that drawe with the penne of the writer.
15 And the princes of Isaschar were with Deborah and Isaschar: so Barak was sent on his feete in y
e valley: in the diuisions of Reuben were great thoughtes of heart.
Vergill and
Homere rehearsed the order and number of the ships captaynes & people, which wer helpers vnto those princes whom they praised: so now
Deborah rehearseth those of y
e people of
Israel which came to take in hand this warre.
Deborah was of the tribe of Ephraim.
A roote of them, that is a prince of
Ephraim. This I thinke pertayneth to
Deborah her selfe: for as it semeth, she was of
Ephraim and iudged the people vnder the oke of
Ephraim as is before sayd, and without doubt this warre was taken in hand by her conduct and admonitions. But this semeth somewhat darke, in that it is sayd that the battayle was appointed agaynst
Amalek, but by a figure or figuratiue kinde of speache, we must by
Amalek vnderstand the
Chananites also. Howbeit I am not ignorant, that by this roote of
Ephraim, some vnderstand
Iosua, who was both an
Ephraite, and also fought agaynst
Amalek, as it appeareth in the boke of
Exodus: and they suppose that in these thinges which follow, therfore is made mention of y
e tribe of
Beniamin, to declare & shew forth that
Saul whiche should come of the tribe of
Beniamin should within a while afterwarde finishe the warre agaynst the
Amalekites whiche thyng we read was done in the first booke of
Samuel. This exposition, as I do not abiect, so also I do not easely allowe it: bycause I do not thinke that the actes of
Iosuah are now rehearsed, neither can I be persuaded that
Deborah by the spirite of Prophecy, did Prophecy of those thinges whiche should come to passe in the tyme of
Saul. I will omit therfore that interpretation, and returne vnto myne owne. Some of the tribe of
Beniamin did at the beginning ioyne themselues vnto
Deborah, although (as I iudge) they were very few of them. But out of
Machir (which was a noble famely of the tribe of
Manasses) came some notable men.
Zabulon also was not without some Doctors, Lawyers, & Scribes, whiche were better with a pen than with weapons, and that is signified, in that it is sayd.
They whiche drawe with the penne of the writer, that is, whiche were exercised in drawyng the pen. And the tribe of
Isaschar is wonderfully commended, for from it came princes, yea euen at the beginning. Furthermore it is added that
Isaschar was as
Barac. For as
Barac was sent vnto mount
Thabor, so it semeth y
t
Isaschar with his footemen was sent into the valley, and there he thē on eche side inuaded the enemies, when the battayle beyng begon the Israelites were in daunger, there the Israelites behaued themselues valiantly. Wherfore iustly are they in thys place excedingly praysed. The complices therfore of this warre are mencioned, namely,
Ephraim, Beniamin, a part of
Manasses, Isaschar, Zabulon, and
Nepthalim. But there is nothing spoken of
Iuda, Simeon, Leui, and
Gad. Afterward are reprehended
Reuben, Dan, Aser, and peraduenture al of the tribe of
Manasses, as we shal hereafter see. Wherfore they aboue named which ayded in the battayle, were worthily called remnantes, bycause they were both fewe in number and also of no reputation.
In the litel brookes of Reuben. The tribe of
Reuben is reproued bycause it detracted the battaile. They dwelt beyond
Iordane in the Pastors, and it semeth, that by reason of theyr shepe and cattell they had no regard vnto the publicque wealth. The places of the
Rubenites are not vnworthily called riuers: for they had gotten fertile pastors by the riuer of
Iordane. He attributeth vnto thē greatnesse and wisedome, but he accuseth them for this, namely, bycause they had so great a care vnto their owne thinges. Such a thing semeth here to haue come passe, as is that whiche is set forth in the parable of the Gospell, namely, that diuers which were bidden vnto the wedding refused to come, bycause some would go proue a yoke of oxen, some had bought a Town, and other some also had maried a wife. But of the remnantes which were gathered out of the stretes & high wayes, was the wedding fulfilled. So also cōmeth it to passe in our dayes, when kynges, Emperours, Princes, Noble and mighty men of this world do therfore despise the profession of the Gospell, bycause they preferre theyr owne commondities before religion and heauenly thinges.
16 Why abydest thou among the shepefolds, to heare the bleatings
[Page 107] of the flockes? in the diuisions of Reuben were greate thoughtes of harte.
17 Gilead abode beyond Iordane: but why doth Dan remayne in shipes? Aser sat on the sea shore, and taried in his decayed places.
Ruben is described both by the arte of a shepheard which he exercised and also by the places of Pastors whiche he inhabited: and therwith all it is shewed that they were great men, and men of a wise vnderstandyng, peraduenture to reprehend their swelling and pride, as though they would not obey the commaundementes and conduct of
Deborah being a woman. This is the nature of hyghe mindes, that they thinke that al things that they do, are wel done. But in that it is added, To heare the bleatinges of flockes: it may be vnderstande plainely as though the
Rubenites had more minde to the bleating of cattell, than they had to the regarde of the publicque wealth, but some vnderstād
Allegorically, saying that the
Rubenites sat styll among the shepefoldes by the fertile pastors of
Iordane, althoughe they heard they lamentations and complaintes of the flockes of
Israel, that is of the people of God, with whiche lamentations and complayntes they earnestly implored theyr ayde.
Gilead abode by the riuer of Iordane, or beyond Iordane. Some thinke that the
Galaadites were reprehended together with the
Rubenites, bycause they also with their cattell abode by
Iordane, and neglected this battayle. Halfe the tribe of
Manasses, vnto which the
Galaadites pertayned, when y
e land of
Chanaan was deuided, obtayned the region beyond
Iordan together with the
Rubenites. They which thus expound it, are encombred with a certain doubt, bycause it is before sayd that
Machir came: and he was both the sonne of
Manasses, and also possessed the mount
Gilead. Therfore if
Gilead came as it is before sayd, why is he here reproued as thoughe he came not? Peraduenture they will aunswere,
Two sonnes of Manasses. that
Manasses had two childrē
Machir, &
Iair, of which childrē wer two families deriued, of whiche either possessed parte of
Gilead. Wherfore it might be, that
Machir, of whom before is mencion had, came: but
Iair is nowe reproued, whiche together with the
Rubenites neglected this battayle. But other, with whom I agree, do thus thinke, that the thinges which are now spoken serue to aggrauate y
e crime of the
Rubenites as though it should haue ben sayd
[...]: Thou
Ruben without doubt dwellest by the riuers of
Iordane, and there dwelleth
Gilead also, who came for all that to the battayle. Therfore all excuse both of dwellyng and place is cut of from the
Rubenites. And it semeth that this sentence should be spoken by a certaine interrogation. Did not
Gilead also dwell by the riuers of
Iordane? Wherfore cease
Rubē to excuse that whiche thou hast naughtly cōmitted.
VVhy doth Dan go to the shippes?
The situation of the Danites This can not be vnderstand of shyppes lōging to the sea, for as much as the lot of the
Danites fell not by the sea side: but we must vnderstand it of the shippes of
Iordane. Not as though
Dan did altogether dwell by
Iordan, but (as they say) this tribe was so feared with the sight of the hostes, y
t they fled vnto their shippes, to passe ouer to y
e
Rubenites. And that, euen as it was filthy and vncomely so also is it nowe iustly & worthily blamed.
Aser sat on the sea shore, and in his decayed places. Aser is also blamed, who semeth to haue excused his absence: first bycause he dwelled far of, y
t is, by the sea shore: secondly bicause his Cities and Townes were decayed and vnfensed. And therfore would he tary at home, for feare lest if he had gone, his enemyes should easely haue had occasion to inuade his borders. For, for as much as he possessed places whiche were weake, he thought that if he were absent, his neighbours would easly beriue him of them. I do not doubt, but that it was greuous and troublesome to those tribes so to be reprehended, which yet the holy ghost would haue done: partly that they beyng admonished, might repent: partly y
e other and
[Page] we also beyng by this example stirred vp, myght not refuse to obey the worde of God yea thoughe it be with daunger: whiche if we shall not performe, as these men are now reproued, so also shall we in the last day of iudgement, not onely be reproued with ignominie and irrecouerable hurte, but also we shalbe damned for euer.
18 But the people of Zebulon haue ieoparde their soules vnto the death, and Nepthalim in the high places of the field.
She praysed the tribe of
Zebulon and
Nepthalim for theyr desertes bycause they had put forth to reproche their soule, that is their life. For other men counted thē fooles, bycause so few and vnarmed men durst rashly take in hand warre agaynst so many and well appointed souldiers as they thought.
Or They put their soule to reproche, bycause they nothing estemed their life, and in a manner counted it as a vile thing, putting themselues forth into most certaine daunger of death, if they should looke vpon mans iudgemēt. Howbeit they are for y
e same cause very much to be commended, bycause they preferred both God and also his worde before their owne life. And it is added.
In high places of the fielde, or els in high fieldes, bycause those were souldiers led vnto mount
Thabor, from whiche place they might easely behold y
e whole host of their aduersaries. But although they beholde them, yet were they not so feared, to leaue of their enterprise.
19 The kinges came and fought: then fought the kinges of Chanaan in Thaanach and by the waters of Megiddo: they receaued no gayne of money.
Nowe is described the forme of the battayle or victory. She sayth in the plurall number that kinges came and fought: bycause peraduenture
Sisera had very many other rulers ioyned with him, who although they were not there in person, they had for all that their hostes there. Or els by a figuratiue kinde of speach the plural number is put for the singular number, as is this sentence of y
e Poet. But we haue gone a great space of the sea.
Virgil. Cicero.
Cicero also sayth, we haue deceaued the people, we semed to haue bene orators.
Thaanah, and
Megiddo, semed to haue ben riuers in the tribe of
Manasses whiche had by them two Cities of the same names, not farre from mount
Thabor. We must thinke therfore that the hoste of
Sisera possessed all the playne grounde whiche laye betwene these two Townes.
Cicero. And those repeticions, for one verbe serue to adorne y
e sentēce or song.
Nilchamiu Are Nilchamiu, that is they fought then, they fought as
Cicero also sayth: No man looketh vpon the matter, no man considereth the reason, &c. so y
t betwene two wordes repeted he putteth this one worde (no man) This word also
Melachim that in kinges is repeted.
Cicero. For it is sayd that the kynges came, and that they fought as
Cicero also sayth, This O fathers appoynted is found to be your acte, and not myne, and vndoubtedly it is a most noble acte: but not myne (as I haue sayd) but yours.
They receaued no gayne of money. This may we thus vnderstand, they came to enriche thēselues with the spoyles of their enemies: but that came not to passe according to their expectation. But others interprete these wordes more subtelly, saying, that the enemies so deadly hated the Israelites, that they had no regard to the gayne of the praye, but they would fight vnder
Sisera agaynst the Israelites euen without wages, that is, as it is sayd, without meate and drynke & harnesse. Some referre it to this, that they thinke those enemyes of the people of God were such bloudsuckers, that if in the battayle they had gotten any of the Hebrues, they would take no raunsome of them, but strayght way sley them, being such as desired not the pray, but onely thursted for theyr bloud.
20 They fought from heauē, the starres from theyr courses fought agaynst Sisera.
She maketh mencion of the helpe that came from heauen & from the starres, by the will and gouernment of God. But how that came to passe, is not expressed. But it might be, that fire was sent among the enemyes, or that hailestones thundring and lightninges (as
Iosephus affirmeth) afflicted the
Chananites. Peraduenture also the winde so stirred vp the dust in the face of the
Chananites: (as
Leui writeth happened vnto y
e
Romanes in the battayle of
Cannensis) that they could vtterly see nothing at all.
Liuius.
The starres from their courses fought. That is from their degrees and stations, least any man should thinke that they descended from heauen, or departed from their course.
21 The riuer Kison swepte them away, the riuer of auncientes, the riuer Kison, O my soule thou hast marched valiauntly.
To the helpe of the heauen and of the starres, the riuer fauorably ioyned it selfe: for it swelled, when as otherwyse it was wont to be but small. Wherfore it was so encreased, that it both choked and swept away many of the enemyes. But this worde
Goth signifieth not by any meanes to sweepe, but as it happeneth when a house is sweapte or made cleane with broomes, for then what soeuer is vncleane, it is together with the dust cast forth. So in this destruction, they whiche were counted noble, were in the same sorte sweapte awaye, as if they had bene dust and filthe. This word
Riuer is often repeated in this verse, whiche vndoubtedly is pleasaunt, when it is in due place done: whiche I therfore speake, least any should thinke these repetitions to be to no purpose. Yea and
Cicero also writeth in solute oration:
Cicero. When I shall come agayne into fauor with
Appius Claudius, and shall come agayne by
Cu. Pompeius: I therfore when I shall come agayne, &c. And this
Kyson is called
Kedumim as thoughe it had two names, and were called by both the names, or els bycause there peraduenture was some other riuer so called, which riuer bicause it ran into
Kyson, gaue it also his name. But some translate that word of
Ancientnesse, namely of Counsels: bycause God hymselfe had before the foundacions of the worlde were layd, created and appoynted that riuer to this purpose, to be an ayde vnto hym in this victory in tyme to come. It chaunsed not so, that the whole host of
Sisera was drowned in that riuer. For how could that be, when there was an incredible number of souldiers, and the riuer of so narrowe a bredth? But as it is to be thought, y
e chiefrulers & captaynes which entred into y
e water w
t their horses & chariots, wer drowned: which thing whē the other souldiers saw, their courage was both dawnted, & also they turned themselues to flight. And we see this to come to passe oftentimes in cāpes, y
t those thinges whiche of their owne nature seme to be of no great value, do much profit either this party or y
e part in y
e victory. This acte without doubt hath some affinity, with y
e drowning of
Pharao, but y
t the sea is not so well cōpared with a litle riuer: neyther did a part of
Pharaos host perish in the Sea, but the whole host was ouerwhelmed in it. But all these men (as we haue sayd) wer not drowned in
Kison. Farther the rashnes of the Egiptians semed greater then these mens, when as it is much more foolishe to enterprise to passe ouer the sea, then to wade ouer a riuer.
22 Then were the houfes of the horses broken with the oft beating together of the mighty men.
Here is set forth the third calamitye, namely y
t theyr horses hoofes were broken.
[Page] By nature in dede the horse houfes are myghty and strong, neither are they easely clouen, but the spurryng of them forwarde to ruine was so great in thys conflict, that they were worne awaye. This worde
Sos, that is a horse, is spoken in the singular number. And that number is also vsed of our men both Poetes and Orators, in steade of the plurall number. For we saye that Fraunce hath ouercome Spaine,
Virgil. and
Virgill sayeth: The stoute
Romane was no lesse valiant then his fathers. When the houses of the horses were broken and torne, the horsemen could neither inuade the Hebrues, neither yet were they able to saue themselues by flieng away. The Hebrues bycause they wante a superlatiue degree, therefore to expresse it, they double both nownes and verbes: as it is here sayd
Miūharoth Deharoth that is of great and very often leapynges. Wherfore the repetition of one selfe same worde serueth not onely for the adornyng of the sentence but also to expresse the vehemency of the signification. There are therfore thre, discōmodities now rehearsed, which came vnto the
Chananites, namely one from heauen, an other from the riuer, and the thirde of the houfes of the horses beyng broken.
23 Curse ye Meroz (sayd the aungell of the Lord) in cursing, curse the inhabiters thereof, bycause they came not to helpe the Lorde, to helpe the Lord agaynst the myghty.
She curseth the Citie of
Meroz whiche was great and nyghe vnto the place where the battayle was fought, bycause they would not ayde them whiche labored, beyng also desired of them thereunto.
Deborah curseth not the Cities and tribes which dwelt farre of, bycause they, although they had no true excuses, yet had they some, suche as they were. But these men whiche dwelt nere at hande, saw y
e thing it selfe, and were called: & for as much as they would not heare, they iustly and worthily fell, vnder these sharpe and sore curses.
Said the aungell of the Lord. This she therefore putteth in, least she should seme to speake of anger, as though she should haue sayd: Euen God himself hath commaunded me thus to sing. Other vnderstand by the aungell,
Barac, and that peraduēture not ill: for it might be, y
t he went to y
e Citie to stir it vp to fight, who when he sawe the citizens to be so wilful & obstinate, by the impulsion of the spirite of God, he in this maner cursed it. As touching y
e composition, she maketh y
e cōclusiō with y
e helpe of Lord, & beginneth y
e next clause w
t the self same wordes, as doth
Virgill:
Virgil. O ye Periedes do ye these noble thynges to
Gallus, to
Gallus I say, whose loue doth dayly so much increase towardes me.
What is to be iudged of cursinges & bannynges.We haue at large before handled the place of cursinges, wherfore now I wyll not speake much of it. The Summe is: That it is not lawfull for a man, to curse any mā, for the satisfieng of his owne anger. For when our own matters are in hand, we must loue our enemies: & we must blesse thē which curse vs. But when God doth somtimes certainely make manifest, that he will haue some destroyed, they whiche are so admonished of his wil, can not but allow it, for by the spirite wherw
t they are inspired, they wil also the same thing y
e God wil. And after this maner
Dauid & other Prophetes burst forth oftētymes into cursinges of the enemies of God, whiche selfe same men for all that, as they were men, by naturall compassion whiche is not vicious, were not a litle sory for the destruction of the enemies of God. So
Samuel, Dauid, Ieremy, yea & our sauiour himself, wept & lamēted y
e fall of vngodly mē. Neither is it to be doubted, but y
e dutyes of this kind were very acceptable to God, for as much is they procede from charity. Howbeit when we see some men cruelly to rage agaynste the godly men and Gospell of God, it is lawfull in that case to praye, that either theyr will may be chaunged, or theyr strength confounded, that they shoulde not accomplyshe all the things which they appoint to do. Which things if they can not be obtained, this is at the least to be prayd for, y
e God will geue vs strength & myght to suffer all such things which may aduāce his honor & glory. And we must diligētly weigh,
[Page 110] that this curse was therfore stirred vp agaynst the citie
Meroz, bycause they denyed to helpe y
e people of god. What thē is prepared for those, which do not onely not helpe the seruauntes of Christe, but persecute, grieue, and cruelly vexe them? Farther we must marke, that it is sayd: these
came not to helpe the Lord, as though God neded theyr ayde: and that coulde not be as touchyng hym selfe: howbeit God in hys people wanteth helpe, and in the members of Christ when they are vexed, Christ himselfe is vexed. Wherfore he will say in the last day of iudgement: I was hungry, and ye fed me,
Math. 25. I was thirsty and ye gaue me drinke &c. Wherfore let vs hereby learne to obey whē God calleth vs as did the Israelites whiche are commended of
Deborah, neither neglected they to take in hande the battayle. Let vs learne also to helpe those that are in nede, especially when they followe theyr vocation.
24 Iahell the wife of Heber the Kenite shalbe blessed aboue other women, aboue women shall she be blessed in tentes.
When she had cursed the wicked Citie, by a contrary phrase she addeth a good prayer: as the City
Meroz was worthy to be cursed, so of the contrary was
Iahel to be commended. Christ in the last daye of Iudgement wyll not onely saye: Come ye blessed of my Father: but on the contrary parte, he wyll adde: Go ye cursed. Here is in hys place a parte of the saluation of the aungell
Mary, as it is described in
Luke: Blessed art thou aboue women. Whiche clause is here twise put for the greater mouing. But in that in this repetitiō it is added,
In tentes, it may be thus interpreted, For this cause let this woman be praysed, bycause she dwelleth in tentes. So that by a wonderfull, compendiousnesse of one worde, the slaying of
Sisera is noted, which happened not in the campes, but was done in y
e tente. Or els we may say that
Iahell is to be praysed aboue other womē dwellyng in tentes. For the family of the
Kenites dwelled not in houses but in tentes. Wherefore she is praysed aboue all the women
Kenites, which are signified by this worde tentes.
25 He asked water, and she gaue him milke, she offred him butter in a cup of the mighty.
Iahel is here praysed for her prudence and strength:
For what vertues Iahell is praysed. but the mother of these vertues is fayth. It was prudence to call the enemy vnto her, handsomely to couer hym, and to geue him milke to drynke. Also to finde out a hammer and a nayle, and to chose out his hed among the rest of the members whiche she would strike, and among the partes of the hed to smite thorough the temples. Her might and strength is hereby knowen, bycause a woman durst enterprise suche a notable acte, and feared not to assayle such and so greate a Captayne, but had a full confidence that she, notwithstandyng that she was a woman, should be able to kyll hym. Peraduenture thou wilt saye, the Scripture maketh no mencion here of fayth. I graunte that it doth not by expresse wordes: but when it is sayd she shalbe blessed or praysed, her fayth is noted. For we be al by nature the children of wrath, neither are any blessed with faythfull
Abraham, but by fayth, as the Epistle to the
Galathians testifieth.
He asked water, and she gaue him milke. That he might the easelyer and soner fall on sleepe. Why menciō is made of butter, this (as some say) is the cause, bycause out of that milke the butter was not yet cherned. And in dede of that kind of milke a mā may drinke a great draught, for as much as beside the quenchyng of thirst it hath also a certaine swetenesse.
She vsed the cup of noble men. Whiche namely was a very great one. For noble mē wer wont to drinke out of large and wide cuppes.
Cicero.
Cicero also agaynst
Anthony sayeth. If so be that it had happened in the Supper tyme among thy greate cuppes, who woulde not count it filthy &c. Yea and they were wonte in
[Page] bāquets of noble mē, at y
e latter end to bring forth great cuppes. Wherfore this witty woman, to the end she would prouoke him to drinke a very depe drought, vsed a cup apte for the fame.
Kimbi.
R. D. Kimhi expoundeth these thinges, as thoughe she gaue him not onely drinke, but meate also. For he thinketh that when he had dronke, the woman did set butter before him to eate. Whiche exposition if we receaue, we must then put out this word cup whē as that is vsed for drinke, and not for meate: vnlesse by the maner of a cup we vnderstand such a kynde of vessell wherin meate also is wont to be put.
26 She put her hand to the nayle, and her right hand to the workemās hammer: with the hammer smote she Sisera, she smote of his head, wounded him, and persed his temple.
27 He was bowed down betwene her feete, he fell downe, he slept betwene her feete he bowed hymselfe, and fell: and when he bowed himselfe, there he fell downe, destroyed.
That whiche is translated, She put her hand, in the Hebrew it is put in the plurall number,
Taschlechauah, and yet the speache is but of one, namely of
Iahel, whiche semeth can not aptly be done. Wherfore some do so expound it, that the two extreme letters of that worde are added by this figure
Pleonasmos, so y
t the nomber may be reduced to vnitie, that
Iahel be sayd to put her hande to the nayle. Other thinke that the plurall nomber, ought not to be referred vnto
Iahel, but vnto her strength & might, which extended her handes to these thinges. There are some also whiche to vndoo this heard doubt, say y
t the handes should be interpretated moued or put to, in the passiue voyce. For the right hand was put to the hammer, & the left hand vnto the nayle. Lastly, y
e order of the wordes whiche semeth to be troublesome, of some is thus construed:
Her hande vnto the nayle,
A description. namely her left hande:
and her right hand to the workemans hammer, put themselues that is, desired or gaue thēselues vnto it. And this is a verye trim descriptiō, wherby this thīg done is manifestly set before our eyes, neither maketh it vs onely in our mindes to see the woman, holdyng in her hand the hammer & the nayle, but also it sheweth vnto vs one certayne part of the body whiche was striken, namely the hed, and in the hed, the very temples, bycause they are easely pearsed. And vndoubtedly that membre was striken of her, which beyng broken or persed, the whole body is vtterly left vnprofitable. Farther, there are here described certain mocions, which are propre vnto such as perish sodenly, & by a violent kynd of death. For whē he was very sore woūded, & by ouermuch payne in a maner astonished,
he bowed his body twise or thrise. For he went about to rise, and wanting strength he fell downe agayne,
and miserably lay betwene the feete of Iahel. So God throweth down and putteth to shame the arrogant and proude enemies of his people. For what thing can be thought to be more filthy, then for such a great captayne to be spoyled of his host, to lye lurkyng, dronke, and snortyng, and so to be kylled of a woman?
28 The mother of Sisera looked out at a windowe, and cried thorough the lattece: why is his chariot so long a commyng? why staye they the wheeles of his chariots?
29 Her wise and noble Ladyes aunswered her. She also cōforted her selfe.
30 Haue they not founde, & they deuide the spoyles? euery man hath a mayde or two: Sisera hath a pray of diuers coloured garmētes: a praye of sondry colours made of needle worke, of diuers colours of nedle worke on both sides, for the chief of the spoyle.
In the last part of the songe, to the end we might manifestly see, to how great a confusion and ignominy the enemies of God came vnto, and from how great a hope they fell, the person of the mother of
Sisera is brought in, and the wordes both of her, and of other noble women which wer together with her, ar setforth. She might haue sayd in few words: The mother wayted, that her sonne should returne with glory and laden with spoyles, whome the wretched woman knew not to haue so myserably perished. But if she shoulde so haue sayde, the oration would haue bene slender and cold. Wherefore to make it of efficacye and vehement, y
e talke of the women is put here. Which maner also was very much vsed amonge the Ethnike writers, and it is reade also in
Esay the .14. chap. where is expressed the talke of kinges and princes which were deade,
A figuratiue speech is not to be accused as a lye. with which they receaued the king of Babilon being miserablye destroyed and discendinge downe vnto them. Neither do the holy writers lye when they fayne such thinges, forasmuch as they write not to deceaue, but to declare y
e thing more openly. The motherly affection, & vehement naturall loue of the parentes towards the children is here expressed, whiche for the longe absence of theyr children are very muche carefull, and are many wayes afflicted. It is sayd therefore that the mother of
Sisera, whilest he desired to returne, beinge troubled euen herselfe oftentimes, looked out at the windowes or thorow the latesses beyonde the windowes, to see if she could see him returninge. And this she did not without crieng and lamentation, suspecting by this his long tarying that euill had happened vnto him. But the women which stode by had a great deale better hope, for they interpreted y
e tarying of
Sisera in y
e good part.
Terence in
Adelphis hath notably wel writtē. It is much better,
Terence y
t those things happē vnto vs which our wiues in our absēce suspect of vs, then those thinges whiche our parentes suspect. For when a man tarieth longe in a place, the wife sayth with her selfe he loueth, or is loued, he is a drinkinge, his minde is pleased, and he is in so good case, that he forgetteth to returne home. But the parentes when theyr sonnes return not in time, by and by they are afraid, least they haue had some fal, lest they be a cold, or haue broken somethinge, and till such time as they returne they are wonderfull carefull. Neither do I rehearse these thinges without a cause, bicause the old translation, writeth y
t that most wise princesse of womē which talked together wyth the mother of
Sisera, was
Siseras wife. Wherfore it is no marueile if she were in better hope then his mother. But bicause heuy thinges are not pleasaunte, and euen by the instincte of nature we fly from them, therefore they which vpon suspicion are heuy do easely receaue comfort. Wherefore it is now written, that the mother of
Sisera was so satisfied with the wordes of y
e woman whiche comforted her, that she herselfe with the same wordes aunswered her selfe. When shee was pricked w
t sorow & heauines. The some of the comfort was, that the victory was altogether on
Siseras side, but his returne was differed to distribute the spoile whiche they had taken, and forasmuch as the same distribution oughte iustly to be done, namely to geue vnto euery one according to his estate, laboure, and desert, and for that in so greate an host very many thinges are to be deuided after so noble a victory: it could not therfore be done in a short time.
Thys Hebrew word
Racham, signifieth not properly a maid: but yet so must we translate it, bicause that womā being an enemy of the Iewes speaketh with greate contempt of the Hebrew wemen, and nameth them by the secrete parte of the body, namely by the belly and womb. It is spoken by the fygure
Sinechdoche but very bitterly. For she signifyeth that they were vnchaste, and appoynted to vnhonest vse. And forasmuch as the more noble rewardes are wont to be geuen vnto princes and the best thinges to the captaine of the whole host, therefore she sayth, to euery man shalbe geuen a mayde or two, that is, the praye of the rascall souldiours shalbe bondmen or bonde women be geuen. But to our
Sisera shalbe geuen the most worthiest thinges, garmentes I say of diuers colours and nedle
[Page] worke.
Plini in his 8. booke the .48. chap writeth that the men in the old time vsed to dye their wolle and garmentes with such sundry and pleasaunt colours,
Plinius. bicause they would imitate the most beautifull coloures of floures and herbes. And the same writer attributeth vnto the
Babilonians the inuention of diuers coloures in garmentes, and euen as garmentes of siluer which were found out in
Asia vnder
Attalus the king, were called
Attalical, so those garmentes whiche were by the
Phrigians wroughte with the nedle, beinge set out with golde and sundry coloures and pictures, wer called
Phrigionical. And for that these workmanshippes wer in the old time had in estimation, god would haue the holy tabernacle, and the high priestes garmentes wrought with nedle worke. And this is not to be passed ouer, that by the ciuile lawes it was not lawefull for euerye man to weare such precious garmentes. Wherfore it is sayd now in this song, that garmentes of sundry coloures, and such as were wrought with the nedle ar attributed only to the prince. In the Code
de vestibus oloberis, lege, Auratas, It is prohibited vpon great punishmente that any other men shoulde were precious garmēts.
Lawes for apparell And it is no doubt, but that in the old time there wer lawes for apparel, which at this day lye vtterly voide. These womē spake as they knew y
e maner then vsed, for they were not ignorant of the custome in war, wherby princely garmentes wer not distributed to priuate men, but vnto captaynes and emperors.
Discipline of warre amonge the elders. Farthermore we muste consider that the elders vsed greater discipline in their camps, than at this day our men do. For when a town or city was sacked, euery man had not that which he by violence tooke: al thinges wer brought vnto the king or Emperour, and not vndoubtedly that he only should haue them, but that he should part them according to the labor, dignity, and quality of the souldiors, which manifestlye appeareth in the decrees, 23. question the .5. chapter
Dixerit aliquis. They are the woordes of
Ambrose in his booke of
Abraham the Patriarche. And the same thing is most playnly taught,
Dist. the .1. chap.
Ius militare. This hebrew word
Tsoari signifieth properly a necke or neckes in the plurall number, but in this place by translation it signifieth a captayne or prince.
31 So let al thine enemies perish, O Lord: But they that loue thee let them be as the Sunne when he riseth in his strength. And the land had rest .40. yeares.
The thinges which are now mencioned, the holy Ghost doth therfore speake them by
Deborah, to expresse with a great emphasis and signification, that those thinges do happen vnto the vngodly which they be afeard of: & the things which they hope happen cleane contrarye. Therefore the songe is nowe concluded with an elegant exclamacion, and consisteth of thinges contrary:
So let all thine enemies perish O Lord, as
Sisera hath fallen. This her Apostrophe or turning to God stirreth vs vp, that we shuld with a singular affectiō embrace God y
e author of so great & notable acts.
Deborah also in this speaking, declareth, that she setteth not forth her own cause, for she sayth not, let my enemyes perish, but thine.
But they that loue thee, let them continually encrease in al kind of good things,
as the sunne increaseth from his rising, vntil it be none wherin he is most strong ether from the spring time to the highest of sommer. She addeth not,
Let them that loue him be saued as the Antithesis or cōtrary position required. For these two are contraries, namely to be saued, and to perish.
But let them be encreased, saith she,
& strengthened, as the sunne increaseth from his rising vnto his strength. By thys conclusion the vse of example is taught vnder the forme of a prayer.
Sisera is ouerthrowne, but the people of Israel is encreased with a notable victory: so therfore shall it come to passe and happē vnto vs. We shalbe deliuered if we be godly, & they which do persecute vs for Christs cause, shal perish. Wherfore it is profitable, by exāples to gather out rules of the gouernmēt of God, which rules w
t frute let vs apply vnto our own things. This performed
Dauid, as touching
[Page 112] this selfe same historye, in his psalme, where he sayth do vnto them, as vnto
Middian, as vnto
Sisera, &
Iabin at y
e riuer
Kyson. Wherfore y
e some of this hystory is to set before vs y
e seuerity of god toward his enemies, & again his clemē cy towards the godly. And therfore it behoueth y
t the seuerity of his iudgements breath in vs a fear, and that by fayth we take hold of his goodnes and clemency.
The syxt Chapter.
ANd the children of Israell did euill in the syghte of the Lorde: and the Lorde deliuered them into the hands of Middian seuen yeres.
2 Wherfore the hand of Middian preuailed against Israel, frō the face of Middiā the children of Israel made them dennes in the mountaines, and caues, and stronge holdes.
3 For when Israell had sowen, Middian came vp, and Amaleke, and the sonnes of Kedem came vp agaynst them.
4 And camped against them, and destroyed the fruite of the earth, euen till thou come to Haza: neyther lefte they anye foode in Israell, neither cattell, nor oxen, nor asses.
5 For they went vp and theyr cattell and came with theyr tents as greshoppers in multitude: so that they and theyr camels wer without number, they came I say into the land to destroy it.
Deborah and
Barac were deade: by the authority of whiche princes the people of the Hebrewes were kepte in their dutye and religion. But after theyr death, they fell agayne vnto sinnes, and especially vnto idolatry. But yet they are not counted to haue turned so heynously from God, as they did before: for it is not written:
And they added to do euil. Farther their punishment was not so long, for they serued the
Madianites onely
seuen yeares. Moreouer it is not sayde, that God sold them, as he did before, but that he
deliuered them. I confesse that these coniectures are but small: but yet not so small, that they shoulde seeme vtterly to be despised. Two thinges are principally entreated of in this hystorye,
The principall pointes of thys history.
The ordre of thinges to be spoken of. the affliction of the Hebrewes, and theyr deliuery by
Gidion. But bicause eche of these partes haue their causes, therfore we must also entreate of them. For euen as affliction springeth of sinne, and deliuery beginneth of repentance: so was it mete, that first it should be declared that the Israelites had sinned, before mention be made that they were deliuered vnto the
Madianites, and theyr repentaunce must first be shewed, before their setting at libertye be spokē of, wherfore these things shal in iust order be spoken of, and shalbe noted in theyr places.
First of all it is written, that Israell sinned, to the end we might vnderstande that they were iustly punished. The kind of theyr synne (as we shall afterwarde see) was idolatry. And the punishment which followed was their deliuery vnto the
Madianites to be vexed of them. And what these
Madianites were, I thinke it good in few wordes to declare.
What the Madianites were.
Ierome
Madian (if we may credite
Ierome) was a citye so called of a certaine sonne of
Araham whome he begat of his last wife
Ketura. It lieth beyond
Arabia toward the South, in the desert of the
Seracens, not far from the Sea called
Erithreum. And these people were called
Madianites, and peraduenture by an other name more in vse with the
Ethnikes, namely
Maudrenites. From thence
Moses hadde his wife and of them also came the
Kenites, whiche went together with
Moses into the land of
Chanaan. And lastly from thēce those black men ar thought to haue theyr ofspring, which in our times wander euery wher, and of some are called
Egiptians: they dwell in tentes: and beinge very theuishe
[Page] men, they liue all alwayes of other mens goods.
But what these Madianites were, it skilleth not much to know, let this contēt vs, in that by the history it is declared, that the people of God wer by them verye grieuously afflicted. And the Israelites to auoyd the miseries made them
Caues for so doth this Hebrewe woorde
Manaharoth signifie.
What differēce is betwene a caue and a den.
And dennes. It is in Hebrew written
Mearoth. But what difference there is betwen these two words, as muche as I can gather by the Hebrewes, I wyll declare. Those fyrste places were in bankes of hilles, and were so called bicause from the vpper partes, they had certayne chinckes and holes, which were like windowes, so that throughe them they had light sufficient within. And the same places were very handsome for men to dwel in them.
R. Leui sayth, that through those holes or clifts, which were like windowes, spies, when they saw the
Madianites comminge, did vse either by kindling of fiers, or by some other token, to geue knowledge vnto the Hebrewes, wherby they might gather their stuffe, fruites & cattels into the dennes & leade them away from the enemies which wer comming by. For dennes wer not in mountaynes, but places vnder the earth in the fields being dark & w
tout light, wherein men did not dwel, but they mighte after a sorte hide their things and goods. But caues in lattin are called
Specus, a speciendo, which is to behold and to looke vpon, bycause out of them as out of highe places they whyche were there, vsed to looke through. They made also
fenced places as bulwarckes and castels, which might be openly sene, but that they could not be conquered. And not only the
Madianites inuaded the Iewes,
Iosephus but with them were the
Amalekites and also the children of the east, whome
Iosephus calleth
Arabians. They suffred the Israelits to be in peace and quiet, so long as they tilled and sowed the earth, but when the fruites were ripe, they inuaded them, and destroyed and wasted their fyeldes. And the Israelites do aptly setforth the nature of sinners, whiche when they put little confidence in god, & haue almost forgottē him, then they fly vnto mans inuentions, helpes and municions: which yet iustlye and worthelye stande them in no steade: for strayght way it is sayd.
6 Wherfore Israell was excedingly impouerished by the Madianites, and the children of Israell cried vnto the Lord.
Of munitions and castels.Neyther caues, nor dennes, nor strong fensed castels could helpe the miserable Israelites. For sinners must not onely take heede of outwarde enemies, but they must chiefly flye from the anger of God, from whiche vndoubtedly no man can auoyd by caues, dennes or municiōs. And as long as that endureth, these humaine helps do not defend frō outward enemies. And if any man wil not beleue this,
Ecbatanis. let him call to memorye the breadth of the walles of
Ecbatanis, which as it is written in y
e boke of
Iudith the .1. chapter) was thyrty foote broad, and seuenty foote hygh, and had in it an hundred Towers, and yet all those thinges could not withstand those which besieged it.
Babilon And of
Babilon also it is written, that the walles of it was an hundred foote in higth, and fighty fote in breadth, and it is sayd to haue bene so large that it might haue bene a prouince rather then a city, and yet it was conquered and vtterlye ouerthrowen. Suche thinges men goe about when they withdraw themselues from God, these their hornes are erected agaynst God. These thinges do leade vnto desperation the afflicted, which thynk not vpon God, as though tirannes by whome they are oppressed could neuer be plucked out of so strong and wel fenced places. But in
Abacuk the prophet such madde building are wonderfully laughed to scorne of the spirite of God, and
Abdia in the name of God threatneth the children of
Esau, that theyr nest should be throwne downe to the ground, howe soeuer it seemed vnto them that they had set it in heauen.
But what more notable example nede we to seeke for, then that tower, whiche men straight after the flood, began to builde, as though they would defend them selues against God, if he againe should go about to destroy the world wyth waters, but the Lord from heauen laughed to scorne their made furiousnes, as it is amply set foorth in the booke of
Genesis. God wanteth no excellent politike deuises: for first, from such, which so much trust to munitions, when they thyncke they shall stand them in most steede, he vseth to take awaye the courages of the bold, and al promptnes, & so to strike them with madnes, that he vtterly maketh them voyde of wisedome. Wherfore he debilitateth their harts, & their strength faileth them. Yea, and they seme to be made afeard and verye sore abashed, euen of the very stones, beames and walles of their Castels. I could here easely shew thinges, whyche haue in our age happened, but that I must haue respecte to bee briefe. Reade the .2. chapter of Barucke.
What then? Are not Cities or Castels to be fensed?
Whither it be lawful to fence cities & castels. I deny not but that that may be done, but I would haue Princes which do in such sorte builde, first to be a certained of this, that no thinges created can defend or succor men, vnles with them be ioyned that power of God, whereby with his becke hee ruleth and gouerneth the world: and when hee withdraweth that, whatsoeuer men go about or enterprise, it vtterly happeneth contrarily. And euen as out of breade, wyne, or other meates we ought not to looke for nourishment, if God do drawe backe vnto himselfe that his power and operation, which hee daylye lendeth to those things: so also without it, ther is no defence to be had out of munitions, walles, being otherwise neuer so strong, and Castels very well fenced. Wherefore before we begyn munitions, we must put our confidence in God, and we must lay the most profitable foundation of holy prayers: and pray vnto God, to keepe vs chiefly in true and sincere godlynes, to cal vs backe from synnes, and daylye to geue vnto vs a perfect repentance. Lastly, we must desire, that when a iust and holy man shal haue neede to haue the vse of such munitions, hee woulde vouchsafe to bestow vpon them that his most mighty and healthfull power. Which selfe same cogitations and prayers we must vse both in meate, drinke, apparel, or any other thing, when we begin to receaue them.
And the children of Israel cryed. Now shalbe declared the deliuerye of the Israelites, but firste is set foorth their repentance and inuocation. Nowe at the length the Hebrues flie vnto the sure rockes, vnto the safe dennes, and vnto the true Castels. For the rocke or castle best fenced, (as we reade in the Prouerbes) is the name of the Lord. In that rocke
Dauid escaped al aduersities.
7 And when the children of Israel cryed vnto the Lorde, bycause of Midian.
8 The Lord sent vnto the children of Israel a Prophet, who sayd vnto them: Thus saith the Lord god of Israel, I haue brought you out of Egipt, I haue brought you (I sai) out of the house of bōdage.
9 And I haue deliuered you out of the handes of the Egiptians, & out of the hand of al that oppressed you, and haue cast them oute before you, and geuen you their land.
The maner whereby the Israelites wer stirred vp to cal vpon God, is in this place set forth. They were turned vnto God by the impulsion of faythe, whyche was stirred vp by the preaching of the woord of God: for he had sent vnto them a man which was a Prophet, not legions of Angels, not a multitude of souldiours, not armour, neither warlike engins. He directed vnto them a Preacher & Minister of the woord of God. And this ought not to seme absurd, if this verbe
Vaiischlah be interpretated in the signification of the preterpluperfect tense, for as much as it is a thing very much vsed in the holy scriptures. And yet I denye
[Page] not, that this place may be vnderstand an other way: namely that the Israelites in dede cried first, but yet with a certaine violence stirred vp by troubles and miseries, which violence by it self, could not be allowed of God, nether had it obtained any thing at his handes, except it had bene adorned with a true faith & perfect repentaunce: for the bringing to passe wherof, God not forgetting his mercy, sent them a Prophet or Preacher meete thereunto. Howbeit the first sense, which cōsisteth al the preterpluperfectnes, pleaseth me very wel: although I deny not but that both waies may be admitted. Farther, some thinke that these thinges ar to be vnderstand by
Synechdoche, so that it is ment that not one prophet, but very many prophetes were sent of God. But I iudge that it is wrytten of some one certaine prophet, which was of great authority among the Hebrues. And I am not ignorant that some thinke this prophet to haue ben an Angel: which I allow not, forasmuch as he is called both a man and a prophet. And I finde in no place of the holy scriptures y
e Angls wer called prophets: although on the contrary we rede in them sometimes that a prophet was called an Aungel,
Aflictiō
[...] make open the waye vnto profitable sermons. as it most manifestly appeareth of
Malachi. But let vs marke this rather, that oppressions and aduersities, which often times happen, do geue good occasion of profitable sermons: for as much as the hearers by such vexation ar made much more attentiue. The Hebrues thinke that this Prophet was
Phineas, of whom also they saye that it is written in the first booke of
Paralip. the .ix. chap. that he liued in the time of
Dauid, when as for all that the same place may otherwise bee expounded. But who hee was, it maketh no great matter. We must rather marke the argument of the sermon, whiche is in fewe woordes toutched. First, the benefites of God are rehearsed: their deliuery I say out of
Egipt, wherby they were deliuered from seruitude most grieuous: his defence against those which went about to oppresse them: and lastly, the possession of the land of
Chanaan. God had now faithfully performed al these thinges, as hee had promysed vnto their fathers. Whereby it manifestly appeareth that the couenaunt made with the fathers, was on his part kept vnuiolated. Let vs note in these wordes, that God at that time was by this title praised, namely bicause he had deliuered his people out of
Egipt: for his nature otherwise is most farre remoued from the mindes of men, neither can it any otherway be knowen, but by the effects. But of this thing I haue inough spoken, as much as semed sufficient. Wherefore it is manifest that the Preacher which was sent from God, doth beate into the Hebrues the benefite which they had receaued, namelye both to stirre vp in the Israelites the knowledge of the true God, and also to shewe foorth hys truth endued with constancy.
10 And I sayd vnto you: I the lord your God. Fear not the gods of y
e Amorites, in whose lād ye dwel, but ye haue not obeied my voyce.
Now is added what God againe required of the Hebrues, namelye that hee shoulde be their God, and that they shoulde not feare the gods of the
Amorites, or not worship them. For in this woorde feare is verye often comprehended all maner of worshipping and religion. For what should they woorship straunge gods, when they were the peculiar people of the true God, by whom they were deliuered from the house of bondage, that is, out of a prison or dungeon moste hard, and afterward in their iourney they were deliuered both from the
Amalekites, & also from the
Moabites, & from
Sihon and
Og the kinges? Wherfore forasmuch as they had receaued these benefites of their God, it was neither lawful nor meete that they should worship straunge gods.
Two principal synnes of the Israelites.
Ye haue not obeyed my voyce. Two most grieuous crimes of the people are reproued, wherof the latter dependeth of the first. First they beleued not his word, & then they obeyed it not. Vndoubtedly they which beleue not the thyngs that God setteth forth, do not also obey his cōmaundementes. And contrarywise, they which do truly beleue, do willingly and without compulsion obserue
[Page 114] his commaundements. Although the wicked actes of the Hebrues were sundry and manifold, yet onely one is reproued, namely Idolatrye, bicause in it almost al the other sinnes are comprehended. For if we commit synne there, wher God is called vpon, and if we sinne in that thing wherein we seeke to be reconciled vnto god, what goodnes can ther be in any other of our actions? If these things be corrupted in vs, which are taken for holy thinges, what maye be iudged of other workes which are counted prophane? Wherefore forasmuche as in these thinges the Hebrues greuously fel, we must vnderstand that they also sinned in all other thinges.
11 And the Angell of the Lorde came, and abode vnder the Oke, which was in Ophra, that pertayned vnto Ioas the Abiezerit: and his sonne Gideon threshed wheat to prepare his flight frō Midian.
When by faith the sinnes of the Israelites were forgeuen, and that they had called vpon God and repented, their deliuery is set forth, wherby they were deliuered from the outward bondage of the
Madianites. Which without doubt God would haue done by
Gideon the Iudge, for the which cause hee raised hym vp to deliuer y
e Iewes. And this brought he not to passe, til such time as things were almost come to vtter desperation: al humane helpes wer taken away, and the Israelites trusted onely to flight. Wherfore
Gideon is not called, but when he gathered some wheate to hide, least the
Madianites shoulde violentlye take it away. And that is ment by this Hebrue woord
Lehanim, that is (if thou turne it woord for woord) to prepare his flight. For he would hide that wheate from the
Madianites, were it neuer so litle, that with it he might somewhat sustaine both himselfe and his household. He which appeared vnto him, was in very deede an Angel, as it shall afterwarde by manifest tokens and argumentes bee declared.
He came to Ophra, but to that Ophra whych pertayned vnto Ioas the Abiezerit, which is therfore added, bicause there was also an other
Ophra in the Tribe of
Beniamin, wherof is mencion made in the boke of
Iosua. And I doubt not but y
t the Angel came vnto
Gideon in the shape of a man, for he abode vnder the Oke:
Gideon was of y
e tribe of Manasses. and (as we shal heare) he spake vnto hym.
Ioas the Father of
Gideon was of the family of
Abiezer, which in the booke of
Numb. and in
Paralip. is reckoned among those that were of the Tribe of
Manasses.
And Gideon at that tyme threashed corne in the wyne presse.
Twoo maners of threashing. The Hebrues haue two wordes,
Dash, which signifieth to thresh, but yet then when we occupy to threashing beastes. The other woorde is
Chabat, which is also to thresh, but yet with flayles and without beastes. Wherfore it is noted that
Gideon vsed this latter kinde of threshing, that he might the better hide that which he did: and therfore it was in a wyne presse, where forasmuche as wyne was vsed to be pressed, no man did easily suspect that any wheate was there threshed. Let vs marke in this place, that the excellent men in the olde time, when they had gotten any leasure, either from holy seruices, or from ciuil things, thei spent al that leasure, either about husbandry, or about the arte of a Shepehearde. For they would not consume them selues with ydlenes, sumptuousnes, glotony, or dronkennes. And this shal we not onely learne in
Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, Gideon, and other holy fathers, but also it manifestly appereth by the histories of the
Romanes. For there we reade that
Curius and
Seranus and such like, wer elected for the chiefest Magistrates, when in the fieldes they were at plough, and tylled the grounde. And the earth also at that tyme (as
Plini saith) brought foorth her fruites more plentiful and aboundant, when it was handled with the handes of Emperors most noble. Not vndoubtedlye, bicause the earth was endued wyth any sense, but bicause wise men, as they vsed wisely to gouern waighty affairs, so also for husbandry, when they were occupied about it, they exercised it wyth
[Page] farre greater diligence then did the rude men. Our
Gideon without doubt had seruauntes, whom he might haue commaunded to haue wrought what woorke so euer was to be done, yea and his father (as we shall afterwarde heare) was a man of power among the people. And for all that he was suche a one, yet he despiseth not rusticall woorkes.
12 Then the Angel of the Lord appeared vnto him, and sayd vnto him: The Lord is with thee, thou valiant man.
A salutacion vsed of the godlyHere is expressed a moste auncient maner of salutacion, wherein they sayde:
The Lord is with thee. We rede in the booke of
Ruth, that
Boaz vsed it, when he came vnto his haruest men. The Angell also in this manner saluted the blessed Virgin. Yea, and the Church of Christ by the Minister saluteth the people in the holy seruices, and saith: The Lord be with you. The angel called
Gideon a strōg man, not by that strength (as it is thought) wherwith he was before endued, but by the strength which should afterward be geuen him, for the accomplishing of thinges. Although it might easily be, that
Gideon was a man skylfull in feates of warre. But the first interpretatiō agreeth better. Howbeit
Augustine in hys questions vpon this place,
Augustine. thus readeth this particle, as thoughe God hym selfe should be called a strong and warlike man, as if he should haue saide: That God which is mighty & warlike, is with thee, or be with thee. Neither ought it much to moue vs, bicause this woord
Man is added, forasmuche as it is after the same maner writtē in the song of
Exodus. For God may so be called by a
Metaphore. But the first exposition is more receaued, and seemeth more simple.
13 To whom Gideon answered: O my Lorde I praye thee, is the Lord with vs? Why then is al this come vpon vs? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told vs of, and sayde: Dyd not the Lord bring vs out of Egipt? But now the Lorde hath forsaken vs, and hath deliuered vs into the hand of the Madianites.
The hebrue word
Bi signifieth in me: and is spoken by the figure
Eclipsis as though it should haue bene, looke louingly vpon me. And therfore they turne it, I prai thee: which is a particle of one that exhorteth. The next word is
Adonai, by which name
Gideon called him which appeared vnto him, not by a religious or deuine title, but by a common title, whych is applyed also to prophane men. For he vnderstood not that he was an Angel: he thought he was some Prophet or holy man.
Gideon perswadeth himself that God was not with him, when the Israelites were afflicted with so great miseries. For he vnderstandeth the saying of the Angel, as though he had said that God was not onely with hym, but also with al the Hebrues.
God is not supposed to bee with those whiche ar afflicted And it is no doubt, but that the nature of mā thinketh that God is not with those which are afflicted. The saintes after this maner semed to expostulate with God. Wherfore in the Psalmes it is written: Aryse O God, why turnest thou thy face awaye from me? why hast thou forgotten me? and such lyke. This is a grieuous kinde of temptacion, wherunto if a man geue place, and be therwith ouercom, he grieuously sinneth. For he transgresseth the first precept: I am the Lord thy God. But, howe farre that sentence is from the truth, this historye declareth. For when
Gideon thought that God was absent from him, then was he present, and talked with him.
VVhere be al his miracles? These woordes may be vnderstande two wayes. The first way is, as though
Gideon should reason by contraries, saying: When God was with our fathers, he did marueilous thinges for their health: but now hath he deliuered vs vnto the
Madianites, neither deliuereth he vs by his excellent workes: therefore he is not with vs. The other interpretation is, as if by a certain godly expostulation he should say: wher doth God now restrain these his
[Page 115] marueilous woorkes?
What temptation is counted grieuous to the godly. Why suffreth he the benefites which he so plentifully bestowed on our fathers, so much now to want? Vndoubtedly whilest we ar thus forsaken, al these thinges, as it semeth, are frustrate of their end. These thinges manyfestly declare, what is the temptation of godly men in aduersities & troubles: For the deuil, the flesh, and the world go about to persuade them, that they are nowe forsaken of God, and that they in vayne put their confidence in hym. Which kinde of temptation also was moued vnto Christ, when vpon the crosse he cryed: O my God, my God, why hast thou forsakē me? For none (as I think) would beleue that the same had happened vnto Christ, vnlesse the Euangelists had written, that he being vpon the crosse vsed such wordes. And this temptacion would he therefore suffer, to the end that (as it is wrytten in the seconde to the Hebrues) he myghte be lyke vnto vs in all thynges wythout synne. Wherefore
Esay testifieth: Hee hath in deede borne our infirmities, and caryed our sorrowes.
14 And the Lord looked vpon hym, & said: Go in this thy strength, and thou shalt saue Israel out of the lande of Madian. Haue not I sent thee?
The Angel looked vpon
Gideon, when he had spoken these wordes: For peraduenture whilest he spake them, he looked not vpon him: but then he behelde him, when he sent him to delyuer the Israelites. But in that he sayth
In thys strength, it is expounded two maner of waies. The Hebrues saye, that by the sight of the Angel he was fylled with strength, and therefore it is sayde: go thou in this strength, which I haue now geuen thee, and thou shalt deliuer Israel frō the
Madianites. Neither is it anye straunge thing, that God doth chaunge those whom he choseth to any function, and endueth them with sundry gyftes. For we rede that it so happened vnto
Dauid and
Saul, when they were called to bee kynges. And it is expressedlye wrytten in this booke that
Iephthe and
Samson were adorned with the spirite of strength. That strength also may here bee noted, which God vsed in helping the fathers, when for them he wrought myraculous thinges in the tyme of
Moses and
Iosua. Gideon had demaunded where those marueilous woorkes were now become, and therfore the Angel answered him: Go in that strength, whereby those thinges in tymes past were wrought, and by it deliuer
Israel. By which woordes the Angel declareth, that hee shoulde not by his own strength bring to passe the thinges which he had commaunded him, but by that power of God, which was geuen the fathers in the olde tyme,
The Angel calleth himself the Lord. And this ought not to seme marueilous, that the Angel is called the Lord. For that is for this cause done, either bicause he did it & spake it in the name of God, or els bicause he was in verye deede the sonne of God, which so appeared. The calling of the Iudges is therfore so diligently described, that wee might vnderstand that priuate men are not able to attempt matters and affaires of so great waight, vnlesse a certaine authority had bene geuen them of God. For to gather an hoste, and to take weapons against those whyche haue the chiefe rule of thinges, vnto suche as are weake and destitute of al ayde, it is altogether daungerous. Wherfore ther is required an assurednes and vndoubted calling, which cannot be had, vnlesse fayth go before, whiche consisteth of the woorde of God, when it is rightly vnderstoode. The Aungell vseth an intorrogation when hee sayth:
Haue not I sent thee? Bycause this maner of speaking is verye apt to augment a commaundement.
15 And he sayd vnto him: O my Lord, wherby shal I saue Israel? Behold my familye is the poorest in Manasses, and I am the least in the house of my father.
God sayd not that he would delyuer
Israel, but he declared that it shoulde be done by
Gideon, who therefore maruelleth, forasmuche as he saw that he wanted all such thinges as were requisite to so great a woorke. For warre coulde not be made by a poore man, and one of the base sorte, suche a one as
Gideon perceaued himselfe to be: when as to the accomplishing therof wer required power, ryches, and especially authority. Wherfore
Aristotle to ciuil felicitye, hath ioyned outward goodes, and that namely for this, bicause they are necessary instrumentes of actes most noble.
Of hys Myllenary or thousand, he therfore maketh mention, bycause God in the publike wealth of the Iewes (as we rede in
Exodus) instituted thys maner, namely y
t by tribunes or thousands, & hundreds the people should be gouerned: For it could not easily be, that by a few Magistrates, an infinite number of people should be numbred, and so gouerned, that their maners, liuing and ordinaū ces might diligently be looked vpon, whych one thing chiefely pertaineth to gouerne well & rightly.
Why God appointed tribunes, Centuriōs and Captaines ouer ten. For when euery man is permitted vnto him selfe in these thinges, he both abuseth his liberty, and also easily transgresseth the lawes, bycause he is not noted. Wherefore God in hys people woulde for that cause haue rulers ouer ten, and ouer hundredes, and also ouer thousandes, least that publike wealth (if the people were necligently looked vnto) shoulde fal to ruine, and waxe woorse and worse. That band of a thousand, wherof
Gideon was one, he declareth to be the
poorest among all those of the tribe of
Manasses. Farther, he saith that he was
the least in his fathers house or family, and therfore he saw not, by what meanes he could set at liberty the Hebrues. Some say that
Ioas the father of
Gideon was at that time a tribune or ruler ouer a thousand men, & that his sonne ment him, when he said y
t his family was the poorest among the tribe of
Manasses. This sentence I disalow not, forasmuch as afterward it shall easily appeare y
e
Ioas was of some authority amōg his people. But whither this word
Alpi, signify him or no, I wil not rashly affirme, forasmuch as the first exposition, is both apt and also wel agreeth with the woordes of the history.
Whyther Gideon synned in gainsaying the āngel.
Many holy mē seme to haue resisted the promises and callyng of God.This must we rather note, wither
Gideon in obiecting these things sinned or no. Vndoubtedly if we looke vpon the holy scriptures, we shal finde very many other, which sayd that their infirmity striued against the vocation and promises of God.
Abraham sayd he was an .100. yeare old, and therfore he desired that
Ismael might rather liue before the Lord, than that he should waite for a sonne of
Sara which was both old and barren. Yea, and she also when she heard that a childe was promised her, she could not keepe herself from laughing, bycause she alredy felt her selfe vnapt by nature to beare a childe.
Moses also, that he might not be sent vnto
Pharao, alledged the impediment of his tong for a let. Farthermore
Ieremy sayd: Ah Lord, I am a childe, and I cannot speake. The blessed virgin also sayd vnto the Aungel: How can this be done? forasmuch as I knowe no man. There might peraduenture also be mencion made of others, but these are now sufficient. And I doubt not but that some of these whom I haue touched, fell in speaking these woordes. For God was angrye with
Moses, when hee so obstinately excused the office which he had committed vnto him.
Saras laughter also was reproued. But I know that the other were praysed for their faith: for
Abraham, bycause he beleued the promyse, was iustified, and
Elizabeth sayd vnto
Mary:
What is the differēce betwene those whyche seeme to resyst God. Blessed art thou which beleuedst: for the thinges which the Lorde hath sayd vnto thee, shal be performed. The difference betwene these is hereby to be taken, bycause some did in suche sorte aske an excuse, for that they beleued not the woord of God, neither could they be perswaded to agree vnto God whyche sent them, or made promise to them. Wherfore forasmuche as they synned, God was not without a iust cause both angrye with
Moses, and also reproued
Sara. But there were other some of them, which beleued the woorde of God, and yet for all that they put foorth certayne questions, not in deede to resist, but to declare
[Page 116] what thinges seemed to be a let vnto theyr calling, or to the thynges commaunded them, and in demaunding these thynges, they desired nothing els, than that they might be instructed of the way & maner, which they ought to vse, and they required to be confirmed, least those thinges which seemed to be a let,
The same wordes ar allowed in one, that are disallowed in an other. might plucke them backe, either for waiting for the promises, or els from fulfilling the thinges cōmaunded them. Howbeit these men can not be seperated one from an other, by the woordes which they spake, when as almost they spake all one thing. But by the purpose and thought of the hart they are seperated: for if they spake and excused those thynges of incredulitye, they oughte not to bee counted without blame: but if they beleued, and desired onelye to bee confyrmed and instructed, we ought not to diffame them as guilty of incredulity. But who shal discerne these thinges in them? Surely God which knoweth the harts and conscience of euery one of them. And we know that the fayth of
Gideon is commended in the .xi. to the Hebrues. But whither that were straight waye geuen him, when he heard the woord of God, or whether it came vnto him after some tarying and wrastling with humane reason, we are ignorant.
16 Then the Lord sayd vnto him: Bicause I wil be with thee, and thou shalt smite Madian as it were one man.
Cease of (saith he) these humane reasons, and haue no regarde to strength, riches, and authority: if these thinges should ciuilly be done, thou mightest iustlye require them. But now thou shalt vse my power and might. Thou shalt saue
Israel, not by thine own might, but
bycause
I wyl be with thee. So God answered vnto
Moses when he detracted his message. So was it also said of
Iosua, I wil be with him. After that maner was
Ieremy answered, when he cryed that he was a childe, and could not wel speake. I wil be with thee (saith the Lorde) thou shalt accomplish al these thinges to whatsoeuer I wil send thee.
Gideon therefore is instructed of the way or maner of the victorye, namelye, that God woulde haue the handling and charge of it: and that chiefly by these woordes:
Thou shalt destroy the Madianites as it were one man. For w
t God it is as easy to ouerthrowe an infinite number, as one man. And the same thing as touching the marueylous murther of the
Madianites, then vndoubtedly tooke effect, when they smote one an other with their own swordes, and by the impulsion of God they wounded one the other.
17 Thē he answered him: I pray thee, if I haue foūd fauour in thy sight, then shew me a sygne, that it is thou that talkest with me.
18 Depart not hēce I pray thee, vntil I come vnto thee and bring my sacrifice and laye it before thee. And he answered, I wyll tarye tyll thou come agayne.
He therefore desireth a signe, least he should thinke him selfe to be illuded by a ghost or spirit. For he was not content with words, but he would haue an assured signe of the talke nowe had. But this sentence:
That it is thou that talkest wyth me, semeth to be spoken by the figure
Eclipsis, so that we must vnderstand, in the name of God, least peraduenture I might thinke, that the woordes which thou speakest, are the woordes of a man, and not count them for the Oracle of God.
This visiō hapned to Gideon being wakyng, & not sleeping. These thinges were not done when he was a sleepe (as it appeareth by the historye) but when he was waking, although God, as we shal afterward heare, appeared also by night vnto
Gideon. He requireth a signe, bicause it is the parte of a godly man to trye spirites, and not rashlye to beleue euery spirite, especially when any newe and vnaccustomed woorke is commaunded: and that whych otherwyse is not thought to bee lawfull, there no man wyll easilye assent, except he be fullye perswaded that hys callyng is of God. But when doctrine now
[Page] receaued, and confirmed by holye scriptures is set foorth, or woorkes required, which in them are commaunded, we must beware that we require not signes, for asmuch as we are bound to beleue and obey them. But of this thing we wil more largely intreate afterward.
19 Then Gideon went in, & made redy a Kid, & vnleauened breade of an Ephah of floure, & put the flesh in a basket, & put the broth in a pot, and brought it out vnto hym vnder the Oke, and presented it.
This place may be enterpreted two maner of waies. One way it is thought that
Gideon would haue made redy a dinner for the man of God: for such a one did he take him to be. Therfore for honours sake he desired to refresh him wyth meate in his iourney, & to talk with him at leasure for the shewing of the signe. And he thought not that God or an Angel was present with him. Wherfore he thought to folow the example of
Abraham &
Lot. And in dede the things which he presented, partained rather to a dinner, thā to a sacrifice. He erected no alter, neither prepared he the fat to be burnt, nor the shoulder and the brest to be lifted vp, nor the blood to be shed. The other interpretation is, that he would therfore bring him a sacrifice, that in that oblation he might obtayne a signe, as to
Abel the fauour of God was declared when he was offring sacrifice. And the authors of this sētence beleue that this doth nothing let that
Gideon sod the flesh,
Flesh in sacrifices was sometimes sod. forasmuch as that kind of sething was sometimes vsed in peace offrings, as the fyrst booke of
Samuel testifieth. Of the interpretours of this place this latter sētence seemeth to be receiued: for they iudge y
e
Gideon intended to offer sacrifices: But I rather allow the first sentēce as touching the feast, although I know that the Angell contrary to
Gideons purpose vsed that meate to a sacrifice, and in it gaue the signe, which a little before was desired of him. This hebrew word
Mitsoth signifieth vnleauened cakes.
Why the Elders vsed so oftē swete cakes in their feastes. But the roote of the word may be
Natsa, whiche is to hast, or to make speede. For the Elders were carefull to prepare meate for straūgers with as much speede as might be. Wherfore they straightway baked new bread, bicause peraduenture their houshold bread was somewhat hard and stale.
The measure of an Ephah. Therfore, to y
e end they might the sooner refresh y
e weary, they vsed swete cakes, which were very soone baked. This measure
Ephah was not a measure for liquide thinges, but for thinges dry, and (as the Hebrues affirme) it held thre peckes, and a pecke contained .144. egges. And ten
Ephas made one
Corus. Certaine
Rabbines fable that there is therfore mencion made of sweete breade, bycause this thing was done in the time of Easter. But how trifling this is, hereby we may gather, bicause it is wel knowen that swete bread were by the commaundement of God vsed, not onelye for sacrifices at Easter, but also at other times, especially such as wer to be burnt at the altar of the Lord. But if we shal say that
Gideon prepared not a sacrifice, but rather a feast, we haue alredy shewed the reason, why he brought swete bread.
Gideon is vtterly to be quitted of ydolatry. For his wil was not to do sacrifice vnto the Messanger of God: bicause his purpose was eyther to set meate before the mā of God, or els to sacrifice vnto the lyuing God, by the hand of the Prophet, whom hee counted to bee farre better than himselfe.
20 And the angel of God said vnto him: take the flesh & the vnleuened bread, & lay it vpon this stone, & poure out the broth: & he did so.
21 Then the Angel of the Lord put forth the ende of the staffe, that he held in his hand, and touched the flesh & the vnleauened bread, & there arose vp fire out of the stone, & consumed the flesh & the vnleauened bread: so the Angel of the Lorde departed out of hys syght.
They which thinke y
t
Pinhas the sonne of
Eleazar was this mā of god, which
[Page 117] appeared vnto
Gideon, affirme y
t the same man was also afterward called
Elias. And euen as when
Achab raigned in Israel, he obtained fire from heauē, wherby the burnt offring was consumed, wherupon he had poured water and that aboundantly & very many times: so likewise now out of the rocke, by the power of god be raised vp a flame, wherby y
e meate which was put vpon it was burnt, wherupon he had before caused the broth of the flesh to be poured. I confesse in dede that ther is some similitude betwene these two actes, but therwithal I see many thinges to be causes, wherby the one differeth from the other. Farther, I vtterly reiect this fained tale, wherin they faine that
Pinhas was present eyther there or here. Ther, by reason of the great distance of times: & here, bicause (as I haue expounded,
Augustine. & the wordes of the history do manifestly testify) it was eyther god himself or an angel, which talked with
Gideon. Augustine in his booke
De mirabilibus sanctae scripturae, teacheth that the signe, whiche is here geuen, doth aptly agree vnto that which was demaūded. For it was shewed, that by the wō derful power of god, without mans labour and fight, the enemies of the people of the Iewes should be ouercome, euen as by the might of god aboue the ability of nature fire came forth,
Ambrose. wherwith without mans healpe or industry those vittailes were consumed. But
Ambrose very elegantlye writeth the Allegorye of this place, in the Proheme of his booke
de spiritu sancto, which I to auoyd tediousnes do ouerpasse. This one thing onely I wil admonish you of,
Al thinges that wee offer, are to bee offred by Christ. y
t our giftes are then acceptable vnto God, when wee offer them vpon the rocke, whiche is Christ. There our actions are by the fire of the holy ghost purged, & that which otherwise of his own nature is vncleane, is of God receaued as holy.
And the Angel of the Lord departed. By this sodain departure
Gideon vnderstood that it was an Angel whom he saw, wherefore he was sore afraide, as the wordes of the history which follow, do manifestly declare.
22 And when Gideon saw, that it was the Angell of the Lorde, he sayd: Alas my Lord God, shall I bycause I haue sene an Angell of the Lorde face to face?
This is spoken by the figure
Ecliptica: for when
Gideon sayth:
The fathers by seyng of god & of angels wer made alrayde.
Alas my Lorde God, shal I bycause I haue sene an Angel of the Lord: there should be added,
dye. Thou shalt euermore perceaue that the old fathers, after that they had sene god or beholdē his Angels, wer very sore afraid, yea & so astonished, that they feared present death to come vpon them. And no maruail, for they wer not ignoraunt, what God answered
Moses, when he desired to see his face: Man shal not see me and liue.
Iohn Baptist also (as we reade in the first of
Iohn) sayth: No man hath sene God at any time. And
Paul to
Timothy hath confirmed the same writing. No man hath sen God, neither can he se him: for he is inuisible, bicause he dwelleth in the light that no man can come vnto. And that also which nowe
Gideon speaketh,
Mannah the father of
Samson (as we shal afterward heare) shal speak.
Iacob likewise, after he had wrastled al night, thinking that he had striuen with a man, when he vnderstood that he was an Angel, maruailed howe he escaped a lyue and safe. Haue I sene the Lord (sayth he) face to face, and is my lyfe saued? As though that y
t was in a maner impossible. Yea, and the Hebrues, when the Lord discended to mount
Sina to geue the lawe, were so striken with feare and dread, that they sayd vnto
Moses: Haue thou (we praye thee) to doo wyth God, least, if he go forward so to speake before vs, we dye. To this serueth that also whych is written in the same booke of
Exodus, when the couenaunt was then made betwene God and the people, and
Moses recited the cōdicions, and sprinkled the people with y
e blood of the sacrifices which wer offred, he brought forth the Elders vnto the mountain, wher they saw God sitting in his throne wyth chiefe glory and maiesty. But after the recital of that vision, it is sayd: Neyther did God extende hys hande vnto them: which declareth that it was a newe and
[Page] vnaccustomed sight, that men should se god, & haue their life stil whole & sound. Wherfore that altogether is mencioned as a thing geuen by a singular prerogatiue.
Ierome.
Ierome also testifieth, that
Esay was vnder this pretence killed of the Iewes, bicause he said that he had sene God sitting vpon his throne, as it appeareth in the .vi. chap. of his booke. They caueled that he lyed, forasmuch as God cā not be sene of men, which yet remain stil a liue. Wherfore they condemned him for a lier, as though in prophecieng he had taught y
e people not the things which the Lord had shewed him, but his own inuencions. This they fained against the innocent prophet, when as bysides it they had no other cause against him.
And there are the like examples in the new testament: when our Lord manifested in mount
Thabor to his Apostles a certain shew of his maiesty & glory, he was altogether changed before them, & he shined with an incredible brightnes & light, with whō wer
Moses &
Elias straightway present, & the voice of the father sounded from heauen. These thinges bicause they many waies ouerpassed the faculty of mans sight, the eyes of the Apostles were not able to beare them: wherfore they fel downe to the earth, & wer as it wer dead.
Peter also, whē in fishing at the cōmaundement of Christ he caught an incredible number of fishes: for before his woord he had long labored in vaine, marueiling at the straunge sight, and vnderstanding that God was in Christ, he was so afeard of himself, that he said vnto him: Lord, I pray thee depart from me, bicause I am a sinfull man, and cannot without daunger suffer the presence of God.
Paul also declaring his rauishing vnto the third heauen, where he vnderstoode thinges deuine, whyche in word he might not expres vnto mē, writeth: whither it wer in the body, or without the body, I cannot tel. Verely he durst not affirme that those thinges happened vnto him, whilest he had the vse of the body, & senses of this life. Wherefore it manifestly appeareth, that
Gideon was not without a cause astonished.
But why the beholding of God or of the Angels seemeth to bring present destruction vnto men,
Platos sect. we must now shew the reason. Peraduenture that hapneth by reason of the grosnes of the body, which (as the sect of
Platos affirme) is to vs as it wer an obscure & darke prison. Wherfore forasmuch as by it we are letted, so that we cānot see things deuine, if peraduēture at any time we behold them, by & by we remember that the ioyning together of the body & mind is nowe dissolued, & that we shal straightway dye, & that therfore deuine things are set before vs to behold, bicause now is at hand the seperation of the soule frō the body. For
Aristotle in his
Metaphisicis testifieth,
Aristotle. y
t the powers of our vnderstanding are in such sort vnable to vnderstand things deuine, which of their own nature ar most euident, y
t iustly they may bee compared vnto the eyes of the Owles or Battes, whych cannot looke vpon the brightnes of the Sunne, and lyght of the day. They which thus thinke, doo in deede say somewhat, but not so much as is sufficient, to expounde the thing manyfestly.
The bodye remoueth vs not from the beholding of God.The body from the first creation was not therfore geuen vnto men, y
t it should be a let vnto them to know God, neither that it should restraine our soules as in a certain blinde & darke prison: for so the goodnes of God, which created the bodily nature of man, should be accused. And that the thing is thus, the historye of
Genesis proueth, which testifieth that God was very familiar with our first Parentes, though they had bodies: for he led them into Paradise which he had planted, he shewed them the trees wherof they might eate, and for certaine trees hee gaue them a law that they shoulde not toutche them, he set all creatures before
Adam, to cal them by what name he listed. Wherefore the bodye was not a let, wherby the first man could not be familiar with God.
Synne seperateth vs frō god Sinne vndoutedly remoueth vs from the sight of god. Therof cōmeth our dimnes, darknes, blindnes & ignorance as touching things deuine. For this cause we ar turned into Moles, Bats & Owles. But God of his owne nature may be sene, yea he is the lyght it selfe, but that the blot of synne is put betwene. Peraduenture thou wylt saye,
[Page 118] that is now sufficiently declared,
Bycause of sinne men flye from the sight of God. that sinne is the originall cause of our blyndnesse but we haue not yet shewed, why mē are so afeard at y
e sight of god. Yea by cause of sinne happeneth all this also vnto vs: for men, besides y
t by reasō of their darknesse they are oppressed with y
e diuine light, beyng of sinne accused by their conscience, do flye from the iudge who is no lesse mighty then iust. For they vnderstand that God himselfe is such a one, that by reason of his purenesse and iustice he will suffer no vncleane or filthy thing before hym. Wherfore to haue God present they thinke nothing els, then that their punishement prepared for them and the paynes whiche they haue deserued are at hande. For this cause our first parentes when they had sinned straight way hid thēselues, and at the voyce of God were so afeard, that they determined to hide themselues among the trees of Paradise: whiche vndoubtedly came of a troubled conscience for as much as God of his owne nature is both quickning and also the author of all consolatiō. Wherfore it is manifest that these terrors and discommodities, came not by hys defaulte, but thoroughe our owne wickednesse.
¶Of Visions, or in what sorte and how muche God may be knowen of men.
NOw the matter geueth vs occasion, somwhat to speake of visions of things deuine, and in what sorte and how much God may be sene of men. But least our disputacion should want either methode or els an order, I will first set forth certaine distinctions whiche I perceaue are nedefull.
First, the knowledge of God is supposed to be offred vnto the sēces,
Distinctions which serue to the questiō put forth. or vnderstanding. Or els we thinke that it commeth of nature, either els by a prerogatiue, and reuelacion which passeth nature. Father the knowledge of the substaunce, nature, and (as if I should say) of the very essēce, is separated from that knowledge whiche consisteth of tokens, testimonies, argumentes and signes of the diuine presence. Lastly we must speake, either of that knowledge, whiche agreeth with this our life, or of that onely which is looked for after this world.
The nature of GOD is not knowen by our sences. I will begyn therfore at the sences: and of the knowledge of them this I suppose, that the nature, substaunce, and essence of God can not be comprehended by the sences. For those thinges haue no affinity with God whiche are vnderstand by sences, but are from him most farre distant. And to say the truth the qualities, which long to any certayne generall worde, and are reckened for accidences, do stirre vp the knowledge of the sences. And for as much as God, whiche is most simple, is not subiect to those, he can not therfore be knowen by the sences. And this to be true is by certaine experience perceaued whiche euery man taketh of his owne iudgement. For it is most certain, that no man hath by his sences perceaued hym.
The error of Anthropomorphites. Howbeit the
Anthropomorphites persuaded themselues that God might be knowen by the sences, as men which did attribute vnto god a humane body: but their opinion is vtterly reiected. For the holy scripture testifieth that God is a spirite, and it also putteth a manifest difference betwene a spirite and a body, when our sauiour sayth: Fele and see, bycause a spirite hath neither fleshe nor bones. And there is none which vnderstandeth not, that a humane body and his members, can not consiste without fleshe & bones. Farther their foolishnesse hereby appeareth, bycause there is not a body founde, whiche is euery way pure and simple: for let it be as equall as thou wilt, at y
e lest way it hath partes, wherof it is composed. And that all composition is agaynst the nature of God, euen the Ethnike Philosophers perceaued.
But leauing the
Anthropomorphites, we must speake of certayne other, whō
Augustine in his Epistle
ad Paulinam, de videndo Deo, maketh mēcion of.
Augustine. They as the Scriptures testifie and the right faith confesse, do beleue that God is altogether most simple, and that he wanteth a body. But they deny that he can not
[Page] be sene with the eyes of the blessed, in that blessednesse whiche we wayt for. And therfore they say we are deceaued, bycause we measure the state of the lyfe to come by those thinges, whiche we see here to be done and to happen. Wherfore say they, although the dull eyes of our body are not able here to see God, the aungels or spirites, yet when they are confirmed in felicity, they shall see them, but not in dede by their owne nature & power, and the sharpenesse of their sight shalbe so illustrated,
Our bodely eyes do not beholde the essēce of God neither here, neither in y
e lyfe to come. that they shall see euen the very essence of God. These men peraduenture erre lesse than the
Anthropomorphites: but yet they erre. For how soeuer our eyes shalbe confirmed whē we shalbe in the blessed state, they shall for all that remayne eyes, and shalbe bodily eyes: wherfore they shall not excede the nature and latitude of their obiectes. In dede they shall then easely abide a vehementer and larger light, than now they can in seing suffer, neither shall they be hurte by those colours wherwith they are now offended, but yet they shall not attayne vnto the essence of god. For there are no bodies whiche in the blessed resurrection shalbe so nobled, that they shall either be made spirites, or els ceasse to be bodyes. Wherfore neither to the body of Christ is this geuen, that after his resurrection it was turned into a spirite. For this were not to haue the body rise agayne, but to be abolished. Wherfore they, whiche thinke that our eyes shalbe made so perfect, that they shall beholde the substaunce of God, do not beawtifye them, but in very dede destroy them. The
Anthropomorphites do sinne agaynst the nature of God, in that they cloth it with a body: but these men do iniury vnto the nature of man, which persuade themselues that it shall not abide in the blessed resurrection. Our sentence therfore abideth and is true, as well of this lyfe wherin we presently lyue, as of the life which we wayte for to come.
What the Patriarches and Prophets saw.But thou wilt aske, what then sawe the Patriarches and Prophetes, to whō we read in the holy Scriptures that God many tymes appeared? I aunswere, that as touching the outward senses, they saw onely certaine images, similitudes and formes, whiche were offred sometymes vnto them by god and by hys aungels, whereby it was shewed both that he was present with those fathers, & also spake vnto them, heard them and admonished them of thinges healthfull. But these things, namely the presence of god or of the aungels, also the wordes and significations, the sense it selfe vnderstand not, but by reason, and in minde they were gathered by those thinges, whiche the iudgement of the senses receaued. Wherfore the
Chaldey Paraphrast, when in
Exodus it is writtē, that god came to mount
Syna, affirmeth, that god himselfe came not simply, but translateth it, that the glory of god came: as thoughe he should haue sayd, certaine noble and wonderfull signes were there sene, by whiche god testified that he hymselfe was there present: whiche selfsame thing he doth in
Esay the 6. chap: where he writeth.
In what thīgs God shew him self to be presēt I saw the Lord sitting vpon his throne which was highe and lifted vp. But what manner of similitudes and images they were, which offred them selues as tokens of the presence either of an aungell or of god, it is easy to be gathered out of the holy Scriptures. The burnyng bushe appeared vnto
Moses, the cloud, the piller of fire, the smokes, voices, thundringes lampes, lightnings, the propiciatory, the arke of the couenaunt,
Vrim and
Themim, and sondry formes euen of men, whiche either did, or spake, or in some maner of sorte shewed themselues either to Prophetes or to other men. All these thynges I saye, were signes and tokens of the presence both of God and of the aungels. And the same things were sene of the fathers, either when they were slepyng or els whē they were waking: & sometymes by the spirit of god or industry of the angels at the cōmaundement of god,
Prophets somtimes se things printed in imagination and somtimes outwardly. y
e phantasy or imagination of mē receaued forme by such similitudes and figures. Wherby those thinges whiche god would shewe, were no lesse expressed in the myndes of the vnderstanders, than if they had ben perceaued by the outward senses.
Wherfore in expounding the Prophetes it is true, that very oftentymes we
[Page 119] stād in great doubt, whether y
e thing were so done outwardly, or rather so appeared to y
e Prophet to be done in mind. And in certain of thē by reason of the circū stances of the matter, we are compelled to graunt that it was onely a vision, as
Ierome testifieth of the breeches or hosen of
Ieremy,
Ierome. whiche at the commaundement of the Lord he put in a rocke by the riuer
Euphrates: and he suffred them to remayne there so long, till they were rotten: and then he was commaunded to take them, and to put them on agayne. And this vision happened whilest the city of
Ierusalem was grieuously besieged by the
Chaldeyans, whē the Prophet could not go and come to the riuer
Euphrates. For at the same tyme, when he would once haue gone to
Anathoth, where he was borne, he was taken euē as he was going out of the gates, and accused of treason. In like manner the same
Ierome affirmeth, that that was onely done by a vision, whiche is written in
Ezechiell, of the bread baked in the doung of an oxe, and how it lay many dayes vpon one and the selfe same side. To these may be added the eatyng of the booke, and such like, whiche either humane nature, or circumstances of the matters and tymes, suffred not so to be done, as it is writtē. And as touching the preaching & expressing vnto the people, that things which y
e Prophetes had in their myndes, a thing sene by phantasy or imagination, was all one, and had as much efficacy, as if it had outwardly bene sene. But yet they fled not vnto the visions of the mynde, when the thing it selfe might outwardly be done. For seyng God can vse both wayes, he hath sometymes taken this way, and other sometymes that way, as it hath pleased him, and as he hath iudged mete and profitable for vs. But in all these things, me thinketh the sentence of
Ambrose is to be holden,
Ambrose. The visions of Prophets wer not naturall. which intreating of these images, sayeth: That they were such as will did chose, and not such as nature hath formed: whiche vndoubtedly maketh agaynst those, whiche will haue prophesieng to be naturall, as though by the power of the heauens, or some certain instinct of nature, or temperature of humors such images & sights offred themselues to be sene, of the outward senses of the Prophetes, or to be knowen inwardly by imagination & phantasy. The will (sayth
Ambrose) namely of god or of an aungell, would those thinges, and aboue other thinges chose them, and not the power of nature formed them.
But there is an other doubt which in dede is not to be left vnspoken of,
Whether God at any tyme shewed himself or whether they were alwayes angels that appeared. namely whether god himselfe at any tyme shewed himselfe vnder these images or formes: Or whether onely aungels alwayes appeared, which wrought & spake with y
e Prophets, sometimes in theyr own name, & other sometyme in the name of god? Ther haue ben some which said y
e god himself neuer appeared, but by angels in y
e name of god all those things were accōplished which are written to be either spoken or done in those visions. And they contend that they haue certayne testimonies in the Scriptures which make with thē: among which one is found in the Actes of the Apostles, where
Stephen expressedly calleth him an aungell, whiche called to
Moses out of the bushe, when as for all that he is in
Exodus named God. Farther
Paul to the
Galathians testifieth that the lawe was geuen in the hande of a Mediator, be the disposition of Aungels. And no man doubteth, but that in
Exodus it is written, that the law was geuen by god. Wherfore they conclude that we must vnderstand that God appeared not by himselfe, but by Aungels. Howbeit forasmuch as the essence or diuine nature, can not be taken away either from the holy ghost,
The holy ghost shewed himself in a Doue. or from the sonne (for either of them by nature is God) how will they defend their opinion, when as it is expressedly written in the gospell, that the holy ghost descended vpon Christ in the forme of a Doue? If they say that an aungell came and not the holy ghost, they accuse the Scripture as a lyer: but if they cōfesse, that together with that Doue the holy ghost appeared, what shall let but that god himselfe also appeared vnto the fathers vnder other figures and images? They cā from this by no meanes escape, except (which I thinke they wil not do: otherwise they should bring in a manifest heresy) they
[Page] will deny the holy ghost to be God. And that which I haue aunswered of the holy ghost, we may obiect the like of y
e sonne, out of the wordes of
Paul to
Timothe the 3.
The sonne of God appeared in humane flesh chap, where he writeth: Without controuersy it is a great mistery, god is made manifest in the flesh, iustified in the spirite, &c. For the whole Churche and right faith confesseth that the word was the true god whiche appeared vnder the fleshe of man. Whiche if he did, as vndoubtedly without conterfayting he did, why may he not be said to haue done the same in the old Testament vnder sōdry formes and manifolde figures? Without doubt that was much greater whiche he gaue vnto vs in the latter tyme. But he whiche hath geuen the greater thing we doubt not but that he also can geue that whiche is lesse.
Peraduenture they will say, that that whiche was geuen in the latter tyme, the holy Scriptures do set forth to the end we should beleue it: but that whiche ye require to haue ben done in the old time is no where read.
It is the word or sonne of god by whom God spake vnto the fathers & Prophetes. Yea but if we diligently marke, the Scriptures teach, that also. For the sonne of god is named by the Euangelist the worde or
[...], whiche we must beleue was not by him done rashly, but bycause it might be vnderstand that by him god spake, when the scriptures testifie that he spake. Wherfore as often as we read, y
t the word of y
e Lord came vnto this mā or to that man, I iudge that the same is so often to be attributed vnto the sonne of god Christ our Lord, namely that god by him spake vnto the fathers and Prophetes. Which least I should seme to speake in vayne, I wil for this sentence bring forth two testimonies.
Iohn. 1. The first is read in the first chap: of
Iohn: No man hath sene god at any tyme, & straight way by y
e figure
Occupatio is added. The sonne which is in y
e bosome of y
e father he hath reueled hym. For a man might aske, If no man haue sene god at any tyme, who appeared then to the fathers when things deuine wer shewed vnto them? who talked with them, when sondry formes and images appeared vnto them in the name of god,
Iohn. 12. and wrought with them? Straight way it is aunswered: The sonne which is in the bosome of the father he hath reueled him: he was to man, the most true interpretor of the father. An other place, is in the gospell the 12. chap: where it is thus word for word writtē. Therfore they could not beleue, bycause agayn sayd
Esay: He hath blinded their eyes, & hardened their hart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor vnderstād with their hart, and should be conuerted, and I should heale them. These thinges sayd
Esay, when he saw his glory, and spake of hym. Vndoubtedly these two pronounes His, and of Him, do without cōtrouersy signify Christ, for a litle before the Euāgelist had sayd, Though he, namely Christ, had done so many signes before thē, yet beleued they not in hym, that the saying of
Esay y
e Prophet might be fulfilled y
t he sayd, &c. And to this sentence, which in very dede is natural, do agree
Chrisostome, Ierome, Cirillus, &
Augustine. Farthermore the wordes of
Hosea the Prophet which he hath in the 12.
Hose. 12 chap: are diligently to be weighed, And thus speaketh the Lord there: I haue spoken vnto the Prophetes, and I haue multiplied visions, and vsed similitudes by the hand of the Prophetes, &c. Hereby we vnderstand, that similitudes were not geuen vnto the Prophetes from the beginning, but god himselfe spake vnto them.
By examples it is declared both that God himselfe, & also that āgels somtymes apperedBut now must we by examples and such as are most euident, confirme, that the appearynges of god are vtterly distinct from the visions of aungels. First it is declared vnto vs in the boke of
Genesis, that
Iacob saw a ladder which reached from earth euen to heauen, and by it the aungels both ascended and discended.
1 And at the top of the ladder, namely in heauen, stode the Lord from whom
Iacob heard noble and large promises. Hereby is gathered, vnlesse we wil stil be blind, that aungels shewed themselues in one kind of images and god himself appeared
2 in an other forme. This selfe same thing may we see in
Esay, when he sawe the Lord sitting in his throne, and with him two Seraphins, whiche cried mutually the one to the other, Holy, holy, holy. And with so great reuerence they
[Page 119] worshipped God which was in the middest, that with their two vpper winges, they couered their face, and with the two neither wings their feete. Who seeth, not here a great difference betwene god and the aungels which appeared? I will
3 not speake of
Ezechiell, which saw aungels in the formes of creatures, namely of an Oxe, an Egle, and a Lion, by whom wheles were turned, but God himselfe sat in the hyghest parte in the forme of the sonne of man. Of
Daniell also
4 was sene the auncient of dayes, vnto whom came the sonne of man. And he addeth that thrones were there put, bookes opened, and a certain forme of a iudgement appoynted: then he maketh mencion of aungels, of which he sayth were present ten thousand and ten hundreth thousand, whiche ministred vnto hym.
And here we heare, what great difference there is betwene God and the angels which ministred. Farther there is a place most manifest in
Exodus, when God,
5 beyng angry with the people, denied that he would go any farther with them thorough the desert, least being prouoked with theyr sinnes, he shuld at once vtterly destroy them. But he promised to send his aungell, with which promise
Moses was not content, and sayd that he would by no meanes go with the people, except god himself would go together with thē. And vndoubtedly by prayer and constantly abiding in his sentence, at the length he ouercame, and (as he desired) had god for y
e guide of their iorney. How can these men therfore say, y
t god himselfe was not present vnder those formes, but only angels were sene in such images? Moreouer let vs remember, that
Moses (as it is writtē in the same boke
6 of
Exodus) desired of God to see his face: which his request god (for that he loued him excedingly,) would not vtterly deny, but yet he would not graunt him all that he required. Wherfore he aunswered: My face thou shalt by no meanes see, bycause man shall not see me & lyue, but thou shalt looke vpon my hinder parts, namely my backe. What is more manifest than this testimony? Surely god by certayne wordes here promiseth, to appeare vnto
Moses in the shape of a man, of whose forme or image
Moses should see not the face but the backe. And the same he faythfully performed vnto
Moses: for as god passed by,
Moses sawe the backe of his image by the rocke, and heard the wonderfull and noble names of god rehearsed with a most loude voyce. Which when he saw, he fell prostrate to the earth and worshipped: and it is not to be doubted, but that he gaue vnto hym that adoration, which is onely due vnto the onely god. For forasmuch as he beleued that he was there present according vnto his promise it is not to be had in controuersy, but that he worshipped him as being present in very dede. And vndoubtedly god, except he had shewed himselfe present in very dede at the arke &
7 mercy seat, should haue throwen the Israelites hedlōg into idolatry, if he would haue had onely aungels to aunswere such as came to aske counsell, for that he commaunded them to cal vpon him and to worship him there. To these may be
8 added that history whiche is written in the booke of kinges of
Micheas the Prophet, whiche prophecied before
Achab king of
Israell and sayd, that he sawe god, with whō was present an host of aungels, & he heard him aske, who shal deceaue
Achab, and that one offred himself to be a lying spirite in the mouth of the Prophetes of the king
Achab. By this vision also we vnderstand, that there was an assured and notable difference, betwene god and the aungels, whiche appeared all together vnto the Prophet. Wherfore the gift of god which he gaue vnto the fathers, is not to be diminished or to be extenuated: & we must cōfesse, y
t he was in very dede presēt, whē he appeared, forasmuch as we reade y
t it was so done, and there is nothing that letteth, as farre as can be gathered out of y
e holy scriptures, neither is the very nature of god any thing against, it that it could not be done. It were not sound to attribute vnto aungels all those things which in the scripture are read of such visiōs. For so might we easely slip so farre, y
t at the last we should beleue y
t the word was not immediatly created by god, but by angels at his commaundement. Wherfore let vs confesse that god was present in very
[Page] dede,
God was present in verye dede, whē it is sayd that he appeared vnder diuers formes. & shewed himselfe vnder diuers formes, as often as we heare that the scripture testifieth or speaketh the same.
Now resteth to aunswere vnto the places before brought. As touchyng the Epistle to the
Galathians, I graunt that the disposition of the aungels was in the geuing of the law: for they stood by God when he spake, they made redy the mist,
Aungels ministred vnto god when he gaue the law. thundringes, lightnings, & lāpes, they prepared the tables of stone, & many wayes ministred vnto God being present & speakyng. Neither do the wordes of the Apostle deny, but that God himselfe spake, & gaue the law, as the scriptures testifie. Yea & there haue ben some, which by the hand of a Mediator, do not expound it to be
Moses,
The aungell which spake vnto Moses in the bushe, was y
e sonne of God but y
e sonne of god: but whether they do it rightly or wrōgfully, I haue no leasure at thys present to discusse. But we nede not in many wordes to aunswere vnto y
e which blessed
Stephen sayth (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) namely that an angel appeared vnto
Moses in the bushe, & talked with him. For if by the angell we vnderstand the sonne of God (as I haue often admonished) there will then remayne no doubt.
But that the things which I haue now alledged, as touching this matter, may the plainlyer & more certeinly be vnderstand, I thinke it good to confirme them by some testimonies of the fathers.
Chrisostome.
Chrisostome in his 14.
Homely vpon
Iohn saith. The things which y
e fathers saw, were al of thē by permission, but yet they saw not y
e pure & simple substaūce of god. And he addeth: If they had sene it, then should they not haue sene it in any part differing, for y
t it is pure, simple, & cā not be described: Wherfore it standeth not, it lieth not, neither sitteth, as sometime it was to those Prophetes shewed. He saith moreouer: God, before the sonne came into flesh, exercised y
e father with those visiōs & images. He there also writeth y
e, which a litle before we alledged, namely y
e with bodyly eyes we cā not see created spirites, as are our soules & angels. Wherfore much lesse must we beleue, y
t we can see god with the senses. And least a man thinke, y
t it onely agreeth with god y
e father to be inuisible, & not with y
e sonne, he bringeth thys sentēce of
Paul, that he is the image of y
e inuisible God. And without doubt he could not be hys image,
Augustine. if he were not inuisible, as he is whose image he representeth.
Augustine also in his 3. treatise vpon
Iohn, saith of
Moses: Althoughe it be sayd that he talked with god face to face, yet when he desired to see y
e face of god, that is his very substaunce, he could not obteyne it. And in the same place he addeth: He saw the cloude, & the fire, which were figures. And within a litle after: If they say that the sonne was visible before he was incarnate, they dote.
Augustine besides these hath in his Epistle to
Fortunatianus, gathered many more things to this purpose out of
Nazianzenus, Ierome, & other fathers, which wer to long here to rehearse.
Howbeit I will bring two argumentes, which are wont to be obiected against this sentence. In the beginning we sayd that the nature of God can not therfore be comprehended with the senses, bycause his nature is not bodily. But all the old fathers seme not to haue beleued so.
Tertullian. For
Tertullian agaynst
Praxea writeth that God is a bodye, and in other places hee oftentimes testifieth the same. Yea in his litle booke
de Anima he teacheth that our soules are bodyes. And whiche semeth more straunge, hee laboureth by manye reasons to confirme it. Yea and in his booke
de Dogmat. Eccles. the 11. chap: he writeth that all creatures are bodyes, and euen the aungels by name: bycause there is nothing, whiche filleth all thinges as doth God: but all thynges are limited with certayne places, as it appeareth of the soule,
Augustine excuseth Tertulian. whiche is closed in with the body.
Augustine in his Epistle
ad Quod uult deum excuseth
Tertullian in this maner, that by a body he vnderstoode the substaunce, & that whiche is in very dede, as though he therfore wrote that god is a body, least he should seme to deny y
t he is, forasmuch as the vulgare people do thinke that y
t is vtterly nothing,
The nature of god is without a body. which is not a body. Howbeit y
e same
Augustine in his boke
de Genesi ad litterā, in this maner reproueth him, that at sometyme being ouercome by y
e truth, he said, That euery body is passible: wherfore,
[Page 121] least he should make god passible, he ought to haue denied him to be a body. Neither neded he so to bend himself to y
e capacity of y
e cōmō people, y
e therfore he should pronoūce false things of god. For Christiās are not so to be instructed, y
e like rude persons (whō
Aristotle also cōfuteth) they should thinke that y
t is nothing, which is not a body, but rather they ought so to be taught, y
t in thinking of god they affirme nothing w
tout rules of y
e holy scriptures. And as for y
e booke
de dogmate Ecclesiastico, we must attribute no more vnto it thā is mete. For it is ascribed vnto
Augustine, but the learned beleue not that it is his.
The other thing, which is somtimes obiected, is an argument of y
e
Anthropomorphites. For they cōtēd, y
t for this cause we ought not to beleue y
e god is without a body, bycause the Scriptures testifie, y
e man was made to y
e image of God, which could not be true, except he haue a body as we haue. For y
e image should want y
e similitude of y
e wherunto it is referred. They thinke also y
e the Scripture maketh with thē, when as it oftētimes attributeth vnto god the mēbers of men.
Ierome. But
Ierome (as
Augustine to
Fortunatianus citeth him) wittely & sharpely derideth their argumēt. If we should leane vnto this reason (saith he) we shall easely proue y
t a man hath winges, bycause y
e scripture sometimes ascribeth thē to god, to whose image it is manifest y
e man was created. These men ought rather diligently to haue weighed that the image of God, consisteth in holinesse, righteousnesse & truth, as
Paul hath taught. Whiche thyng if they had sene, they had not only remoued a body from god, but they should also haue led away their mindes from grosser cogitations. Why do they not affirme that God is in very dede a beare, a Lion or fire, bycause so do
Amos, and
Moses, and also the Epistle to the Hebrues call him? In the 95.
Psalme it is written: He that made the eye, shall he not see? he that made the eare, shall he not heare?
Ierome saith that there should haue ben said: he that made the eare, hath he not an eare? & he that made the eye, hath he not an eye? But so it is not sayd, least in thinking of him,
Why the scripture attributeth members vnto God. thou shouldest be deceaued, & suppose that he hath those mēbers. But the holy scripture, if some tyme it attribute members vnto god, vndoubtedly this is the only cause, to helpe our infirmity, whereby althoughe we can not comprehend the essence of God as it is, yet in very dede it prouideth that by some certayne simboles and shadowes we may vnderstande somewhat. Wherefore members are by a most profitable Metaphore attributed vnto God, that we diligently remembryng his proprietyes, might godlyly and faythfully exercise our myndes.
Why the Anthropomorphites are condemned. And the
Anthropomorphites: if for that cause they had ascribed members vnto God, as the Scriptures setteth them forth, to be a helpe vnto the weake vnderstandyng of men: they myght be excused, neither should they haue bene condemned. But they contended that the nature of God had so in very dede: wherefore iustly and worthely are they accused. But what shall we aunswere to
Paul, whiche of the seyng the nature of God in heauen, sayth: We shall see him face to face, and by that meanes he semeth to graunt vnto our eyes and face the beholdyng of god, and after a sorte to ascribe vnto god himself a face?
There is a face of the body and a face of the mynde.
Augustine aunswereth that there is a face also of the mynde, when as
Paul sayth, that we nowe with a face vncouered do beholde thinges deuine, and not with a vayle put betwene, as the Iewes vsed when they talked with
Moses.
But these thinges beyng thus finished and concluded,
In the eternal life the blessed shall know the essence of God. let vs in few wordes speake of other kyndes of the knowledge of God. In the euerlastyng lyfe the blessed shall knowe the essence of God, not in dede by the senses, but by the soule or mynde, for as muche as
Iohn sayeth: When he appeareth, we shall see hym as he is.
Paul testifieth the same, nowe we see hym thoroughe a glasse and in a shadowe, but than shall we see hym face to face. The same thyng is gathered by the wordes of Christ: Their aungels alway beholde the face of the father, for in an other place he hath taught, y
t in the blessed resurrection the iust shalbe like the angels of god. Wherof it followeth, y
t we shal see god in like sorte as the angels
[Page] do: wherfore if they see his face, thā shal we also behold it. There is an other testimony also written by
Paul to y
e
Corinth. Than shall I know, euen as I am knowē.
The nature of GOD is not wholy and by all meanes cō prehended.
Chrisostome. And y
e god seeth vs thoroughly & essencially, no mā doubteth. Howbeit let vs not thus persuade our selues, y
t the blessed shall wholy & euery way know y
e nature & substaunce of God, but so much only as we shalbe able to receaue
[...] for things finit cā not fully receiue y
t which is infinite: nether is y
e which is created, able fully & perfectly to cōprehend his creator. Wherfore
Chrisostome in his .14. Homely vpō
Iohn, Ambrose in his first boke vpō
Luke y
e .1. chap, also
Ierome (as
Augustine in y
e place before alledged declareth) all these I say deny y
t the angels see god. But y
t can not simply & absolutly be vnderstād, whē as otherwise Christ saith, y
t they see the face of y
e father which is in heauē. Wherfore it remayneth, y
t the same is to be vnderstād of y
e whole & perfect knowledge of his nature & substance. Wherfore in
Iohn y
e 6. chap: it is written: No man hath sene god, but he which is of god, he hath sene y
e father. Also: As y
e father knoweth me, so know I y
e father. Wherfore this is onely geuen to Christ which is god, perfectly & fully to know y
e essēce of god. Other also shall see it, but yet so much as their capacity cā cōprehend. If thou aske, whether it shalbe equally or no? I will not aunswere to that, at this present. For in an other place, we shall haue occasion geuen vs to speake of the diuersity or equality of rewardes in the blessed life.
But what shall we affirme of the state of this life? Shall our mind whilest we liue here in knowing of god attayne to his essēce?
Whether in this lyfe we may in soule or minde knowe the essence of God, or no. No verely, bicause it is writtē: Man shall not see me & lyue. No man hath sene God at any tyme. And
Paul addeth: He can not be sene, bycause he dwelleth in the light that no man can come vnto. Howbeit these thinges are not to be vnderstand as touchyng all maner of knowledge: for also whilest we lyue here, it is geuē vnto vs after a sort to know god. Wherfore these sayings are to be vnderstād (to speake as the stoolemen do) of the substantiall & essentiall knowledge of God. Neither is this against it, in y
e it is written that
Moses saw god face to face, which also before him
Iacob spake, neither y
e which in an other place is written of y
e same
Moses, y
e god talked with him as a frend with his frend. For these things are not spokē simply, but by cōparisō with other, bycause those excellēt mē aboue other knew those things, which at y
t tyme were opened vnto mē as touching god. For vnto thē god would after an exquisite & vnaccustomed maner shewe himselfe, whiche he did not to others. And this to be y
e sēse of these words.
Augustine &
Chrisostome hereby do gather, bycause afterward when
Moses desired to see the face of god, it was denied hym.
The naturall knowledge as touching God, is slender and obscure.
Symonides.There remayneth, to intreate of the knowledge of god, which whilest we liue here we may obtayne. First the same is naturall, & that very slender & obscure. Which thing
Symonides knew right well, who (as
Cicero writeth in hys booke
de Natura deorum) being demaunded of
Hierone a tyranne of
Sicilia, what God was, he alwayes deferred to aunswere, bycause y
e more he thought as touching y
e thing, y
e more obscure alwaies it semed vnto him. Wherfore
Clemēs Alexādrinus in his 5.
Clemens Alexandrinus. boke of
Stromata, bringing a reason, why y
e knowledge of God is so hard, saith: It is not
Genus, it is not
Differēcia, it is not
Accidēs, nor y
e subiect of
Accidēces, & therfore it cā not be vnderstād of vs, which comprehend onely such things in our mind & reasō. The effectes, which y
e Philosophers vsed by their vnderstāding to know god, are not equal w
t his dignity, power, & faculties. Wherfore they declared only certain cōmō & light thīgs. But we geue vnto him
Attributa or proprieties, y
t is, good, iust, faire, wise, & other such like: bicause we haue no excellenter things, nor nobler names, whiche cā better be applied, or agree w
t him. Neither yet are these things so in him, as we speake: for, for y
t he is most simple,
The knowledge of God by fayth. he is farre otherwise good, iust, & wise, thā men either are, or are called.
But besides this naturall knowledge of god, this knowledge also offreth it selfe vnto vs, which consisteth of faith, & is by the worde of god reueled vnto vs.
[Page 122] But faith is not of vs (as to the
Ephesians it is sayd) but it is the gifte of God: for Christ also saith: No man can come vnto me except my father drawe him. Faith therfore aboundantly gathereth out of the holy scriptures y
e knowledge of god, as much as sufficeth to saluation, or as much as this our lyfe is able to receaue. Howbeit as
Paul testifieth this knowledge also is imperfect. For now we know hym by a glasse in a shadow & but partly: & althoughe in this knowledge we profyte, whilest we liue here, yet can we not atteyn to the knowledge of the essence of god. I know that
Augustine thought as touching
Paul &
Moses, y
e sometyme,
The opinion of Augustine, of Paul and Moses. in minde whilest they were here, they saw the substaunce of God: but I can not easely agree vnto it, forasmuch as I iudge that those places of
Iohn, of the lawe, & of
Paul, which I before alledged, are most euidēt. Vnto which this may also be added, which is written in the 6. chap. of
Iohn. Not that any man hath sene the father: he which is of god, he seeth the father. And this is not to be passed ouer, y
e that which is here spoken of the father, is true also of the sonne, as touchyng his deuine nature. Bycause, as I haue aboue declared, both out of
Chrisostome and out of
Augustine, the nature as wel of the Sonne, as of the Father is inuisible. And it skilleth not if thou say, as
Augustine sayth, that they sawe the nature and substaunce of God, not vsing the outwarde senses but in a certayne traunse or rauishing, or beyng alienated from the vse of this lyfe. These thinges are not gathered out of the Scriptures, yea contrarily we haue heard that
Moses was denyed the sight of the face of God. Wherfore by the knowledge of fayth we both knowe God and his good will towarde vs, as much as is sufficient to our true and perfect saluation.
But among all those thinges, wherby out of the holy sciptures we know god,
In Christ god is sayd to be made visible. there is none more excellent than Christ himselfe. Wherefore
Paul hath iustly sayd: without controuersye it is a great mistery, God is made manifest in the fleshe, &c. The Lord also sayth:
Philip, he whiche seeth me, seeth also the father.
Paul also said that he knew nothing els, but Iesus Christ, and him crucified. And vndoubtedly in Christ God may be sayd to be made visible: bycause he was ioyned together with man in the same selfe person. Wherfore they whiche sawe Christ, might say y
t they had sene God. And he which by faith beholdeth and acknowledgeth him, doth see far much more, than if he should behold the burnyng bushe of
Moses. Wherfore to the
Collos. it is written, that in him are put all the treasures of the wisdome & knowledge of god. And
Iohn doth healthfully admonishe vs in his Epistle the 3. chap. as he which hath a hope to see God as he is, let him prepare himselfe therunto, by purging himself, as he is pure & cleane. Thus much of the Question, now let vs returne vnto the history.
23 And the Lord sayd vnto him: Peace be vnto thee, be not afeard, thou shalt not dye.
24 And Gideon built there an alter vnto the Lorde, and called it Iehouah Shalum, euen vnto this day. It is yet in Ophrath y
e pertayneth to the Abiezerite.
Whē these things were spokē vnto
Gideō, by y
e history it appeareth not, but I thinke it was y
e next night after y
e things already rehearsed, wherfore he was cō maūded to build there an alter, where y
e meates which was setforth were cōsumed with fire, namely vpon y
e rocke, wherof is menciō made a litle before.
Why God appeared vnto Gideon the second tyme.
Gideō was vexed w
t feare, supposing y
e bycause he had sen god, he should die. Wherfore god cōforted him, y
t he being voyde of y
e feare, might y
e chearefullier prepare him selfe, vnto those thinges which wer cōmaūded him. That feare wōderfully letted his faith. For how could he beleue, that he should set y
e Israelites at liberty, which euery houre suspected death to be at hād. Wherfore god in cōforting him, remoued away y
e feare, y
t he might persecute y
e worke, which lōged especially vnto faith.
Thou shalt not die, saith he
Peace be vnto the. In y
e hebrew phrase, peace signifieth trāquility, good successe, & as y
e cōmon people say, prosperous fortune.
[Page] This word
Shalū is deriued of y
e verbe
Shalā, which is to performe, to finish, & to accōplish. The latin word
Pax also which is peace, agreeth w
t y
e hebrew significatiō. For if we may beleue
Augustine, Pax y
t is peace, is a trāquility of ordre. And then we recken al things to be peaceable, whē they are right & quietly disposed.
And Gideon built there an altar. These wordes are spoken by the figure
Prolepsis: for he was in the night admonished of y
e Lord to builde this altare, for the holy scripture vseth to set forth a thing summarily: & then to declare the thing as it was done. Wherfore god came vnto
Gideon in his sheape, comforted him, that he should not feare least he should dye, cōmaunded him to buyld an alter, to take a bulloke, to do sacrifice, to cut downe the prophane groue, and to ouerthrow the alter of
Baal,
Why the Elders vsed alters. which was had in estimation. The elders vsed alters not only to sasacrifice vpon, but y
t they might be monumentes of some notable benefite geuen by god. We read y
t
Moses did so, when the Israelites vnder y
e Lord obteyned the victory against
Amalek. After y
e exāple of
Gideō, euery one y
t is iustified by faith & hauing peace toward god by Christ, & being assured of eternall life, ought in his hart to graue such a litle,
Christe is our peace.
Christ is my Peace which thīg
Paul also hath taught when he wrote to the
Ephes. He is our Peace, which made both one.
25 And the same night, The Lord said vnto him, Take thy fathers yong bullok, & the other bullok of vii. yeares old, & destroy the altar of Baal, that thy father hath, & cut downe the groue, that is by it.
26 And build an altar vnto the Lord thy god vpon the top of this rocke in a playne place, & take the second bulloke, & offer a burnt offring with the wood of the groue, whiche thou shalt cut downe.
That which before was in a sūme spokē, is now particularly expressed. Some thinke y
e two bullokes are here mēcioned, of which the one is called y
e secōd other by order of natiuity, or as they stoode in order at the racke & mangor. And that second, is specified, to be vii. yere olde, in at which time being made fat, at y
e lēgth to be offred to
Baal: this bulloke god would haue offred vnto himselfe for aburnt offring. And bycause there is no farther mencion made of y
e first bulloke, neither did god cōmaunde what he would haue done with it, therfore I thinke we must vnderstād but one & the self same bullok which before is put absolutly, & thē by exposition repeted y
t he might be by some certaine tokēs knowen frō other bulloks, wherof peraduenture his father had many, so y
t it was vii. yeares fatted, & stood in y
e secōd stalle. And as touching y
e vii. yeres fatting there is no cause why we should meruaile at it,
Apis the oxe was lōg fatted forasmuch as y
e oxe called
Apis or
Serapis which was wont to be sacrificed, was fatted certain yeares before. And it is not hard to beleue,
The Hebrues vsed the superstitions of the Egyptians. but that this custome of the Egyptians was supersticiously kept among y
e idolatrous Hebrues, for that they were not onely neighbours vnto Egypt, but also they came out of it into the land of
Palestine.
God would haue an alter erected vnto him vpon a hard and stronge rocke, namely vpon y
t, wherout fire was stricken, to burne those thinges whiche
Gideon brought, as though God by y
e miracle had appointed it for himselfe. He cōmaundeth an alter to be raised vp in a place apt, for y
e stone or rock, as it is to be supposed, was great. Wherfore he willeth
Gideon to chose one certain euen part of it aboue the rest, which was most fit to build an alter vpō. And this is chiefly to be noted, y
e god when he would deliuer the Israelites from y
e
Madianites cōmaūded aboue all things, y
e idolatry should be ouerthrowē. For vntill as long as religiō is not restored,
Nothing goeth forwarde well in a plub. welth except religion be first restored nothing goeth forward well & luckely in the pub. wealth. Farthermore faith is y
e groūdsele & foūdation of actiōs to come. And y
t cā not be had, where y
e worshipping of god is turned into superstitiō & impiety. Which thing if god in a maner in al expeditions doth obserue, let Magistrates therby gather, what they ought aboue all things to do among y
e people whō they gouerne. Priuate mē also by this exāple ar admonished, chiefly to frame piety in their minds.
[Page 123] It is not sufficient to build an altar vnto the Lord, vnles the sacrilegious altare be cut downe: neither is it inough to ouerthrow that, vnles vnto the true god be his altare builte. There are whiche fall from the Pope, but they so fall, that they will not follow the Gospell. And some there are which do in such sorte receaue the true doctrine, that for all that they wil not depart from the pernicious masses, and other papisticall impietyes. God hathe not so, not so (I saye) commaunded whiche soeuer of these thou neglectest, thou breakest his commaundemente.
That there were groues by the temples of the idoles, none,
About idoles were groues. whiche hath red Poetes or hystoryes, doubteth. That was a certayne mutacion of the Patriarches, which offred sacrifices vnder okes, or in hilles, which they called high places. They delighted (as I thinke) in close places, wherby theyr mind, when they sacrificed, was more voyd of worldly cares and affayres. And for the most parte experience teacheth vs, that in darke places, & where high trees grow, a certain admiration commeth vnto the mindes, by which admiration they applye themselues the more to the meditation of thinges deuine. God cōmaundeth the groue to be cut down, bicause it was together w
t y
e altare dedicated vnto the god
Baal. Yet he commaundeth his wood, and the oxe appoynted for him, to be transferred to his own sacrifice, least any man should think that the true god is not lord of all thinges. For there is nothing so vnder the power of the deuill, but that it may be turned to the glory and honour of god. Yet the godlye oughte not by this example to eate thinges offred vnto idoles, when they know that they are suche in dede. Not vndoubtedly, bcause the nature of that flesh is chaunged, or ceaseth to belonge vnto god, but bicause of the conscience of the weake ones, and leaste it shoulde seeme that we woulde be made pertakers of the table of the deuilles. But such lawes God hath prescribed vnto vs, not vnto him selfe. Wherefore he maye vse thynges dedicated vnto idoles for hys owne burnt offringes.
The groue, the altar, and the bullock are mencioned to belong vnto
Ioas the father of
Gideon: because he had y
e office of a Magistrate in
Ophrath: & whatsoeuer was the cause, it is to be thought that he mayntayned idolatry there. And forasmuch as sacred places & sacrifices are appointed to the possessiō of priuate men, therfore magistrates are wonte to haue the rule & disposition of them.
Gideon is chiefly commaunded, to do these things that euery man might vnderstand, that in purging of religiō, or amending any other sin, we must first begin at our own famely, and at such as are niest of kinne, least any man should seme to correcte other, and in the meane time leaue his owne neglected and vnamended.
27 Then Gideon tooke tenne men of his seruantes, and did as the Lorde badde him. But bicause he feared to doo it by daye for hys hys fathers householde, and the menne of the Citye, he dydde it by nyghte,
The feare of
Gideon resisteth nothyng agaynst hys fayth. God wil haue euery man to fulfil his vocatiō, but yet he forbiddeth not to adde prudence. We must take place, time, and occasion, vnlesse God appoynt these thinges also Howbeit we muste beware, that in adding these cautions we goe aboute nothinge that is agaynst the precepts of God: for that prudence is praysed which with thinges well done neglecteth no sinne.
Supersticions are more set by o
[...] men,
[...]h
[...]n pure religion Hereby also we gather that
Gidion was not o
[...] to
[...] basest sort, forasmuch as out of his famely he could take out
ten seruantes. He feared, and so feared that in the day time he durst not do that whiche the Lorde ha
[...] commaunded. For the worshippinge of
Baal was nowe confirmed: and superstitions once established by takinge deepe rootes, are wonte to haue more
[Page] authority, than perfecte, pure and sincere worshipping of god can euer obtayne. Such vngodlines is there grafted in the hartes of men, that at this day, if a man in the papacy detest the masse, or deride a pece of bread, which the wicked sacrificers both worshippe and cary about, he shalbe much more cruellye punished and tormented, than if he shoulde with horrible blasphemies defame the true God and our Lord Iesus Christ. So at that time he was counted as a most detestable heretike worthy to be killed, which had done any contumely vnto the holy seruices of
Baal.
Whereunto the feare of Gideon tendedBut wherunto tended this pollicy of
Gideon? That must needes be cutte of which was done, neither coulde the author of so greate an enterprise be hidden. This is true: but he iudged that in the mean time this daūger was to be auoyded, lest in the day time in the acte doing he should be taken. For he should haue bene letted both by his fathers houshold, and also by the men of the citye, from executing the commaundementes of God. and peraduenture in accomplishinge the worke shoulde haue beene slaine.
The name Baall agreeth very well with the true God. Thys
Baal (as in an other I haue declared) had his beginninge of
Bel the father of
Minus. But as touchinge the name, we must know, that by it an excellent propriety of God is expressed. For
Baal in hebrew signifieth a Lord, a maister & a husbdā, al which things in very dede agree with God. For he is Lorde of all thinges, and the teacher of all true wisedome, & the onely husband of the churche. Wherefore these men erred not in iudging the proprieties of God. Neyther erred the
Grecians whē they called him
[...]. For by that title they declared that God is the author of lyfe. The Romaynes also called God
Iubiter, as though they should say
Iubiter father. Wherfore these words are for god most worthy: and it may be, y
t the old mē which so spake, had a respect vnto the true god the chief of all. But that was vtterly vngodly and detestable, which afterward was committed, namely to ascribe these proprieties as well to starres as to men, and also to brute beastes and idoles, wherby all thinges were filled with idolatry. Farthermore the Hebrewes, although God had taught thē his name, by which he would haue them call vpon him, and praye vnto him, yet they forsoke it, & vsed the names & holy seruices inuented by y
e
Ethnikes, & neglecting the rites commended vnto the both by the law and also by their elders, they receaued prophane ceremonies. Wherfore they had an altare dedicated vnto an idole, a groue about it, and certayn yeares they fed and fatted some certayn bullockes for the sacrifice. And at the length they became not the worshippers of the true god, but the true worshyppers of
Baal in all thinges.
Gideon in the night ouerthroweth the altar, cutteth down the groue, buildeth an altar vnto the Lord, & (as he was cōmaunded) offred a burnt offring. Al these things wer testimonies of his fayth, whereby he confessed, and that frō the hart that he detested idolatry, and perfectly beleued in the only lord the god of the Hebrewes
1 and sacrificed vnto him. Some thynges are here mencioned, which were not done by an vniuersall law but by a certayne prerogatiue and priuelege.
Gideon being of the tribe of
Manasses sacrificeth, when as sacrificing belonged only vnto the
Leuites. This if he had done of his own brayne, he shoulde not haue
2 wanted blame. Secondly a priuate man ouerthroweth the aultare, and cutteth downe the groue: in whiche thinge he tooke vpon him the office of a magistrate. But in these things we must haue a regard to the word of god, by which he was peculiarly stirred vp to do these things. Wherfore they which to these works ar not in like manner called, ought to kepe thēselues vnder the common law. But as I haue in an other place admonished, idolatry is of all men to be taken away but yet of euery man, according to his state & condition. Let magistrates by outward violence, ministers by the word, and priuate men, by abstayning and gainsaying, take away vngodlynes.
28 And when the men of city rose rose earely in the morning, they saw the altar of Baall destroyed, & the groue, that was by it was cutte down, and the second bullocke offred vpon the altar that was made.
29 And they said one to an other, who hath done this thing? & whē they enquired and asked, they sayd Gideon the sonne of Ioas hath done this thinge.
30 Then sayd the men of the city vnto Ioas, Bring out thy sonne that he may dye: because he hath destroyed the aultar of Baal, and hath also cut downe the groue that was by it.
31 Ioas aunsweared vnto all those that stoode by: will ye pleade Baals cause? Or will ye saue him? He that will pleade for him let him dye ere the morninge. If he be god, let him pleade for himself against him that hath cast downe his altar.
32 And he called him in y
t day Ierubbaal: saying: Let Baal pleade with him, bicause he hath broken down his altar.
They most grieuously prosecute the matter against him which had inuiolated the sacred thinges of
Baal, and yet they suffred the worshipping of the true god to lye neglected and despised. It is the maner of humane wisedome, with earnest labour to defend theyr owne inuentions: and obstinately to resiste those thinges which god hath commaunded. They will kill
Gideon, as a sacrileger and moste pernicious heretike, they behaue themselfes sediciously against the Magistrate, they shew forth no lawes, but in a certayne blinde fury they iudge the crime cō mitted to be vtterlye worthye of death, when as they themselues rather should haue bene condēned worthy of death, bicause they had violated the worshipping not of an idole, but of y
e true God. What he was y
e shewed that
Gideō did these thinges, the history expresseth not. God suffreth not such thinges to be hidden therfore he had means and ways in a maner infinite, whereby he would make them open. But to know what were the tokens of the thyngs done, it is no skil to vs, but let vs diligently marke the impotency of idolatrers.
Idolatrers can not abide to haue vngodlye worshippinges taken away. They cannot by any meanes abide to haue wicked worshippinges taken away. The Hebrewes sayd vnto
Ieremy that they would vtterly worshippe the queene of heauen, that is the moone and other starres. The
Ephesians being as it were in a rage, cried without meane or reason, Great is
Diana of the
Ephesians. The
Romaines whilest
Italy was wasted by the
Gothes, Vandales, and
Lombardes, neyther cried nor desired any other thing, but that the alters and temples of idoles might be restored. That said they was y
e hed of euils, bicause the holy seruices of country were abolished. The like example do we no see in these men, they neither wil nor can not abide, that
Gideon shuld escape whō they saw had cut down theyr idolatry. Now is
Gideon counted a seditious fellow, which hath committed such thinges as we at this day of the gretest part of christendome ar accused of sedicion, which haue disturbed false worshippinges now being receaued. And we graunt indede that seditions ar to be auoided as much as may be, bicause ciuile peace is a good thinge which wise and quiet mindes ought to desire.
Obedience to the word of god is to be preferred before euil
[...] peace. But contraryly the truth is not to be suppressed, nether must we sin against the worshipping of God, and it is much better to defēd the word of god thā ciuile peace. Euery godly man so roweth when tranquility of the publike wealth cannot be coupled with the obedience of the word of God. Wherfore for asmuch as the one or the other is to be chosen, the whole and vncorrupted worshipping of God ought rather to be wished for, thā the commodity of outward peace. For the end of cities and publike
[Page] wealthes is, to obey God, and rightly to worshi
[...]pe god, that is by his word and prescribed rule. For to haue a city or publike wealth quiet and peaceable, is not by it self necessary, but to obey God, to beleue his word, and to worshippe him as he hath prescribed, is the summe and end of all humayne things, and therefore it is to be preferred aboue all good thinges. Neither is it anye newe or vnaccustomed thing, that by true piety sedicions are stirred vp. Christ of that thing hath admonished vs: I came not (sayth he) to send peace on the earth, but a sworde. I came to kindle fire: what will I, but that it should burne? The time shall come sayth he, that for the Gospels sake, the father from the childe, the children from the parentes, brethern from brethren, shall not onely be alienated, but which is more cruell,
The godly are not guilty of the troubles whych happen for religions sake. they shall deliuer one an other to the death. And yet these sedicions & troubles are not to be ascribed vnto the godly: forasmuch as they whēthey obey god, do not depart from their office, they do that which they should do: the fault consisteth in the vngodly and idolatrers, they are to be accused, and cōdempned as guilty of those euils, because they can not abide the truth, neyther will they obey the word of god. Wherfore prechers of the gospel ar to be absolued of this crime: for sediciōs spring not throgh theyr default which obey god, but through the peruersnes of the world, which streyght rageth agaynst the word of god.
Ioas, like a wise and stoute Magistrate, at the beginning asswageth the people being in an vprore, shewing them how vnworthy a thinge they doo, when they beyng priuate men, dare auenge the cause of
Baal. VVill ye pleade his cause? As though he should haue sayd. It is not your office, it pertayneth to me and the other magistrates. And then he maketh a proclamation agaynst the sedicious persons.
He that will so stand in Baals cause, shal dye, and that this daye,
or the morninge. He shal not liue till morning, for he shalbe executed out of hand.
If Baal be god, let him plead his own cause agaynst him, which hath cast down hys altar, and hath cut down h
[...]s groue. If the matter be to be discussed without iudgemente and ordinary action,
Baal hath no neede of thys your helpe: for seing he is god, he can right wel reuenge himself. The last part of this sentence is somewhat dark.
He that wil plead. Lo, for him or against him, let him dy this day before morning. Some expounde this woorde
Lo, to signify,
for him namely for
Baal, as though the
[...]retor had put forth his decree after this maner: Whosoeuer goeth aboute to moue sedition, as though he would pleade for
Baal, him will I strayghtewaye punish, as a troublesome citezen, which dareth to take vpon him more then hys state may suffer. The other sense is to expound this woorde
Lo, against him, as though he should haue sayde: do not rage in this sorte, bycause he shall vtterlye dye, and that this day before morning, which agaynst
Baal hath pleaded and contended. By the power of this god he shall not so escape. And this sentence seemeth to be confirmed by the words which follow:
If he be god, let him pleade his owne cause agaynst him, which hath done him iniurye. But I rather allowe the fyrst sentence: because the holy scripture rather vseth this word
Lo in that sense.
Gideon by his fathers aunswer was named
Ierubbaal. He shal plead (saith
Ioas or
let Baal plead against him. These ar words ether of them that praieth, which would so speake in earnest or faynedly, or els of one that affirmeth as though he should affirm, that it should vtterly so come to passe. The men which herd these word
[...]s, either because they meruayled that the father wished these things vnto his sonne, or els bycause they beleued that the earth would strayghtway swalow him vp, or the lightning would destroy him, or that god would by some exquisit punishment punish him, they waited (I say) to see what would happen. And therfore they called him
Ierubbaal. And his surname was then of farre more estimation, when they saw that he escaped safe and sound, and contrarye to the hope of all men deliuered the Israelites from the power of theyr enemies.
By this example Magistrates may know what they should doo,
The office of a stout Magistrate agaynste tumultes bycause of religiō when Papistes stirre vp sedition or tumult in their dominion, bicause Masses are abrogated, Idolatry taken away, and the Pope throwen downe. They must valiantly stande by it, and must declare, that this charge pertaineth not vnto these, by violēce to defend rites and supersticions: forasmuch as they haue not the sword: theyr care should be this, to see that godlynes be rightlye and orderlye appointed. If so bee that they desire any thing against lawes or right, and thinke that they haue the better cause, let them from God waite for the successe. He is of himselfe by nature both mighty and wife, and therefore if he allowe the Masse, the Pope and superstitions, hee wyll then take those thinges in hande himselfe. In the meane time they ought to compel their subiectes to obey iust and healthful decrees. By these thinges it appeareth as I suppose, that
Ioas was not a Baalite from the hart, for he could not haue said: If h
[...]e God, let him pleade his own cause. Vnles thou will faine that he said, in time to come
Baal shal pleade his owne cause: but what he before iudged of
Baal, now he declareth, when he seeth the daunger of death that his sonne is in for his sake.
33 Then al the Madianites, and the Amalekites, and the children of Kedem were gathered together, and pitched their tentes in the valley of Iszreel.
34 And the spirite of the Lorde did put on Gideon, and he blew a trumpet, and Abiezer was gathered together after hym.
35 And he sent messengers through out al Manasseh, and he also was ioyned wyth hym. And he sent messengers vnto Aser and Zebulon, and to Nephthali, and they came vp to meete hym.
When the vprore & seditions wer pacified, which were stirred vp for a thing godlily done of
Gideon, God prouided that occasion shoulde be geuen, whereby he might by
Gideon geue vnto the Israelites the victory against their enemyes. That thereby at the last they might vnderstand with howe muche godlines and profit, the worshipping of
Baal was taken away. In the cōming of the enemyes the spirit of the Lord did put on
Gideon, the spirit I say of strength, as the Chaldey Paraphrast interpreteth. God had before appointed
Gideon for a sauiour of the Hebrues, now when he should go forth vnto the battail, he suffreth him not to go vnarmed, but endueth him with his spirit. The
Metaphore of putting on is deriued of garmentes, which are put vpon the bodye. The spirite of the Lorde therfore is inwardlye hidden in the outwarde man, and so woorketh by him, as though he had put him on. And this is a phrase of speche very muche vsed in the scripture, and especially in this booke. This did the Angel signify shoulde come to passe, when he said vnto
Gideon: Go in this strength, and deliuer the Iewes frō the
Madianites. Now is it brought to passe that
Gideon is endued wyth the spirite of strength. For this was that power and myght of God, wherewith in the old time he deliuered the fathers. He blew a trumpet, and
Abiezer followed him, which in dede was marueilous, forasmuch as they were so angry for the ouerthrowing of
Baal. But their myndes were by the inspiration of God chaunged. For when they saw that the Idole did to him no hurt, they began to haue a good opinion of him. The whole tribe of
Manasses followed him, also
Zebulō, Aser, Naphthali. Gideon alone was called, but yet he would not fight with hys enemies alone. For faith refuseth not humane helpe which iustlye may be had: for godly men are not by fayth styrred vp to tempt God.
36 And Gideon sayde vnto God: If thou wylt saue Israel by my hande as thou haste sayde:
37 Behold I wyl put a fleese of wool in the threshyng place, if the
[Page] dew come vpon the fleese onely, & it be dry vpon al the earth, thē shal I be sure, that by my hand thou wilt saue Israel, as thou hast sayd.
38 And it was so: for he rose vp earlye on the morrowe, and thrust the fleese together, and wrynged the dewe out of the fleese, and fylled the vyole with the water.
39 Againe Gideon sayde vnto God: Be not angry wyth me, and I wyll speake onely once more: Let me proue onely once, I praye thee wyth the fleese. Let it, I pray thee, he dry vpon the fleese onely, and let the dewe be vpon all the ground.
40 And God dyd so the same night: for it was drye vpon the fleese onely, and there was dewe on all the grounde.
Mans imbecillity is diuers and manyfold, wherby it cōmeth to passe, that in the promises of God we wauer and doubt.
Gideon was called by so playne and manifest woordes, that there was no occasion of doubting left. He had no cōmon signe when the sacrifice was consumed with fire: he is nowe furnished wyth an host, & yet he now also wauereth, & needeth a new confirmation. We vse not so to do when we beleue men: for if there de but a bare promise, or a hand writing made, we are content. But God must continually beate in into vs those things which he promiseth, and seale them with miracles and Sacramentes, and yet euen then also we geue litle credit vnto them. And though we should endaūger our selues for accomplishing of our own lustes, or prosecuting our own affairs, there are we stoute, there are we bolde, and nothing afeard, when as otherwise few there are found which in God his cause, or for his words sake wil put them selues in daunger. In which thing neuerthelesse we ought to be most stoute: for God wyl not leaue vs destitute of his ayde. He addeth the spurres of promises, the confirmation of miracles, and to those which cease of, he threateneth verye grieuous punishmentes.
Whence our distrust cōmeth And this pestilence springeth of no other thing, but bycause we trust to our owne sense and reason, more then is conuenient. And against thys euyl there is no remedy so present, as frō them to prouoke our selues to fayth and constancy in God.
Whither Gideon in requiring these signes, be to be condēned.
R. Leui ben Gerson thinketh that
Gideon, when he required these signes, did partly distrust, and partly beleue: whose opinion if it be receaued, then
Gideon is guilty of infidelity. And I iudge y
t we must not labour much, vtterlye to acquite him of al faultes. To the Hebrues his faith in dede is commended: but me thinketh that we must not deny but that it was wauering, before it was by diuers meanes confirmed. And vndoubtedly it is a great matter, to confirme the harte of man in the woord of God. Although I am not ignorant, that they which defend
Gideon, do say that he doubted not, but that he was called of god to set at liberty the Israelites. But in requiring these signes, he onelye asked counsell of God: whither he should then obtaine the victorye againste the
Madianites, when now he had collected and host. And that in the old time with the captaines of the Israelites was a common custome. For
Saul and
Dauid, although they wer by God chosen kinges, namely to saue the people, neither did they therof any thing doubt, yet did they often times aske counsel of God, whither they should ascend to any place, whither their enemies should be deliuered into their handes: or contrary, whither they should fall before their enemies, or bee deliuered into theyr handes. So peraduenture it might be sayd, that this captain, for that he had not with him the Arke of the Lord, or a Prophet whom he might aske counsel of, as touching the successe of the battail, by those signes did aske counsel of the Lord.
Augustine in his .63.
Augustine. Ambrose. question vpon
Genesis in this maner excuseth
Gideon, and affirmeth that he by these petitions tempted not God, but asked counsel as touching the successe. And as cōcerning this thing, as he is wont, he agreeth with
[Page 126]
Ambrose, who in his first booke
de spiritu sancto, and .i. chap. affirmeth that
Gideon doubted not. And the
Rabbines of the Hebrues think that these signes wer geuen vnto
Gideon by the ministery of some prophet: but what he was, neyther the scripture declareth, neither can they tell. And there are some of them whiche suppose that al this thing was done in a vision. But of these things what nede we any more to argue? Forasmuch as there is nothing whiche letteth, but that
Gideon might in very dede both demaund, and haue experience of these things. Howbeit, the thing teacheth that al these things happened in the summer time, for that there is mencion made of dew.
I easily assent vnto
Augustine, which saith that
Gideon tempted not God,
Augustine. We maye require a signe to strengthen our fayth. bicause I am perswaded, that by such signes he woulde haue his fayth confirmed, which otherwise was wauering. It is synne in deede to doubt in faythe, but to strengthen the same, it is lawful in time to require a signe. For in the Gospell the man cryed: Lord, I beleue, but helpe thou my incredulitye. Yea and
Gideon also in the selfe same thing had before tryal of consolation: wherfore it is no maruel if he againe desired the remedy, which he had had experiēce of.
Why Gideon required contrary sygnes. He requireth contrary signes, bicause the first semed not to be so great a wonder, that the rest of the earth should be dry, & the fleese moyst. Bicause such is the nature of wool, that by a certaine proper power it draweth moystnes vnto it selfe, as the
Magnete stone draweth yron, and
Naphtha, fire.
Naphtha a kinde of chalk. Wherefore the wool myght easilye drinke in the dewe, and that aboūdantly, although the earth wer not yet moist. But that about the fleese the earth should be moist, and the wool dry, it was vtterly against nature.
What is the Allegorye of these sygnes,
Augustine vpon the .71.
Augustine.
Ambrose. The Allegorye of these signes. Psalme writeth, and also
Ambrose in his first booke
de spiriru sancto, in the Proheme. The fleese they vnderstand to be the people of the Hebrues, who in the old time wer watred with the woord of God, when as the whole earth, that is, all other nations, wanted the preaching of the woord of God. Christ also was the minister of the circumcision, & in the first embassadge he sēt his Apostles onely to y
e Iewes. But afterward the thing was so altered, that the whole worlde, after the comming of the holy ghost vpon the Apostles, was watred wyth the woord of God, and the Iewes vtterly wanted it, and as barren bowes were cut of from the fertile and fat Olyue tree.
¶Of Miracles.
IN the ende of the chapter twoo thinges are to be enquired of. The first is of miracles: the other is, how much or in what sort it is lawful to require them.
The Etymology of y
e wordes.
As touching the firste, the Hebrue verbe is
Pala, or
Niphla, whiche is, it was hard, or marueilous: wherof ar deriued these nownes
Niphlaoth or
Miphlaoth. By which woordes are noted thinges seuered from other, for their dignitye or excellency, seperated I say, and wonderful. The Grecians call it
[...], of thys verbe
[...], which is to maruayle. The Latines call them
Miracula, that is miracles, bicause they are woorthy of admiration. They cal them also
Prodigia monstra, and
Portanta, that is wonders, monsters, and thinges seldom sene, that we should vnderstand that God by these thinges wyl shewe that some certayne thing shal come to passe or be done, contrary to the cōmon order of things aboue hope or expectation.
Miracles very muche renoumed. Wherfore seing mircales ar done aboue the natural course of thynges, they bring with them admiration. And vndoubtedlye there are verye many miracles, which by writers are made famous, as the temple of
Diana in Ephesus. the Tombe of
Artemisia Queene of
Caria, the horrible great image of y
e Sūne at
Rhodes, the walles of
Babilon, & very many other of y
e sort. Wherfore
Augustine against the Epistle of the
Maniches, the .xvi.
Augustine. A general description of myracles. chap. prudently writeth, I call a miracle whatsoeuer appeareth harde or vnaccustomed, aboue the hope or faculty of the wonderer. By which wordes, a certaine large description
[Page] of miracles may be had.
Transubstantiation is yll fayned to be a myracle. And forasmuch as it said, that a miracle appeareth, they are worthely reproued which do fayne Transubstantiation, and wyll haue it to be a miracle, which can neither be confirmed by the holy scriptures, and seing that it appeareth not, neither can it be sene, it cannot be called a myracle.
After this very common and large description, ther is to be added, that of miracles certaine are true,
False miracles and certaine are false. For those are called false myracles, which either are not that which they seme to be, or els if they bee, they are not done by anye power, which passeth nature, but by the powers of nature, although it be secrete. For Angels either good or bad may do them, and that thre maner of wayes. For sometime they applye vnto matter the strengthes of nature, which they perfectly know, of which cōiunction of y
e matter wyth efficient causes, do follow effectes, & ar in dede in a maner vpon the sodaine, at the which the beholders cannot but maruayle. The deuils know that of thinges putrified are engendred Frogges, woormes, or some certaine Serpentes, so that heate in certaine degrees be added. Wherfore seing to them it is not hard to couple these thinges together, they do it somtimes to deceaue men with al. And by this meanes
Augustine thinketh (as he writeth in his .3.
Augustine. booke
de Trinitate) that the sorcerers of
Pharao did sometimes the same thinges which
Moses dyd. Farther, the mouings of the spirites, of the blood and humours, doo verye much trouble the bodies of men: whereby figures, images, and shapes of thinges, whyche in them are kept, are in the same mocion brought before the phantasy or imagination, & by that maner and order, that the troubler of the spirite knitteth them. Wherof do spring sundry and manifold sightes, which we see doo sometimes happen in suche as are in phrensy. And the thing may come so farre, that the formes and images which are inwardly kept, may be called backe euen vnto the outwards senses. Whereby, he which suffreth such thinges, weeneth that he verilye seeth and feeleth those thinges whiche are in his imagination or phansye, and in hys sense, when as in very dede there is no suche thing outwardlye done. And thys kinde of miracles ought rather to be referred to illusions, then to miracles.
It also commeth to passe, that sometimes these spirites by their own power, either of the ayre, or els other elements do forme certaine bodies, y
t they appeare vtterly like mens bodies, and vnder them they appeare to whō soeuer they lust. So came they sometimes to
Abraham, Lot, and other fathers. These thinges (if we speake properly and simply) ar not true miracles, but in our reason & iudgement ther is nothing letteth, but that they may so be called. Yea and commonly Iuglers are said to do miracles, when as for all that they deceaue by the nymblenes of the handes, or by the powers of certaine thinges natural, do represent thinges wonderful to the beholders.
What true miracles are.But this is the definition of true miracles. A miracle is a woorke hard and vnaccustomed, by the power of God, which passeth al faculty of nature created, to this ende wrought, to cause the beholders to wonder, and to confirme fayth towardes the woord of God.
Causes of myracles. Wherefore the matter of miracles are woorkes: and the forme is, that they be hard and vnaccustomed. The efficient cause, is the power of God, which ouercommeth nature created. And the end of them is both admiration and also confirmation of faith.
And that we should not doubt of the efficient cause, this I thinke good to be added: That that power of God which vtterly is aboue the faculties of nature, is to be vnderstande, sometimes to woorke by it selfe, and other sometimes eyther by Aungels or by men, and that in such maner as wee shall afterwarde declare.
Augustine. Farther, I wyll adde, that
Augustine writeth in the place before alledged against the Epistle of the
Maniches, the .xxvi. chap. Miracles woulde not mooue except they were wonderfull, and they would not be wonderful, if they shoulde be accustomed thinges. As therefore they say that by admiration sprang Philosophy, whych
Plato thought to be the Raynebowe, and for that cause calleth the
[Page 127] daughter of
Thaumans, so may we beleue that faith,
Faithe cometh not of miracles but is by them confirmed. which cōmeth of the worde of God, although it do not vtterly spring of miracles, yet by them it may be confirmed. And therefore
Augustine in his .xii. booke of Confessions the .xxi. chap. saith: Ignorance is the mother of wondring at signes: this is an entraunce vnto faith to the sonnes of
Adam, which haue forgotten thee. By this sentence he teacheth that men which haue forget God, haue by the admiration of miracles an entrance or cōming vnto faith. And without doubt it is so. The wyll of God is hidden from vs: but he, as he is good, openeth the same to holy Prophets & Apostles: which that they may profitably declare vnto men, he geueth vnto them the gift of his holy woord. But bicause he knoweth that mortal men are contrary & against his word, he hath graūted the power of working of miracles, that those thinges might the easilier be beleued, which he would haue his messenger profitably to speake. That cōfirmation of faith cōmeth by miracles,
Marke testifieth, who toward the end of his Gospel saith: And they went forth, preaching euerye where, the Lord working with them, & confirming the word with signes which followed. And how apt this kinde of confirmation is, hereby it is manifest. The promises of God do of no other thing depend, then of his wyll & power. And the signes which we now intreate of, do testify the power of God, forasmuch as they by al meanes ouercome nature, and set forth the truth of his wil: for by the inuocation of his name, & by his grace & spirit they are wrought.
Augustine. Wherefore
Augustine in the place now alledged against the Epistle of
Manicheus writeth, that miracles do bring authority vnto the woord of God. For he, when he did these miracles, semed to haue geuen an earnest peny of his promises. Neither ar these wordes to be passed ouer, which the same
Augustine hath vpon
Iohn, in the .24.
Miracles consist not in the greatnes of woorkes. treatise. That miracles consist not in the greatnes of workes: for otherwise it is a greater woorke to gouerne this vniuersal composition of the world, then vnto a blinde man to restore light, which he is destitute of.
These thynges declared, there remayneth that by apt distinctions we destribute miracles into his partes. Some of them are to be wondred at,
An other distinction of myracles. by reason of the thing it selfe which is done, for that it is so vnaccustomed and great, that in the nature of thinges, we cannot finde the lyke of it. Suche was the staying of the Sunne in the time of
Iosua, and the turning of that shadowe in the tyme of
Ezechias, the conception and byrth of the Virgin, the foode of Manna in the deserte, and suche lyke. But there are some which ar miracles, not for the nature and greatnes of the thing, but bycause of the maner and waye whiche was vsed in bringing them to passe, as was the cloude and rayne of
Helias, the budding of floures and fruites in the rod of
Aaron, the thunders of
Samuel, the turnynge of water into wyne, and suche lyke: For suche thinges are done by nature, but they were then myracles, bycause of the maner whereby they were wrought, that is, not by naturall causes, but at the commaundement and wyll of Sayntes.
There is an other deuision of myracles,
An other deuision of miracles bycause some of them doo onelye mooue admiration, as lyghtenynges and thundrynges in mount
Sina, the turning of the shadowe of the Sunne in the tyme of
Ezechias, the transfiguration of the Lorde in the Mount. There are other, which besides the admiration, doo bring a present commoditye vnto men, as when by the rodde, dryncke was geuen out of the Rocke, Manna from heauen, and when by the Lord and the Apostles sycke folkes were healed. And sometimes they bring punishment and hurt vnto the guiltye. For by the woordes of
Peter perished
Ananias and
Saphira. Elimas the Sorcerer was made blynde by
Paule: and some were by hym delyuered vnto Sathan to be vexed.
By this also are miracles deuided,
An other partitiō of miracles. bicause some of them are obtained by praiers. For so did
Elias and
Elizeus, namelye by praying, restore their deade to lyfe.
[Page]
Moses also praying for
Pharao, draue away Frogs and other plages. And other some are wrought by commaundement and authority.
Iosua commaunded the Sunne to stay his course. The Lord Iesus commaunded the windes, and
Peter said vnto the lame man: In the name of Iesus Christ rise & walke. Ther ar also other which are done neither by praiers, nor by commaundement, but of theyr own wyll and accord, the saintes them selues doing some other thing. Euen as when the shadow of
Peter as he walked, healed those that were sycke, and the napkin of
Paul healed also folkes diseased.
Augustine. An other diuision of myracles.Lastly,
Augustine (as it is written in his .83. booke of questions, question 79.) deuideth miracles, that some are done by publik iustice, that is, by the stable and firme will of God, which in the world is counted as a publike lawe. By it, God would that his ministers, that is, Apostles and Prophetes, shoulde in preaching woorke miracles. And there are other some which by the signes of this iustice are wrought, as when the vngodly in the name of God or of Iesus Christ do work any miracle, which is not geuen but by the honour and reuerence which thei vse towardes the name of God: not that God, or nature, or any thinges created desire to gratefy them. As, when a man stealeth away a publike seale or handwriting, he may wrest many thinges, either from the men of the countrey, or from the Citizens which are not geuen vnto him, but vnto the seale which they know doth belong to the Magistrate and Prince: So he, which followed not Christe, did yet in his name cast out deuils. Thirdly, are those miracles reckoned, which by some certaine priuate bargaine are wrought, wherby the Sorcerers do binde them selues vnto the Deuyl, and the deuil likewise to them. But those at done neither by publike iustice, nor yet by the signes therof, but come onelye of a certayne priuate conuention. Howbeit wee must knowe, that miracles of the second and third sort are not firme, neither do they assuredly happen. For asmuch as we reade in the .xix. chap. of the Actes of the Apostles, that the sonnes of
Sceua would haue driuen out Deuils in the name of Iesus, whom
Paul preached, to whom the Deuil said: Iesus in deede &
Paul I know, but not you. Which when he had spoken,
Ciprian. he inuaded them. And the same thing doth the act of
Ciprian testify of the third kinde, before he was conuerted vnto Christ. For by magical artes he assayed to perswade a godly virgin to his filthy pleasure: which thing at the last the Deuil confessed that he could not performe vnto him.
Howbeit we must marke, that these miracles which are by a priuate contract done,
Thei be not miracles in deede which the Deuil woorketh. are not in very dede miracles, but pertaine onely to those which we made mencion of before the definition: for although sometimes they bee that in verye dede which they seme for, yet are they not true miracles. For who doubteth, but that it was true fyre, wherwith the Cattel of
Iob were burnt? and a true blast of winde, wherwith his house being throwen downe, his children were slayne? Yea and
Augustine contēdeth that the Serpents which the Sorcerers brought forth were not illusions,
Augustine. but true Serpentes in dede. For the history sayth, that when they came vnto the third signe, the Sorcerers sayde: This is the finger of God, and they testified that now their cunning failed them, & that they could no more do those things which
Moses by the power of God did. And that is a token that they wrought not before by illusions, & that the Sorcerers euen tyll that time contended with
Moses in things in dede, & not in illusions. But some wil say:
Whiche signes say: of Antichrist ar called lyes. If the matter be thus, that the thinges which are done by the diuell & Sorcecers, be in very dede that which they seme for: why is it vnto the
Thessalonians of Antechrist written, that by him very many should be deceaued by false signes & wonders? We must say, y
t the lye ought not to be referred to y
t which is to bee done, but vnto the miracle. For although the thinges which are done, shal sometimes be the same things in dede which they seme to be, yet shal they not be miracles, although they seme so. But
Augustine answereth. Signes & wonders ar called lies, either bicause they appeare, & are not in dede, or els bicause they leade
[Page 128] men to lyes. For Antechrist by those signes shall seeke nothing els, but to deceaue and allure men to beleue false thinges. That is no newe or vnaccustomed thing, that y
e cause should by his effect obtain his name or propriety. But in that they appeare and are not, it may be two maner waies vnderstand: either bicause among true thinges some illusions are mingled: or els bicause thei are set forth for miracles, when as they are no miracles in deede.
There is an other doubt to be dissolued, how that power of God, whiche passeth nature, vseth either Angels or mē, as wel good as euil, to worke miracles. He vseth them as certaine instrumentes, & sometimes he doth miracles at their desire, prayers, and commaundement, without any of their outwarde woorke. And sometimes he wyl haue them, to adde some woorke or maistrye of theirs. For
Moses smote the sea, and the rock with his rod. Christ touched the leprous, and anointed the eyes of the blinde. But we must vnderstande that there is two kindes of instrumentes. Some are so ordained, that althoughe they are not the principal causes efficient, yet do they very much profite, for the bringing foorth of the effect, as is pron to cut hard thinges, and medicines to heale, when as for all that they are instrumentes of the woorkemen.
What strength instruments of God haue in doing hys miracles. But God in woorking miracles vseth an other kinde of instrument, namely, which of their own nature haue no strength to bring forth the effect. For what good could the rod do to open the sea? What could the shadow of
Peter helpe to heale the sicke? Vndoubtedly nothing, if thou looke vpon nature it selfe. The instrumentes therefore which god vseth in these miracles, do of their own nature either nothing helpe vnto them, or rather sometimes let them, as the beholding of the brasen Serpent, the salt of
Helizeus, the water of
Elias, which he poured on the burnt offering, and the clay which Christ put to the eyes of the blinde. Wherfore, when miracles are done by instrumentes of this kinde which nothing helpe, yea rather do let the might and power of God, is much more apparantly illustrated.
Christ also to teache that natural strength seemeth nothing hereunto, at the mariage sayd vnto his mother: What haue I to doo with thee O woman? Not that he woulde in that thing derogate the authoritye of his mother, but that it might manifestly appeare, that the nature which hee tooke of her, was by hys own power, nothing able to woorke miracles. Wherefore,
God vseth both good and euyll, aswel mē as angels, to woorke miracles. forasmuche as God for the working of miracles vseth men and Angels, and those as well good as euyl, and sometimes those miracles are benefites, and sometimes punishments, wherewith men are either punished or holpen, we must not doubt whether God do sometimes punish by good Angels. For it is very manyfest that Sodome was ouerthrowne by Angels, the host of
Senacherib slayne by an Angell, and
Dauid saw the Angel which was the minister of the pestilence of the Israelites.
But
Augustine vpon the .78.
Whither God doth by angels directlye helpe. Psalme doubteth whither God by euyll Aungels hath wrought miracles, whereby men wer immediatly endued with some benefite. And he faith, that he hath not red it in the holy scriptures: neither vndoubtedly haue I red it. Vnlesse we wyl say, that at the length it profited
Paule, that he was vexed by the angel of Sathan. And that for that cause some wer by him deliuered vnto Sathan, that their spirite in the day of the Lord might be saued. But the question of
Augustine tendeth not to this, but whither perfect and manifest benefites, as restoringes to health, prophecies, giftes of tonges, foode, deliuerye, and suche like, are of God sometimes by the Deuill geuen vnto holye men by some certayne miracle: I thinke herein as
Augustine thincketh, that the same is no where testified in the holy scriptures. But that by euyll Angels, as wel the godly as the vngodly are tempted, punished & vexed, it is euident. But after a diuers sorte,
Augustine. bicause (as
Augustine in the same place affirmeth) there are after a sorte two flockes of men, namely one of the wicked, and an other of the good. The good are the flocke of God: euen as the wycked are the flocke of the Deuyll: wherefore towardes them he woorketh more frely as toward his own,
[Page] he vexeth, mocketh, and handleth them yll, as by hys owne ryght. And yet towardes them can he not do any thing beyonde the measure prescribed of God. But against the flocke of God he dareth do thing, but so much as God himselfe wyll somtime permit him, as we reade was done of
Iob. God sometime suffreth the sayntes to be greuously afflicted of Sathan, to the ende his grace towardes them may most manifestly be declared.
Whither the plagues of the Egiptians wer done by good Aungels or by euyll.But when
Augustine expoundeth these wordes of the Psalme: namelye, the sending out of euyll Angels, he doubteth whither the plagues of the
Egiptians were done by a good Angel or by the Deuyl. And at the length he sheweth, that the plague and destruction of the first begotten maye be ascribed vnto the ministery of the Deuyl: but the other plagues are to be attributed vnto good angels, that the sentence both of the booke of
Exodus and of the Psalme may stand fast. Howbeit, as touching that plage of the firste begotten, in
Exodus it is written vnder the name of God: I wil this night passe through Egipt, and wil smite. &c By these woordes that destruction semeth to be ascribed, eyther vnto god, or to a good Angel, and not vnto the Deuil. But that moueth me not much, bycause although it were done by the ministery of the Deuil, yet maye it be ascribed vnto the Lorde. For
Iob, when by the woorke of the Deuil he was bereft bothe of goodes and children, said neuerthelesse: The Lorde hath geuen, and the Lorde hath taken away, and that (sayd he) was done by the Lorde, which was done by the Deuil. But some obiect: If we assigne these things vnto the Deuil, then shal he seme to haue fought against himself. For the Sorcerers, by the help of deuils, withstoode
Moses, when they did the same thinges that he dyd. And if plagues were by euyl Angels sent against the
Egiptians, and the Sorcerers went about to withstand them, then Sathan semed to resist Sathan. Neither could the Sorcerers haue trulye sayde that they fayled, and testified that it was the fynger of God whych wrought. But these reasons in my iudgement are not strong, bycause the thinges done by the Sorcerers, were done by the power of Sathan, which is vnto him naturall. For by it he is able to applye the seedes of thynges and woorking causes to his matter prepared, and to woorke wonders as touching the sight of man. But those thinges, wherewith God afflicted the
Egiptians, were by his most mighty power wrought by the instrument of the Deuyll. Wherefore it is no maruail if the Sorcerers failed, and felt the most excellent power of the finger of God.
The place of Exodus and of the Psalme is conciliated.Howbeit the booke of wysdome the .xviii. chap. semeth vtterly to ascribe these plagues vnto God, wher he saith: while al thinges wer stil, and when the night was in the middest of her course, thy almighty word. &c. And in the .xvii. chap. it is written, that the
Egiptians being among those plagues, especially when they were oppressed with darknes, wer with horrible vexations of minde, and sights very terrible so vexed, as though most doleful spirites had perpetuallye bene before their eyes, and about their phantasy: which vndoubtedly might be done by the sending of euyl Angels, as the Psalme doth mencion. Their hart also was hardened, and their mindes were dayly made much more obstinate againste the Israelites. And that semeth to haue pertained to the sending downe of euil angels. Wherfore these two places may easely be made to agree, in ascribing the plagues which ar mencioned in
Exodus to good Angels, and the terrible sights and hardning of the hartes to the sending of euyl Angels vpon them, of whych the Psalme now alledged maketh mencion.
The power to work miracles maketh not mē better or woorser.But forasmuch as God (as it is declared) for the woorking of miracles, vseth both euil & good, angels & men, the godly men ought not therfore to be greued, bicause oftentimes he geueth not vnto them this faculty. For they are not for y
e cause of any worse condition, then are they to whom God graunteth to woorke miracles. For the Lord said vnto his Disciples, when they returned from theyr embassadge: Reioyce not in this, bicause spirites are subiect vnto you: reioyce ye
[Page 129] rather for this, bycause your names are wrytten in heauen. There are some which are so desirous of such thinges, that to obteine signes, they are not afraid to vse euen the help of y
e deuill: and vnder this pretence they excuse themselues,
To worke signes we must not vse the help of the deuill. bycause god himself to worke signes vseth Sathan, in following of whome they do well, so farre ar they of that they can be cōdemned guilty of any crime. They say also that
Paul deliuered some to the deuill to be vexed: and therfore they also may vse his ministerye. But what manner of men are they, whiche wil affirme that it is lawfull for them to do asmuche as is lawfull vnto god? God is the author of all creatures, wherfore it is no marueile if he vse them all. But vnto vs it is by the law of god prescribed that we should not do it.
It is not lawfull to imitate God in all thinges. And the immitation of god is so farforth commended vnto vs, as by his law it is commaunded vs and no otherwise. For he reuengeth his owne iniuries. And who will saye, that priuate men may do the same? God adioyned vnto his owne burnt offring the bullocke appointed for
Baal (as we haue haue now hard) with the wood also dedicated vnto the same idole: Shall euerye one of vs therefore eate thinges dedicated vnto idoles? The rule of our actiōs, is the word of God. Wherfore we ought not to be drawen to imitate him, but so muche as the lawe suffreth. That lawe hath he made, not for himself, but for men, that they should frame theyr life after it. Wherfore it was to him lawful to require of
Abraham the immolation of his sonne, which thing none of vs can require of our frend.
Paule and other Apostles had euill sprites subiect vnto them, and by them it was sometimes lawfull vnto them, to punish the guilty for theyr saluation: Wherefore those to whome such a gift is not graunted ought to abstayne from excercising the same.
Wherefore the vse of the power of euil spirites is of two sortes, wherof one is with authority, and that belongeth chiefelye vnto god, also to the Apostles, and to the sayntes of the primitiue church. The other by compact & obedience which is vtterly forbidden mē. For what participatiō cā ther be of the light with darknesse, & of god with
Belial? And for that cause the sorcerers which beleue thē, can not be excused, yet they ar by the law condēned guilty of superstition & idolatry. And it is not to be thought, but that god vpō very iust causes, and to vs most profitable hath forbidden these things to be done.
Why God forbad men to vse the helpe of the deuil to worke myracles. For he prouideth that we should not be deceaued, and that by those meanes we shoulde not be throwne hedlonge into destruction. For therto at the length commeth the fellowshippes with Sathan. For the deuil is a lier, & the father of lyes, and he is also a murtherer, euen from the beginning, as Christ hath taught. Wherfore let this be a firm sentēce, which the scholemen also in the 2. boke of
Sentences. Disti. 8: & among them
Thomas especially, so that not only the old fathers haue ratified, that if there be any thing to be desired, which is aboue the faculty of mā, the same ought to be desired onely of God, which thing they which do not, they fall into Apostacy from faith,
The inconstancy of certayn fathers and especially of scholemen. worshipping creatures insteede of god. I would to god both the olde fathers and the schole men, would haue abidden constant in it, who afterwarde (forgettinge themselues I cannot tell how) consented to the inuocations of sayntes, beynge nowe deade, and haue instituted exorcistes or cuniurers to the bodyes & reliques of saints, which being adorned with no peculier gift of miracles, do with most seuere threatninges, and very imperiously adiure deuils: desiringe of the sayntes, whych are now dead, to driue out euill sprites out of those that be possessed.
But those spirytes if sometymes they gooe oute, as they are bidden they doo not that agaynste etheyr wyll, but they dyssemble obedience, therewith to establyshe idolatrye. And it is no lesse pleasaunte to them to possesse soules, then to vere bodies.
Augustine in his x. booke
de ciuitate dei, the .xi.
Augustine. chapt. telleth that
Porphyrius wrote vnto
Anebuntes, that certayne sorcerers were so accustomed with threatninges to feare deuils, that they said: That if they would not do those things which they wer cōmaunded to do, they would break down heauen & earth, and so presse and punish them. Who seeth not here the subtelties of the deuil, which faineth that he feareth such folish and ridiculous cuniuratiōs, as they call them. But of this we haue spoken very largely
I thinke it good nowe to returne to examine the laste parte of our difinicion, wherin it was sayd, that miracles are therfore done to establish fayth. And that seemeth to be very much against this particle, that we ought not lightly to geue credite vnto miracles, forasmuch as they may shew occasion of erring. And ther hence is deriued no sure kind of argument, but an argument very daungerous. And that is proued by manye places. First the Lorde sayth in the .24. chapter of Math. that the false prophetes in the latter time shall by sygnes so deceiue men, that if it were possible euen the very electe should be deceiued, which selfe same sentence
Paul to y
e
Thessal. more amply prosecuted. By the boke of
Exodus also we learne that we may not beleue signes. For the sorcerers of
Pharao did for a little space worke the same signes which
Moses did. In
Deutr. also it is commaū ded that we must not beleue a prophet, although he worke signes, if he moue vs to idolatry. Wherfore seing miracles may be wrought, aswel for the defending of false doctrine,
Augustine. as for true, they ought not to be counted mete to confirm faith. Yea and
Augustine in his 10. boke
de ciuitate dei the .16. chapt. writeth: If aūgels require sacrifices to be offred vnto them, and worke signes: and contrarywise, if other shall testify that we must sacrifice onely vnto God, and yet working no miracles: we must beleue them and not the other. The same
Augustine contra Faustum de Manichaeis sayth:
Miracles ar not sufficient to cōfirm faith. Signes ye worke none, wherby we should beleue you, yea and although ye shoulde woorke them, yet shoulde wee not beleue you. Wherfore we must know that miracles in very deede are not sufficient to confyrme fayth: for it is before all thinges nedefull to iudge of that doctrine, whiche is brought: and that by the testimony of the holy scriptures, wherewith if it do agree, we must beleue it euen without signes. But if miracles be added, the beleuers are still the more established: and they whiche yet haue not beleued, are made at the least more attentife, and the way to beleue is opened vnto them
Miracles and sacramentes ar after a sort likeMiracles also ar after a sort like vnto sacraments: for both of them ar added as certayne seales vnto promises. And euen as miracles profite not, vnlesse firste there be a respect had vnto the doctrine: so also the Sacramentes bring no commodity but much hurt, vnlesse they be receaued with a pure fayth. Both of them serue to confyrme faythe, but neither of them are sufficient by themselues. For they are blessed, and to be praysed in dede, which beleue without the helpe of miracles. Our Lord sayth: Blessed ar they which haue not sene, and haue beleued. And yet for all that the confyrmation of signes is not to be contemned.
Why the lorde sometimes forbad that his miracles should be published. Paraduenture thou wilt say: Seing they are so profitable to confyrme fayth, why did the Lorde in
Math. the .9. and .11. and in manye other places forbidde that they shoulde be published? There were many causes thereof, he woulde firste haue his doctrine preached, and afterward miracles shoulde followe. But if he had permitted certayne whome he healed, strayghtwaye to haue published abroade that which he had done, then should not doctrine haue bene ioyned with that spreading abroade of the miracle, forasmuch as they were not yet instructed in godlynes. He did it also, least he shoulde seeme to be infected with-vayne desyre of worldly glory. Therefore he would by hys own example withdraw vs from the same. Farther none knew better then himself, what they wer whome he healed. And he woulde not suffer euerye one to publishe and preache his miracles. Wherfore he prohibited diuers, that they should not do it. Moreouer he saw that by the vayne and naked preachinge of miracles, it woulde come to passe, that the light and fickle vulgare people shoulde not be led vnto the sincere fayth, but rather to appoynte vnto him worldly honours, which he coueted not. And this to be true the .6. chap. of Iohn declareth, where it is written, that the people bicause they receaued breade of him, woulde haue made him a kinge. Lastly, he would not stirre vp agaynst himself the enuy and woodnes of the high Priestes, Scribes, and Pharesies more then oportunity of time woulde suffer.
[Page 130] Wherfore in
Luke the .9. chap. when in hys transfiguracion he had shewed vnto his Apostles a shew of his glory, he cōmaunded thē, that they should not at that time publishe abrode that which they had seene. The same thinge also he commaunded, when demaunding what men sayd of himself, he had wroong from
Peter the true confession, wherin he affirmed that he was the sonne of God, he commaunded I say that they should not tel vnto other that Iesus was the Messias. For they wer not then so confirmed, that if they had spread such things abroad, they could in disputing haue confirmed the same by apt testimonies. Wherfore he thought meete that they shoulde tary till they were more fully instructed. He would not haue the truth vtterly to be vnspoken of, but yet to the openinge of the same, he chose a time conueniēt. Wherfore it is not therby rightly gathered that myracles are of no force to confirme fayth, bycause Christ sometimes forbad that they should be published, forasmuch as that commaundement of the Lorde belonged onely for the taking of better occasions, and not perpetually to keepe silence. Lastlye there is an other thinge,
Whi
[...]
[...] goeth b
[...] rac
[...]s or
[...] me
[...]h after. whiche seemeth to be agaynste that article of the definicion: For it seemeth that faythe cannot be confyrmed by miracles, when as they require it, and wil haue it to goe before them. For in
Math. the 13. chapter it is written, that Christe, bicause of the incredulitye of his owne citizens, wroughte in a manner no miracles. And
Marke addeth, that he could not. Wherfore it shuld seme that it is rather to be said, that miracles ar constituted and stablished by fayth, when as if it be not present (as the Euangelistes say) miracles can not be done. I aunswere, that they which by prayers will obtayn miracles, must after an accustomed & iust maner be endewed with faith: for vayne are those prayers counted which leane not vnto fayth. But if a miracle be geuen, there is nothing letteth, but that fayth whiche is begon, maye by it be stirred vp & confyrmed. Farther this is for assured, that god is not letted, but that he can also geue miracles vnto the vnbeleuers,
God sometime geueth miracles vnto the vnbeleuers. yea he hath oftentimes geuē miracles vnto them. Vndoubtedly
Pharao and the
Egiptians were infidels. And who knoweth not but that there were vnto them very many miracles wrought by
Moses? Christ likewise did then shew the miracle of his resurrection, when all men in a manner dispayred of his doctrine and truth. Wherfore nothing letteth but that faith may by miracles be confirmed. And for that cause as we haue said, they which contend by prayers to obteyne signes, do labour in vayn, except they beleue. Bicause prayers without fayth are of no value wyth God, which Christ hath manifestly taught in
Math. the .17. For when his disciples could not heale the lunatike child, when the cause thereof was demaunded, he sayd, that it came of theyr incredulity: whose aunswere openly declareth,
Against the coniurations wich are made al the sepulchres or graues of the deade. what we muste iudge of those cuniurers, which at the sepulchers of saincts and at reliques, go about to expell deuels. All thinges are there faynedly done. Deade men are without faythe called vpon, and the deuill playeth to gether with idolatrers, and faineth that he beleueth, to the end that pernicious worshippynges may be retayned: whiche is hereby manifest, bycause those Exorcistes are both men moste vnpure, and also they do all things there without fayth.
Origene vpon the .17.
Origene chapt. of
Mathew hath very wel written agaynst this abuse. If at any time (sayth he) we must be by these holpē, we must not speak with the spirite, eyther in adiuring hym, or commaunding hym, as though he hearde vs, but onelye let vs perseuere in geuinge our selues to prayers and fastinges. These words spake he, euen then when the inuocation of the dead, and worshipping of reliques were not vsed in the church. What would he at thys day say if he should se the madnes of our times? But to return vnto y
e hed of the doubt, I iudge that fayth goeth before miracles, as touching those whych by prayers obtayne them, but not as concerning those whych stand by, and haue not yet beleued the preaching which they haue heard.
Wyth what faith euill men are endewed, by whome god worketh miracles.But let vs see by what meanes miracles may sometimes be done by wicked men. For some shall say in the latter time: Lord, haue not we cast out deuils in thy name, haue not we prophesied &c? Vnto whome shalbe aunswered: Verelye I say vnto you, I know you not. They vndoubtedly in working miracles, as it seemeth credible, added prayers, when as for all that they wanted fayth, neyther were they iustified, neyther pertayned they to the kingdome of God. Wherefore that seemeth not to be firme, that prayers poured out without faith are not herd. But we must note y
e ill men which by prayers obteined miracles, wer not vtterly w
tout fayth.
Three kyndes of fayth. For there ar three kinds of faith foūd. For there is a faith whych consisteth of humayne opinion and perswasion, wherby those thinges which ar written in the holy scriptures ar beleued to be no lesse true then the histories of
Liui, Suetonius, & those things which ar now written of the new Ilandes. This kinde of fayth, as touching many thinges, is common to the Turks & the Iewes. Ther is an other faith, wherby we being stirred vp by the heauenly inspiration, do liuely & with efficacy cleaue to the promise of the mercy of God. By this faith certaynelye is attayned iustification. Lastlye the thirde fayth is called the fayth of miracles, whereby we are neither chaunged, nor made the better, euen by a heare: forasmuch as it is the mouinge of the spirite of God, wherewith men are stirred vp to desire miracles,
Myracles are not alwayes wrought at the prayers of wicked men. vtterly beleuing that it is the wil of God, that they should be done, and that which is required, should haue successe. Wherfore whilest they leane vnto this fayth, sometimes they obteyne, that whiche they desire: whiche I therefore speake bycause not alwayes they doo so, neither are they alwaies illustrate with that inspiration.
Chrisostome.If so be that thou wilt demaūd, how this kind of fayth can be proued, let
Chrisostome aunswere, which vpon the .17. chapter of
Mathew maketh mencion of it. There Christ sayd: If you haue fayth as much as is a grain of mustard sede, you shall say vnto this mountayne: throw thy self into the sea, and it shall do it. In expounding these wordes, this father sayth: bycause at this day these thinges ar not done in the church, shal we therfore say that Christiās are destitute of faith? God forbid, that we should iudge so euil of the people of God. The fayth which iustifieth, is present, but that which is called the fayth of miracles, hath now ceased. This kind of faith also is shewed by the words of y
e apostle in the .i. epistle to the
Corrinthians, wher he sayth: Although I haue all faith, so that I can remoue mountaynes, and haue not charitye, I am nothinge. Neyther let that trouble vs, in that he sayth
Al. For that distribution is to be drawn vnto the faith of miracles. But that is more manifestly perceaued by the same epistle, wher the Apostle maketh menciō of fre gratious gifts, saying: to some is geuē the word of wisedome, to other the word of knowledge, to some the power to heale, and to other some fayth in the same spirite &c. That fayth can not in thys place be vnderstand, wherby we are iustified. For it is not rekened among giftes, which ar priuately distributed to some, but is commō to all true Christians. Now as I think it appeareth, by what meanes they whiche are not iustified by theyr prayers, doo sometimes obtayne miracles, namely bycause they ar not destitute of euery kind of faith. But now we haue sufficiently spoken of this fyrst question.
Whither it be lawfull for godly men to desire miracles.Now must we see, whither it be lawfull for godlye menne to desire miracles. These reasōs they vse to alledg which seme to be against it. First because god in that thing should be tempted: and that doth the law of god vtterly forbid. Yea & our sauiour wyth this aunswere reproued the deuill: Thou shalte not tempt the Lord thy God. And the Hebrewes ar reprehended for this by name, bicause thei tempted god in the wildernes. The son of god also, when the Pharesies sayde, mayster, we will see a signe of thee, sayd: This froward and adultrous nation seketh a sign and a sign shall not be geuen them &c. And
Achab otherwyse a wicked king, pretended a shew of righteousnes, saying that he would not tēpt God, and therefore he detracted to desyre a sygne.
Vnto the question I answere: That after a sort it is lawful to desire signes, and the same also after a sorte is vnlawfull. The first parte of the sentence is thus proued: When holy men desire, as touching any vnaccustomed vocation to be made more assured of y
e wil of God, & are afrayd, least peraduenture they should be deceaued (for as concerning it they haue nothing for certayn in the holy scriptures and we must not lightly beleue men and angels in those thinges: for euil angels vse sometimes to be trāsformed into angels of light) when I say they are troubled with such doubt, & the will is ready, yea desirous to obey the commaū dement of the Lord, if than they desire to be confirmed by some signe, these godly men cā not be accused of tempting of god, or of rashnes. For who soeuer in those cases desireth those thinges, whiche god vseth to offer, he departeth not from the right way. No man is ignoraunt, but that to
Achab was offred a signe, that he might be cōfirmed of the promises offred him by
Esay. Wherfore to desire those thinges whiche god sometymes geueth and frely offreth, ought not to be prohibited as vnlawfull. The thing wanteth no examples.
Moses when he had nede of the helpe of god, oftentymes in the desert obteyned miracles for the people of god. And to confirme the doctrine of truth, both
Helias and
Helizeus, desired of god that life might be restored vnto the children of their hostes. And to the same end Christ sayd: But that ye should know that the sonne of man hath power to forgeue sinnes, he turned to the man sicke of the palsey and sayd:
For what causes godly men may desire miracles. Take vp thy bed, rise and walke. Wherfore miracles are desired of holy men, and that iustly, either that they may be made the more assured of their vocation, or to helpe a great and vrgent necessity, or els to beare witnesse vnto sound doctrine. And alwayes, when they desire miracles to these endes,
Cautions in desiring of miracles. let them desire the same not of any creatures, but of god onely, and in asking them let them vse a meane: for they declare that they will or desire nothyng, but that whiche is agreable vnto the will of god.
Nowe on the contrary parte let vs consider after what maner miracles are vnworthely and vniustly desired. First there are some,
When it is not lawfull to desire miracles. whiche therfore desire miracles, bicause they are not wel persuaded of the power, goodnesse and prouidence of god, neither seeke they any thing els, but to haue a trial of those things. Neither are they contente with the doctrine of the holy scriptures, which manifestly and amply teache all these thinges. Wherefore iustly are they to be reproued, for asmuch as they be ready rather to beleue miracles, than y
e worde of god. Wherfore
Abraham aunswered vnto that riche man whiche was tormented in flames of fire, whē he desired that
Lazarus might be sent vnto his brethren, that they also should not be thrust downe into the same punishementes: They haue
Moses and the Prophetes. By which wordes is manifestly declared, that we must rather beleue y
e holy scriptures, thā miracles. There ar other also, which for this cause desire miracles, that they may liue more pleasauntly as touching the flesh, and to satisfie their wicked lustes. Of which faulte the Hebrues are accused, bycause in the deserte, when very great aboundance of
Manna was ministred vnto them, they desired fleshe, that they might lyue the more pleasauntly in that wildernesse. Lastly, some desire miracles for this entent, to satisfie theyr vayne curiosity. For (as
Plinius hath sayd) y
e nature of mā is most gredy of new things.
Plinius. Wherfore they seme to desire miracles as playes and passetymes to sporte thē selues withal. In that maner looked
Herode for miracles of Christ: for when he was brought vnto him, he desired to fede and delite his curiosity with miracles. Nowe I suppose it is manifest, how it is forbidden to desire signes, and howe it is lawfull sometymes to desire them.
Now must we dissolue these thinges,
An answere to obiections. What it is to tempt god. which semed to be agaynst those thinges that we haue spoken. They which by the waye and maner already described do desire miracles, do not without doubt tempt God: forasmuch as that is nothing els, than of an vnbeleuing minde, and of rashnesse, to desire a triall of hys will
[Page] and power, whiche vice certainely is in the holy Scriptures iustly and worthily reproued. Wherfore, the Lord Iesus Christ, did not without iust cause reproue the deuil, when he would haue led him to haue throwen himself hedlong from y
e temple, whereby he myght be made the more assured of the beneuolence of God towardes him, when that by arte there was a playne way to discende by. The same sonne of god also did not vnworthily reprehend the Iewes as a frowarde and adulterous generation, vnto whom he therfore denied a signe, bycause they had already sene very many, yet they spoke euill of them al, and mocked Christ, in such sorte that they desired not euery kinde of miracle, but one from heauen, as thoughe they would not also deride signes from heauen: vndoubtedly theyr purpose tended to no other end, but to alienate y
e people from the Lord, although he had wrought wonderfull miracles. And as touching
Achaz the wicked king, I shall not nede to stande long about him: for he fayned that when he was called of y
e Prophet, he did very faithfully beleue, as thoughe he neded no miracle, whē as for all that he was altogether vnbeleuing, whiche the 2. booke of kinges manifestly declareth: for he sent vnto
Tiglathphalasar the king of the
Assirians, to deliuer him from the siege, so farre was he of from putting confidence in the Lord. And when God was not ignoraunt of his discease, he offred vnto hym the remedy of a miracle, and gaue him his choise, whiche for all that he of hypocrisie refused.
Obedience is the principall fruite of faith. If
Achaz had in very dede beleue god, he would not haue refused to obey, for asmuch as obedience is reckened among the principall fruites of faith.
Let vs (I pray you) with this wicked kyng conferre his most holy sonne
Ezechias. For he did not so, but to the end he myght be made the more assured of recouering health, he very modestly required a signe: vnto whō when
Esay y
e Prophet graūted his desire, willīg him to chuse whether he would haue y
e shadow of y
e sunne to be remoued forward, or turned backward, he tooke his choise, neither did he frowardly like his father w
tstād y
e miracle offred him by god. But wicked
Achaz added hipocrisie vnto infidelitie. For he considering that miracles are for two causes refused, either for that a man beleueth fully in god, neither hath nede of the ayde of miracles, or els for that he vtterly contemneth god, and passeth no thing at al of his aide, he would hide y
e latter disease wherof he was sicke, namely y
e cōtēpt of god: & he dissēbled vertue, wherof he was cleane voyde, namely a singular faith, as though he durst not tempt God. But for asmuch as God most perfectly knoweth the hart and the raynes, he reproued hym by the Prophete according to his deserte. What other thing is it to refuse a miracle offred of God, thā to repell the succor of the spirituall infirmitie? As he that is hunger storuen is to be accused if the refuse bread: so was he to be reproued, which reiected a medicine offred hym by god, whē as he knoweth, what euery one of vs nedeth, far better than we our selues can see. This is nowe sufficient as touching these things, whiche at the begynning of the question semed altogether to forbidde the askyng of miracles.
I know in dede there are some whiche thinke that miracles are vtterly not to be desired:
Augustine. but onely not to be refused when God offreth them. And they thinke that
Augustine maketh with them, whom (in his 4. booke
de Consensu Euangelist. and in his questiōs
super Genesin. Questiō 63) semeth to affirme thys thing. But if thou wilt obiect, that very many godly & holy men did it, and especially our
Gideon: they answere, that they were moued by the spirite of God to desire miracles: and therfore it was all one, as if God had frely offred signes vnto thē, and they of obedience shoulde haue receaued the miracles whiche were offered. But these things ought nothing to trouble vs, bycause
Augustine in the places alledged, doth not absolutly and simply prohibet to desire miracles, except they be desired to tempte god withall, or vpon some noughty occasion. Yea in the 63. question vpon
Genesis he sayth: When this is not rightly done, it pertayneth to the tempting of god. Let vs heare him rather in his 10. boke of Cōfessions the 35.
[Page 132] chap. where he sayeth: In religion also is temptyng of god, when signes and miracles are desired, to take a triall: Whiche thyng I also a litle before haue willed to be taken hede of. And I will easely graunt that the Sainctes required not miracles by the instinct of the fleshe, or prouokyng of humane reason: other wise their prayers had ben voyde and of none effect, for that (as
Paul testifieth) it behoueth, that y
e spirite do with vnspeakable groning pray for vs. But I thinke I haue now sufficiently spoken of the questions proposed.
¶The vii. Chapter.
1
THen Ierubbal (who is Gideon) rose vp early, and al the people that were with him, and pitched beside the well of Harod, so that the host of the Madianites was on y
e north side of thē in the valley by the hil of Moreh.
2 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideō: The people that are with thee, are to many for me to geue the Madianites into theyr handes, least Israell make theyr vaunt agaynst me, and say: myne owne hand hath saued me.
3 Now therfore proclayme in the eares of the people, and say: Who is timerous and fearefull? Let him returne, and departe early from mount Gilead. And there returned of the people 22000. & so 10000. remayned.
4 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideon: The people are yet too many: Bring them vnto the water, and I will try them for thee there. For of whom I say vnto thee: This man shall go with thee, the same shall go with thee: and of whomsoeuer I say vnto thee: This man shall not go with thee, the same shall not go.
5 So he brought the people to the water. And the Lorde sayd vnto Gideō, As many as lappe the water with theyr tongue, as a dogge lappeth them put by themselues: & euery one that shall bowe down hys knees to drinke, put a part.
6 And the number of them that lapped by putting their handes to their mouth were 300. mē: but all the rest of y
e people kneled downe vpon their knees to drinke water.
7 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideon, By these 300. men that lapped, will I saue you, and delyuer the Madianites into thine hand: and let all the other people go euery man to his place.
8 So the people tooke vitayles in theyr handes, and theyr trompettes, and he sent all the rest of the Israelites euery man vnto hys tente, and retayned the 300. men. And the host of Madian was beneath him in the valley.
As much as we can gather by the history, the host of
Gideon consisted of 32000. souldiers: whiche nomber although it may seme great, yet in comparison of the enemies it was but small. For they had 13500. men in campe, but of the 32000. souldiers of
Gideons, god chose onely 300, by whom he would geue the victory vnto the Israelites. This is a very smal number, that of euery thousand he toke only .x. But so god wrought. For there ar few good, said he. If in
Sodome there had ben onely x. men iust, the whole Citie had ben saued. The number of good men, thoughe it be small, yet it is of such force, that God for their sakes spareth the rest. Wherfore most true are the oracles, wherin it is sayd: Many are called, but few are chosen, and the remnauntes onely shalbe saued. But although God
[Page] allowed not so great a number, yet the acte of
Gideon is not to be condemned, which gathered it vnto himself: for he vsed that prudence, which was not cōtrary to the worde of god: yea if he had not collected an host, he might haue semed to tempt god, as he which had refused helpes prepared, and those iust helpes. Let vs remember that in humane actions there ar two notable daungers: One is of rashenesse,
Two verye great daūgers in humane actions. when we will not vse meanes and helpes set before vs. With which euill the Anabaptistes are greuously infected: for they will vse no weapons, and they abhorre from the offices of Magistrates. The other daunger is, least we attribute to much vnto humane and naturall aydes, whiche they do that trust to much in their workes. Of these two daungers the one
Gideon by himselfe auoydeth in collecting a sufficient great army: for in his enterprise he would not neglect an ordinary ayde of souldiers. And God prouideth that he should not fall into the other daunger: for from the multitude of those souldiers he withdrew the greatest parte.
Why God remoued so many from the hoste of Gideon. And why he did it, this reason he bringeth, bycause men do gladly vsurpe glory vnto thēselues, neither will they graunt any of it euen vnto God, as it is mete they should. Therfore he sayth that his will is, that euen as the victory should be geuen by hym, so also it should euidently appeare, to be graunted by hym.
Euen then also when by many souldiers we ouercome, god geueth the victory.Euen then also when many souldiers get the vpper hande, God geueth the victory: but that is not so manifest, as when with a litle host we ouercome our enemyes. God also fedeth vs, euen then when all thinges are aboundant and good cheape: but that is not so well perceaued, as when a great multitude is refreshed with foure or fiue loaues. And vndoubtedlye it is the power of God, when the gospel is defended and spread abrode by men very well learned and princes most stout. But it is not then so euident as when it is sowed by idiotes & power men, and that with great fruite, & incredible felicitie. Wherfore
Paul sayd: Brethren see to your vocation: not many noble men, not many mighty men, not many wise men are called, but god hath chosen the foolish, weake, and contēned things of the world, bycause he would not haue the Crosse of Christ and the power therof abrogated, but manifestly to appeare, that euen as
Ieremy commaunded, the strong man should not glory in his strength, nor the riche man in his riches, neither the wise man in his wisedome. God doth very wel agree with the Prophet, where he sayth to
Gideon, Least Israel boast against me. Who soeuer is proude bycause of the prosperity whiche he hath obteyned, y
e same man boasteth against god, and his doing is all one, as if he should chuse vnto himselfe an other god. God commaundeth a decree to be proclaymed, that they whiche were feareful, should returne home. No new thing is commaūded, for asmuch as that precept is found in
Deut. the 20.
That which is here commaunded it is also cō maunded in Deut. chap: where preceptes of warlyke affaires are very well set forth. First, the Israelites are commaunded, not to be afeard, when they see the weapons, horses, chariotes and multitude of their enemyes, bycause y
e Lord standeth on their side. Then it is ordayned, that the Priest should come forth amongest them, with a sermon, confirming the hartes of the souldiers, that they are the people of god, and therfore ought not they to feare their enemies. Farther it is commaunded, that they should be dismissed, which in that yeare had built an house, which had planted a vineard, and whiche had maried a wife. First, least if they should fal in the battaile, they should dye without tasting the fruite of their owne labours. Secondly (as I suppose) bycause such men haue a great affection vnto those thinges whiche they haue lately obteyned, and therfore they do litle good in the campes,
The cause of their feare whiche wer dismissed. when as their minde is at home. Lastly, that is also ordayned whiche the Lord nowe commaundeth, that as many as are not of a valiant courage, but feareful, should returne home, least by their feare they should daūt the courages of others. For oftentymes it happeneth, that by the feare of a fewe, which begyn to geue place vnto their enemyes, the rest of the camp, which otherwise are strong and valiant, do turne themselues to flight. Great is y
e number
[Page 133] of those whiche God refused, when as 22000. departed: But yet bycause God will haue men to acknowledge those things to be iust which he doth: therfore he maketh it euident, that al they which departed, were iustly dismissed, namely bycause they were fearefull.
R. Leui ben
[...] Gerischon. And
R. Leui Gerischon affirmeth that they were also euill men, for as muche as their feare proceded not of a sound and perfect conscience. They feared peraduenture, that the vengance and wrath of God towardes them was now at hand.
The profession also of Christian religion requireth strength,
In professiō of Christian religion we haue nede of greate strength. and that no common strength. And therefore the Lord sayd, that we must imitate hym, whiche would build a towre. For first he counteth with himselfe the charges, least afterward not beyng able to finishe the worke whiche he began, he be compelled to leaue it vnfinished. Also we must followe a kyng goyng on warfarre, whiche diligently weygheth with himselfe, with howe many thousand souldiers he may mete his enemyes. Neither is he mete for the kyngdome of heauen, whiche strayght waye pluketh his hande from the ploughe. And howe great a strength we haue nede in professing of Christ, the wordes of
Paul do manifestly declare, wherein he sayth: All they whiche will lyue godlyly in Christ Iesu, must suffer persecution. The same thyng also testifieth he, saying: Our battayle is not agaynst fleshe and bloud, but agaynst wicked spirites whiche dwell in the ayre. Wherefore we are not called vnto idlenesse, but to a most sharpe battayle, and therefore we haue nede of stoute and valiaunt courages.
What the bowyng of y
e knees signifieth. Neither is it sufficient for good souldiers to cast awaye feare out of theyr myndes, vnlesse also they be prompt and industrious. Wherefore the seconde tyme they are brought vnto the water, where yet the sluggishe are separated, which will not drinke, but bowing themselues on their knees. Those are they whiche pamper themselues, they can abyde no sorowe, and they are quickly ouercome. There were onely 300. whiche dranke with reaching their hande vnto their mouth, & they alone were ioyned vnto
Gideon. Here may we se, how god with drew frō
Gideon his captayne humanes aydes, not vndoubtedly to betray him, but therby to geue him a more noble victory. Wherfore when helpes of nature are taken away, then must strēgth of fayth remayne, wherewith we muste no lesse followe our vocation, then if they were present. Whiche thynge very many doo not, whiche strayght waye as soone as they see themselues destitute of humane helpes, they byd al pure doctrine farewell: when as for all that they ought to remember, that the power of God, whereby the blynde are made to see, the dead made a lyue, and the poore, blessed, nothyng dependeth of worldly helpes.
Concernyng the wordes of the historye two thynges are to be noted. The firste is, that the fearefull are commaunded to returne vnto
Gilead, whiche semeth not to be agreable vnto the place where they were. For they were not on this syde
Iordane, where mount
Gilead laye in the tribe of
Manasses, in the famely I saye of
Machir, but they were come into the lande of
Chanaan beyonde
Iordane. Wherefore we muste saye, that either there were two mountes so called: or that that whiche is written of mounte
Gilead, is to be referred vnto the begynnyng of those whiche departed awaye: as thoughe it should haue ben sayd, that they were sent awaye, whiche were borne in mounte
Gilead. These thinges doo certayne interpretors write, whiche whether they be true or false, it is not certayne. For we are ignoraunt whether
Gideon with his host passed ouer
Iordane or no. Farther we must note that thys worde
Tserath signifieth to purge: whereby the Historye sheweth, that the hoste shoulde be purged of the Souldiers that were dismissed, bycause (as I aboue mencioned) there were none remoued from that multitude of Souldiers, but suche as were vnwoorthy. Wherefore they coulde not iustly complayne of the iustice of God.
Iosephus. I very much meruayle of
Iosephus, whiche affirmeth that God woulde haue none to go forth
[Page] with
Gideon, but such as were fearefull, that therby the victorye myght be the more noble, and referred to be receaued onely of God. And he sayth, that they which bowed their knees and dranke, were valiant men, and trusted to much in their owne strength. And for that they nothing passed vpon their enemyes, they kneled downe without any feare and dranke: but they which stoode and reached theyr handes to theyr mouth and lapped water out of them, those sayth he were of a cowardishe minde, as they whiche for feare of their enemyes durst not frely euen drinke. But this fayned thing very much disagreeth with the history, bycause God commaunded to be proclaymed by expresse wordes, that the fearefull should depart, and he would haue hys precept obserued whiche he gaue in
Deut. Wherefore it semeth not that he would adioyne timetous folkes vnto
Gideon. But
Iosephus in hys narration omitteth the commaundement that the fearefull should be dismissed, either bycause it was out of his memory, or els for what other cause I can not tell.
An Allegory.Here myght be annexed diuers Allegoryes concernyng the drinkyng of the waters. For by those some vnderstande pleasures, and some afflictions. And vndoubtedly they are not apte for the kingdome of God, whiche study to fill themselues with pleasures and delightes of this worlde. Neither are they commended, which suffer themselues altogether to be troubled with aduersities. For as they are praysed whiche vse this worlde, as thoughe they vsed it not: so also are they commended, whiche in their minde do not so greuously take sorowes and aduersityes as the Ethnikes doo whiche haue no hope, and are destitute of a perfect consolation of faith.
The history mentioneth that the men which
Gideon tooke vnto him, namely the 300. had trumpettes, whiche ought not to be maruelous. For the summe of the souldiers at the beginning was 32000. Wherfore there might be among euery thousand souldiers .x. trumpeters. And therfore it was easy to fynd .300. trumpettes there.
Augustine.
Augustine vpon this place writeth, that
Abrahā (as it is read in the boke of
Genesis) armed 318. of his bondemen, against the three kings which had led
Lot awaye prisoner, and thereby, he gathereth that he had yet more ayde then
Gideon. Which is so much the truer, bycause besides seruauntes and bondmen,
Abraham had
Abner, Mambre, and
Escholl to helpe him.
9 And the same night the Lord sayd vnto him: Arise, get the down into the host: for I haue deliuered it into thine hande.
10 But if thou feare to go downe, then go thou and Purah thy lad downe to the host.
11 And thou shalt hearken what they say, and afterward shall thine handes be strong, and thou shalt go downe to the hoste. Then went he downe, and Purah his lad vnto the out side of the souldiers, that were in the host.
12 And Madian, & Amalek, and all the childrē of Kedem, lay in the valley, like grashoppers in multitude, & their camels were without nomber: as the sande which is by the sea side for multitude.
13 Gideon I say came, and beholde, a man tolde a dreame vnto his neighbour, and sayd: Behold I dreamed a dreame. And lo a cake of barley bread tombled from aboue into the hoste of Madian, & came euen to a tente, and smote it, that it fell: it ouerturned it, I saye, and the tente fell downe.
14 And his neighbour aunswered and sayde: This is nothyng els saue the sword of Gideon the sonne of Ioas a man of Iscaell: God hath geuen into his handes Madian and all the host.
[Page 134]15 When Gideon heard the dreame tolde, and the interpretation of the same, he worshipped. And he returned vnto the hoste of Israell and sayde: Vp, for the Lorde hath deliuered into your handes the host of Madian.
Gideon is also confirmed by the wordes of his aduersaryes: he had withdrawē from hym humane aydes, and therfore least he should be smitten with feare, he prepared a confirmation for him after a certayne wonderfull sorte. God, whiche made vs knoweth right well the nature of mans fleshe and reason. We oftentyme bragge that we put no cōfidence in prosperous things, when they are present: but when we are destitute of them, we wonderfully waxe colde, and there we fele how we deceaued our selues and other. We deserue assuredly for our incōstancy (I wil not say infidelity) vtterly to be abiected: but the heauenly father, as he is good, breaketh not a brused rede, and quēcheth not smoking flaxe, which we now see in
Gideon. He sendeth him to the host of his enemies to be cōfirmed, and he vseth y
e
Madianites, the enemies of y
e Israelites for an oracle. And it is not maruelous: for if in the old time he vsed wood & gold in y
e tabernacle, at the arke, I say, & mercy seate, to geue answers, what should let but that he may vse men also vnto that office? And without doubt the beginning of the victory was,
The beginning of a victorye, is to knowe the feare of the enemyes. to manifest vnto
Gideon the feare of his enemyes. For in warfare nothing more profiteth, then to know the feare of the enemyes: and to knowe the same at the length for assured, very much pertayneth to warlike pollecies.
And in manifestyng of it, God obserueth his olde accustomed manner. Longe before that by
Rahab of
Iericho he shewed vnto
Iosuah, that the hearts of the enemyes were excedingly smitten with feare, & now euē by the
Madianites thēselues he teacheth
Gideon how fearefull they were. Neyther among other testimonyes (as the Rhetoricians say) are there any of more strength,
A notable example of obediēce. then the testimonyes of the enemyes. Wherfore when
Gideon heard euen of his enemyes how they wer affected, he doubted not of the successe of the battayle. Here is set forth a notable example of obedience. For
Gideon was deadly hated of the
Madianites, bycause he had now collected an host agaynst them, and yet beyng commaunded to go to their tentes he obeyed. And if he had ben afrayde, there was no other companion graunted him, then
Purah his lad. Wherfore seyng he durst take vpon hym so great a thing, it is to be thought that he was illustrate with no small fayth. Neither can he iustly be reproued of vanity, as though he tooke hold of dreames, for asmuch as he obeyed the worde of God.
Hereby also may we learne,
Vnto the wicked sometimes are geuen true dreames and the interpretacions of them. that dreames of prophecieng are by God geuen vnto enemies of godlynesse, and to that nation, which afflicted the holy people & the Churche: and this is not the first tyme. For vnto an Ethnike kyng, namely vnto
Pharao were fatte and leane kine, full and empty eares of corne, shewed by God in dreames. Vnto the baker also and butler, were shewed thinges y
t should come to passe, & afterward,
Nebuchad-nezar, whiche led away y
e Israelites captiues, saw twise dreames y
t had significations. But this is more meruelous, the dreame which is here declared, nedeth no
Ioseph or
Daniel for an interpreter. For y
t which the souldier by y
e inspiratiō of god dreamed, his fellow souldier expounded. Wherfore god gaue vnto vngodly men, both a true dreame & also a faithful interpretatiō therof. And y
e confirmeth, y
e fre giftes of grace are cōmon both to y
e godly & to y
e vngodly, wherfore it is not mete y
t any should boast of thē. For they testify not the holynesse of men, but onely the liberall bountifulnesse of God.
By it also is declared the wisedome of god, & his incōprehensible power,
God cā vse the moste vilest thinges to the saluatiō of his children. that he can to y
e saluatiō of his vse not only y
e enemies, but also al maner of thing, yea the vilest. For what is vayne & of lesse reputation than dreames? & yet for the saluation of y
e elect, they serue y
e wil of god. Nothing semed vnto y
e Ethnikes more ridiculous thē circūcisiō: wherfore y
e Iewes were euery where called of thē
Apellites
[Page] &
Recubites, & yet neuerthelesse by it God confirmed his couenant with the fathers. These elemēts also, bread, wyne, & water, are very cōmon things if they be cōsidered by thēselues, in which things for al that Christ hath cōmended vnto vs Sacramentes of most great value. Let vs reioyse therfore that we haue such a God, that can conuert all kinde of things to the saluation of his children. And agayne let vs counte the vngodly (as they are in very dede) for most vnhappy, when as of their owne they receaue damage, so that not onely of their enemyes, and they are wonderfully hurte euen of euery thing most vile.
As touching the Hebrew wordes, they translate
Tsallil for noise, and sound: for it is deriued of this verbe
Tsalal which is to sound, to make a noyse, or to ryng, as mettall doeth. Farther
Tsalath signifieth to roste. For the barley loafe, which is now entreated of, semed to be baked vpon the coales, out of whiche came a wonderfull noyse: & therfore this word
Tsallil is transfered hither. But I meruayle,
Augustine. wherfore
Augustine, writing vpon this place, maketh mencion that there was a table: I thinke it was false in the translacion which he vsed. But the Allegory
Iosephus manifestly expoundeth.
Iosephus. In Allegorye. In generall (sayeth he) barley bread is vile and despised. And in all
Asia no people are of lesse estimation than the Hebrues, whiche now begin to sound & to make a noyse, bycause they had now raysed an host against them, and made
Gideon theyr capitaine. In that this loafe by his tombling semed with great violence to ouerthrow their tentes, it manifestly foreshewed that the hoste of the
Madianites and
Amalekites should be deliuered vnto
Gideon and to the Hebrues. This is the Allegory of the dreame, and a most true interpretation therof.
Why Gideon was more confirmed by the dreame then by by miracles.
Gideon being thus confirmed, departed. But in that he was more confirmed by this dreame, then he was by the former miracles, it is not to be counted for absurd, bycause neither miracles, nor dreames by them selues can confirme doubtfull myndes, but they do it onely then, when God by his spirite maketh them of efficacy, whiche he bestoweth sometymes to these, & sometymes to other, accordyng to his will. Wherfore it commeth to passe, that they whiche sometymes by miracles are not perswaded, may by dreames be drawen: and agayne they whiche by dreames beleue not, may with miracles be conuerted. For God can freely geue power and efficacy vnto those outwarde thinges, accordyng to his will.
¶Of Dreames.
Ethnike authors.
The opinion of the Peripatetikes.BVt now must we intreate of dreames: and first we will see what may be affirmed of them by naturall reason: and afterwarde howe much we must attribute vnto them by the worde of God. As touchyng the firste,
Aristotle, Hippocrates, and
Galene, also other famous Philosophers haue written many things, and amongest them
Aristotle in his litle booke
de Diuinatione per Somnium (if so it be his booke, althoughe we can not doubt but that it is wytty and learned) sayeth first, that this kynde of diuination semeth not vtterly to be abiected, bycause of the common sorte very much is attributed vnto it: and those thynges whiche are commonly receaued of all men, can not vniuersally be false. Hereunto he addeth, that there are very many dreames, of whiche an apte and mete reason may be geuen: whiche (as experience teacheth) deceaue not men, but haue their successe. Therefore it is not mete that we should despise all manner of diuination by dreames. Howbeit we must receaue it warely, for that it is very heard to geue causes thereof, bycause nature in this parte woorketh very obscurely.
Aristotle thinketh not that dreames are sent of God. And
Aristotle thinketh not that dreames are sent of God. For if (sayeth he) they should be sent of hym, he would geue them to good and wyse men. But it is not so. For foolishe and euill men for the most parte obteyne this faculty: beastes also do dreame: And who will contende that God geueth diuinatiō vnto thē? Neither dreames which are occupied about the phantasye
[Page 135] of such as slepe are to this end geuen, that therby they should foretell things to come. Farther if god should geue dreames, he would geue them rather in the day time, that men might the diligentlier behold them. Neyther can we easely se why he should choose the night vnto him for that purpose. And lastly forasmuch as god is not enuious, he woulde not so obscurelye admonishe them, whome he would instruct of thinges to come, but he would shewe them manifestly and opē ly. But dreames are so obscure, that for the interpretation of them we muste go vnto prophetes, and southsayers. These thinges are in a maner gathered all out of
Aristotle, wherby he vtterly transferreth the thinge from god vnto nature, as though the reasons of dreames should from thence be sought for. But I wyl in treat of that afterward when I come to the doctrine of the scripture. Nowe will I declare his opinion as touching this thinge.
Dreames sayth he ar either signes or causes,
The Peripatetikes exposiciō of dreames. or els cōpared vnto those things whych are signified rashely or by chaunce. Euery one of these thre members is thus expounded, dreames he sayth are signes sometimes of the affections of the body or mind. For by those very often are declared,
Formes ar moued accordinge to the diuersity of the humors. which humors do beare rule in the body, abounde, and offend. For accordinge to the quality of nature, and tē pering of humors preuaylyng in the body, are formes & images moued. Where choler aboūdeth, are sene flambes, fires, burning coles, lightnings, brawlings, and other of that sorte. If melancholy get the vpper hand, smokes, deepe darkenesse, all things almost blacke, filthy thinges, dead bodyes, & such like do offer themselues. But fleume stirreth vp images of showrs, raynes, riuers, waters, hayl, ise, and such things as haue aboundant moistnes ioyned with coldnes. By blood ar moued sights that ar fayre, bright, white, pleasaunt, and are like vnto the common purenes and vsuall forme or face of things. Neither do the phisiciōs contemne these things, yea rather (as
Galene and
Hipocrates teach) they enquire very diligently of the sick, of thē: bycause therby they may vnderstand the temperāce of those humors which lye inwardly hidden.
Why forms ar more sene sleeping then wakyng. But the cause why they which are on slepe, & not they which are waking, do by sight fele the nature of these mocions, is this: bicause at the beginning they are little, & when we ar waking, the sense of them flieth frō vs. For by strōger mocions of outward things, which appear before our eyes, we ar drawn an other way, but being on slepe we cesse frō outward labours, & ar voyd from the course of grosse sensible things. Wherfore the sightes and images, which are by the humors continually moued, are better comprehended of the fansy when we are on sleepe, then when we are wakinge. And that whē we slepe we far better fele smalthings, then we do being waking: hereby it appeareth, bycause we thinke that noyses, be they neuer so small, are great thunders. And if any swete fleame sticke peraduenture vnto the tounge or roofe of the mouth, it semeth to vs that we taste hony, sugar, sweete wines, and pleasant meates, yea sometimes we thinke that we largely eate, and aboundantlye drinke. Wherfore those mocions of humors which are small, are in slepe shewed to be as it were wonderfull greate: for whiche cause Physicions do hereby know very many beginninges of diseases.
Dreames also are certayn signes of the affections of the minde,
Dreames ar also signes of the affectiōs of the minde. as of couetousnes, hope, ioy, and mirth, and also of qualityes. Wherfore fearfull persons do se other maner of things then they do, which ar bold: so do they which ar couetous se other thinges, then they whych are in hope: also the learned are wont to haue farre contrary dreames, to the dreames of the rude people or artificers. For the mynd also when we slepe, is occupied aboute those thynges, wherein when we are wakinge, we are either daylye, or els verye often busyed. There is an other thynge also dilygentlye to bee obserued (as
Galene dooth verye well admonyshe) that there are certayne kyndes of meates,
Galene. whyche beynge naturallye cholerike, melancholike, or fleumatik, do by theyr quality, or about the phantasy
[Page] of the sleepers moue images and formes, which ar agreable with those humors, although the temperature of bodies of them which slepe dooe not of themselues offend in these humors. Which thing also the phisicion ought to obserue concernynge dreames, namely to see what meat the sick man did vse. Wine also (as
Aristotle teacheth) beinge immoderatelye dronke, doth in dreames engender misformed Images.
When a dreame is a sign it is referred vnto a cause, namely vnto the humors abounding, which humors it signifieth. It maye also be called a signe of some euent to come, bycause from the same cause, that is, from the humors whiche are signified, may be caused eyther sicknes or health. Wherefore a dreame, as it is a signe of an humor, so also is it a token of an effect, which is produced of it. For from the self same cause, namely from the humor, springeth both a dreame, and also a discease. Howbeit they are not conuerted, for sicknes or health are not signes of dreames.
Dreames are somtimes causes of y
e things which we do.
But now let vs see, how dreames may somtimes be called the causes. That is then, when any man by his dreame is perswaded, eyther to do, or to trye any thing, as if a man be made whole of the sicknes of the splen, for that that he was let bloud in the vtward side of his hād, for so was he taught to do in hys dreame. And now and then it happneth vnto the learned, y
t they find those things wherof they are in doubt in the same bokes, where in theyr dreame they thought they had found or red them.
Dreames sometime by chanse resemble those thinges which happen.
But now let vs consider the third mēber of the distinction which we brought, namely when dreames do rashly or by chaunce signify those things which afterward do happē. That taketh place in those things, whose cause is not in vs, but rather distant, and far of, as if a man should see a victory, or a murther to happē in hostes far distant from him, or any man that is absent exalted to very greate dignity. These thinges say the
Peripatitikes are ioyned together by chaunce: neither canne they be conferred together, eyther as causes, or as signes. Euen as if when we are talking of any body, the same man paradueuture come in the mean while, we say
Lupus est in fabula, whē as yet the same mencion making of him, was neyther the cause, nor signe of hys commyng. So therfore these thinges are sayd to be ioyned together rashlye, bycause both they come by chaunce, and also they seldome haue successe: for this is the nature of things comming by chaunce, to happen seldome.
Who they be which naturally oftentimes se tru dreamesFarther,
Aristotle hath taught, who they be, which aboue other foretell many things in dreames. And the same be chiefly attributeth vnto idle persons & such as ar euer pratling, & thē to such as ar melancholike & phrantike, which are depriued both of sences and minde. He seemeth also to ascribe somewhat vnto kinsfolkes and friendes. For these kind of men haue very many dreames when they slepe. For pratlers and idle persons are wholy voyde of cogitations, wherefore they at inwardly fylled with images and formes. The melancholike also by reason of the power and nature of melancholy, do dreame very many thinges. Farther, they ar very much geuen vnto cogitatiōs. The phrantike also, bicause their mind is void both of the knowledge of the outward senses, and also of the vse of reason: therfore they ar vtterly geuen to imaginations. Lastly, frends do for that cause se many things of their frends in theyr dreames, bicause they ar very much careful and pensiue for them. Al these men now rehearsed, are wont by dreames to foretell many thinges, bycause in diuerse dreames and in a manner infinite, it is not possible, but that some true thinges happen sometymes. They whyche the whole day excercise themselues in shootynge, do much oftner bit the marke, then they which do very seldom shoote. And they which play al the day at dyse or tables, do much oftener throw good castes, then they which little or seldome vse that kinde of play.
Howbeit we must vnderstand y
t those signes, which ar attributed to dreames,
[Page 136] as touching the fyrst kynde alredy declared, are not necessary,
Of dreames which ar signs there is no necessity of the effectes to be gathered. for asmuch as they may be letted. And yet this hindreth not but that they may be signs. For this is so also in the clouds, which vndoubtedly ar signes of rain, when as for al y
t sometymes they are discipated by the wind before it rayn. And vrine hath tokens either of sicknes or helth, when yet the effect may be letted by vehementer causes, & the same also happeneth of the pulses. Yea and those counsels, which we haue appoynted, and which with great deliberation decree to do, very oftentimes are not accomplished, bycause some other thinges happen betwene, wherby we can go no farther: which self same thinge if it happen in dreames, it is no maruayle, forasmuche as they are signes of thinges not perfecte, but rather of the beginninges of thinges, and those weake and feable mouinges of humors maye yet be easely letted of many other causes.
Democritus thus expoundeth those dreames,
Democritus. which resemble thinges cōming by chaunce, and farre distante: There are alwayes (saythe he) defluctions from things themselues, which ar caried to the bodies of those that slepe, and do affect them with the quality and symilitude which they bring with them. And y
e same he affirmeth to be for two causes more felt sleping then waking. First, bicause y
e ayre by night is easlyer moued, as we see done, when the water is smitten with a little stone, very many circles ar with that stroke multiplied and driuē a great way, vnlesse some other contrary motion resiste it. But in the nighte the ayre is more quiet, then in the day time, bycause it is not driuen into sundry parts by the course of creaturs which moue themselfes. An other cause is, bicause they which slepe do easlier receaue light mouings. And lastly the same author also referreth not the causes of dreames to god.
Galene.
Galene also in his little booke whiche he wrote
de presagiis in somniorum, aboue other thinges maketh menciō of this, whē in dreames we se those thinges, which when we were waking, we neither did nor thought, they ought not to be referred neither to artes, neyther to qualities, or custome of those things, which happened when we wer wakinge, but vnto humors. This rule seemeth to tende to thys end, that we might vnderstand of what thinges dreames are to be counted signes. And he graunteth that these things are better knowen in the night, then in the day, bycause then the soul withdraweth it self into the inward parts wher it easilier feleth those things which ar ther.
An history of a certayn dream. And he maketh mencion of one who thought in his dreame he had a thigh of stone, which many thought to pertayn to his seruants, but w
tin a few dayes after that, his legge fel into a palsey. An other thought that he was vp to the throte in a cesterne full of bloude, out of which he could by no meanes escape. And that declared that much bloud abounded in hym, and that he had very great neede to be let bloud. He maketh mention also of an other, which in his dreame thought that on his critical or iudiciall day he was washed in a bath wyth great aboundance of water, who afterward fell into a great sweat. Farther sayth he they which slepe do thinke sometimes that they are greuousely laden, so that they ar not able to beare the wayght: & sometimes so light and nimble, that they run, & in a manner fly. Al these things saith he, are
[...]okens of excesse or defecton of humors.
Hippocrates also of these thīgs in a maner writeth the same namely that y
e mind in the day time, destributeth his powers into the senses & other faculties:
Hippocrates. And in the night it draweth thē to y
e inward parts, & therfore it doth the better know them. Howbeit he maketh mencion that there are certayn dreames which come by god, wherby calamities are foreshewed to come vnto cities, people, and other certayne greate men, for the expounding of which dreames, some do professe certayne artes. Vnto which neuerthelesse he semeth to geue but very small credite. When by dreames it is noted that y
e humors do offend, he sayth that they which are in daunger, must be holpen by diete, exorcist, and medicine. And whither the dreames be good or euil, he will haue prayers added. When helth is by dreames
[Page] signified, we must pray sayth he vnto the Sunne, vnto
Iupiter celestiall,
Iupiter possessor, to
Minerua, rich
Mercury, and to
Apollo. But if the dreames be vnlucky, we must pray vnto the goddes sayth he which turne awaye ill, namely vnto the goddes of the earthe, and to the Heroicall men, &c. Wherfore eyther
Hippocrates was supersticious, or els he would seme so. But to me, as touching sincere godlines, that I mislike not: Yea it is very much commended, that if at any time wee be vexed with troublesome and terrible dreames, we muste praye vnto god, that it would please him to turne away those euils, if there be anye whiche hange ouer our heddes.
What is the outward cause of dreames.There is an other kinde of dreames, whiche procedeth of an outward cause, namely from the power of heauen, or (as it is commonlye called) the influence, which altereth the ayre. For this ayre touching our bodies, affecteth them with a new quality: Wherby sundrye images and dreames are stirred vp vnto those which are on sleepe. Wherfore there are manye effectes wroughte of heauen, of whych it bringeth forth some in the phantasy, and power or faculty of imagination: and other some in deede. And that may easely be shewed by an example. In dede in the ayre or cloudes there are raine: and in the imaginacion of the Crow there is such an alteration before the rayne, that he beginneth to croke. Wherfore the effects in the phantasy of those which ar on slepe, and also in dede, come vndoubtedly of the self same cause: Yet haue they great diuersity by reasō of the subiectes in which they are made. And it is not to be doubted, but that there is a certayne slender and hidden similitude betweene these effectes. But it is verye hard to vnderstand the reason of this proporcion or analogy. And if we say, that the starres are the cause of such effectes or affections, who can refer these signes vnto his own propre cause,
Why diuinatiō by dreames is hard and vncertayne. that is, to some certayne starres more then to other, Assuredly I suppose that there are very few (I will not say none) whiche can do it. Farther if they shuld also be referred vnto propre starres, what can we iudge to come to passe by them, especially as touching things comming by happe, whē as iudiciall Astrology is euermore counted moste vncertayne? In fyne, images & & similituds which ar sayd to portend things to come, ar so doubtful, vncertain & ambiguous, that we can affyrm nothing for certayn of thē. Wherfore this is to be added, that forasmuch as dreams cannot be broght to passe of one only cause, but of many (as we haue declared) we shall easely fal into an error, if we of those many causes chuse onely one certayne cause. Therefore let vs hold this, that is, not easely to foretel any thing by dreames, for that they may easlier de iudged by the euentes, then the euentes can by them be foretold. Wherefore there remayneth of dreames but onely a certayne suspicion, whiche also of necessity is verye sclender.
A gate of horn & a gate of puerye.The two most noble Poetes,
Homere (I say) and
Virgill, made twoo gates of dreames, the one of horne, the other of yuery. That of horne (as they say) pertayneth vnto the true dreames, and that of yuery, to false: and they say y
t the gretest part passeth through the gate of yuery, and not through that of horn. Wherfore in iudging naturall dreames, let vs not passe the measure of suspition, nor stick to much in dreames: forasmuch as it is not the duty of a christiā man to cleaue more then is conueniente vnto perillous and vncertayne coniectures, bicause whilest they so busily apply them selfes to those things,
Of dreames sent ether of god or of the deuill.
To fore shewe any thynge by visions or dreames twoo thinges are required. they neglect other things whiche are of greater wayght. And the deuil very often times mingleth himself with those thinges to this entent, eyther to cal vs back from good actions, or els to driue vs to actions that are euell.
Nowe let vs see, what we oughte to affirme of dreames sente of God, or moued by the deuel. When any thing by y
e work of god or of angels is in dreams foresene, twoo thyngs are required. The fyrste is that certayne notes or images of things which are shewed, do inform or imprint the phantasy or imagination.
[Page 137] Secondly must be adioyned iudgement, to vnderstand what those things at the last do portend. As touching the first, we must know, that these notes and images are somtimes offred vnto the senses, bicause of those things which God maketh outwardly to appeare, as whē
Balthazar the successor of
Nebuchad-Naezar saw in the wall the fyngers of a hande which wrote, as it appeareth in
Daniel. And somtimes without any outward sight are images and formes described in the imagination or phantasy: which happeneth two maner of waies. For either the formes or images which are kept in the minde, are called backe to such vse as God hath entended, as when to
Ieremy was shewed a seething pot tourned to the North: Or els newe formes are shewed, whyche by the senses were neuer seene, as if formes of coulours and images shoulde bee shewed vnto one blynde from hys byrth.
And in this kinde or prophesieng, images or formes are in steede of letters.
Formes or images ar lyke letters. For as they are ordered and disposed, so sundry oracles are shewed. Euen as in the diuers chaunging of letters, orations and sentences are made diuers. Teachers which instruct their scholers, may by their study and industry of teaching fashion manifold images in the mindes of the hearers: although they be not able to geue the iudgement and right vnderstanding. But God ministreth both,
God somtimes geueth not vnto one & to the selfe same man formes, and the vnderstandyng of them.
They whych haue onely images, are not simply prophecies. not in dede alwaies together: for to some sometimes he sheweth onely the formes, as to
Pharao, and to his Butler and Baker, & also to the king of
Babilon, al which men needed an Interpretor (namely
Ioseph &
Daniel) to expound their dreames. And vndoubtedly those, vnto whom are shewed onely the images of thinges to come, are not truely and plainly counted Prophets, forasmuch as they haue but onely a certaine degree, beginning, and in a maner a step of prophecye: euen as
Caiphas also the high Priest is not to be counted a Prophet, when as hee spake those thinges which he knew not.
But why God would sometimes by dreames manifest vnto Kinges & Princes thinges to come, as now he doth, there are two causes: The one is, bycause he had a regarde vnto the people and Nations whom they gouerned. For if the penury which was at hand, had not ben shewed vnto
Pharao, Egipt had vtterly bene destroyed by famine. Secondly, it was the counsel of the Lorde, by these expositions of dreames, to manifest vnto the world his Prophetes and holy men, which before were hidden, which thing the holy scriptures testifye happened in
Ioseph and
Daniel. The Ethnike Historiographers also do write verye manye thinges of dreames, which Princes sometimes saw. Yea,
Tertulian. and
Tertulian in hys booke
de Anima, maketh mencion of certayn of those dreames, as the dreame of
Astyages of his daughter
Mandane, also of
Philip of
Macedonia, and of
Iulius Octauius, whom
M. Cicero being yet a boy, thought he saw him in his dreame, and being awake as soone as he met him, he straightway knewe him. And the same man telleth of certayne other also of this kinde.
But omitting these, let vs by testimonies of the holy scriptures (which shall easily be done) confirm, that certain dreames ar sent by God.
Mathew testifieth that
Ioseph the housbande of
Mary, was in dreames thrise admonished by the Angel. The wyfe also of
Pilate had knowledge by a dreame, and sent woorde to her housband, that he should not condemne Christ being an innocent.
Peter in the Actes of the Apostles the x. chap. saw a sheete let downe from heauen. And in the .xvi. chap. a man of
Macedonia appeared vnto
Paule, and mooued him to go into
Macedonia. And the Lord commaunded the same
Paule in a dreame, that he should not depart from
Corinthe, bycause he had a wonderfull great number of people in that City. I might rehearse a great many other places, both out of the old Testament, and out of the newe, but that I wil not be tedious.
Philo a Iewe.
Philo a Iew (as
Ierome in his booke
de viris illustribus saith) wrote fyue bookes of Dreames, which are sent by God.
Ciprian also telleth,
Ciprian. that in his tyme wer certain things sene by dreames, which serued for the edification of the Churche: & he doth geue
[Page] not a litle,
Augustine. Thre kindes of dreames. but very much authority vnto them. And
Augustine in his .xii. booke
de Genisi ad litteram, the .3. chap. sayth: That there are three kindes of dreames. The first (saith he) pertaine vnto the outward senses, which he calleth corporal. Againe, other some he calleth Spirituall, which consyst of images, & haue place about the phantasy, or power of imagination. The last he nameth Intellectual, bicause they are comprehended onelye by reason and iudgement of the mynde. And those which consist by imagination, namely those that are put in the secōd place (as we haue a litle before taught) saith he, make not Prophets, & affirmeth that
Ioseph was much more truly a Prophet, then
Pharao. And bicause we wyl not go from our history, we may affirme the same thing of the soldiour, which in the hearing of
Gideon expoūded the dreame of his fellow soldiour, namely, that he rather was a Prophet, then he which had the vision. But in this order or degree of Prophetes,
Daniel excelleth the rest. For he dyd not onelye interpreate the dreames of the king: but when he had forgotten those thinges which he saw in his sleepe, he could reuoke them into his memory againe. Farther, he did not onely interpreate the dreames of other men, but also he was by God instructed of his owne visions.
By the Deuil also are dreames sometimes moued, for
Augustine in the place alredy alledged
de Genisi ad literam writeth, that one possessed wyth a Deuil, by dreames declared in what houre a priest would come vnto him, & through what places he would passe.
Oracles answered sometymes by dreames and visions. And we are not ignorant that the Ethnikes had oracles, where men were al night to obtaine visions and dreames. Suche a one was the oracle of
Amphiarus, Amphilochus, Trophonius, and of
Esculapius. In those places, the Deuil shewed vnto those whiche slept, remedies and medicines to heale suche as were sycke: and therwithal also he gaue answer of other matters. And to obtaine such visions and dreames, there were commaunded vnto those which came to enquire of any thing, I cannot tel what choise of meates, and separate lodginges,
Pithagorians. and certain pure and chaste daies. It is said also that the Scholers of
Pithagoras eschewed beanes, bicause they make troublesome dreames. But our God, to declare that he is not bounde to those thynges, shewed vnto
Daniel the kinges dreame, when he and his fellowes by prayers had vehemently desired it of him. And it is not to be doubted but that the deuil can mingle him selfe with dreames,
Augustine. when as through his diligence there haue bene and also are now many false Prophetes, wherefore
Augustine in his booke before alledged the .xix. chap. If an euyl spirite (saith he) possesse men, he maketh them either diuelish, or mad, or els false prophetes. And contrarywise a good spirit maketh faithful prophetes, speaking misteries to the edification of other.
He also demaundeth in the same booke, the .xi. chap. by what meanes the reuelations of euyl and good spirites may be discerned one from an other.
Augustine. Howe dreames ar to be knowē whiche are of a good sp
[...], and which are of an euyll. And he answereth: That that can not be done, except a man haue the gifte of discerning of spirites. But he addeth that an euyl spirite doth alwaies at the last leade mē to wicked opinions and peruers maners: althoughe at the beginning the difference can not be knowen with out the gift of the holye ghost. In his Epistle to
Euodius, which is the .100. epistle, inquiring of the same matter, he sayth: I would to God I could discerne betwene dreames, which ar geuen to errour, and those which are to saluation, neuerthelesse we ought to bee of good courage, bycause God suffreth his children somtimes to be tempted, but not to perysh.
Aristotle.But what shal we answer vnto
Aristotle, who denieth that dreames ar sent of God, and that for this cause in special, bicause God would geue this faculty of diuination to wyse and good men, and not to the foolish and wicked? We answer, that for the most part it is true, that true Prophetes, which are by God illustrate with dreames and visions,
Why God somtimes vseth euyl Prophetes and vnwyse. are both good and godlye. Howbeit, leaste it should be thought that the power of God is bound vnto the wysedome or maners of men, God wyl sometimes vse the woorke of euyl men in those things: to
[Page 138] declare and shew forth the great and wonderful power of his prouidēce,
Tertulian. as one which can vse all kinde of instrumentes. Farther, as
Tertulian writeth in hys booke
de Anima, seing that he distributeth his Sunne and rayne both to the iust and to the vniust, it ought not to be marueilous, if he bestowe also these gyftes, which serue especially to the instruction of men, both to the good and to the euil. And that we should not be ignorant of his doing, the holy history declareth that the Ethnikes were by God verye oftentimes admonished and corrected in theyr sleepe. So
Pharao king of
Egipt was commaunded to restore vnto
Abraham his wife, and
Abimelech king of
Gerar was in like maner admonished. And
Tertulian saith moreouer, that euen as God, when hee instructed the wycked in theyr sleepe, doth it that they might become good: so contrariwise the Deuil inuadeth the godly when they are a sleepe, by dreames to seduce them oute of the ryghte way.
Aristotle thought y
e God in distributing his giftes, ought to haue a regard to wise men, and especially to Philosophers:
God reuealeth misteries rather vnto the litle ones, then to the wyse. when as Christ hath taughte altogether otherwise. I thanke thee (saith he) O heauenlye father, that thou hydyng these thinges from the learned and wise, hast reuealed them to lyttle ones. &c.
Paul also sayth, that the vocation of God chiefly pertayneth to the vnnoble, vnlearned, and weake.
An other argument was, that beastes also when they sleepe do dreame, when yet no man wil say that God ministreth and disposeth their dreames. That Philosopher is deceaued, bicause he supposeth that if God do send some dreames vnto men, he ought therefore to be made author of al dreames, which vndoubtedly to farre frō our meaning. For we referre not vnto God himselfe, al those things which ar natural, as certain peculiar effectes, by which immediatly (as to speake with Scholemen) men should be instructed of thinges to come. We haue sufficientlye before declared of what causes dreames come in creatures.
God, though he somtime sēdeth dreames, yet sē deth he not all. And to entreate Logs
[...]like: There is no firme connexion from a priuate or peculiar proposition to an vniuersal. Wherefore, though God do minister some dreames, wee may not thereby gather, that all dreames, whether they be in beastes or men, ar sent by hym. Beastes otherwyse haue the power to heare, neither want they eares: and yet, bicause God sendeth not somtimes Prophets vnto them to speake and shewe them thynges to come, we cannot conclude that God doth not sometimes sende holy men vnto men, by whom they maye bee both admonished, and instructed.
He saith moreouer, that if God were the author of dreames, he woulde cause them to be done as wel in the day time, as in the night. But I affirme,
God vseth both times, as well the daye as the nyght. that it is free for God to vse eyther time as he wil, forasmuch as he is Lord as well of the day as of the night, and as wel of sleeping as of waking. And that he somtimes did in very deede shew visions vnto prophets in their sleepe, & sometimes when they wer waking, as it semed best vnto him, the holy scriptures do restlfy.
Farther, what absurdity is it, if he oftentimes vse the cōmodity of the nyght and sleepe, when as the Philosophers and Phisitions them selues doo confesse, that men are at such time more apt to receaue mocions very light? Shall this cō modity serue the Phisitions turne to know the humors of the bodye, & can it not serue God, for the saluation of soules? In the booke of
Iob the .33. chap. there is a godly and apt place written after this maner: when slepe falleth vpon men, and they sleepe vpon their beds, then God openeth the eare, and sealeth corrections.
Lastly was obiected, that God if he would admonish men, he would do it openly and manifestly, & not obscurely, or by rydles. I answer, that the true prophets and such as were inspired by God, did very wel vnderstand the thinges whyche God told them in such dreames: wherefore they needed no expositers. And if hee somtimes sent dreames vnto Ethnike Princes (as he did vnto
Pharao and
Nebuchad-Nezar) he therfore did it, to make his Prophetes that wer hidden (namely
Ioseph and
Daniel) to be notable. Otherwyse he gaue vnto his Prophetes
[Page] iudgemēt, & a cleare vnderstāding of such visions which he ministred vnto thē.
Why Aristotle erred.But
Aristotle is herein deceaued, bicause he had a respect onely to deceauers, which prophessed such kindes of prophecies, and bewitched men, as though they could expound al sortes of dreames, and shew whet they portended. But we vnderstand not those things which we haue now alledged, of al kinde of dreames, neither of al maner of prophetes. For they pertain onely to those, which God indede sendeth: wherefore the coniectures of deceauers and Southsaiers haue nothing here to doo. But the authoritye of so great a Philosopher doth not muche moue vs:
Epicurus. bicause although that
Epicurus fauoureth that sentence which he doth, who to disburden his Gods from the labour of regarding of dreames, teacheth that they as al other thinges,
Plato. The Stoikes. do come rashly and by chaunce. Yet contrarywise
Plato geueth muche to dreames sent of God: and the
Stoikes pronounced that dreames in the night, are as it were a familiar and domestical oracle, by whyche God doth prouide for humans kinde.
Augustine. Whyther the Soule of it self haue power to foreknow thinges to come. This wil I not ouerpasse, that
Augustine in the place before alledged vpon
Genesis ad literam, the .xii. booke, and .xv. chap. doth demaund whither the Soule of it selfe haue power to foreknow thinges to come, and that by his own nature. And he denieth that it hath: bicause (saith he) if it had, it woold vse it, when as al men do so earnestly desyre to knowe thinges to come. Wherfore visions and dreames of Prophets attaine to their truth, not by nature, but by God.
But now must we see, how the consideration of dreames shoulde be prohibited, seing they are suggested by God and his Angels: for if the matter be so, then are not dreames to be contemned,
Al regarde of dreames is not forbidden. but with diligence to be obserued. I aunswer therto, that al regard of dreames is not forbidden, but that onelye which is procured by euyl and vayne artes, and which is accustomed to be obtained by worshipping of Deuils. Otherwise ther is nothing which letteth, but y
t by dreames we may iudge of humors, or, if they be of God, or by anye meanes perceaued to bee of him, to obey them. Thys is also forbidden, that wee extende not naturall dreames farther then their nature may suffer. And that doo they whych applye dreames vnto euentes comming by chaunce, wherein they haue no respect, neyther to the cause, nor to the effect.
The Romane lawes punished Interpretours of dreames.And superstitious diuination by dreames, is not condemned by Christians onely, but also is extremely forbidden by the
Romane lawes. For in the .9. boke of the Code
de maleficis, & Mathematicis: In the law
Et si excepta: It is ordayned that such diuiners should be very greuously punished, so that although they were in any place of dignity, yea and longed to
Cesar him selfe, yet myght they be punished: which otherwise was not lawful to do, to men of nobilitye. And by these woordes are they expressed:
Aut narrandis somniis, occultam artem aliquam diuinandi.
A lawful obseruation of dreames, and an vnlawful.
&c. And this difference which we here put for the lawful and vnlawfull obseruation of dreames, is verye well sette foorth in
Ieremy the .23. chapter. For there god by his Prophet detesteth vaine and fond dreames, but commendeth suche as are true and of god. In
Deut. the .xviii. chap. obseruers of dreames seme generally to be reproued. But we must know, that according to the truth of the Hebrue, there is no mencion made of them. In deede other superstitions and idolatries are ther condemned, but of dreames ther is nothing at al spoken, although in other places the wicked obseruation of them is reproued.
It is lawful to praye that wee may be admonished, euen by dreames.
Monica y
e mother of Augustine. Wherfore the good & lawful obseruation of them is not to be forbiddē: yea, it is sometimes lawful for holy men to pray, that they may be admonished euen in theyr dreames, of those things especially which they iudge meete, & cannot by them selues attaine vnto.
Monica the mother of
Augustine, being desirous to haue her sonne maryed, for the auoyding of fornication, desired god that he would reueale vnto her somewhat of that thing, euen in her sleepe: and she affirmed that god graunted her a certaine taste, whereby she discerned those thinges which of her self she saw in her sleepe, from those thinges which were shewed her by the suggestion
[Page 139] of God. And this doth
Augustine write in his .vi. booke of Confessions, the .iii. chap. And leauing him, we knowe assuredlye that
Daniel prayed to come to the knowledge of the dreame of
Nebuchad-Nezar. And this is to bee holden for certaine, that it is the dutye of godlye men, to praye vnto God, that euen then also when we sleepe, we may be kept chaste and cleane, as touching the body and spirite. For which thing
Augustine prayed in his booke of Confessions,
Augustine. the .x. boke and .30. chap. For visions which come by night, wherewith either the mynde is troubled, or the body defiled, are punishmentes of synne, especiallye of originall synne. For it should not haue bene so in Paradise, if
Adam had abidden in that truth, wherin he was created, as
Augustine writeth in his .v. booke against
Iulianus, the .viii. chap. Now wil we returne againe vnto the history.
16 And he deuided the .300. men into three bandes, and gaue euerye man a trumpet in hys hand, wyth empty pytchers, and lampes wythin the pytchers.
17 And he sayd vnto them: Looke on me, and doo lykewyse. For be hold I wil come to the syde of the host, & then euen as I do, so do ye.
18 For I wil blow wyth a trumpet, and al they that are wyth me: Then blow ye also wyth trumpets on euery syde of the hoste, and ye shal say: For the Lord, and for Gideon.
19 So Gideon, and the hundreth men that were with hym, came vnto the outsyde of the hoste, in the beginning of the mydle watche, and they raysed vp the watchmen, and they blew with their trumpets, and brake the pitchers, which they had in their handes.
Gideons industry or pollecy is here set foorth,
Many policies of Gideon. and the fauour wherwith God prospered his successes and enterprises. He deuideth his three hundreth men into three bandes, that he might on sundry partes inuade the
Madianites, and by a sodaine feare trouble their hoste on euerye syde. He vsed also another pollecye concerning the time, for he set vpon them in the night. For when they were in a maner in a dead sleepe, they wer the easilyer by a great hurly burly astonished with feare. Farther, hee chused the moste commodious part in all the night, for suche a purpose: for he assayled the
Madianites about the beginning of the second watche or garde. Wherefore it is called
Rosch Haticonath, that is,
the heade or begynning of the middle watche or garde. This woord
Toch signifieth wythin:
Augustine. Ther are foure watches of the night, whereof euerye one containeth three houres. and therof is deriued
Ticonah, which is a myddle.
Augustine in his Sermon
De verbis domini, the .14. Oration, sayth, that the Elders deuided the night into .4. partes, of which euery one contained .3. houres, which he confirmeth also by the testimonies of the holy scriptures. For it is said that the Lord came vnto the Apostles in the .4. watch of the night, when they labored so vehemētly in the sea, that their shypp was very neare soonke. The same father writeth the lyke thyng vpon the .79. Psalme. The Glose also in the Decrees .1. question, the .1.
Superueniente Pascha, maketh mencion of the names of those partes of the night,
Conticinium, Intempestum, Gallicinium, &
Antelucanum, that is, the bed time, y
e dead part of the night, the Cocke crowing, and the dawning of the day.
And
Isidorus in hys .v. booke of
Etimologies, maketh .vii. partes of the nyght,
Isidorus. for he addeth these three,
Vesperum, Crepusculum, and
Matutinum, that is, the euentide, the twylight, & the morning. The second watch may be vnderstād the midle watch, as touching our history. For ther are .2. watches betwene the first and the last: wherfore howsoeuer it be, the second must needes occupy the midle place.
The inuentone of nyght watches.
Plinius. But the inuenter of these gardes or watches in hostes (as
Plini wryteth in his .7. booke & .56. chap.) was
Palamedes, which by this place we see cannot be so, forasmuch as the actes of the Iudges are of farre more antiquitye, then was
Palamedes, vnles peraduenture he spake onely of the watches of the Grecians.
[Page] The vse of watches floorished in the olde tyme, not onelye in hostes, but they were had in vse also, for the safe custody of manye other thinges. For at
Rome there were watchmen,
Watchmen for to geue warning of fyres. which in the night time went vp and downe the Citye, to geue warning of fires, and therfore both in the Digest, and in the Code, the title is:
De officio praefecti vigilium. This industrye also was translated vnto Shepeheardes,
Watches of Shepeheardes which we may see euen by the Gospel: For in
Luke the .ii. chap. the Angels, when Christ was borne came vnto the Shepeheardes, whych kept watche ouer their flocke. We reade also, that both Ethnikes and Christians vsed watches in holy seruices.
Watches vsed in holy seruices At
Rome there were holy seruices vnto the Goddesse
Bona, which were done in the night season. And in the old Testament we reade, that godly women abode all night at the tabernacle, for doing iniury vnto whom, the children of
Ely were accused.
Philo a Iewe (as
Eusebius Cesariensis in his first booke rehearseth) affirmeth, that the Christians which were in the Apostles time,
Philo. amongst other theyr laudable institutions, did most chastely watche, in geuing thankes vnto God, applieng them selues vnto prayers,
Tertulian. doctrines, and praysinges of God.
Tertulian in his Apologie writeth, that the Christians supped oftentimes and moderatly together, bicause they knew they should woorship God in the night tyme. In the Actes
Paul continued his sermon and disputation til after midnight, so that
Eutichus a yong man being oppressed with sleepe, fel downe from a high loft. Yea, and Christ also, abode al night vpon the mountaine praying: and he reprehended the Apostles, which could not watch euen one houre with him, and exhorted them to watche and praye, that they might not be oppressed wyth temptation.
Ierome vpon the .25.
Ierome. chap. of
Mathew writeth, that the Iewes had a tradition, that the
Messias would come at midnight, in which houre in dede the first born of Egipt were slayne. Wherfore he writeth, that he supposeth that that tradition came from the Apostles, that the Priests in the holye night of Easter shoulde not send away the people, so that if peraduenture the Lord appeare, he may finde them watching. But this is not at this daye obserued: for the watches are not kept on the night of Easter, but on the night of the Natiuity.
Consilium Carthaginense.In the Counsell of
Carthage the .4. chap. 49. it is ordayned that a Priest, which without any necessity of his bodye, ceased from keeping night watches, should both be depriued of his degree, and also put out of his benefice. But in the Counsel of
Eliberinum,
Consilium Eliberinum. chap .35. watchings in Church yardes are prohibited, where they were wont to watch, hauing waxe candles lighted: which I suppose was inuented, not that by that obseruation they might deliuer the soules of the dead from purgatorye,
Watches at the Sepulchres of the deade.
Ierome. but rather in honour of them. For as euerye man helde deare his friendes which were deade, that the memory of them shoulde not bee forgotten, they watched at the place where they were buryed, one daye in the yeare, which we manifestly perceaue in the life of
Hilarion, written by
Ierome, where he telleth that a certaine Deacon sayd, that he should watch at the tombe of blessed
Antony, within a day or two, bicause now a yeare, or certayne yeares were passed since he died. The Elders watched also at the Sepulchres of Martirs, therby to shew vnto them honor, applieng themselues to doctrine, exhortations, geuing of thankes, & praiers, especially in these perilous times, whē they might not easily in the day time assemble together. Farther, peraduenture piety was by y
e meanes the better obserued. For in the day time men wer occupied w
t sundry labours & workes. Wherfore, y
t the worshipping of God might not lye vtterly neglected, they appointed certaine houres in the night for it.
Ierome against
Vigilantius, maruelously cōmendeth the institutiō of y
e church for watching, & he thinketh y
t we shuld not cease frō this obseruation, although by occasion of these watches, some filthy things wer cōmitted. For (saith he) the errors of yong men, and light women, which can synne also in an other place, and play filthy partes at home, ought not to reuoke vs from so holye a custome.
[Page 140] But we see that at this day contrary to the sentence of
Ierome, watches ar abolished, not onely of Martirs, but also those which were done in the honour of the Lord, as it manifestly appeareth in the Counsell of
Antisiodorensis, chap. the .v.
Consilium Antisiodorense. although in some places there remaine some remnants of watches, as at
Mantua vpon the feast of
Bartlemew, and at
Versellis on the night of Saint
Eusebius. But al men know, how vnreasonably and immoderatly mē behaue themselues in those watches.
Watches turned vnto fastinges. Wherfore they haue conuerted the obseruation of watchings into fastinges. But what maner of fastinges I pray you? Suche which they vse now adayes in abstayning from eating of fleshe. But whatsoeuer it be, the sentence of the Apostle is firme and constant, that the exercises of the body haue no great vtility, but piety is of force to al thinges. We must in dede fast and watch, as much as reason requireth, and strength of the body wil beare. And I doo not thinke that in this thing we ought with to much zeale to imitate
Basilius, Nazianzenus and such like, which with outward obseruations so brake their bodies, that at the length they became vnprofitable, both to them selues, and also to other. The golden mediocritye is to be kept, wherein wee must keepe the laudable measure of frugalitye and temperaunce. And thus muche by the waye of watches.
20 And the three bandes blew with trumpets, when they had broken their pitchers, and they tooke their lampes in their leaft hande: and the trumpets in their right hand, to blow withal, and they cryed: the swoord of the Lord, and of Gideon.
21 And they stoode euery man in his place, rounde about the host, and al the host brake theyr aray, and cryed, and fled.
The blowing of the trumpets, with the wonderful great cry of men, on euery syde, and the sodaine light, which the burning firebrandes gaue, when the pytchers were broken, did not onely astonish the
Madianites, but they beyng yet oppressed with sleepe, were so troubled, that they could not tel what to do. Wherfore they supposed that there were many and sundry hostes there, and had nowe inuaded their host, and God filled them with such a certaine disines & madnes, that they counted their fellowsoldiours in stede of enemies, and miserably slew one another.
The holy ghost suggested thys warlike polecy This warlike pollecy was not found out and inuented by
Gideon himself onely, but, as it is to be beleued, he did it by the suggestion of y
e holy gost. And how God fauoured his enterprises, the holy history declareth, whereby we might learne, that God must prosper our enterprises, otherwise they are easely made vayne and of no force. For trumpets, fyrebrandes, and empty pitchers, of their own disposition and nature, haue smal force to obtaine a victory, especially if euery one of thē be taken a part, & although being ioyned together, they seme that they can do somwhat, yet if God had not added his power, they wold haue bene but laughed at. And they cried:
The swoord of God, and of Gideon. God is mencioned as the true & principall efficient cause, &
Gideon is added vnto him,
The victorye must not be parted betweene God & Gideon as a fellow worker and instrument appointed to this worke. And it is not therfore so written, bicause the victory should after a sort be parted, and the one halfe geuen vnto God, & the other part to
Gideon, whych thing also we must obserue as touching eternal saluatiō. For we must count the obtaining of it, to be wholy receaued of God, and not by free wyl, as the
Pelagians do. Not vndoubtedlye to the ende we should lyue ydlely, or cease frō good workes, when as
Paul to the
Philip expressedly commaundeth, that we should worke our own saluaciō: but that we might vnderstand that all that we do, is of him, euē as in the same place it is added: For it is he which worketh in vs, both to wil & to perform, according to his good pleasure. Of this victory the .83. Psalme maketh mencion: Doo vnto them as thou diddest vnto
Madian, as vnto
Horeb, &
Zeb, &
Zebah, &
Zalmona.
[Page] Which sheweth vnto vs that the order of this history is diligentlye to be kept in remembraunce of vs, that wee maye hope for the like, by praiers desire them of God, and haue a confidence to obtaine them. And not onely
Dauid maketh mencion of this narration, but also
Esay in his .x. chap. where he entreateth of
Senacherib. God (saith he) wil raise vp a whip, like the destruction of
Madian. And in very dede it so happened, as the Prophet prophesied: for the whole hoste of that king was by God destroyed, as was this host of the
Madianites.
The names of the Captaynes of the Madianites do expres the nature of tirannes.And as touching the names of these Captaines, they doo verye well signifye their tiranny.
Aareb is a waster,
Zaab is a woulfe,
Sabchah is killing, and
Salmona is prohibiting shadowe and refreshing. So do tirannes behaue themselues, they wast and rauen all thinges, they kil lyke woolues, and take awaye all refreshing and commodity from their subiectes: when as yet if they were Princes in deede, they should do farre otherwise. But God so punisheth them, that he wil haue their wicked affectiōs of their myndes, manifested not onely in dedes, but also in their names. Yea, and they them selues, as though they wer not sufficiently described and expressed in the holy scriptures, haue framed vnto themselues certaine armes, tending very muche to this purpose. None of them in a maner doo in their armes cary vertues, but Lions, Woulues, Tigers, Beares, Eagles and such lyke, whereby they rather set foorth their cruelty, then vertue and goodnesse.
22 And when the .300. men blew with trumpets, the Lord set euery mans swoord vpon hys neyghbour, and vpon all the hoste. So the host fled vnto Beth-Hasittah in Zererath, and to the border of Abel meolah vnto Tabath.
23 Then the men of Israel were gathered together out of Naphthali, and out of Aser, and out of al the tribe of Manasses, and pursued after Madian.
This counsell or act of God is no new or vnaccustomed thing. For so dyd he when
Ionathas with his armour bearer came vnto the host of the
Philistians, as we reade in the first booke of
Samuel. And that is not vnlike whiche in the secōd booke of
Paralip. the .xx, chap. is written, of the battaile, which in the time of
Iehosaphat the king, was fought with the
Moabites and
Ammonites. For in those battailes also the enemies of the Israelites wounded one another. And
Goliah was by
Dauid slayne with his own swoord. And we also in these daies haue many times experience of the like benefites. For when our aduersaries haue decreed by violence and force vtterly to oppresse vs, by a wonderfull prouidence they haue turned their force against themselues, and being letted by manye slaughters and warres, they haue ceased from their enterprises most cruel.
24 And Gideon sent messengers vnto al mount Ephraim, saying: Come downe agaynste the Madianites, and take before them the waters, euen vnto Beth-Bara, and Iordan. Then all the men of Ephraim gathered together, and tooke the waters vnto Beth Bara and Iorden.
25 And they tooke twoo Princes of Madian, Horeb, and Zeb, and slewe Horeb vpon the rocke of Horeb, and slewe Zeb at the wynepresse of Zeeb. And they pursued the Madianites. And they broughte the heades of Horeb and Zeeb vnto Gideon beyonde Iorden.
Now were other of the Israelites gathered together, as
Aser, Naphthali, and
Manasses, Gideon also sent vnto the
Ephraites, that the victory which he had gotten
[Page 141] might on euery syde haue a lucky ende. He enuieth not to haue a companion of his glory, when as yet he with a few put himselfe in great daunger. I would to God we were so conioyned in the Church, that when wee haue begone anye good and profitable institution, we woulde for the performance of the same, desire other to helpe vs: but, which is to be lamented, as our sinnes do deserue, we oftentimes let one an other.
Come down against the Madianites, & take before them the waters. As touching these waters, the Interpreters do varye.
Kimhi thinketh that it is not
Iordane, his reason is, bicause it is added, euen vnto
Iordane. R. Semoloh vnderstandeth that of those waters which deuideth
Palestine, or the lande of
Chanaan, from
Siria, and among those waters he rekoneth
Iordane. But the place of
Beth-Bara is to be noted, bicause of the first chap. of
Iohn,
Beth-Bara. where our translation hath
Bethania, which in dede lyeth farre distant from
Iordane, neither did
Iohn there baptise those that came vnto hym. But the Greeke text hath
Bethabara. Wherfore it is thought that this place, whereof we now entreate, is ther ment. He commaundeth that the waters should strayghtway be preuented from those which fled, whilest yet they were troubled with feare, before they shoulde recouer strength vnto them againe.
We must not slowlye followe the victory. For he knew that it was very much hurtfull for Capitaines, slowlye and softlye to pursue the victorye. Wherefore he addeth all speede, least his enemies might haue space geuen them to vnderstande theyr errour, and to renue their power again. And therfore he commaundeth that with speede they should meete them, that the victorye begone, myght at the lengthe haue a full ende.
And they tooke twoo Princes. The
Ephraites accomplished that which
Gideon commaunded, in preuenting those that fled, and they slew the Captains of the
Madianites: Horeb they slewe at the rocke, which was afterwarde called by his name, and
Zeb in the wynepresse, which
Kimhi expoundeth, as thoughe there were there a playne countrye. Whose forme or figure was lyke a wynepresse. The
Ephraites brought the heades of the twoo Princes vnto
Gideon beyonde
Iordane. This is supposed to be now put in by the figure
Prolepsis: for it is thought that it was not done tyll suche time as
Gideon had returned frō the victory being finished. In the meane time let vs consider the ignominy that god put those tyrannes vnto, bringing their most proude heades vnder the power of the Israelites, whom they counted for people very abiect, and wonderfullye oppressed them with their cruelty. It is thought that the head of
Pompeius which was offered vnto
Cesar, dyd much encrease the calamity of that man. It is also declared that the heade of
Cicero was brought vnto
Anthonius, as a thing most myserable.
But nowe in fewe woordes we must touche the Allegory of this act,
An Allegory taken oute of the holy scriptures not vndoubtedly a vayne Allegorye, but which is drawen out of the fountaines of the holy scriptures.
Esay in the .ix. chap. intreating of the redemption by Christ, writeth in this maner: The yoke of his burthen, the staffe of his shoulder, and the rod of his oppressor hast thou ouercome, as in the daye of
Madian. By whyche woordes is shewed, that this victorye is to be referred vnto that deliuerye from synne, which by Christ we haue obtayned. Neyther doo these trumpets portend any other thing then the preaching of the Gospel, now spread abroade throughout the whole worlde. For God geueth saluation vnto the worlde, by the ministery and doctrine of the Church, not as though this were sufficient, but the pitchers being broken, burning fyrebrandes are shewed foorth, bicause by the death of Christ vpon the crosse, the lyght of the holye ghost shyneth in the hartes of men, and the cryes of prayers are adioyned, from whence saluation commeth vnto the true Israelite.
¶The .viii. Chapter.
1.
THen the mē of Ephraim said vnto him: Why hast thou done thys vnto vs, that thou calledst vs not, whē thou wētest to fight with the Madianites? And they chode with him sharpely.
2 To whom he answered: What haue I nowe done in comparison of you? Is not the gleanyng of grapes of Ephraim better, then the vintage of Abiezer?
3 God hath delyuered into your handes the Princes of Madian, Horeb, and Zeeb: and what was I able to do, in comparisō of you? And when hee had thus spoken, then their spirites abated towarde hym.
The Ephraits nobler thē they of Manasses.THe
Ephraites enuied
Gideon, bicause great glorye redounded vnto hym by this battaile. That Tribe was much more noble then the Tribe of
Manasses. For
Iacob when he blessed the sonnes of
Ioseph, stretching out his hands preferred
Ephraim which was the yonger, before
Manasses, whiche otherwyse was the first borne. Wherfore it is no maruail, if they now tooke it hainouslye, that they of
Manasses caryed away the victory without their conduct.
Is not the gleanyng of grapes of Ephraim. Gideon aunswereth verye wittely, and by gentle woordes asswaged the spirites of the
Ephraites. By the name of spirite I vnderstand violence, which proceded of arrogancy and hautynes of mynde, as we reade in the Gospel: Blessed are the poore in spirite. Hereby it appeareth that a gentle answer breaketh anger. That which sprang of enuy, he so semeth to haue taken it, as though they had bene styrred vp by a certain honest emulation, and desired that they also might be authors of the libertye of the Israelites. They which be enuious, are wont to be sory for this, bicause they want some good thing, which they see other haue alreadye obtayned.
Gideon sheweth them, that the matter is not so as they thinke for: when as the greater part of this victory redounded vnto them.
VVhat haue I done (sayth he)
that may be compared wyth your acte? I beganne the warre in deede, but ye haue slayne
Horeb and
Zeeb, which was the principallest thing in this battayle.
The gleaning of your grapes, are better then my wynepresse. For the two Princes, whom ye haue both taken and killed, are of much more price then the rest of the multitude, which I haue vanquished. And if a regard should be had vnto the Tribe or family, the least part of the tribe of
Ephraim is better, and stronger, then all the power and ability of the
Abiezerites. Gideon telleth them not that he was peculiarly chosen of God vnto this office: for that woulde more haue prouoked them to anger. Wherfore he thought to geue place to the desyre of glory, wherwyth they burned, and to their enuiousnes. And yet in the mean time he lieth not: for asmuch as the tribe of
Ephraim was most strong. Neither could
Gideon by himselfe, or by his own power performe those thinges which they did, althoughe by the fauour and helpe of God he dyd greater thinges.
¶Of the affections of enuy and emulation.
BVt I thinke it good somewhat to speake of the affections, namely of Enuye & Emulation, & such like. Affections (as it is wel knowen) pertain vnto the general word of quality, & ar contayned in that forme, which is cōmonly called
Passio, & passibilis qualitas. And amongst those ther are two more grosse & very cōmon,
Foure principall affections whych followe knowledge. Delectation (I say) & Sorow. Their chief place is in the synowes, which are dispersed in a maner throughout the whole body. Vnto which, when either agreable things to nature, or things contrary ar applied, then either we haue a delectatiō, or els a grief. Farther, ther ar other affectiōs which folow knowlege,
[Page 142] by whiche as their nature is, the heart altereth hys mocion by mouing the pulse either vpwarde or downeward, accordyng as knowledge doth receaued good or euil, & that either present or els nye at hand. For when we fele that good is present,
1 the heart therewith is ioconde, and is affected pleasauntly.
Laetici
[...]. And this affectiō is called Gladnesse. But if we perceaue that the good is not present, but not far
2 from vs, yea at hand and very nyghe to be obteyned,
Spes. then are we stirred vp by hope to attayne it, and the heart is in like sorte pleasauntly moued. But when
3 we see that euill is present, the heart flieth awaye with a heauy mocion,
Dolor vel Aegritudo.
[...]. for it is contracted, it abhorred it, and is vexed: and this affection is wont to be called both payne, and grief, in Greeke it is called
[...], so called as the
Stoikes thinke, as thoughe it were
[...]: that is consumption: for euen as the body of him that is sicke wasteth away by sickenesse, so the mynde semeth in a maner to weare away with sorow. There is also an other knowledge of euill, not now beyng present,
4 but whiche already is at hand. The heart flyeth from that also,
Metus. The foure affections whiche haue their begynnyng of Grief & payne.
Misericordia. Nemesis. Inuidia. and by hys mouyng very manifestly declineth from it: and such an affection is called Feare.
Of those foure principall affections, these are now to be entreated of, whiche haue their begynnyng of Heuynesse, or Grief. And they also are reckened to be foure. Mercy,
Nemesis, Enuy, and Emulation, of whiche
Aristotle in his Rethorikes hath written many goodly thinges.
But before we entreate particularly of them, one thing is to be enquired of: Whether Affections are to be counted good or euill. The
Stoikes affirme that they are euill, and they haue vniuersally condemned affections,
Aemulatio. Whether affections be good or euill.
The Stoikes. this reason leadyng them thereunto, bycause by them the mynde, iudgement, and sound Counsell is troubled. For they so distract and shake the mynde or reason, that it can not at pleasure and quietly haue the contēplatiō of thinges naturall and diuine, neither orderly and rightly determine of things to be done. Farther, bicause by their wayght they oftentymes driue men to perpetrate filthy and vniust things: yea and they hurte the body also, when they are very vehement. These in a maner are the reasons of the
Stoikes. The
Peripatecians teache muche otherwise, that is, that those things are not true, which the
Stoikes affirme,
The Peripatecians. but when affections are not chastised & kept vnder by reason, then are they suffred immoderatly to runne at randon. For euē y
e affections, if they be kept in with certain bondes, are both good and profitable, as beyng the matter of vertues, and whiche are by nature appoynted for their whetstones. For anger bringeth no small helpe vnto strength, and mercy is set vnder the vertue of clemency. And in the same maner it may be sayd of many other.
But this sentence wherin the Philosophers do so disagre,
What the holy scriptures affirme of affectiōs must be decided by the iudgement of the holy scriptures. They write, y
e man both as touching soule and as touching body was created of God. And they adde, that all things were good, what soeuer God created. Wherfore for asmuch as he planted affections in man, but not euill and corrupt, as now we haue them, but right and sound, which should obey and serue reason, they must of necessity be good. Farther the lawe of God doth euery where commend vnto vs mercy, and preacheth repentaunce, whiche can not consiste without payne and grief of the minde.
Dauid also writeth, and
Paul repeteth it, be ye angry, but sinne not. Yea and whiche more is, affections are ascribed euen vnto God, as Anger, Mercy, Grief, Repentance, &c. which things althoughe they are not properly spokē of him, yet this must we marke, that in the holy scriptures that is neuer attributed vnto God, whiche in a man is of it selfe vice, or of his owne nature sinne. This so discussed, let vs nowe entreate of mercy.
¶Of Mercy.
MErcy is a grief of the minde, which we take for the aduersity of other men,
Cicero. Aristotle. or (as
Cicero saith) a grief takē for an others mās misery.
Aristotle teacheth,
[Page] that Mercy is stirred vp, if we see any suffre greuous things which they haue not deserued. For if wicked men be iustly punished, Mercy is not therfore stirred vp. Farther he thinketh, that those cases whiche we pitye, should be terrible, otherwise if they be but light, we are by them litle or nothing moued. Lastly that they are touched with mercy, which do thinke that such things may sometymes happen either vnto themselues or to some of their friendes. Which is the cause, that
Aristotle supposeth, that they which are in prosperity, and do iudge themselues happy, are not prone vnto mercy, yea they ar wont to scoffe & mocke those which are in misery, as they which thinke nothing can hurte them. Likewise he remoueth this affection from such as are desperate and in a most miserable state, bycause they are not afrayd that any worse thing can happen vnto them, then that whiche they haue already. Wherfore they seme in that desperate fortune to haue become men without senses. But if this were true, a man might doubt, by what meanes mercy can be ascribed vnto God, for asmuch as he without controuersy is most blessed, and nothing can hurt hym. But to this might be answered, that mercy is not properly attributed vnto god, but by a metaphore taken of man, bycause he doth those things,
Mercy is also to be shewed vnto those which iustly ar punished. which mercifull men are wont to do. For they helpe the afflicted, which self same thing god also doeth. But in this thing I agree not vnto
Aristotle, whiche will not haue mercy to be shewed vnto those whiche are iustly punished. For
Samuel mourned long time for
Saul, whō God reiected not vnworthily, but most iustly. Christ also wept ouer the destruction of
Ierusalem which was at hand vnto that City, not vndoubtedly without deserte, but iustly. Neither thinke I this true, that sinnes, which some mē commit, do not stirre vp mercy, but onely calamityes & aduersityes do stirre vp mercy. For holy men are no lesse grieued for other mēs causes, whē they fal into grieuous sinnes, thē they are when they be oppressed with euil fortune, yea they ar so much the more grieued, as that euil is more pernicious, and lesse able to be cured. Wherfore we can not deny, but that mercy is a good affection, for as much as it obeyeth the worde of God and reason, especially seyng the Lord by his own mouth hath pronounced, that the mercifull are blessed, bycause they also shall obtayne mercy.
The other affection which hath his beginning of Heuinesse or Grief, is called
Nemesis:
Nemesis. the same hath no Lattin worde, although of some it be called
Indignatio, that is Indignation, which yet by that word do not expresse all that affectiō: for Indignation extendeth farther than
Nemesis.
Holy men oftē tymes ar sicke of Nemesis. But leauyng the word, let vs thus define the thing.
Nemesis is a grief, which is taken for y
e prosperity of wicked men, bycause they seme vnworthy of that fortune. Iust and holy men are sicke oftentymes of this affectiō.
Dauid when he saw the vngodly florishing, said: My fete were almost moued.
Abacuk also, was grieued that the vngodly were of such force, that they could oppresse the saintes, and deuoure the iust. And
Iob semeth in a maner to complayne vnto his friends for the same thing. Farther
Plutarche in the lyfe of
Homere praiseth this affection,
Plutarche. and by occasion therof he far preferreth the
Peripatecians in disputing of Affections before the
Stoikes, & especially by the iudgement of
Homere, who affirmeth that God at the length will angerly punishe, after that the wicked haue a certayne while florished. Howbeit this is to be obserued, that men are not grieued with this affection, for that they shall suffer any losse, by reasō of the prosperous successe of the wicked, or bycause that they by their power can hurt them. For if they were in this maner grieued, thei should not be troubled with
Nemesis, but rather with feare. But
Nemesis is then, when a man for the lucky successe of the wicked, is moued with astomake & hatred of the vnworthinesse of the person.
How mercy & Nemesis agree and differ.This affection in two things cōmunicateth with Mercy: first bycause either of them is a Heuinesse: farther, bycause eche of thē is stirred vp by the vnworthinesse of the thing. Mercy, bycause good men are grieued and oppressed, and
Nemesis, bycause wicked men lyue happely. But in this afterwarde they differ, bycause
[Page 143]
Nemesis hath a respect vnto prosperous fortune, & Mercy vnto sharpe fortune. Wherfore
Nemesis is in a maner a meane affection betwene Enuy & Mercy, for of either it semeth to take somewhat: of mercy it taketh vnworthinesse: of Enuy prosperity, which it hath a respect vnto.
Aristotle. Farthermore
Aristotle teacheth y
t none are affected with
Nemesis for other mens vertues: for if otherwise they of vicious and corrupt men, become iust, moderate, strong, and temperate men, we are not then angry, bycause when they are adorned with vertues, they are no lenger counted wicked men. But then at the last we are affected with
Nemesis, when those good things come vnto wicked mē, with which we thinke y
e good mē ought to be rewarded, as are riches, honours, power, fauor, & such like. But godly men must wisely deale with this affection, that when their myndes are affected with it, bycause of the felicity of the vngodly, let them haue a regarde vnto God, which is the true gouerner and distributer of all good things. Wherfore if men should bestow these outwarde goods vpon the vnworthy, their vniustice might iustly be reproued. But such a reprehension hath no place in God, bycause he doth all things most iustly. This thing
Dauid when he did not diligently consider, sayd: My fete were almost moued. As though he should haue sayd: By reason of this
Nemesis I had almost grieuously fallen.
We muste seldom geue place to Nemesis.
Inuidia. Inuidenciae. Cicero. How enuy and enuidēce differ Enuye. The definition of Enuie. Wherfore we must seldome geue place to this affection, least we seme to reprehende the Prouidence of God.
Now must we speake of enuy.
Cicero thinketh that it should rather be called Enuidence, for they among Lattin men are sayd to be sicke with Enuy, whiche are enuied. But Enuidence pertayneth to them, which consume away with this disease. And therfore he thinketh that Enuy or Enuidence is therfore so called, bycause that they which are enuious, do to much looke vpō other mens fortune. Enuy therfore is a grief which is takē for an other mās prosperity, especially of those which are equal & like vnto vs. For a poore mā enuieth not a king, neither do beggers enuy noble men. We enuy those that are like & equall vnto vs. And the likenesse is to be vnderstand, as touching kinred, riches, beawty, age, witte, dignity, and such like. The cause of Enuidence is not, bycause we feare that some hurte is at hand of those whom we enuy: for that should be feare. But of a certayne hatred and stomacke we can not abide the prosperity of other men, especially of our matches and like. And therof Enuy is the cause.
Enuy is euermore counted euill, and it is by the holy scriptures grieuously reproued. For it is most manifestly against Charity. For the Apostle said vnto the
Corinth. the 1. chap. Charity enuieth not.
Charitye
[...]. For
Paul taketh not properly there y
e worde
[...] whiche is turned enuy. But to the
Galathians he more playnly forbiddeth enuy, writing: Be not ye made desirous of vayne glory, prouoking one an other, and enuieng one an other: Where not only Enuy is reproued,
Desire of glory is the mother of Enuy. but the mother of it is also shewed, namely desire of glory. As also we may in this history perceaue. For the
Ephraites enuied
Gideon, bycause the glory of so great a victory semed to redound vnto him. And this affectiō is of force in all those things, wherin we desire to excel. Neither absteyneth it also from vertues: for y
e enuious persons would not that his matches and like should excell him in any ornament of vertues. But the cause why enuy is conuersant among like, is this, bycause although the prosperous fortune of like or matches, doth take away none of our goods, neither maketh vs lesser then we are, yet the Enuious person so thinketh of the good things of other men, as though by them his honor & dignity, gayne,
Of
[...]. and other ornamentes were darkened. And this is not to be left vnspoken of, y
t euery enuious person is one that reioyseth in an other mans hurte: for he reioyseth in the aduersity of his equall.
Euery enuious m
[...]nne is
[...] that is one that reioy
[...]eth at another mas
[...] Yet are not these to be counted for one and the selfe same vice, seyng they pertayne vnto contrary mocions of the mynde. For Enuidence is a grief or sorow, when he that reioyseth in an other mans hurte is affected with ioy. Yet are these vices, although they be diuerse, otherwise so ioyned together, that there is no enuious man whiche is not moued with the reioysing
[Page] in the hurt of an other. And hereby it manifestly appeareth that Enuidēce plainly is contrary vnto Mercy. For it lamenteth an other mās misery, but the enuious man reioyseth therin, bicause of the disease of reioysing in the hurt of an other wherewith he is sicke.
Nemesis is ioned also with
[...] They that are affected with
Nemesis want not also this motion of the mynde. For he which is sory for y
e prosperous successe of wicked men, the same man is also affected with pleasure, when he seeth them oppressed and vexed. The Latines haue no worde to expresse this kynde of ioye, wherewith both the enuious man, and he that hath
Nemesis is affected, in beholding an others mans prosperity.
Of emulation.Lastly we must entreate of Emulation, which is a grief of the minde, whiche we conceaue for good things whiche happen vnto other, whiche we want, which we thinke should beautify vs, & would gladly attayne vnto them. By this motiō of the minde we desire not, that other mē should be depriued of their ornamēts, but that grieueth vs, bycause we our selues are destitute of thē. And it is a point of a good nature, in this maner to be affected: therfore Emulation is numbred among laudable Affections.
Emulation is counted among laudable affections.
Cicero in his
Tusculan questions, defineth it to be a grief, which procedeth of that, that an other enioyeth that good thing whiche we desire. The same writer obserueth also, that Emulation is sometymes so taken, that it nothing differeth from Enuidence: wherfore it is sometymes reproued. But if the definition therof be receaued, as it is now alledged, it is an affection laudable, bycause it maketh men better: for it vseth to bring forth the imitacion of good things.
We must beware that Emulation degenerate not into enuy.
Cicero.
Riuality is the enuy betwene two louing one woman.
The matter wherin Emulation is occupyed.
Emulatiō hath hope ioyned with it.
The Ephraites were sicke of Enuy, and not of Emulation. But we must take hede, whiche vndoubtedly is easely done, that it degenerate not into Enuy, and Emulatiō procede not so farre, that we should wish that men fortunate and noble, and also wise men, might be spoyled of theyr ornamentes & good things. Wherfore
Cicero sayd, that that Emulation is laudable, which is not like vnto riuality. For this is the nature of those that be
Riuales, so to enioy their delightes, that they vtterly exclude all other. But addyng these cautions, Emulation is both good and holy. Wherfore
Paul exhorted the
Corinthians to emulate Charity, and the chiefest giftes. This affection is chiefly occupied about vertues, and al thinges which are had in honour and admiraciō. For that which a man contemneth and dispyseth, he vseth not to emulate. Emulation hath Hope cōtinually ioyned with it, of obteyning that which it desireth. For if a man should dispayre, it is not possible that he should emulate. And thus much of these affections.
Wherfore we gather that the
Ephraites were moued with enuy against
Gideon, bycause they would haue him depriued of the glory whiche he had gotten. Neither contended they so, bycause they studyed to do the like, although peraduē ture they made that their pretence. But
Gideon maketh not mentiō vnto them of his vocation, labour, industry, loue of his countrey, his good acte, & such other thinges, which might haue serued to the amplifieng of hys deserte towarde the people, and of his dignity. For by that meanes he should the more haue moued them to enuy: but after a sort he gaue place vnto them, & interpreteth their affection, as though it were an honest emulatiō. And teacheth them, y
t they haue now y
e fruit of this affectiō, bycause they had not only imitated him, but they had done more then he had accomplished. But now let vs returne vnto the History.
4 And Gideon came vnto Iorden to passe ouer, he and the 300. mē that were with him, weary, yet pursuing them.
5 And he sayd vnto the men of Succoth: Geue, I pray you, morsels of bread vnto this people that are at my fete, for they are weary: & I will follow after Zebah and Zalmonah Kinges of Madian.
6 And one of the princes of Succoth sayd: Are the handes of Zebah, and Zalmonah now in thine hande, that we should geue bread
[Page 144] vnto thine army?
7 Gideon then sayd: Therfore, when the Lorde hath deliuered Zebah, & Zalmonah into myne hand, then I will beate in peeces your fleshe with thornes of the wildernesse and with briars.
8 And he went vp thence vnto Penuel, and spake vnto them lykewise, and the men of Penuel aunswered hym: as the men of Succoth aunswered.
9 And he sayd also vnto the men of Penuel: when I come agayn in peace, I will breake downe this Tower.
10 Nowe Zebah and zalmonah were in Karkor, & their hostes with thē, about fiften thousand, al y
t were left of all the hostes of the childrē of Kedem: & they which wer slayne, were an hundreth & twenty thousand men that drew swordes.
11 And Gideon went thorough them that dwelt in tabernacles, on the East side of Nobah, Iogbehah, and smote the hoste, for the host was carelesse.
12 And when zebah and zalmonah fled, he followed after them, and tooke the two kynges of Madian, zebah and zalmonah, and discō fited all the host.
13 So Gideon the sonne of Ioas returned from the battayle, before the sunne rose vp.
After a long parenthesis the history returneth vnto the iust order of y
e thing that was done, and declareth in what sorte the ende of the battayle was. When the
Madianites and they of the Easte had wounded themselues one an other, and a few of them whiche remayned, fled away:
Gideon pursued after them, & passed ouer
Iordane. And bycause he had laboured all the night, and sawe that his thre hundreth men were weary, he would somwhat refresh them. Therfore he required meat of y
e city of
Succoth for his fellow souldiers.
Two Succoths. And
Succoth lyeth beyond
Iordane in the tribe of
Gad. Iacob builded it, when he departed from saluting his brother
Esau. Whiche I therfore speake, bycause there is an other place which is likewyse called
Succoth, but it belongeth vnto
Egypt, and is numbred among the first mention places of the children of
Israell.
Gideon desireth that he might haue geuen him
Kichroth, that is
round peces of bread for his weary souldiers. Vndoubtedly, if he had required great plenty of bread or meat generally, they of
Succoth might after a sorte haue ben excused. But by name he desired onely bread. Wherfore they whiche would not do that, can not but be condemned of great inhumanite.
He bringeth two causes of hys request. He bringeth two causes of hys request: my fellow souldiers, saith he,
are weary, namely bycause for the publique health they haue laboured all night: wherby he signified that they were not vnworthy of their reward. Farther we pursue the
Madianites, puttyng our selues agayn in daunger for the health of the Hebrues. Either of these cause were sufficient ynoughe to allure their beneuolence.
The princes of
Succoth aunswere, namely one for them all, and therfore it is sayd in the singular nūber,
Vaiiomer, and he sayd. Wherby is signified that onely the princes and senators of this city were in the faulte, and therfore they were at the length (as afterward shalbe declared) punished by
Gideon, and he threatned them only, as it is here written. They do not onely refuse to geue bread, but also they scorne the man.
Are, sayth they,
the handes of zebah and zalmonah in thy power? Thou speakest vnto vs with so greate a stoutenesse, and so desirest bread, as though thou haddest already taken them.
Gideon was griuously angry with these mockes for so vnworthy a contempt, and he freely and playnely forespake,
[Page] what he would do agaynst them.
If these vngodly and rude men had bene wise, they would haue ioyned them selues vnto him, to assiste his endeuor in fighting for the common health. But this they do not impudently deny bread whiche men vse to geue vnto suche as are weary and hungry, although they be straungers. A wonderfull diuersity vndoubtedly of things: The
Madianites which were strangers, were afrayd and fled: but those whiche were Israelites, mocke
Gideon the conquerer. If thou wilt saye they were ignoraunt of hys vocation: we may aunswere, that they could not denye, but that his worke was good. But graunt that they doubted of the vocation and principality of
Gideon, what excuse at the laste can theyr moste wanton derision haue? For so did
Nabal the
Carmilite behaue hymselfe towarde
Dauid, when he required some meate of hym for hys Souldiers, makyng mencion of hys fayth, and the fidelitye of hys men, in safegardyng hys thynges. But he dyd not onely denye vnto hym that humanity, but sent awaye the messangers laden with contumelyes. The thynges which
Gideon required, were iuste and honesty.
Stipēdes and victuales are due vnto an hoste whiche goeth on warfare. For stipendes and vittailes are due vnto the Magistrates, for as muche as he laboureth for the publicque vtility. Wherefore
Paul sayeth: Therefore ye geue vnto hym tribute, bycause he is the Minister of God, namely in defendyng the innocent, and punishyng the guilty. Wherefore they of
Succoth were bounde to geue those thynges whiche were desired, by the duety of iustice. For the same Apostle writeth, render vnto euery man that whiche is due: to whome tribute belongeth, tribute, to whom custome is due, custome, &c. The Ethnikes also saw this, whē as there are many ciuiles lawes extāt, whiche doo both weyghtely and moste iust prouide, that Souldiers should haue vittayles founde them, when they goo on warfare. And howe muche they synned in mockyng so greate a man, we may gather by the wordes of Christ, who sayeth: If a man saye vnto an other man foole, or Racha, be shalbe guilty of iudgement and Counsell: how muche more shall he be condemned, whiche wantonly scoffeth and mocketh hys Magistrate? Some prynces dyd seuerely punishe those whiche with contumelyes reproched euen theyr images: what ought this man to doo with those, whiche so mocked hym to hys face? These thynges I therfore speake, that we shoulde not thinke that
Gideon did vniustly threaten them. It is not for priuate men to reuenge theyr owne iniuryes: But it is the office of the Magistrate to reuenge both hys owne iniuryes and other mennes, and in reuengyng hys owne, he reuengeth also other mennes iniuryes. For what souer contumely is committed agaynste a prince, it redoundeth vnto the publique wealth and all princes.
Gideon at thys present dyd onely threaten, yet he stayed not there, least by occasion of reuengyng of hys owne iniury, the commodity of the victorye, whereunto he was called by God, shoulde be hindred. He differred therefore that whiche belonged vnto hymselfe: but with spede he prosecuteth that, whiche chiefely pertayned to the delyuery of the publicque wealth. But princes at thys daye do otherwise, who rather make warre amonge themselues, and that for very lyght causes, then they will take in hande a common cause and defence agaynste the Turke. Yea and there are some, and those of the Cardinalles, whiche write that they will (if they can) call backe
Cesar himselfe from that course of victory, wherwith he might obteyne agayne euen the City of
Constantinople, and to punishe the
Germaynes and
Englishemen, and other whiche fell from the Churche of Rome.
Furthermore,
Gideon is for thys thyng to be praysed, namely bycause, althoughe meate wanted, and he was despysed of the Hebrues, yet he desisted not from that vocation, wherein he was constituted by GOD. But nowe both prynces and ministers of the Churche will not abyde in theyr office, vnlesse thynges necessary for theyr lyuyng be moste aboundantly ministred vnto them. He threateneth
thornes and briars vnto the princes of
Succoth. For that Citie
[Page 145] whiche the Ethnikes call
Trogloditis, had a desert in the circuite therof,
Why he threa
[...] neth thornes & briars.
Penuel. wherin grewe many thornes and briars.
Penuel is of
Strabo called the face of God: in which place
Iacob wrasteled with y
e aungell, and sayd at the last: I haue sene the Lorde face to face, and my soule hath escaped safe. The menne of
Penuel in mockyng
Gideon imitated them of
Succoth, and bycause they puttyng theyr confidence in the
Tower whiche they had, did so scoffe at
Gideon, therefore he threatened to ouerthrowe it after hys victorye. But howe thys Capitayne of GOD got meate, it is not written: and peraduenture GOD so strengthned him and hys hoste, that without meate he perfectly obtayned the victorye whiche he had begon.
He fyndeth hys enemyes lyuing in securitye: it was nyght when he passed ouer
Iordane: and they had but euen nowe escaped out of the borders of the Israelites, and they thought y
e
Gideon would be in quiet at the least for that nyght. These were the causes, that they so securely rested themselues. There were fifttene thousand souldiers together, as certayne small remnauntes: for at the begynnyng there came one hundreth and twenty thousand fighting men, which stoode in the brunte, and bore weapons. Whereby we may easely gather what a greate number there were of boyes, scullions, and vnprofitable men, whiche vse to followe hostes. When the two kynges were taken,
Gideon returned, when the Sunne was eleuated, that is, after his rysing: by whiche kynde of speakyng, we manifestly know, that this warre, as it was begon in the night tyme, so also was it finished by nyght.
14 And he tooke a seruaunte of the men of Succoth: and enquired of him: and he wrote to him the princes of Succoth, and the Elders therof euen seuentye and seuen men.
15 And he came vnto the men of Succoth, and said: Behold Zebah and Zalmonah by whom ye vpbrayded me, saying: Are the hands of Zebah and zalmonah now in thy hande, that thou desirest, that we should geue bread vnto thy weary men?
16 Then he tooke the Elders of the City, and thornes of the desert and briars and brake with them the men of Succoth.
17 Also he brake downe the Tower of Penuel, and slewe the men of the City.
Gideon required of this fellowe beyng either a younge man or a seruaunte, to describe vnto hym the names of the princes or Senators of
Succoth. He trusteth not his memory, but will haue their names written, and studieth for this thing onely, not to commit any thing by anger with a furious minde. And therfore with mature deliberation he would punish onely the guilty, and not destroy the vnguilty together with the guilty. He sawe that onely the heades of the City resisted him, wherfore he determined to punishe them alone.
Theodosius,
A fall of Theodosius. an Emperor otherwise most worthy of prayse, fell grieuously, bycause in the City of
Thessalonia, for the kyllynge of one Souldier, whiche bare rule vnder him, he commaunded a great number of Citezins to be slayn without any choise, wherby both the guilty, and the innocent were killed. Wherefore he was corrected by the authoritye of
Ambrosius beynge Byshoppe,
The Emperor corrected of the Bishop. and compelled to publique repentaunce: and by the commaundement of the same man of GOD he made a lawe, whiche is yet in the
Code, that the sentence of death beyng pronounced agaynste any man, should be stayed the space of thirty dayes, before he should be put to execution. But nowe a dayes it oftentymes commeth to passe, that some publique wealth is moste grieuously oppressed, if two, thre, or foure Citezins thereof haue offended: all priuileges, liberty, and other ornamentes are in
[Page] a moment taken awaye.
Why he saued the kinges of Madian on lyue. Farther we muste consider, that
Gideon did rashely saue one lyue
Zebah and
Zalmonah whome he had taken: for he woulde shewe them vnto the menne of
Succoth and Citizens
Penuel, that GOD had deliuered them vnto hym. He vexed the princes both with thornes and briars, as he threatened, that by theyr euill they myght learne, howe muche and what they had offended.
Thornes are vnlucky plāts.
Iodeach is in thys place not onely to instruct, but (as I suppose) it signifieth in Lattin
animaduertere whiche is to punishe.
Thornes are counted euen of the Ethnikes among vnluckly plantes: and therfore it is no meruayle, if they be occupied in punishementes. But whether he slew them, or onely chastised them, by the wordes of the Hystory it appeareth not. But of
Penuel it is manifest ynough, both that the tower was ouerthrowē and the Citezins slayne, bycause either they scoffed more wantonly than the menne of
Succoth did, or els trustyng to the fense of the place they resisted
Gideon, wherefore when they came to the battayle they were slayne: or els let vs graunt that they of
Succoth also perished with thornes and briars.
18 Then said he vnto Zebah and Zalmonah, What manner of men were they, whom ye slew at Thabor? and they aunswered: As thou art, so were they: euery one was like the children of a kyng.
19 And he sayde, they were my brethren euen my mothers children. As the Lorde lyueth, if ye had saued theyr lyues, I would not slaye you.
20 Then he sayde vnto Iether his firste borne sonne, Vp and slaye them. But the boye drew not hys sworde: for he feared, bycause he was yet a childe.
21 And Zebah and Zalmonah sayde, Rise thou, and fall vpon vs, for as the man is, so is his strength. And Gideon arose, and slewe Zebah and zalmonah, and tooke awaye the ornamentes, that were on the camels neckes.
Nowe is set forth the punishement of these two kynges of
Madian, whiche
Gideon had therefore saued on lyue, to shewe them vnto those Israelites, whom he had determined to punishe, when he had obtayned the victory. Firste he asketh them, what manner of men they were, whom they slewe in mount
Thabor. They aunswered
that they were like hym, and so comely and beautiful, that they myght appeare to be the chyldren of a kyng. And that maye also be vnderstande of one of them, when as it is sayde
Echad: we maye also vnderstande it of euery one of them. There are some also which thynke that those that were slayne were in semblance and beauty lykened vnto the children of
Gideon,
Gideon was exceding beaufull. whome therefore they called a kynge, bycause they sawe hym beare dominion in the hoste. Hereby is gathered that
Gideon was excedyng beautifull. But when hys brethrē were kylled, we can not finde by the holy History. But it myght be, that they committed thys acte nowe when they came to make thys warre, or els before when euery yeare they inuaded the lande of the Israelites in the tyme of haruest. Of mount
Thabor we haue before spoken, when we entreated of the victory of
Barak and
Deborah.
It was not lawfull to saue these kyngs on lyue.
As the Lorde liueth, if ye had saued their lyues. Gideon mought haue saued these kynges lyues, if they had not slayne hys brethren: but bycause they had slayne them it was not lawfull. For in the booke of
Numbers there is a lawe, wherein it is ordayned, that the nexte of kynne muste not suffer the bloude of hym that is dead vnpunished, not that a priuate man shoulde kyll a murtherer, but he must be brought vnto the Iudge that there the cause beyng knowē he myght be punished. And therefore
Gideon beyng a Magistrate ought by that
[Page 146] lawe to punishe them. Otherwyse he myght haue let them goo, for as muche as they were not
Chananites, whom GOD had commaunded, that they shoulde not spare. Wherefore
Gideon sweareth nothyng contrarye to the woorde of God.
And he sayde vnto Iether. He commaundeth hys firste borne sonne, beyng then a younge manne, to slaye them, but
he feared, neyther durste he drawe hys swoorde: The two kynges disdayne, & would not be kylled with the hande of a chylde, euen as
Abimelech would be slayne of hys Armor bearer, least he should seeme to be kylled of a woman. Farther, they easely sawe, that they shoulde bee longe in payne or they were dead, when as the chylde by reason of want of strength coulde not rid them out of theyr lyfe quickely.
Why Gideon willed his sōne to kil y
e kings. And
Gideon peraduenture dyd for thys cause commaunde hys sonne to doo thys thynge, to inflame hys hearte, euen from hys tend
[...]r yeares agaynste the enemyes of the peopl of GOD, as it is written of
Hannibal, who from a chylde vowed hymselfe agaynst the Romaynes: Or elles he dyd it to learne hym from hys tender age to obey the lawe of God, wherein was commaunded that the bloud of the next of kynne beyng shed, should be reuenged.
But might not he haue committed that office vnto a hangeman? why would he so vrge hys sonne? To thys maye be aunswered two wayes. Firste that in the olde tyme it was not vncomely to slay the guylty. Farther,
The Hebrues had no hangemen. that it is not sene that the Hebrues had hangemen. And vndoubtedly, that thys was no office amonge the Hebrues, this testifieth, bycause in the lawe it is written, that a blasphemer beyng taken, was so stoned to death, that the hande of the wytnesses dyd throwe the firste stone agaynste hym: neyther was the puttyng to death of any body committed to any peculiar hangeman. And there are many examples whiche testifye that it was not ignominious to slaye the guilty.
Saul when he woulde haue the Priestes slayne, called not hangemen to doo it, but turned to the noble men whiche were with hym, and commaunded them to inuade the Priestes: who reuerensyng theyr ministery and dignitye, durst not obey. Onely
Doeg the
Edomite durst execute so greate a wycked acte, who was not of least estimation with the kynge.
Samuell also with hys owne hande slewe kynge
Agag the prysoner.
Ioab in lyke manner when he had cought holde of the horne of the altar, was slayne of
Banaia the chiefe Capitayne of the hoste. Wherefore it seemeth that the Hebrues in that auncient tyme hadde no hangemen.
But as muche as maye be gathered by the Hystoryes of the Ethnikes,
Lictores, were ministers appointed to execute corporall punishment.
Plutarche.
Lictores began at Rome vnder
Romulus, who (as
Plutarche wryteth in hys lyfe) were called so eyther
of ligando, that is of byndyng, or bycause the
Grecians callem them
[...], or
[...], bycause they executed a publique office.
Romulus gaue them Roddes bounde together to cary, and to them was an axe ioyned. They had also cordes to bynde the Citezins withall, that beyng bounde, they myght eyther beate them with roddes, or strike them with the axe. But the men of more auncient tyme wanted thys office: euery man executed it without any infamy, as it was by the Magistrate commaunded hym. And in verye dede that woorke of punishyng malefactors, hath in it no dishonestye or vncomelynesse, For if it be honest, for a iudge or prince to geue sentence of death agaynst euyll doers, why then shall it not be iuste and honest to execute the same sentence? Yea and GOD hymselfe in punishyng, vseth not onely euyll spirites, but good spirites.
But thou wilte saye,
Why Lictores and hangemen are of the commō people euill spoken of. why are
Lictores and hangemen commonly so euyll
1 spoken of? Firste, bycause the common people are afrayde of them, neither would any manne be punished for hys wicked actes: hereby it commeth that the syght of the hangman driueth into them a certayn horror. And that the people were so affected, y
e maner of y
e publique wealth of Rome declareth, where whē ambicious
[Page] men flattered the people more then was meete, they sent away the hangeman out of the market place, and iudgement house of Rome, as euen the Oration of
Cicero for
Rabirius testifieth.
The Romaynes vsed not a hangeman for their Citezins. The Citezins of Rome were not beaten with roddes, nor put to death. Theyr extremest punishement was banishement, they were caried into ylandes, & at the length condemned to y
e working of Mettalles. But the latter Romayne lawes, whiche are in the digestes, blotted out that exemption: for in very dede it was vniust. For a faulte worthy of death ought not to be wynked at, althoughe a Citezin of Rome were the author of it. And there were two principall lawes whereby the backe and head of the Citezins were prouided for,
Portia lex & Sempronia. the lawe I saye
Portia, and
Sempronia, whose power and defence neuerthelesse
Paul (as we rede in the
Actes) vsed, and so escaped both roddes and bondes. This is one cause why
Lictores and hangmen are so hated.
2
The irregularity of the Canonistes.An other cause hereof in the Papisticall opinion of irregularity, whiche as the Canonistes wyll haue it, is contracted of euery murther. These men thinke that a man can not so iustly kyll any man, that he may be promoted to the holye Ministerye: when as yet the Inquisitours of the herecticall prauity (as they terme it) doo dayly cause an infinite number, and those innocentes, to be kylled. The Popes Legates also in gouernyng of Cityes, and Prouinces, and makyng warres, althoughe they be Cardinalles and Byshoppes, doo styll continually cause bloud to be shed. But in the meane tyme, with greate hypocrisie they take hede, that the sentence be geuen by a laye Iudge (as they call hym) and so they wrappe themselues out of that irregularity. But the holy Scriptures do not so teache.
Moses sayde vnto the
Leuites, whiche with hym had kylled so many, ye haue consecrated your handes: so farre was it of that they shoulde be depriued of the holy Ministery. But the Pope saith, that
Dauid for shedding of bloud, was in the olde tyme prohibited to builde the Temple. But in this place we muste marke the misterye wherin
Salomon shadowed Christ, the peacable king. For he was by hym expressed, whiche hath gathered together the Churche, the true Temple of GOD without weapons, vnto the true and euerlastyng peace. But bloude beyng iustly and ryghtly shed,
Bloud shed iustly & rightly, restraineth not from the holy ministery. restrayneth not from the holye ministery. For
Pinhas who was hygh Priest, thrust thorough two moste vnpure whoremongers.
Elyas, a man of the stocke of the
Leuites, slew with hys owne hande the Prophetes of
Baal. And
Samuell, a man of the same tribe, dyd hymselfe kyll
Agag the king, & yet neither of them both were reiected frō theyr office. Neither do I therfore speake these thyngs, to commend the promotyng of murtherers vnto holy orders: but thys only I oppugne, that euery slaughter & euery murther maketh a man so irregular (as these menne saye) that he can not be ordeyned a Minister of the Churche. What if a man haue bene a Iudge or a Magistrate, or in iuste warre hath fought for hys countrey, can not he therefore be ordayned a Minister of the Churche? Peraduenture he hath obteyned excellent giftes of God, and is endewed with singular doctrine, adorned with a pure lyfe, instructed with dexterity of gouernyng, and godly eloquence: can not the Churche (as these men most absurdely thynke) vse hys gyftes? Vndoubtedly that was not obserued in
Ambrose, he was seruaunt vnto
Cesar, and decided matters in the lawe beyng Pretor of
Millan, and yet was he by violence taken to be a Byshop. I knowe that
Paul requireth that a Byshoppe be no striker: but no manne doubteth, but that that is to be vnderstande of an vniuste murther or violence. But what should a man here doo? all thynges are by the Papistes handled supersticiously.
3 Nowe the thirde cause why
Lictores and hangemen are euyll spoken of, is this, bicause very many of them liue wickedlye and filthy, and were before tyme noughty men.
Aristotle. Howbeit the office defileth them not: but rather by theyre faulte they pollute an excellent office.
Aristotle in his .6. boke of
Politikes the last chapter
[Page 147] sayth, that good men abhorre this kind of office, namely of punishing of mē,
[...]. bycause it hath a hatred annexed vnto it. For they doe oftentimes incurre the hatred of men. But in my iudgement, a good and godly man ought not for that cause to abhorre his administration. I remēber an aunswere of
Chrisippus,
A saying of Chrisippus. who being demaūded why he excercised not the office of a magistrate. If I excercise it not rightly (sayd he) I shal displease god: but if I do rightly, I shal displease men: but I wil do neither of both. He semed to some to haue aunswered very prudently, but me thinketh he answered folishly. For he should rather haue aunswered cōtrarily that the publike welth ought to be gouerned, and that rightly, to please both God and good menne: but a wise and good man muste not haue a respecte vnto wicked men. By these thinges it is now manifestly shewed, that
Gidion in that he himselfe killed the kinges of
Madian, committed nothing that was not decent for him, neyther that he commaunded his sonne to do any fylthy acte.
22 Then the men of Israel sayd vnto Gideon: Reigne thou ouer vs, both thou and thy sonne and thy sonnes sonne, bycause thou hast deliuered vs out of the hand of Madian.
23 And Gideon aunswered them: I will not raygne ouer you, neither shall my chyld reigne ouer you, the Lord shal raigne ouer you.
The people
[...]eceauinge a benefite at
Gideons hand, would haue made him king, that they might not be coūted ingrate. But seing gratitude is a vertue, it ought to haue no vniust thing ioyned with it: whiche these men obserued not. For they appoynted not theyr kyngdome by the lawe of god. In
Deut. the .27. chap. it is written, that he should be a king whom god had chosen.
It pertained vnto god to elect a king. Neyther perteined it vnto the people, to appoint a kinge whome they would. Wherfore that which they doo now, is not frely to geue any thing that is theyr owne, but to geue y
e which is an other mans. The right to appointe a king, belonged to god, and not vnto men: which thyng also
Gideon wysely saw, neyther was Christ ignorant therof, when they which were filled with bread, came vnto him to create him a king,
Christ refused a kingdōe offred vnto hym.
What manner of men the olde Romayne bishops were. he wayghed the maner of his vocation, and for that his kingdome was not of this worlde, and vnderstoode that they vsurped an other mans right, and were not moued therunto: By iust causes, he put of from himself such a burthē. The same things happened in a maner vnto y
e bishops of Rome. Which at the beginning were holy: for very many of thē wer notable by constancy of faith, & martirdom. Farthermore their church was kindled with feruentnes of charity, & towards the poore most liberal, so that it sent almes euen into the east part, to the Ilands and metalle places, where the holy confessours of Christ liued in exile. All which thinges got that chaire much fauor and grace with the faithful.
Gregorius. Wherefore the supreame power and kingdome in the church was in a manner offred, some times vnto those bishops: which they like
Gideon refused with a great spirite & singuler modesty. Of which thing also what
Gregorius the b. of Rome iudged, I will briefly declare. In his .4. boke of Epistles. in the .32.34.36.38. & .39. Epistles he of that matter writeth at large, both vnto
Mauritius the emperor, and also to
Constantia Augusta, likewise to the Patriarkes,
Alexandrinus, and
Antiochenus, yea and to
Iohn the Patriarche of
Constantinople, and lastlye to
Anianus Deacon of the same church.
In the time (sayth he) of
Pelagius my predecessor,
Ioannes Constantinopolitanus when he had assembled a sinode, by an other pretence, claymed vnto him self the title of the vniuersal supreame Patriarch, which thyng
Pelagius toke in euil part, and therfore made the acts of that Sinode frustrate. Farther, he commaunded his Deacon which was his deputye, whome he had with the Emperoure, that he should not communicate with
Iohn, being so arrogant and proud.
Gregorye
[Page] succeded
Pelagius and decreed the same things, & writing vnto the emperor, sayth,
Peter the chiefe amonge the Apostles, neuer called himselfe vniuersall Apostle, and neuerthelesse
Iohn byshop of
Constantinople now goeth about to cal him selfe the vniuersall Patriarch: & straightway he crieth out: O times, O maners. And this reason he addeth to these things, if the vniuersal head be so ordeyned of men, by the ruine or corruption of such a head, the church also shall perishe together. Of this place
Nestorius was once bishop, who beleued most wickedly of the sonne of god.
Macedonius had the same dignitye, who beleued not that the holy ghost was god. If those Patriarches had then beene vniuersall Bishops in the church, the whole church had fallen also with them.
Let none of the papistes cry that it is no strong argument: bicause it is none of ours, but
Gregories their father: let them cry out against him, who afterward addeth: That he which maketh himselfe vniuersall bishop, taketh away from other bishops their office, for where anye man is vniuersall byshop, he leaueth no office of a bishop vnto others. This also is the collectiō of
Gregory, and not foūd out by vs. And vndoubtedly if a man at this day loke rightly and more nighly vp on the thing, he shal see that the bishops of the west doe gouerne theyr churches onely by the ordre geuen them by the bishop of Rome.
Gregory counteth it for an absurdity that the Pope should be preferred before the Emperour.
Gregory afterwarde addeth that
Iohn preferreth himselfe aboue the Emperor: which thing
Gregory coū ted for an absurdity. But oure men now a dayes thinke it necessarye that
Cesar should be subiect to him: yea they haue oftē times resisted emperors, many times wearied them, and sometimes moued them out of theyr place. And yet
Gregory theyr father detesteth and inueigheth agaynst it, as a thinge vniust and not to be suffred. And writing vnto
Augusta he is yet more vehemēt, saying that the same belongeth vnto Antechrist. Wherfore let not our mē meruayle, if we sometime cal the bishop of Rome Antechrist, for asmuch as their
Gregory, calleth him by y
e most goodly title, which wilbe vniuersal bishop.
The sinode of Chalsedonia erred.The Sinode of
Calcedonia, as the same
Gregory sayth, gaue vnto the seat of Rome this prerogatiue, namely vnto
Leo the first of that name. Howbeit no mā vsed it, because our elders being men most holy, saw it was not meete for anye mortal man. Onely Christ is the vniuersal hed of the church For he is the smal grayn of musterdsede, whiche hath incresed into abrode and large tre, that it ouerspreadeth the whole world: and he is that little leauen, wherwith thre peckes of meale wer leauened. And the stone hewed out without handes, whiche is become so great a moūt that it hath filled al thinges. Wherfore Christ him self, for as much as he is able to be with vs, is to al vs the vniuersal hed, to whom euery one of vs cleaueth as membres. Moreouer
Gregory admonisheth
Alexandrinus and
Antiochenus, that they shoulde receaue no Epistles, whiche had written in them a tittle of so great pride. And he sayth, that to receaue such a title, is to fall from the fayth. Now let our men go, and obtrude this yoke, whiche by the testimony of theyr
Gregory we can not receaue, except we should go back from faith: Namely in attributing that to a manne, which we must beleue is propre and peculiar vnto Christe. Neither doubteth he to affirme, that this
Iohn transgressed the decrees of Christ, the rules of the Apostles, and Cannons of the fathers. All these things sayth he, hath he violated in the vsurpation of this one title. And he addeth, what wilt thou aunswere vnto Christ in the last day of iudgement, thou that hast arrogantly takē vpon thee his office, and wilt haue al his members subiect vnto thee? He commaunded, that we shoulde not call anye a father vnto vs vpon erth. But thou commandest men to cal thee vniuersal father. In what estimation therfore hast thou the wordes of the Lord?
An error of GregoryHowbeit in collecting of these places of
Gregory, I thinke there ar some thinges which ar diligently to be takē hede of, namely two: of the which the one is, that he sayth y
t
Peter was the chief membre of the vniuersal church: &
Paule, Andrew
[Page 148] and
Iohn, were heades of singular churches. This I therefore admonish you, forbycause the Apostles wer not byshops of singuler churches, for they wandred abrode thorough out the whole worlde, they founded churches & wan sondry nacions vnto the Lord, and al they were members,
Another error of Gregory. and that principal mē bres of the vniuersal church. Wherfore this sētēce of
Gregory is not to be admitted. The other thing, which I iudge is to be obserued, is that
Gregory doth testify that this his
Iohn did fyrst vsurpe vnto himself the title of vniuersality,
Theodoretus. which assuredly I cannot be perswaded of. Forasmuch as
Theodoretus in his booke
de haerecibus, when he writeth of
Nestorius, oftentimes sayth, that he was made vniuersall
patriarke. Yea and
Iustinianus in
suis nouellis, attributeth that title to diuerse
Patriarches. And (to speake as the thing is) I suppose, that
Gregorie this prety little saynt would haue had the thing or matter of an vniuersal bishop, although he reprehended the name and title. For as the history of those times teacheth, and his epistles testify, he abstained not from gouerning of other churches He shewed indeede that the name should be auoyded, namely least the
patriarch of
Constantinople by that title should eyther preferre himselfe, or be equal vnto the byshop of Rome.
But before these times,
Ciprian wythstoode the churche of Rome,
Cipriā resisted the church of Rome. whoe sought then to clayme vnto it self some tiranny, and he iudged that appellatiōs should not be brought vnto the seat of Rome, but would haue Ecclesiastical causes iudged in euery singuler prouince: namely, that they which in any place wer condemned by the iudgement of byshops, should not be restored by the ayd of the seate of Rome: when as yet he chiefly reuerenced the church of Rome, & acknowleged it as y
e
Matrix in these our regiōs. And assuredly to haue it in great estimacion, is a farre other thing, then to graunt vnto it tiranny or dominion aboue al other. For to the first we may after a sort agre, but to the other we must not assente, vnlesse we will fall from the fayth. Afterwarde in
Augustines time, when he was present at the Sinode of
Africa,
The counsel of Afrike resisted the church of Rome. there was great and longe alteration about this thinge, and at length the bishop of Rome coulde neuer proue (whiche thing yet he chiefly endeuored to do) that this power was geuen him in the councell of
Nice, that menne from all partes of the worlde mighte appeale vnto him. Wherefore if it were eyther for lacke of knowlege or of some rashnes, or by the people, or by flaterers geuen to any byshop of Rome, it should by the example of
Gideon, Leo, and
Gregory haue bene refused.
We must not trust vnto the inconstancy of the common people,
The inconstancye of the common people. which is alwayes moueable now they wyll haue
Gideon to raigne, a litle afterwarde you shal see that they were most vngrate againste him: for (as the historye declareth) they slew his children.
Gideon refuseth not the principality, as though he would not labour in the publike wealth:
What the Popes oughte to haue before theyr eyes. but bicause he vnderstode that it was no lawful vocatiō: which the Popes also ought to regard. He had before his eyes y
e law in
Deut. now alledged. The Pope ought also to loke vpon the words of Christ: Kinges of the nations (sayth the Lord) bear rule ouer theyr subiectes: but ye shal not do so: and being demaunded, who should be greatest, he aunsweared, that he which was lowest, and which more serued others. This is to gouern the church, not to commaund, but to serue.
Peter himselfe also taught ministers not to beare dominion ouer their flocke.
Who are in the church to
[...] uerenced aboue other. And
Paule hath written that Christ is set the hed of the church, & not men: although in it they are aboue other to be much made of, & to be honored, whych more then other profet the faythfull, and are more largely endewed with good gracious giftes: and as Christe required of
Peter, doo more depely loue him: and which ar more aboundantly endewed with those qualities, which
Paule to
Timothe and
Titus requireth in bishops. If we highlier honor such men in the church aboue other, not as lords, not as vniuersal bishops, not as heads of the church, but as excellent ministers thereof, the authority and obedience of the word of god should therby be nothing diminished.
An error verye hurtful in the church.But they do not so. They haue fixed the exellency and dignity of the ministers of the church, vnto chayres, places, and cities, howsoeuer he be in greater price & honor, which sytteth in those chayres or places, and what manner of man so eue
[...] he be in lyfe and manners. And so is there no regarde had to the graces and giftes of God, but onely to the place and seate. This vndoubtedly was the fountayne, ofpring, and beginning of al euils and superstitions. Our elders thought it good, that in cities which were more famous, where marchandises were traded, and were assemblies of men, where Proconsuls or Presidentes gouerned, there also the bishops should be of greater authority and iurisdiction. Whereby custome obteined, that those Churches and chayres were had in greater honor.
But (as it commeth to passe) ambicion crepte in, and in those places byshoppes were ordeyned, not alwaye suche as were more worthye, but such as were better fauored of Princes. And oftentimes the better learned and more holy were geuen ouer to small and abiecte bishoprikes. When
Augustine was Bishop of
Hippouerhegium, one called
Aurelius gouerned the most honorable church of
Carthago. And who knoweth not that
Augustine in doctrine, maners, and authoritye, farre excelled
Aurelius? The same thinge happened vnto
Gregorius Nazianzenus, who was byshop in an abiect place, namelye in
Sassimis, when as many other, not to be compared with him, obtayned the chief chayres. After this way & maner the bishop of Rome began to be preferred aboue other, namelye bycause of the moste ample dignitye of the citye:
The cause why the bishop of Rome was preferred before other. whyche cause neuerthelesse he vnderstanding that it was no firme groundsele of the honor which he had obteyned, he hath fained other causes of his excellency. And first he pretendeth that he had this priueledge by y
e councel of
Nice: which yet he could not proue before y
e fathers of
Africa, bicause in that Sinode the charge onelye of suburbe churches was committed vnto hym. Not a charge to beare dominion, but to geue counsel to admonish, and if there wer any things of more waight, to referre the same to the counsell. As to the bishop of
Alexandria the suburbe churches of Egipt, and to the byshop of
Antioch of the suburbe churches of the east parties. And it was not geuen the bishop of Rome, to be the vniuersall pastor. Neyther is it possible that a weake and mortall man should feede the flocke of Christe in all countries.
Farthermore the bishop of Rome boasted, that he was set to be the head of the church:
The bishop of Rome canot be hed of the whol church. whych cannot be meete for any man. For from the heade ar deriued mouinge and sense by the sinewes, into al members, as
Paule very well teacheth to the
Ephesians and
Colossians. But no man can performe that, as of himselfe, by closures & ioynts to quickē the mēbers of y
e church w
t the sprite of god. It lōgeth onely to christe,
Magistrates & princes may be called heads of the people. to destribute vnto his mēbers spiritual mocions, illustracion of the minde, and eternall life. Indede kings and magistrates may be called heads of the people, bicause they gouerne ciuily, and from them we may looke for good lawes and ciuyle mouinges: but in the church men entreat not of ciuile life, but of spiritual and eternall life, which we cannot loke for, but at gods hand, neyther can any mortall men quicken the members of the church. Kinges & magistrates when they are godlye, in my iudgemente oughte to haue the chiefe place in the church: and to them it pertaineth, if religion be il administred, to correcte the defaultes. For therfore they beare the sword to maintayne Gods honor. But they cannot be heades of the churche.
Paule to the
Romaines and to the
Corinthians, where he maketh rehearsal of the members of the churche, putteth some to be eyes, some noses, eares, hands, and feete: but he adorneth none with the dignity of the heade, who yet to the
Ephesians sayth this of Christe, that god had geuen hym to be the head of the body of the church.
We must not make the church two headed. Let the papistes shew writen in any other places of the holy scriptures, that Christ gaue an other hed vnto y
e church, & they shall haue the victory. But I know assuredly they cānot. For if that could haue bene done the church should be a two hedded monster. But it is a sporte to heare what
Iohn, sometimes B. of
Rochester in defendyng the Pope aūswered
[Page 149] to this. To graunt two heads of the Church (sayth he) is not absurd: for the Apostle writeth, the man is the head of the womā, & neuertheles euery wife hath byside her husband which is the head, an other head also. Wherfore he concluded that we may thus affirme of the church, namely that it hath both Christ and the Pope to be head. But this man faileth by a false
Sillogismus of equiuocatiō. For speaking now of a head, as it is attributed vnto the Church, he falleth to a natural head. In matrimony the husband is the head of the wife, not the natural hed,
How the husband is the hed of the wyfe. but as touching
aeconomical life. But the natural head of the woman, is the beginning of her natural life. And vndoubtedly if we looke vpon the natural head in the church, we shal finde that it is not one head: but looke howe manye men there be in it, so many heades shal there be: for there is none without an heade in it. And when we speake of the head of the Churche, we must keepe our selues in the
Metaphore: and as it should be absurde and monstrous, for one man to haue two natural heades, so shal it be iudged as portentous, for the Churche to haue two Metaphorical, that is spiritual heads. We must alwaies, whē we entreate of any thing, persist in the same order and kinde: which thing if wee doo not obserue, we shal easily be deceaued by equiuocation.
But let vs returne to the Pope,
Of the keyes foundation of the Churche. who least he shoulde seme to be destitute of testimonies of the holy scriptures, taketh two places out of them. Whereof the one is: Vpon this rocke I wil builde my Churche, and wyll gyue the keyes. &c. But that place pertaineth to al those which confesse the verity of faith: for
Peter, when the Lord demaunded what the Apostles beleued of him, aunswered in the name of them al, that he was the sonne of the liuing God. Wherefore, that which Christ speaketh vnto him, pertaineth to all them, whych together wyth him beleue and professe the same selfe thing. For the keyes are geuen vnto the Church. And in
Iohn, the Lord after his resurrection gaue them vnto all them: at the last also, when he should ascend vp into heauen, he sent them all alike to preache throughout the world. And as touching the foūdation, the Church hath no other foundation but Christ. For
Paul vnto the
Corinth. sayde: No man can lay any other foundation, then that which is already layde,
How the Apostles are called foundations of the Church. which is Christ Iesus. And if at any time the Apostles be called foundacions of the churche, that is to be vnderstand, bicause they in the first time of the Churche cleaued vnto the foundation, as the first and greater stones, not bicause the Churche leaned vnto them as to the principal foundation.
The other place which they bring out of the scriptures, is,
Not onely to Peter was the cōmaundement geuen to feede the flocke of Christ. bicause Christ saith vnto
Peter, feede my Lambes. But they are excedingly deceaued: for it was not the office of Peter onely, but also of the other Apostles, to feede the flocke of the Lord. But it was so sayd peculiarly vnto Peter, bicause he had denyed the Lord thrise, and therefore he might haue seemed to haue fallen from the fellowship of the Apostles, vnles he had of Christ bene restored by certaine woordes. And that not onely he, but also other ought to feede the shepe of Christ, his own woordes testify, which be writeth in his Epistle, wher he admonisheth other Ministers to feede the flocke of the Lorde. But graunt, that the Lorde gaue vnto Peter anye principal thing: what hath the bishop of Rome common with him? Let hym declare his spirite, and as Peter hath labored for the Church, let hym also labour: which thing if he performe, then wil we acknowledge him, not as an vniuersal bishop, but as a good Minister of Christ.
The spirite of Christ is not boūd to chairs He sayth that hee hath the chaire that Peter had. What seate I pray you speaketh he of? The holy ghost is not bounde to seates. But graunt that it were so,
Antioche had Peter sitting in it before
Rome had. For that church he planted, and long whyle gouerned. But they say that he was slayne at
Rome. But the Iewes crucified Christ himselfe at Ierusalem, which is a thing of greater waight. Wherfore if we should follow this argument, the bishop of Ierusalem should be preferred aboue all other. Yea, and Peter, as it is written to the
Galathians, was not the Apostle of the Gentiles,
[Page] but of circumcision, as it was agreed betwene
Paul, Iames, Iohn, and
Barnabas. Neither do we euer reade that
Peter prescribed the other Apostles any thyng, or that they depended of him. Yea
Paul most manifestly testifieth, that he receaued nothing of Peter. Farther, it is certaine y
t Peter was slain vnder
Nero, &
Iohn liued euen to the time of
Traiane. And they say that
Cletus, Linus, and
Clemens succeded Peter at
Rome. What then, shal we thinke that
Iohn the Apostle was subiect vnto
Clemens? And of necessity he should be so, if the Byshop of
Rome be the vniuersal head or general bishop. But who wil say that this may be suffred? Moreouer,
An Epistle of Clemens. lyes may be confuted with lyes. Our aduersaries bring the Epistle of
Clemens, which is a fained Epistle, as a thing certaine. We wyl gratefy thē in this thing,
Clemens Iacobo
[...]ratri domini, Epis copo Episcorū, & regnanti Ecclesiam que esi Hierosolymis, & omnes que sūt vbique, Dei prouidentia. and we wyll now graunt that to be true, which is false. Let them marke his superscription, which is written after thys maner:
Clemens to
Iames the brother of the Lord, by the prouidence of God y
e bishop of bishops, & gouernour of the Church which is at Ierusalem, and of al the Churches euery where. What wyl they say here? The bishop of Rome ascribeth his title vnto the Byshop of Ierusalem, and attributeth this vniuersall charge of all Churches vnto him, and not to himselfe. This argument maketh verye muche agaynste those, which haue vnto the Churches obtruded this Epistle for true, & ratefied it. But that can nothing hurt vs, which is takē out of that epistle, against our doctrine. For we know that it is a fayned thing, as that which was neuer alledged by any of the fathers. And in it the same
Clemens affirmeth, that he hym selfe wrote the litle booke called
Itenarium Perri: which booke (as it is said in the Decrees) is counted among the
Apocripha bookes. But of this thing I haue spoken sufficient, & these thinges haue I rehearsed, onely that we might vnderstand, howe much
Gideon is to be preferred before the Antechristes of Rome.
Whither the gouernment of God bee excluded by humane Magistrates.Here is put forth an other question, whether the rule and gouernmēt of God be therfore excluded, bicause the Magistrate of a publike wealth, or of
Aristocratia, or of a kingdome, is geuen vnto a man. The cause of the doubt is, bicause when it was sayd vnto
Gideon: Thou shalt raygne ouer vs: he answered, I wyl not raygne ouer you, but the Lord shal raign ouer you. It is not hard to dissolue this question proposed: forasmuch as the administration, wherwith God gouerneth publike wealthes, hindreth not the Magistrate, which is his Vicar & Minister. And assuredly God raigned together with
Dauid and
Iosias: and the Israelites at that tyme had a certaine Magistrate, and one of their own, with whom also God himselfe also gouerned. Wherfore the wordes of
Gideon do not teach this, that God cannot raigne there, where as is a lawfull king. But this thyng onelye he regarded, that the present state of thinges, whiche was instituted by God,
When God is sayd to gouerne pub. wealthes. ought not to be altred without him. Ther was a publike wealth then in Israel, they had Senatours, and in al places ther wer Iudges appointed: wherfore the forme of the publike wealth could not by men be chaunged, w
tout great offence. If so be thou wilt demaund, when it is to be thought that God doth gouern & rule in other Magistrates? I answer: Then, when this is onely prouided for, that Citizens may liue vertuously. And forasmuch as piety is of al vertues y
e most excellent, the Lord doth then raigne, whē althings ar referred vnto it. Farther, as touching ciuil actions, when to euery man is rendred his own, & Magistrates gouerne not for their own commodity, but for the publike vtility.
When the thing is otherwyse, shall wee saye that God raygneth or no, as when
Nero, Domitianus, Commodus, Heliogabalus, and suche wycked men wer gouernours?
A distinctiō of those thynges which are done vnder Magistrates. Did God then cease from gouerning of the worlde? I thynke we must make a distinction of these thinges, which are done in those kingdomes, of the good thinges I say from the euil: forasmuch as there is no Empire so vitiate and corrupt, but that it stil retaineth in it many good thinges. Let vs looke vpon the gouernment of
Nero, & we shal se ther in a maner, an infinite number of wicked and mischeuous actes, where yet many partes also of Iustice floorished.
[Page 150] Prouinces were gouerned by Pretors, and Presidentes, which execute lawes, not altogether vniustly. It was lawful for
Paul to appeale vnto
Rome, neyther could the Hebrues by the lawes be permitted to iudge him as they lusted themselues. And the same
Paul, when he had shewed that he was a Citizen of
Rome, escaped both from bondes and from stripes. Wherefore seing in a gouernment most corrupt, very many good and profitable thinges floorished, the same coulde come frō none other but from God. It is therfore manifest that god at that time forsooke not the care and administration of thinges.
But if thou go forward and aske,
How God ordereth himself toward the fauts of Princes. whether the vices and corruptions of Empires are to be referred vnto God: I wyll answer, that the true cause of synne is in man, but the wil of God doth neither allow those vices, nor cōmaunde them in his lawes: yea, he prohibiteth and detesteth them. But he vseth them to punish the wickednes of the people: for, for the synnes of the people, he maketh an hipocrite to raygne, and in his fury he geueth kinges. For such thinges are euyl and synnes, and haue in them a consideration of punishments: & as they are punishmentes, they pertayne vnto the iustice of God.
But when Princes are so corrupt, what is to be done? We must obey,
Whither it bee lawfull to ryse vp against euyl Princes. but
vsque ad aras, that is, so farre as religion suffreth. Maye priuate men take vpon them to alter a corrupt Prince? They may do it in admonishing, in geuing coū sel and reprouing, but not by force of weapons. Yea, Citizens may fight for the defence of the publike wealth, as long as it lasteth. Wherfore
Pompeius, Cicero, and
Cato, are not lightly to be condemned, for that they resisted
Cesar, going about to styrre vp insurrection, althoughe at that time the publike wealth was very corrupt. But when he had once obtained the Empire, he ought not by priuate men to be depriued with weapons. Wherfore
Augustus said vnto
Strabo, who spake euil of
Cato, being then dead, that he was a good Citizen, which contended that the present state of thinges should not be chaunged. In the publyke wealth of the Hebrues, which floorished in the time of
Gideon, God gouerned in very deede. It was (as I haue said)
Aristocratia, where Elders were chosen by common voices, to do iustice: in which office, vnles they rightly behaued themselues, they were both punished, and put out of their roume: but if there happened any hard warre, God himselfe raysed vp Iudges, but they were not chosen by the people, neither did the children succede the Parentes in that office. After this maner did God gouerne the Hebrues. The wordes of
Gideon sufficientlye declare, that the Iudges exercised not the office of an ordinarye Magistrate. It was in the Lord to rayse vp for the time whom he would,
What we must consider when any thing is offred vnto vs. therfore the Lord said vnto
Samuel: They haue not reiected thee, but me, that I should not raigne ouer them. Hereby we gather, that when anye thing is offered vs, we must alwayes weigh, whither the same be good of his own nature, and whither it bee lawfully geuen, and may lawfully be vsed. Which if it be not, let vs put awaye from vs, whatsoeuer is offred, as Christ reiected Sathan, when he promised hym all the kingdomes of the world, neither receaued he the kingdome offred him by the people. Thys the Pope considereth not, who for his vnlawfull Supremacye or tyranny, continually warreth, and there is nothing which he attempteth not: so farre is he of to refuse these thinges. &c.
24 Againe Gideon said vnto them: I would desire a request of you, that ye would geue me euery man the earings of his pray (for they had golden earinges, bicause they were Ismaelites.)
25 And they sayd: we wyl geue them. And they spread a garment, and dyd cast therein euery man the earinges of hys pray.
26 And the weyght of the golden earinges that he required, was a thousand seuen hundreth syckels of gold, besides collers, & pomanders,
[Page] and purple rayment, that was on the kinges of Madian, and besyde the chaynes that were about their Camels neckes.
27 And Gideon made an Ephod thereof, and put it in hys City, in Ophra. And all Israel went a whooring after it in the same place, which thing was the destruction of Gideon and hys house.
Here is set foorth an example of a most grieuous fal, very much to be lamented. A man holy in miracles, and notable in faith, filthelye falleth. Euerye man therefore is admonished, not to trust vnto his former lyfe, and thinges that hee hath well done.
Kim his opiniō of the Ismaelites and Madianites.
They had golden earinges, bycause they were Ismaelites. Kimhi thinketh that the
Madianites and
Ismaelites were al one, which he saith is confirmed by the booke of
Genesis, wher it is written that the brethren of
Ioseph sold him to the
Madianites, and straightway it is added that the
Ismaelites sold hym in
Egipt, wherfore he gathereth that they were al one, namelye which had theyr ofspring of
Agara. And she (as some say) was
Ketura the handmayd of
Sara, & afterward the wife of
Abraham. But the Chaldey Paraphrast interpreteth the
Ismaelites, Arabians, and not
Madianites. Yea and
Iosephus in his booke
De antiquit. by the children of the East he vnderstandeth
Arabians. They turne this Hebrue woorde
Scheharonim lunulas, y
t is litle Moones, wherof is mēcion made before. For in the Arabike toung
Schehara signifieth
luna, that is the Moone. The other woord
Netiphoth is deriued of
Nataph, which signifieth to drop. For that woord signifieth a drop, namely that is odoriferous. That was enclosed in smal vessels either of gold or of syluer, that with them both the necke might be adorned, and the nose fylled with a most swete smel.
Of the vse of carynges. But the ornament of earinges was most auncient, and vsed in the time of
Abraham. For his seruant gaue vnto
Rebecca bracelets, when he desired to haue her for a wyfe, for
Isaac his Maisters Sonne. The
Romanes also sometimes vsed them, as we may gather out of
Platus in
Epidico: Doest thou not remember (sayth he) that I brought thee an earing on thy byrth day? The
Egiptians also vsed them: for it is written of
Cleopatra, that she tooke from her eare a most precious pearle, and dissolued it in vineger, whē she contended with
Antonius for a sumptuous preparation of a banket. The
Carthaginenses also wer decked with bracelets, as
Plautus in
Penulo testifieth. For thus he writeth: And as I suppose, they haue no fingers on their hands, bicause they go with ringed eares.
Gideon tooke also purple garmentes: but whither he vsed them to his purpose,
Ephod. it appeareth not. He made an Ephod. The Hebrewe woord
Aphad is to binde, or to gird, whereof this nowne is deriued, signifieng a garment which compassed the shoulders, and then it was bound together, and it after a sorte girded together the inward coate.
Gideon did therfore make this ornament, to be a monument of the victory which he had gotten, as some write: in which thing if he sought his own glory, he cannot but be blamed. But if this were onely his desyre, to keepe in perpetual memory the benefite of God, he is not to be accused, for as much as oftentimes such monumentes were erected, as y
e holy scriptures testify.
Iacob erected a stone, whē he went in to
Mesopotamia, and whilest he fled from
Laban in
Gilead, he builded a great heape of stones together. And it were to long to rehearse all the monumentes or tokens, whiche were in the old time set among the people of God, that the memory of the benefites of God should not be forgotten.
Gideon made an Ephod, and vsed a sygne, not so apt and conuenient.
Wherin Gideon synned. He mought haue written a song, as
Barac and
Deborah did, or erected a pyller, or some suche like thyng.
God had not commaunded in the law, to make an Ephod to this vse, but onely that the Priestes should put it on, when they should doo sacrifice. Neyther is it needeful now to describe the forme of this garment, for as much as in
Exodus
[Page 151] it is most manifestly set forth: this thing onely I wil admonish you of,
Twoo kynde of Ephodes. that there were two kindes of it, as the holy scriptures declare, & as
Ierome both to
Marcella, & to
Fabiola, & against
Iouinianus the first booke testifieth. There was one which onely the high Priest vsed. It was made of purple violet coulour, sylke, & scarlet, it had gold wrought in it, & sūdry kindes of most precious stones. There was also an other which was called
Ephod bad, that is a linnen Ephod, whyche the
Leuites also vsed in holy seruices. Wherfore in the .1. of
Samuel the .2. chap. we reade, that
Hanna made euery yeare for
Samuel a litle coate and an Ephod, when she had then offred him vnto the Lord, to minister at the tabernacle. Yea and
Dauid being girt with an Ephod, daunced before the Arke of the Lord. The children also of
Dauid were girt with an Ephod. But
Gideon made his a pontifical and precious Ephod, for the other kinde was simple & of linnē, wherefore he should not haue neded so great cost to make such a one. For there wer gathered (as the history teacheth) a thousand seuen hundreth (as manye expound thē) sicles of gold. Some suppose that
Gideon did therfore make an Ephod, that euē as
Micha durst take vpō him, to haue a holy ministry at home in his own house, so did
Gideon now attempt the same. But of this sentence we wyll afterwarde speake, when we declare
Augustines minde of this thing. But nowe following the interpretation which we haue alreadye begon, which is of those which say, that
Gideon made this, to remaine as a signe and monument of the benefite of God geuen vnto the Hebrues, this I iudge is to be added, that the vulgare men began to haue in admiration the signe which was set vp, and as they wer prone to superstitions, they iorneyed thither, and offred peace offringes there, whych thing was a ruine and snare vnto them: for by title and litle they fel into idolatry. Neither was
Gideon without blame. For he erected y
e monument, & abused the signe: & when he saw how the people fel, yet tooke he not away that monument, but rather winked at it.
Ezechias afterward did more rightly, who when he saw the people offer insence vnto the brasen serpent, he brake it downe. Certaine
Rabbines labour to excuse
Gideon, bycause wyth a good mynde he caused the Ephod or monument of the benefite of God to bee made, but the Israelites misused it. But they go about that in vaine, for as much as the scripture sayth, that it turned to the destruction of
Gideon and his house.
Augustine intreating of this place,
Augustine. thinketh that the figure of
Synechdoche is here to be vnderstand, so that by this word Ephod, al priestly ornamentes may be noted, as though
Gideon would in his Citye haue an holye ministery: which was plainly against the wil of God, who had appointed to be worshipped at the Arke of the couenant. That was no other thing, then to plucke away men from the tabernacle of God, & after a sort to deuide the church.
Gideon & the people did not (saith
Augustine) sacrifice vnto idols, but with these garmentes they constituted a worshipping vnto the true God in
Gideon his house, that is in
Ophra. But forasmuch as they did otherwise then God had prescribed, they fell therfore into a certaine kinde of Idolatry. And that
Gideon worshipped not idols, it doth not onely hereby appeare, in that he ouerthrew the altar of
Baal, cut downe his groue, and offred vpon the alter of God, the bullocke consecrated vnto
Baal, but also bicause the people al his life time (as we shal straightwaye heare) are sayde not to haue woorshipped
Baal.
This woord
whooring is to be vnderstand Methaphorically,
The Methaphore of who
[...] tyng. which is a thing very cōmon in the scriptures. For the Church is the Spouse of God, and therefore it ought to worship him onely, and to depend onely of him. Wherfore, euen as a maried woman, if she leauing her own husband, follow other men, is counted an harlot and vnchaste: euen so also the Churche, when it forsaketh the worshipping of the true God, and geueth place to supersticions, is iustlye called a harlot and an adultresse. And this is it whiche is nowe wrytten, that the chyldren of Israel went a whooryng after the Ephod, instituted by
Gideon.
Wherefore
Augustines opinion is, that
Gideon would haue had God worshipped so in his country, that the same thynges might ther haue bene done, which were done in
Silo, where the Arke was. Which opinion, although it can not be confuted by the scriptures, yet it appeareth not very lykelye: For we reade not that he had Priestes with him. Neither doo the Hebrue Doctors (who otherwise are diligent in expressing of thinges done) attribut these thinges vnto him, but rather agree with the other sentence, namely that he constituted it for a monument of the victory which he had obtained, which afterward was an occasion of superstition. Wherefore it semeth to be spoken more probably, that this erected signe was had in admiration of the foolishe people, so that they thought it to be a place very meete to doo sacrifice there, and especiallye for the offring of peace offeringes vnto the true God, which seemed not woorthy of reprouing. For at that time it was lawfull to doo that in a maner euerye where, but superstition dayly creeping more abroade, they began to attribute more then was meete vnto that signe, as to a thing deuine, and which had in it some power of God, and for that cause they offred sacrifices, and did incense vnto it, keping neuertheles a pretence of the worshipping of God, and the name of God the Lorde, as in the time of
Ezechias they did incense and sacrifice vnto the brasen serpent.
Whence came the begynnyng of reliques and inuocation of the dead.And in the same maner we rede happened at the beginning of the sepulchers, bones, and reliques of holye men. The Christians buried the dead bodies of the Martirs, as honorablye as they coulde, and to haue the memorye of them kept, they began to haue places of prayer at their tombes, not vndoubtedlye where they would woorship and inuocate the Martirs, but where they might heare the woord of God, receaue the Sacramentes, and exhorte one an other to defende the faith. And in deede that place seemed not a litle commodious for such a purpose: For the sepulchres of Martirs seemed to admonish & inflame the myndes, to enterprise the same battailes, and to behaue them selues most constantly for the name of Christ. Wherfore it was thought that in assembling to the Sepulchres of Martirs, two commodities were gotten. First, bicause some honour might be geuen to so great Confessors, whilest the memory of them was not suffered to be forgotten, but with verye great ioy thankes were geuen vnto God for their happy victory. The other was, bicause men might bee stirred vp to enterprise the like,
The beginning of the images of Sayntes. and to hope for the like gifts at Gods hand. And after the same maner began the images of Christ and of the Apostles priuatelye to bee made, namely that their death, which semed vnto the world full of ignominye, myght be made more honorable, and that the memory of them might floorishe, and by beholding of those images so set vp, men might be prouoked to the iust and laudable imitacion of them. If the thing had abidden within these bondes, it might haue bene borne with al, neither was there any thing there which might iustly be condemned: but euen as the act of
Gideon was turned at the length to idolatry, so in successe of tyme folowed the inuocation of Martirs at their sepulchers, and the images of saintes began to be set vp and woorshipped, not onely in priuate places, but also in temples.
The act of
Gideon was
a snare to him, and to his house, for both hee synned, and his children (as we shal heare) were horribly slayne. It brought also great misery vnto the Israelites. For from this superstition they fel by litle and litle to the open worshipping of
Baal, wherfore they were most grieuously oppressed of their enemies: howbeit as long as
Gideon lyued, they woorshipped not
Baal. Hereby we gather, that al worshipping of God, instituted without his woorde, is to him vnacceptable, and to vs most daungerous. There is but one God, and he wil be worshipped but one way, namely as he himself hath cōmaunded. And if to the worshipping of him, ther be any thing to be added by the decree of men
[...]o
[...] comelines sake, and for a iust and ciuil order, the same ought to bee but lyttle,
Gideon sinneth two wayes. and also mutable, as it shall bee thoughte good for to aduaunce edification. Wherefore
Gideon synneth twoo wayes, both in that hee abused the Ephod
[Page 152] which he made for a signe, and also bicause when he sawe superstition to come thereby, he prohibited it not. The good intent of
Gideon excused not his act, although he had a shewe of piety.
Leo the first of that name,
Leo the fyrst. in his Sermon of the Passion of the Lorde, sayth that
Peter, when he cut of the eare of the seruant of the highe Priest, was moued with a godly mocion. But what godlye mocion coulde it be, which Christ reproued, yea and so reproued it, that he affirmed that he which so drewe the swoorde, should perishe with the swoorde? What other thing was this, then to haue a zeale of God, but (as
Paule sayth) not accordyng to knowledge.
Paule also the Apostle, when he afflicted and destroied the Christians, thought that he dyd God high seruice.
These thinges haue a shewe of a good intent (as they call it) or of godlynes, but they are not in very deede that which they shewe for. Euen so encreased the pompe of the Masse, by no other meanes, then by a shewe of a good intent. For it seemed good vnto our Elders to adorne the Supper of the Lord. Wherfore this Pope added this thing, and an other that thing, so that at the lengthe the thyng came to thys poynte, that these additions excluded the institution of Christ, in such sorte that it may seme to be any other thing els, then the Supper of the Lord, for those thynges are obserued which men haue inuented: but that which Christ willed, namelye that brethren should communicate together, and celebrate the memory of his death, this I say is abolished.
But why the woorshippinges instituted by mans inuention are to bee abiected, this is an assured reason:
Why worshippings inuented by man, are to be abiected. bycause in woorshipping of God we must do all thinges chiefely throughe fayth, but it is of no force if it want the word of God. Wherefore if rites which are retayned for the woorshipping of God, lacke hys woorde, faith may not be geuen vnto them, and therfore ar they rather synnes, then woorkes pleasing God. For all that is not of fayth, is synne,
The authority of the fathers is not sufficiēt. as the Apostle saith. But they say that in those woorshippinges, the authoritye of the Fathers, which were present at Counsels, ought to be sufficient, neither ought we to esteeme their sentences of any lesse value then the holy scriptures. But I wil turne the same to them againe, and aske whither they thinke
Gideon was a holy man? That they cannot deny, forasmuch as the Epistle to the Hebrues the xi. chapter notably testifieth him so to be. I wyll demaunde of them also, whyther
Aaron were a holy man? They wil not deny it I suppose: when as hee was of God appointed to be the highe Priest, and the fellowe of
Moses in woorking of miracles. And yet for all that either of them, when they instituted a woorshipping without the woord of God, are greuously accused by the holye Scriptures. Let them therefore cease to obtrude vnto vs the Saintes: but when we require the woord of God, if they wil that we should beleue them, let them bring foorth the holy scriptures. We know that rites and worshippinges instituted euen by God himselfe, are not acceptable vnto him, when they are done without fayth, as
Esay, Ieremy, and
Dauid most manifestly teache, howe muche lesse wyll hee receaue those thinges which are inuented of men, whiche for that they are not grounded on his woord, doo vtterly want fayth?
¶Of a good Intent.
BVt bycause there is something alledged of a good Intent, whereby some go about to excuse
Gideon, I thinke it good briefelye to touche those thynges, which are necessary, as concerning it.
As touching the signification of the woorde, Intent signifieth a motion of the mynde, whereby by some meane we tende vnto an ende, as if a man shoulde study by geuing of gifts or by seruices to attain vnto any honor. For the nature of thinges is in such sort, that many thinges are so connexed together betwene themselues, that by the one is made a steppe vnto the other. For by medecines & drinkes we attaine vnto health: by studies, reading, & teachers, vnto wisdome.
[Page] Wherfore an intent is an action of the wil, for it is his office to moue and stirre vp the mynde. And forasmuch as the wyl doth not perceaue the thinges that he desireth, before that it hath the knowledge thereof, it moueth not, nor forceth the minde before knowledge, which raygneth in the power of intelligence or vnderstanding. It perceaueth both the end, and those things which serue to the end, and ministreth them vnto the wyl. Therfore Intent stirreth vp to the end, as to a terme,
The definition of an intent. by those thinges which vnto it are directed. Let this be his definition. A wyl tending vnto the ende by some meanes. Wyl, which is his generall woord, is an act of the power that wylleth. The differrence is taken of the obiect, namely of the ende, and these thinges which are ordeined vnto it: as nowe as touching
Gideon, his intent was a motion of his wyll, to keepe the memory of the victory geuen him, by the Ephod which he had made. In will therefore he comprehended at once both the end and the meane.
There is bothe a good intent & an euyll.An Intent in deuided into a good intent and an euyll. And to a good intent this is chiefely required, that the ende be a thing iust and good: which yet is not sufficient. For if a man should steale to geue almes, he vndoubtedlye shoulde set before his eyes a good thing, but bycause the meane is euyll, therefore the intent can not be called good. But if the ende bee both vnlawfull and euyll, then shall the intent also be euyll. Wherefore that the intent be good, both the ende and the meane must be honest and good thinges. Howbeit certayne thinges are by theyr nature so euyll, that we can neuer vse them rightly. As theft, periury, adulterye,
An euill intent of two kyndes. and suche lyke. Wherefore the Apostles rule must alwayes be firme, that wee must neuer doo euyll thinges, whereby good thynges maye followe. Therefore an euyll intent is two maner of wayes: that is, eyther by the naughtynesse of the ende,
Twoo thinges are required in a good intent. or els of the meanes. But the intent can neuer bee good, except bothe ende and meane be good. Thus farre the Philosophers and schoole Deuines agree wyth vs. Nowe must we see wherein they differ from vs.
The Philosophers doo thinke that the righteousnes of the ende and meanes dependeth of humane reason or naturall vnderstanding, as though it were sufficient to put a difference betwene iust thinges and vniust: but that we denye, and requyre fully fayth and the woorde of God,
Augustine. as sure rules, whych thyng
Augustine testifieth in many places, and especiallye vpon the .xxxi. Psalme, where he sayth: Doo not count thy woorkes good before faythe, whyche are nothyng els, then (as me thynketh) great strengthes, and a most swyft course out of the waye, and he which so maketh haste, runneth headlong to destruction: Wherefore a good intent maketh a good action,
Faith directeth the intent. but fayth directeth the intent. Wherefore we must take heede, when we purpose any woorke, that our hart haue a regarde vnto fayth, whereby it may direct his endeuours.
The schoole Deuines wyll easelye graunt that fayth gouerneth the intent, and maketh it good. But we differ from them for three causes. Fyrst, bicause we
1 affirme that faith dependeth onely of the woorde of God: but they wyll haue it to leane vnto Fathers and Counsels,
Faith must not cleaue vnto fathers & coūsels and that in no case maye be graunted vnto them, forasmuche as fayth must bee constant, and vtterlye without errour: whych twoo thynges are not founde in the Fathers and Counsels, bicause they speake thinges one contrary to an other. Fathers very often stryue wyth Fathers, and Counsels are against Counsels: and those Fathers are rare, yea in a maner none, whych haue not sometyme erred, and that in thinges most waightye, and very many Counsels haue neede of amendement. Doth not the scripture by expresse woordes testify that all men are lyers?
2 The other thing, wherein wee can not assent vnto the Schoolemen, is, bycause by a good intent they affirme that our woorkes are made meritorious, yea and that of eternall lyfe. Which thing how farre of it is from the truth, the nature of merite may teache vs: whereof I mynde not nowe to speake.
3 The thyrde thing wherein we differ from the Schoolemen is, bycause they
[Page 153] wyl haue the worke to be made good by an habitual good entent as they speke:
The habitual entent of the Scholemen. That is to saye, done without any good mocion of the hart. They fayn that our actions do please god, as prayers, reading of Psalmes, and geuing of Almes, although in act we thinke nothing of God, & they suppose y
t thys habitual entent which they place in him, is sufficient inough. So that if thou shouldst demaūd of him, whych doth these thyngs, why he doth so? he may be redy to aunswer, that he doth it to the glory of god, especially whē in doing of it he hath not a cōtrary mind or repugnant will. But this can we not graunt vnto them, for asmuch as in this negligence, wherby when we work we think not of god nor of his glory, the commaundement of god is violated, which commaundeth vs to loue god withall the hart, withall the soule, and withall the strengthes. Wherfore we rather counsell that this maye bee knowleged a synne, then to be counted a good woorke.
But bicause they perceiued that theyr sayinges haue some absurdity, they added, so that in the beginninge of that woorke, we thinke somewhat of god and his glory, and so that that which is purposed, be directed vnto hym. But no man doubteth but that the begynning of all those thinges whiche we do, oughte to be good: but afterward, if fayth follow not those thinges whyche we haue well begonne, and if when we are working, we haue not a respect vnto god and his glory, we shall runne hedlonge into sinne, which may not be dissembled. Farther, if we should worke as we ought to do, and as the law requireth, yet should we (as Christ sayth) be still vnprofitable seruants: so far is it of, that we can clayme vnto our selues any merites. Wherfore so long as we desist from thinkinge vpon the honor and glory of God, we fall, neyther are such falles to be dissembled, but rather to pray that they may be turned frō vs, forasmuch as of their own nature they are sinnes,
Fayth is not sufficient in h
[...] bite, but we must beleue also in acte. although vnto the beleuers for Christes sake they are not imputed vnto death. Wherfore let there be added to our workes a good entent: But yet such an entente as is adorned with faythe, and let vs performe the same not in habite but in acte. Wherfore the Lord sayth in the Gospell of
Mathew the .6. chap: The lyght of y
e body is y
e eye. And if thyne eye be symple, y
e whole body shal be lyght. But if the light which is in thee be darknes,
Augustine. how gret shal the darknes thē be? These things
Augustine (in his questions of the Gospels, y
e .2. boke, & .15. questiō, and agaynst
Iulianus in y
e .4. boke, & 20. chap.) iudgeth to be vnderstāded of a good intent. And in like maner writeth he in his .10. Tome, the .2. Sermon, where he entreateth vpon this place, we must not do righteousnes before men, to be seene of them. The intent (saith he) is alwayes to be applied vnto the glory of God, but the wyll to haue it knowen vnto men, is to be auoyded, but so much as shall seme to pertayne to the honour of God. And to that tendeth that whych Christ speaketh: A good tree cannot bringe forth euel frutes, neither an euil tre, good: for as much as the tree signifieth the entent. Wherfore this act of
Gideon done of a good intent (if those thinges be true whyche we haue sayde) cannot be excused, when as fayth gouerned it not.
28 Thus was Madian brought low before the children of Israell so that they lift vp theyr heds no more: and the lande had quietnes .40. yeares in the dayes of Gideon.
29 Then Ierubbaall the son of Ioas went and dwelt in his owne house.
30 And Gideon had 70. sonnes which came out of his thigh: for he had many wyues.
31 And his Concubine that was in Sechem, bare him a sonne also, whose name he called Abimelech.
When we heare that the earth had quietnes, we maye note two metaphores. The first Metaphore is, whereby
the land is taken for them that dwell vpon it. The other is, whereby
silence is put for peace: for that in peace the cryes of souldiers, the noyse of weapons, the blast of trumpets, and the running to and fro of horsemen and fotemen are not harde.
Augustine in this place doubteth, howe it could be,
Augustine. that God suffred superstition and idolatrye so longe vnpunished. And he bringeth two answeres therfore. First, that
Gideō did indede streyghtwayes as sone as the warre was finished,
Why the punishmente was differed 40. yeares. gather a masse of golde, but he made not the Ephod by and by, but longe after, namely towarde the end of his life: or that the Ephod was made as sone as the victory was accōplished, but the people fell not to idolatrye, till aboute the latter tyme of his life. An other cause he addeth, because in that superstition the name of God was kept, neyther was the worshipping of
Baal and other gods of the Gentles admitted for that, as long as
Gideon liued, the Hebrewes came not to that mischief, & therfore god delt not so sharply agaynste them. And it was no small benefite to geue them peace for .40. yeares: of which thing, seying I haue spoken before in the former iudges, I shal not nede now to repeate the same agayne.
Ierubbaal wente and dwelte in his house. He coueted not a perpetuall rule, as did
Cesar, who after v. yeares did agayn, couet to continew vnto himself the prouince of France other. v. yeres. But
Gideon when he had obteined peace, ceased from warres, and dismissing his host, led his life at home in his owne house, in a manner like a priuate man. Suche are vprighte mindes whiche indeede wante ambicion.
In his commē taries vpon the 1. of Samuell the 25. chap.
He had .70. children, for he had many wiues. Of hauinge many wiues I will not nowe speake muche, bycause it is to be entreated of in an other place: this is sufficient to be sayd at this present, that god in the old lawe permitted the same after a sort vnto the fathers.
VVhich came out of his thigh. This is therefore written, least peraduenture we should suspecte that of those .70. children some were adopted. Besides the 70. whiche he had of his wiues whiche were many, he had
Abimeleche by hys concubyne.
¶Of Matrimony and hauing of Concubines.
THe place doth now admonish me, somwhat to speak of hauing of cōcubines, wherof is often mencion made in the histories of the old testament. But fyrst must we define Matrimony, that therout we may gather the vse of concubines: for vnlesse the nature of it be manifest,
Of Matrimonye.
Marrimonium coniungium, nuptie connubium. The definition of matrimony. we can not se how that hauing of a concubine differeth from it. Matrimony, mariages, wedding, and wedlocke sygnify al one thing. And Matrimony (as it is had in the .i. boke
Inst. Iustin. whē mēcion is made of the power of the father, and in the degestes
de ritu nuptiarum, is defined to be a coniunction of man and womā, an inseperable conuersation of life, and a communication of gods law and mans law. But this diffinicion muste be perfected by the holy scriptures. Wherfore we must adde, that this coniunctiō of man and woman was instituted by god, for the bringing forth of children, for the taking away of whoredome, & that therby humayne life might haue helpes and commodityes. In this difinicion vndoubtedlye the coniunction of man and woman holdeth place in the matter. The inseperable conuersation of life pertaineth vnto the forme, for with this purpose and will man and wife muste marye together. For though by adultery that copulation be taken away, yet when the matrimony is contract, they ought both of them to haue this in theyr mind, that beyng once ioyned they must abide & liue together. This belongeth also to the forme, that the cōmunication of gods law and mans law be had betwene them. For they must be both of one religion, & cōmunicate humayne things one w
t an
[Page 154] other. For the wife goeth into the famely of the husband, and with the husbande is counted all one fleshe. Yea and the substance of either parties are made in all poyntes cōmon, but the efficiēt cause of this ordināce was god himself, euen frō the beginning, who made vnto
Adam a helper. And the end (as we haue sayd) is the procreation of children: for god sayd, Increse and multiply. But as touching the other ende, namelye for the aduoydinge of whoredome,
Paule in the .1. to the
Corrinth. hath very well and playnly written.
If thou wilt demaund,
Whither bōds or writings ar required to contract matrimony or no.
Ierome. whither bondes or writynges are required for the cō tracting of matrimonye, we maye au
[...]swere, that they are not required. For the consent of eyther party is sufficiente, as it is had in the
Authentikes, and in the Code, where entreaty is made of mariages. But that whiche
Ierome writeth to
Oceanus, that hereby a wife is discerned from a concubine, bycause a wyfe must haue bondes and a dowry, which thinges concubines had not, thys I say is not vniuersally to be receaued. For his sentence is to be drawen vnto y
e wife, which before was a concubine. As touching her she neded bondes, that shee mighte no more be counted a concubine, & y
t the children which she had alredy, or afterward might haue, might be legitimate. But a dowry is not required of necessitye, because (as it is a cōmon saying,) a dowry hath not place without matrymony,
A dowry is not necessary to cō tract matrimonye. but matrimony may cōsist w
tout a dowry. For a dowry is geuen for the easier susteyning of the hurthē of matrimony. The Cannons haue added, and y
e profitably, y
e Matrymonyes should not be contracted priuely. For if the assent of the man and wife be secrete and without witnesses,
Agaynst secret mariages. Iudges can pronounce nothyng of suche a matrimony contracted. Wherefore if theyr wils should he changed, and after those secret matrimonies, they should contracte solemne and publike mariages, the first mariages geue place vnto them, and the conscience is kept both perplexe and also wounded.
But to speake of hauing of concubines, two things ar to be considered. First what the Romaine lawes ordeyned of it: Secondly,
Of hauing o
[...] Concubines. in what sort it was among the Hebrewes vsed, or what is to be vnderstand, when we reade that the fathers had concubines. As touching the first hauing of cōcubines, was by the ciuile law a certayne kind of matrimony: for a concubine was not a harlot,
Hauyng of a Concubine semed to the Romaynes to be a kind of Matrimony.
The definition of a Concubine which was common to many, nor also a harlot, which was kept of a man together with his lawful wife. And how much it differeth from a wife, it shall appeare by the definitiō of a concubine. For a concubine is she which hath the vse of mariage wyth one that liueth sole. But for that shee is not vnseperable, (bycause they that are so ioyned maye easely be seperated) therefore a concubine differeth muche from a very wife: Farther humayn rights ar not communicated with her, for a Concubine goeth not into the famely of him with whome shee is conuersant. Yea and theyr goodes and facultyes are not commune together, neyther are the children borne of that coniunction, counted lawful and iust heyres, vnlesse they be made legitimate by the benefyte of the prince. Howbeit it is by the Romayne law forbidden that a manne shoulde haue manye Concubines at once, and it is prohibited to haue a Concubyne together with his wife. Moreouer by the Romayne lawes, such can not be counted as Concubynes, whych may be vsed as harlots, as a fre virgine, and a widow vnder .25. yeres of age: for if a man medle w
t them, eyther it shalbe matrimony, or els iudged whoredome. Howbeit a widow maye be a Concubin, if before witnesses it be declared, that she is taken not for a wife, but for a Concubine. And lastly there can be no Concubine, whiche may not become a wife, although not in that place where she dwelleth, yet at the least in an other place, which I therfore ad, because by the Romaine law it was not lawful for the President to mary a wife of that prouince wher he gouerned, whiche yet he might haue as a Concubine.
And if thou wilt demaund, whether the Romayne law allowed Concubines
[Page] or no.
Whether the Romaine lawe allowed concubines or no. I wyll answer, that they did absolutely allow thē, because they condēned, not hauynge of Concubines as a thing vnlawfull, so that it were vsed as before is sayd. Yet it shadowingly reproueth that coniunction, when as it suffreth not the children borne of Cōcubines to be lawful & iust heyres, vnlesse at the length of a Concubine she should become a wife, or vnlesse it be by the authority of the prince. Howbeit we must know that the children of a Concubyne, were admitted vnto a certayne little portion of inheritance, but yet not to a like and equall portion with the legitimate. Yea and the children borne of a concubyne, are not in the power of the father. But when of a Concubine she is made a wife, then it was necessary that there shoulde be tables of Matrimony.
If we will retayne the Romayn law, a handmayden cannot be made a Concubine: for by that law a handmayden could not be made a wife. For the coniunction of a free man with a hand maiden, the Romayn lawes called
Contuberniū, neyther did they count it for a iust matrimonye. Howbeit by handemaydens the Romaynes vnderstode not hired seruantes, but such as were bought: whiche I therefore speake, because our hired handemaydens, are free persons, and therfore it is lawfull to contracte iust matrimony with them.
The Concubines of the fathers were wiues.But now let vs consider of the law of the Hebrewes, & what is to be thought of the Concubines of the fathers. They wer in very dede wiues, although oftentimes they were handemaydens, as
Agar, Bala, Zilpa, and as this Concubine of
Gideon. In the iudgement seate, and as touching ciuile actions, it seemeth that free men of those places where these fathers were conuersant, could not contract matrimony with them, and therfore paraduenture in holy scriptures they were called Concubines. But yet before god, that is by the law of matrimony institituted by hym, they were wyues. Wherfore in the boke of Genesis
Agar whyche is called a Concubine, is also called a wife. Therefore there were two differences betweene the Hebrewe lawes and the Romayne lawes: bycause wyth them hauinge of Concubines was no matrimony, but with the Iewes it was before God: although openlye and by ciuill reason, bycause of the seruile condicion of the woman, shee was not acknowledged peraduenture for a wyfe. Farther, herein they differ, bicause the Iewes had handmaydens to theyr Concubynes: & the same was not lawfull for the Romaynes, if we followe that lawe, that shee should be a Concubine, which may be made a wife. Whē as the Romayne lawes counted not that for matrimony, which was contracted with a handmaydē. But this ciuill law was not in
Ieromes tyme retayned in y
e Romayn Empire,
Ierome eyther because y
e Ecclesiastical canons had mitigated it, or els for some other cause. For in hys Epistle to
Oceanus, he speaketh of certayne, whyche had theyr handmaydens in steede of wiues, for this cause not callinge them by the name of wyues, to auoide burthens, and charges, who yet if they became rich, made theyr handmaydens wiues.
After what maner the decrees permit Concubines. But we must know moreouer, that where Concubines seeme to be allowed and permitted in the decrees, the same is to be vnderstand of those which are in very deede wiues, although by the Romayn lawes and ciuily they were counted for Concubines, bicause that woman was not solemply maried, although there was a mutuall consent betwene them of matrimony. This which I haue brought is had in y
e distinction .34. chapter.
Isqui & Christiano. Whereof the first is the decree of the councell of
Toletanus: the other is the testimony of
Isidorus in his booke
de distantia noui & veteris Testamenti. But when in the decrees there is mēcion made of Cōcubines, which ar not in very dede wiues, they are vniuersally prohibited. And that is, when eyther party will not alway dwel together, neyther acknowledge one an other as man and wife.
Why the son of Gideon was called Abimelech.And this shalbe sufficiēt at this time as touching these things. Let vs now returne vnto
Gidion, who had by his Cōcubine a son named
Abimelech. The Etimology of y
e name is: My father y
e king. Peraduēture y
e cōcubine of
Gideon was arrogāt & proud, which coūted
Gideon for a king, and therefore called her sonne by this name, and kindled in him the flames of bearing rule, that he might right sone play the tirant, and claim vnto himself a kingdome as dew vnto his father.
32 So Gideon the sonne of Ioas died in a good age, and was buried in the sepulchre of Ioas his father, in Ophra Abiezer.
33 But when Gideon was dead, the children of Israell turned away, and went a whoryng after Baalim, and made Baal-berith their God.
34 And the children of Israell remembred not the Lord their God, whiche had deliuered them out of the handes of all their enemyes on euery side.
35 Neither shewed they mercy on the house of Ierubbaal Gideon, according to all the good thinges whiche he had done in Israel.
There is often mencion made in the holy scripture of a good age.
What a good age is. And in the 15. chap. of
Genesis, it is promised vnto
Abraham as a certaine excellent good thing. And it semeth to shewe two things: first a iust space of lyfe, so that death should not come vntimely, and strike as yet in tender age. Farthermore it signifieth prosperity of life and a profitable end. Wherfore it is required therunto that the minde be sound, the body not broken with diseases, no want of riches, the famely, countrey, and dignity abiding firme: this is iudged a good age. But what shal we reckē of eternal life? I thinke
Gideon obteyned it also,
Whether Gideō was at the last saued or no for as much as in the Epistle to the Hebrues the .11. chap. he is numbred with those fathers, which liued adorned with faith. Thou wilt say peraduenture that his faith was not iustifieng and perfect, but onely of that kinde of faith which sufficed to worke miracles. But I do not thinke that the Apostle, when he made mencion of
Gideon, and of the other fathers, wrote of that faith. For the faith whiche there he speaketh of, he defined in the begynning that it is an
[...] or (as they say) the substaunce of things to be hoped for, & a certaynty of y
e which is not sene. And in composing the Cataloge of the mē, which where adorned with this faith, he maketh mēcion of
Abraham, whō he testifieth to haue ben iustified by faith. Wherby is gathered that the faith whiche is there attributed vnto the saintes, is the true and perfect faith, by whiche the godly are counted iust before God.
But they say, he fell into superstitions. I graunt y
t, but he might be renewed by repentaunce, whiche is the effect of true faith, and at the last attayne eternall lyfe. But thou wilt say, what repentaunce was this? when he ouerthrewe not the
Ephod whiche he set vp, neither reuoked the people from superstition? Vndoubtedly there is neuer any repentaunce counted fruitefull, vnlesse that be amended which was done amisse. To this I aunswere, it might be (as
Augustine saith) that this superstition began toward the latter end of his life, which thing, being repentaunt, he had decreed to take away if he had liued. But being preuē ted by death, he was not able to performe it.
And was buried. They made no prayers or supplications to deliuer his spirite from the paynes of Purgatory, And we read not in any place of the old testamēt that for the same cause there were either sacrifices or oblations made.
And when Gideon was dead, the Israelites went a whoryng and worshipped Baal. Wherby we may learne how ingrate men are towards God. He had adorned them with so many benefites, & yet their good prince being dead, which kept them in their duty, they fel straightway frō y
e true worshipping of him. Wherfore it hereby manifestly appeareth how diligētly we must pray for good princes & a godly Magistrate: for then is vnderstand with how great a commodity they were geuen vnto the people, when now at the length the anger of God waxing fierce, they are taken awaye. For that there were many
Baalim,
What Bahal-berith was. The Iupiter of couenaunt. in this place is perticular mention made of
Baal-berith whiche a man may call
Iouē foederis, or
Iouē foederatum. Hym made they a God ouer them, and worshipped him for the Lord. The summe of the worshipping of him semeth to be this, that they referred
[Page] al y
e good things which they had, as receaued of him: & they beleued y
t he turned away frō them those euils which they were not troubled with. By reason of which faith, they counted him for their God, & worshipped his outward image.
And forgat the Lord their god. We can not worship straūge gods but straight way we must cast away the true God. He is one, and therfore he refuseth to be worshipped with more. Wherfore it remayneth that they do not worship the true GOD, but theyr owne inuentions, as many as doo with the true God ioyne other whiche are idoles: for there is no true God whiche wilbe worshipped that way. Or els this is the sense of it, that the Israelites did wonderfully fal from the true God, bycause they did not onely worship
Baal, but they so worshipped him, y
t they vtterly forgot the god of their fathers and grandfathers, & altogether abiected y
e worshipping of hym. Which thing they vsed not alwayes to do: for many tymes they so allowed outward gods, y
t yet in the meane tyme they retayned some part of the olde worshipping.
Neither shewed they mercy on the house of Gideon. That happened vnto thē, which must nedes come to passe. When we departe from the true God, the offices of charity are neglected, for he whiche is euill agaynst God, can not be good to men.
An example of Constātius the Emperor. This vnderstoode the Emperor
Constantius the father of
Constantine: who thought that they would not be faithfull vnto him, whiche for to kepe still their dignity, departed from the worshipping of Christ.
Gideon in dede deserued so to be punished: but they ought not so to haue dealt against hym, especially seing they behaued not themselues so for the reuenging of religion.
To shewe mercy, is a phrase much vsed of the Hebrues, and it is read in many places in the holy Scriptures, neither signifieth it any thing els, then to do good, and to be of a gentle louing and ready minde to helpe those whiche haue nede. And that whiche is nowe spoken, by a certayne anticipation comprehendeth the narration whiche we shall heare in the chap. following, of the calamity and destruction of the house of
Gideon. In the meane tyme let vs consider the nature of the worlde: it is wonderfully infected with the vice of ingratitude: we see in a maner no notable or excellent gifte bestowed vpon any man, whiche by the children of this worlde is not recompensed with great ingratitude.
We must not besiste frō wel doyng bycause of ingratitude. And yet for this occasion we must not suffer our selues to be withdrawē from doyng good, least when as other are euill, we imitate them in departing from our office. Let vs go forward to do good vnto our neighbours and brethren: who if they be thankful, let vs chiefly reioyse for thē,
Why God permitteth ingratitude in the worlde. and afterward for our selues. But if they be otherwise, let vs turne our selues vnto God himselfe, for whose cause we do rightly, decreing with our selues, that we must not haue a regard what the sinnes of mē deserue, but what God requireth of vs, or what is decent for vs, remembryng y
e God very often permitteth the vice of ingratitude in the worlde, wherby our mindes may be the more erected vnto him, for whose cause all our thinges are to be instituted, and let vs so direct vnto him those things which we do, that we require nothing of this world to be rēdred vnto vs as a reward. Farther, whē we see that mē do for the most part after this maner reward those with great euils, whiche haue done them much good, we may cal to remēbraunce the life to come, where shalbe rendred vnto euery man according to his workes. Whiche thing if we had not a cōfidence that it shall one day come to passe, we should vtterly take away the prouidence of God.
¶The .ix. Chapter.
1
THen Abimelech the sonne of Ierubbaal went to Sechem vnto his mothers brethren, and spake vnto them, and to all the famely of the house of his mothers father, saying.
2 Say, I pray you, in the audiēce of all the men of Sechem,
[Page 156] whether is better for you that all the sonnes of Ierubbaal, whiche are 70. persons, either that one man reigne ouer you? Remember that I am your bone, and your fleshe.
3 Then his mothers brethren spake of him in the audience of al the men of Sechem all these wordes: and their hartes were moued to follow Abimelech: for sayd they, He is our brother.
4 And they gaue him .70. peces of siluer out of y
e house of Baal berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vayne and light fellowes whiche followed him.
5 And he went vnto his fathers house in Ophra, and slew his brethren the sonnes of Ierubbaal, seuenty persons vpon one stone. Yet Iothan y
e yongest sonne of Ierubbaal was lefte, for he hid himselfe.
6 And all the men of Sechem gathered together, with al the house of Millowe, and came and made Abimelech king, by the playne of the image whiche was in Sechem.
The destruction of the house of
Gideon is declared, & the detestable vsurpation of tyranny.
Abimelech went, as I suppose from his fathers house: for he vnderstoode that he could not there easely go about that whiche in his minde he purposed. He was minded to bring into
Israell the power of a king, and being otherwise a priuate man, went about to alter the state of the publique wealth. Which thing was vtterly vnlawfull. For that forme of gouernement, whiche the Hebrues then vsed, was instituted & allowed by God, euen as it is written in
Exodus and
Deuteronomy. Wherby is also gathered, that if at any time the people would haue a king, he ought to be created, whom the Lord appointed. Farther, if they should haue appointed a kyng by humane reason, so great a dignity pertayned not vnto him, whiche was borne of a concubine. It semeth that it should rather haue bene geuen vnto the other sonnes of
Gideon, and to the first begotten, before the rest.
It is good to marke by what guile he worketh. He accuseth his brethren,
Abimelech accuseth his brethren vniustly. as though they affected the kingdome.
VVhether (saith he)
is it better, that I or they reigne? As though he would say, one of these two thinges must nedes come to passe, and except I obteyne the kyngdome, they will clayme it vnto themselues: which was vtterly false. For they wēt about no such matter, yea it is rather to be thought but they followed their fathers steppes: who when y
e kingdome was offred him, refused it. Therfore it is very likely that they as legitimate children would follow the example of their father. He goeth to those men chiefly whom he hoped would soone be wonne to come vnto him, namely vnto the kinsfolkes of his mothers.
He vseth glorious reasōs. First he declareth y
t the rule of one alone is better thē y
e dominon of many. And y
t is most easy to persuade humane reason. Wherfore
Homere sayth: It is not good y
e many raigne, let there be one Lord.
Homerus.
Aristotle.
Whether a kingdome be better then
[...]ristocratia, or no. Which verse
Aristotle bringeth in his Metaphisikes. Whiche thing in dede might be graūted as touching the institution & perfection of the nature of man. For in a kingdome occasions in deliberatyng are not ouerpassed and corrupted: and the execution of things decreed, is not delayed and slacked, as we see often happeneth where many beare rule. But in this corruption of nature it semeth to be otherwise, for as much as in it hangeth a daunger & that most grieuous, le
[...]st the kingdome should fall into the hands of a wicked man. Wherfore it is better to retayne
Aristocratia, that is, the gouernaūce of many good men.
Abimelech vrgeth not wi
[...]h the other argument, as he did before, namely the publique vtility, but the proper cō modity of his kinsfolkes.
I
am (sayth he)
your fleshe, and your bone. As though he
[Page] would haue sayd: When I am created kyng, I will chiefly haue a regard vnto you. I will increase you with riches, dignity and power. Wherfore it is better for you to chose me for your king being your kinseman, rather then a straunger. He sayth that he is their flesh and bone, when as yet he was more fleshe and bone of his brethren, and of his father whiche was dead. For children pertayne more vnto the father, then to the mother. But this fellow lieth in all things, and speaketh to get fauor,
What to be fleshe & bloude of any mā, signifieth. and y
t guilfully. It is an Hebrew phrase, to be y
e bone and flesh of any man.
Laban spake so vnto
Iacob, when he required of hym
Rachel for a wife. This sayd the Israelites also vnto
Dauid, when they created hym kyng. And
Paul to the
Ephesians sayeth, that we are the members of Christe, fleshe of his fleshe, and bones of hys bones: for as much as he is our head and the head of the Churche, as the husband is ioyned vnto the wyfe. In summe, it is a speeche whereby is declared the greatest coniunction that may be.
The reasons of Abimelech are confuted.
Abimelech offendeth most grieuously in these reasons. First, in that he affirmeth, that it is better that one do rule, and that the gouernement of many is to be auoyded: here I say he deceaueth and is deceaued: bycause this thing was not to be weighed by the nature thereof, but by the worde of God: for we must not obey humane reason, but the commaundementes of God. Farther, he deceaueth the
Sichemites, whē as he sayth:
Ye are my fleshe and my bone, for althoughe we must haue a respect vnto our kinsfolkes, yet that must be done without any preiudice of the publique wealth, or breach of the cōmaundementes of God. Wherunto thou mayst adde, y
t in electing Magistrates, a regard must be had to the commō cōmodity, & not to a proper profit. But the people is moueable, especially to sedicions & tumults: therfore the
Sichemites ar cōtent with the reasons of
Abimelech, and gaue him money, whiche they would not willingly haue done for lawfull vses.
Why the money was in the Temple. The money was
in the Temple, either bycause it was gathered of oblations, and therfore as holy there kept, or els bycause it was then the manner (as in the olde tyme it was at Rome) that the common money should be kept in the Temple of
Saturne, whiche was the threasory.
Seuenty peeces of Siluer. Some interprete it a pounde of Siluer, & other some, Siluer peeces of money. But whatsoeuer it was, this summe we can not know precisely and exactly. But this is certayne if they were peeces of money, we must thinke they were of a great deale more weight, then are ours: for an hoste could not be hired for so small a price.
What manner of men Abimelech adioyned vnto him. And the men with got them to this warre, are set forth by two wordes of very great signification:
Rikim that is
vayne, poore: Pechizim, that is
light, and hedlonge. And as
R. Dauid affirmeth in
libro Radicum, these men are vnderstande to be light, chiefly in science or knowledge: in whiche signification the same worde is read in the Prophete
Zophonia the 3. chapiter. Euen at this daye also suche men are ready to go on warfarre, namely beggerly fellowes, whiche haue wasted and consumed their goods, and whiche are light hedded, yea hedlong to take vpon them, and to do any wicked acte. And that commeth hereof, bycause they are lyght in science or knowledge, that is, they want iudgement and ryght reason.
Warre maye sometimes iust be made. Vndoubtedly warfarre is a thyng lawfull and iust, if a man vse it ryghtly. For, for as muche as the holy Scriptures doo teache, that the Magistrate beareth the swoorde to reuenge wicked actes, and to defend the good, it followeth that he may arme souldiers, and call together his Citezins to a iust warre. Wherfore Christian men in the old time went on warfarre, when they were compelled to take wages euen of Ethnike princes. For the army of the
Thebeians was holy: for they were al in a maner slayne for Christes sake, and Christian souldiers sometymes when the host was almost destroyed with thyrste, by prayers thorough Christ obteyned water of GOD. But amonge these holy souldiers,
Hyred souldiers are not cō mendable. are not those hired warriers woorthy to be numbred, whiche for three crownes a month sticke not to put theyr lyfe to sale, & strayghtwaye offer themselues, and runne vnto euerye one that calleth them, when
[Page 157] they heare a Trompet or a Dromme, and addicte themselues to hym that offreth them most, hauyng no regard at all vnto the cause whiche they defend.
The
Sechemites, if they had bene wise, ought,
The sinnes of y
e Sechemites when they had heard the accusation agaynste the children of
Gideon, to haue enquired whether the thyng were so or no, and when they had founde it so, they ought to haue brought them to the
Senadrim, that they might by theyr iudgement haue bene punished.
Senadrim was an assembly of 70. Elders. But if they had founde it otherwise, it was their parte to haue chastned and kept vnder
Abimelech as a false accuser. But they did otherwise, they consented to the coniuration, and gaue the common money vnto
Abimelech. At the least they should haue remembred this, that to them (whiche were but certayne members of that publique wealth) it pertayned not to create a kyng.
Examples of murtherers of kinsfolkes. At the length he procedeth to the murther of his brethren, vndoubtedly a heynous crime, whiche (as it shalbe declared) sprange of a very great ambition. An accustomed example both in the holy Scriptures, and also in the Ethnike histories.
Cain slewe
Abel. Ioseph was solde of his brethren.
Ioram the sonne of
Iehosaphat (as it is in
Paralip. the
21. chap.) slewe all his brethren.
Absolom also an vngodly sonne spared not euen hys own father.
Romulus among the Ethnikes slewe hys brother
Remus, and
Domitianus slewe
Titus, Bassianus Caracalla also slewe
Geta. And vndoubtedly tyme woulde not serue me, if I should rehearse all the examples of lyke sorte.
I am not ignoraunt that these manquellers pretended some excuses for theyr wicked acte, but they were but vayne. Firste,
Pretences of murtherers of their kinsfolks they pretended that they for the publique wealthes sake destroyed their brethren and kynsfolkes whiche were all desirous to be kynges, bycause the kyngly power,
An aunswere of Alexander the great.
Cicero. whiche one pertayneth onely vnto one, can not be very commodiously distributed vnto many. So
Alexander the
Macedonian aunswered vnto
Darius, that the worlde could not holde two Sunnes, as though one shuld hinder y
e other in gouerning. Neither was
Cicero ignoraunt of this reason, who in his
.3. booke
de Officiis sayth, that
Remus slewe
Romulus vpon a certayne shewe of vtility, as though he saw that the kingdome should better be gouerned by one, then by two. Whom yet he confesseth to haue offended, beyng deceaued with this shewe of vtility, and that he put of all humanity and piety. The other thing whiche they pretended is, that therfore they slewe theyr brethren or kynsfolkes, bycause they had conspired agaynst them. But when (I praye you) complayne they of conspiracies? euen then when they had slayne those, whom they complayned of, & they could not defend thēselues.
He slewe 70. brethren, excepte one namely
Iotham, of whome shall mention be made afterwarde. The Hystorye writeth that there were
70. slayne, either bycause
Abimelech so willed and commaunded, or elles bicause onely one wanted of that summe:
The maner of the scripture in reckenyng of numbers. whiche thyng we may see oftentymes vsed in the holy Scriptures, that some certayne number is mentioned as a full number, from whiche yet some may be taken away.
He slewe them vpon one stone. It is thought to haue bene some notable stone which was appoynted for a place of execution.
Abimelech therfore is by a greate and detestable murther of hys brethren, consecrated kynge. Kynges were appointed to profit men, and to defend them: but he begynneth his kyngdome with murther. Wherfore he ought rather to be called a Tyranne, then a king. The place where he was created, is setforth: wherfore we must vnderstand that this worde
Alon, signifieth a plant, whiche
R.
Dauid in
libro Radicum supposeth to be a pine tree:
Ionathan maketh it a chestnut tree: and
Ierome turneth it alwayes an oke. Sometimes it signifieth a plaine: and the
Chaldey paraphrast interpreteth it
Mischar, that is, a playne field, thether assembled the
Sechemites to create a kyng. There was an image or piller set vp (as some thinke) to a superstitious woorshippyng: whiche thyng althoughe it be not agaynst the wicked manners of thys people and impiety of
Abimelech, yet it is not of necessity
[Page] that we should so thinke: for we rede many tymes in the Scriptures, that images were erected, not for diuine worshippynges, but for other causes. In the booke of
Genesis the
31. chap. a heape of stones was set vp in mount
Gilead as a border and monument vnto the posterity of
Iacob and
Laban: and in the
35. chap. of the same booke, a piller was erected by the tombe of
Rachel. Yea and
Absalon adorned his tombe with an image.
The famely of Millo.The famely of the mother of
Abimelech was not noble, when as she tooke her name of the towne.
Millo is the name of her house. That worde signifieth other wise a gulfe filled, whiche
Salomon built by the City of
Ierusalem. The
Sechemites created a king, the other tribes neither were at it, neither wer they called. So was there a schisme among the Israelites, whiche is wont oftentymes to happen when the worshipping of god is viciated. These thynges haue I briefly noted as concernyng the Hystory.
Now let vs more nighly looke vpon the wicked and flagicious actes, by which this man came vnto his tyranny. First he was very ambitious, he deceatefully and falsely accuseth his brethren, vseth the corruption of bribery to worke treason, is a robber of the commō threasory, he wrought by open violence, and at the last committed murther of his brethren, called
Parricidium.
¶Of Ambition.
What Ambicion is.
What honor is Excellent men are iustly honored.AS touching the first, Ambition is to much desire of honor. And honor is that reuerence which is geuen vnto any man, to beare testimony of his excellency. And that testimony is borne vnto hym iustly and of right: bycause it is mete, that we recompence somewhat vnto them, whiche doo helpe and norishe vs, and are endewed with giftes of God. And we haue nothing more worthy or better then honor. Farther, that they and their like may go forwarde to excercise them selues longer and more constantly in helping & keping of other. Moreouer, that we adding such reuerence, may get vnto them authority, whereby they may the more aptly and commodiously execute their office.
It is lawfull for godly men to receaue the honours offred them. Hereby it is manifest that it is lawfull euen for holy men also to embrace the honours whiche are geuen vnto thē for vertue, doctrine, and pietyes sake. For they both desire and allow things that are iust, and do reioyse that men performe that whiche the law of God will haue done. And he commaūdeth to honor the father, the mother, the Magistrate, and such like. Wherfore if men obey his preceptes, holy men can not but accept it thankfully. Thou mayst adde, that if it should not so be, their ministery would be contemned, whiche is by all meanes to be auoyded.
What must be taken heede of when honours are admitted.But bycause we are prone to pride, hautines, and arrogancye: therfore we must beware, and that circumspectly, that for the desire of honor, we abuse not that whiche after a sorte may be iust. Wherfore I thought it good to note those thinges, which I iudge are to be taken heede of in this thing. First, that we rest not in this kinde of good, as in the last end. Whatsoeuer we do, must be directed vnto God, and especially that honor whiche is geuen vnto vs, when we rightly and orderly execute our dutyes, so that thereby both we our selues may know, & also teach other to glorify God,
Honor is the reward of vertue. & not men in good workes. For this hath Christ commaunded, that we shoulde so directe our wookes, whereby they whiche see thē, may glorify God the heauenly father. Neither ought this to moue vs which is
[...]ōmonly spoken, y
e honor is the rewarde of vertues. For y
t is not to be vnderstād, neither as touchyng y
e vertues thēselues, nor yet in respect of the mē which are adorned with thē. For it shuld be very yll w
t either of thē, if they had no other ende performed then honor. The ende of good men is eternall lyfe, and the heauenly kyngdome. And the ende of vertues, is to prepare and renewe vs to the glory of God. But honor is called the rewarde of vertues, as touching other,
[Page 158] whiche doo beholde and wonder at the giftes of God in good and holy men:
Howe honor is the rewarde of vertue. and and when they desire to offer or recompence them somewhat, and haue nothing excellenter then honor, then doo they geue that. Wherefore after this maner is honor counted the rewarde of vertue. The other caution is, that a man doo not
2 so burne with the desire of honor, that he care not howe he come by it, whether it be by right or by wrong.
Salust hath writtē an excellent sentēce of this thyng:
Salust. The good man and the euill doo both a lyke desire vnto themselues glorye, honor, and rule: this man the true waye, but the other, bycause he wanteth good artes, contendeth to attayne it by guiles and disceates. Thirdely we must beware,
3 that a man desire not more honor, then his merites and vertues require: or extort dignity and honors, when as rather he is worthy of vituperation. For this should be both absurde, and also want all maner of iustice.
Abimelech tooke not heede of the thynges whiche I haue rehearsed,
Abimelech is ambicious. but incurred them all. For he set before hym the kyngly power, or rather tyranny, as the laste ende: for to it directed he all hys actes and cogitations, also he contended vnto it by disceates and guiles, and not by the good waye and iust meanes. Yea he seemeth rather to graunte vnto a sentence of
Euripidis:
A sentence of Eripidis. That ryght it selfe is to be violated for dominions sake. And for as much as he wanted merites, he rather extorted honor, whiche is geuen as a testimony of vertues, then got it vnto hymselfe by iuste meanes. He deceaueth hys Citizens with no obscure kynde of bryberye, for he flatteryngly requireth of them the kyngdome, bycause he woulde bestowe vppon them greate and moste ample benefites, for as muche as he was theyr kynseman.
The Ethnike lawes condēne inordinate ambicion. The lawes also of the Ethnikes doo condemne suche inordinate ambition. For as muche as in the lawe
Iuliā, de ambitu, it is decreed, that he whyche by bryberye obtayned honours, shoulde be condemned, both by paying of money, that is, a hundreth crownes, and therewith all made infamous.
He deceaueth hys brethren by a false accusation, as we haue shewed:
Abimelech falsely accuseth his brethren & cōmitteth treason. and goeth farther and committeth treason agaynste the people of the Hebrues. For he attempted to alter, yea rather to euerte the state of that publique wealth. In the digestes
ad I. Iuliam, Maiestatis, he is sayde to committe that cryme, whiche dyd any thyng agaynste the people of Rome, or agaynste the safety thereof. And who seeth not that
Abimelech very diligently conspired agaynste the libertye of the Hebrues. He infringeth this lawe also: whosoeuer hath with hym men armed with swoordes and weapons, and kepeth possession of some certayne places: whiche thyng the history affirmeth that
Abimelech dyd.
Abimelech is guilty of robbyng the cōmō threafore. For he gathered together souldiers and came into
Ophrath, & inuaded his fathers house. Wherfore he committeth treason, which (as
Vlpianus testifieth) is next vnto sacrilege.
Abimelech also is guilty of robbyng the common treasure, when as he abused the money, whether it were publique or holy, to hys owne priuate vse.
¶Of murther of parentes or kinsfolkes called
Paricidium.
LAstly, whiche was moste heynous of all,
Parricidium. he polluteth hymselfe with the murther of hys brethren: of whiche wicked cryme there are many thynges wrytten in the ciuile lawes
ad I. Corneliam de Parricidiis. And as farre as I can gather out of the lawes & Hystoryes, in the old tyme the name of that crime was geuen vnto those whiche murthered their parentes, grandfathers, great grandfathers &c. vnto those also which murthered their sonnes, neuewes, and sonnes in the .iiii. degree &c. But afterward
Pompeius extended the signification therof farther, & they were called
Parricidae whiche slew their brethren, sonne in lawes, daughter in lawes, father in lawes, or mothers in lawes, and suche other.
A lawe of Numa Pompilius Althoughe there was an olde lawe, and geuen by
Numa Pompilius: He that wittingly
[Page] bringeth a man to death, let him be taken for a parricide. And also
Augustine in his 3.
Augustine. booke
de Ciuitate dei the 6. chap. counted
Romulus guilty of
Parricidium, bycause he slew hys brother. And there he derideth the Ethnikes, which affirmed that theyr gods suffred
Troy to be destroyed, bycause they would take vengeaunce of the adultery of
Paris. But howe (sayeth he) were they fauorable vnto Rome, when as the builder thereof committed strayght waye at the beginnyng
parricidium? But the same
Augustine in his booke
de Patientia (which yet is supposed to be none of his) in the 13. chap. appointeth a certayne latitude or degrees betwene Paricides: for (as he sayth) he sinneth more haynously which kylleth his parentes or children, then he whiche murthereth his brethren. And he whiche sleaeth his brethren, offendeth more, then he whiche destroyeth those whiche are farther of a kynne. And the wicked cryme of sleayng parentes or grandfathers, semed to be so horrible, that at Rome for the space of 600. yeares, from the building of the City it was not committed.
Romulus in his lawes made no mencion of Paricidium.
An aunswere of Solon. Yea and
Romulus, making no mencion of it in his lawes, and beyng demaunded, why he left it out, aunswered, that he could not be persuaded that any suche thyng can happen vnto men.
Solon also beyng asked why he lykewise by hys lawes restrayned not
parricidium, aunswere: that he by occasion of his lawes would not admonishe men of so horrible a wicked cryme, and stirre them vp vnto it after a sorte by hys admonishyng. For it oftentimes happeneth that they whiche prohibite certayne vices, prouoke men to fall into them, whiche very often will doo those thynges whiche they are forbidden.
The punishement of Parricides.But as for the murther of brethren and kynsfolkes, it was a thing vsed euen from the begynnyng, as all historyes do testifie. And the punishement of paricides whiche slewe theyr parentes or children was by lawes (as it is had
ad legem Corneliam de parricidis) that they should be sowed in
Culeo, that is, in a lether sacke, & with them were put an Ape, a Cocke & a Viper, & thē they were cast into the deepe of the sea, or into the next riuer. But they which slewe of their kinsfolkes or cousins, were punished with the sworde onely. These punishementes, if they were at any tyme by the Magistrates neglected or winked at, God himself punished, as the history of
Samuell declareth of
Absalon, whych slew his brother, and most cruelly inuaded his father. He striketh also with furiousnes & madnes those men whiche commit such horrible wicked actes, as both the Poetes & also the historiographers write of
Nero &
Orestes. For either of thē whē he had slaine his mother, was mad. And it is a cōmō saying, y
t they which cōmit so great a wicked acte,
Cicero. cā not be quiet in mynde. Wherfore
Cicero in his Oration for
Roscius saith, y
e certaine yong mē of
Terracinēsis which were accused for killing their father, wer by this meanes absolued, bycause they wer foūd in y
e morning sleping, for y
e iudges could not beleue y
t they could slepe, which had cōmitted so detestable an acte.
Domitianus also whiche slew his brother
Titus, was killed by y
e vengāce of God. And in like maner
Bassianus Caracalla, whē he had destroyed his brother
Geta. And not to ouerpasse our
Abimelech, God (as we shall heare) sent an euill spirite betwene hym and the princes of
Sichemites, and either party was taken with a certaine furie, so that at length they destroyed one an other.
7 And they told it vnto Iotham, who went, & stode on the toppe of mount Gerizim, & lift vp his voyce & cried, & said vnto them: Herkē vnto me ye men of Sechem, that God may herken vnto you.
8 The trees went forth to anoynt a king ouer them, and sayd vnto the oliue tree, reigne thou ouer vs.
9 But y
e oliue tree said vnto thē, should I leaue my fatnes, wherw
t by me they honor God & man, & go to aduance me aboue the trees.
10 Then the trees sayd vnto the figge tree, come thou and reygne
[Page 159] ouer vs.
11 But the fyg tree aunswered them: Should I forsake my swetenes, and my good fruite, and go to aduance me aboue the trees?
12 Then sayde the trees vnto the vine: Come thou and be kinge ouer vs.
13 But the vine sayd vnto them: Should I leaue my wyne, which maketh mery both god and man, and go to aduaunce me aboue the trees?
14 Then sayd al the trees vnto the bramble: Come thou and raign ouer vs.
15 And the bramble sayde vnto the trees: If ye wyll annoynte me kynge ouer you, come, and put your trust vnder my shadow: and if not, let the fyre come out of the bramble, and consume the Ceders of Lebanon.
16 Now therfore if ye haue done truly and vncorruptly, to make Abimelech king: and if ye haue delte well with Ierubbaal, and with his house: if moreouer ye haue done vnto him according to the deseruyng of his handes:
17 (For my father foughte for you, and aduentured his life, to deliuer you out of the handes of Madian.
18 And ye are risen vp against my fathers house this day, and haue slayne his children .70. persons vpon one stone: and haue made Abimelech the sonne of his mayde seruant, king ouer the men of Sechem: because he is your brother.)
19 If ye, I say haue delte truly and vncorruptly with Ierubbaal & his house this day, reioyse ye with Abimelech, & let him reioise with you.
20 But if not, let a fire come out from Abimelech, and consume the men of Sechem, & the house of Millo. Also let a fire come forth from the mē of Sechē, and from the house of Millo & destroy Abimelech.
21 And Iotham ranne away, and fled, and wēt to Beer and dwelt there from the face of Abimelech his brother.
Iotham the brother of
Abimelech inspired (as it appeareth) with the spirite of god, threatneth that punishments are at hande both for him and for the Sechemites.
He ascended vpon the mount Gerizim,
The citye of Sechem. whiche was nere vnto the citye of
Sechem. In the booke of
Genesis. 34. chapter. there is mention made of this city: at that tyme
Hemor the father of
Sechem possessed it, who rauished
Dina: wherefore the citye was destroyed by
Simeon and
Leui. And afterwarde
Iacob gaue it vnto
Ioseph,
Ierome A place of Genesis is expoū ded. to haue it besides his common lot in the lande of
Chanaan for his posterity, as we rede in the same booke the 48. chapter. Wherefore it was in the tribe of
Manasses, and as
Ierom in his Hebrew questions vpon
Genesis testifieth,
Iacob was there healed of his haltyng, which he got by wrastling wyth the aungell, as it appereth in the same boke the 34. chap. namely y
t he came
Salem to the city of
Sichem. And we must know, that
Salem there is not a name of a city, but signifieth safe and sound. Otherwise
Salem longed not to the
Amorhites but to the
Iebusites, whiche afterwarde was called Ierusalem. In his Epistle to
Eustochius. whych conteyneth an Epitaph of
Paule, the same
Ierome writeth that this city lay situate by the side or roote of mount
Gerizim, and in his time it was called
[Page]
Neapolis, and it longed vnto the
Samaritanes. And the same is it whiche
Iohn maketh mencion of in his Gospel the .4. chapter, wher it is written
Sichar, but (as
Ierome sayth) by a corrupt word, for it should haue bene written
Sechem. Thither went Iesus, when he went out of
Iewry into
Galile.
But the mount
Gerizim and
Eball lay one ouer agaynste an other, and in one of them euery yeare were recited blessings,
The Mountes Gerizim & Eball. and in the other, cursings. Thither did
Iotham ascend, peraduenture at that time (as some suppose) when the multitude was assembled, according to the institution to heare the blessings and cursinges of the law. Whiche thinge yet (to speake as it is) semeth to me not verye likely, for as much as I rather beleue that for the worshipping of
Baal, that ceremonye was omitted, and partelye because it seemeth that the multitude did for this cause assemble thither, with a solemne assemblye to constitute
Abimeleche theyr new kyng. Wherefore in that solemnitye,
Iotham spake these thinges, vndoubtedly by the holy Ghost, as the euent taught. The sūme of his oration conteineth an exprobation of the wickednes which they had cōmitted, and a threatning of most grieuous punishments. And that the thinge mighte be made more playne and manifest before theyr eyes, he vseth a most elegant Apology.
Of a fable and Apology.
What a fable is.
Augustine.AN Apologye they saye is a kinde of fable. And they define a fable to bee a narration of a false thing, fayned for cōmodities sake, or oblectation. Or as
Augustine sayth in his .2. booke and .11. chapt.
de Soliloquiis, a fable is a lye made for delectation: althoughe properlye it cannot be called a lye. For the falsenes is strayghtway found out, and specially in Apologies. For in them are brought in insensible or vnreasonable creatures, talking one to an other, and entreating of matters very weighty. And as sone as the hearer perceaueth y
t, straightway he vnderstandeth that the thing is fayned, and not so done in dede. And vndoubtedly certaine thinges in fables are very likely,
Certain fables are likelye and some are not. and some are most farre distante frō probability. For it is very likely, that sometyme there arose a cōtention betwen
Aiax and
Vlisses, for the armor of
Achilles, which was iudged at the length vnto
Vlisses, and that
Aiax therfore toke such a displeasure, that becomminge madde he slewe himselfe. But contrarywise it is altogether improbable that a woman was turned into a plant or into a stone.
An Apology. Wherfore an Apology may be counted a fable which is not likely.
The kindes of a fable.
What fables are to be repudiated, & what to be admitted. Filthy fables are to be repudiated.The kinds of a fable are, Comedies, Tragedies, Satires, and Narrations of Lirike and Heroike Poetes, & also Apologies. But which of these fayned things are lawfull, and which are vnlawfull, thus may be discerned. They which haue fylthinesse & scurility, that is, mirth ioyned together with filthines, ought not to be admitted. But those which are written honestlye and shamefastlye, so that they refresh the mind with some pleasure, and ar also profitable to setforth good maners, are not be despised. That fylthy ones are to be repudiated, the Apostles confyrmeth by two testimonyes. To the
Corrinthians in the first Epistle he writeth: Euill communications corrupt good manners. And to the
Ephesians the. v chapter it is written, let whoredome and all vncleannes and couetousnesse not reigne in you, as it becommeth sayntes: then is added
[...], and
[...], and whyche are not comelye. By these woordes he reproueth all those cōmunications whych are contaminated with filthines & scurilitye.
Plato. The same thing saw
Plato in his thirde boke
de Repub. wher he excludeth Poetes which spake of gods, as though they should speake of men. Bycause they in so writing, do both vnworthely intreate of the nature of god, which is best and most high, & also they excuse the sinnes of common men, when as they testifye that both the gods and also noble mē committed the same sins, which thing assuredly we may see in the cōmodye
Enuchus of
Terence, where
Cherea a wycked yonge man (beholding a wanton table in the harlotes house,
Terence wherein was painted
Iupiter persynge
[Page 160] vnto
Danae by a showre) began to haue a pleasure in himself, bicause he beyng a vile man did those thinges, whych he knew by that table the chief God in the olde time committed. I did it (sayth he) and I dyd it with a good wil.
Cicero.
Cicero also:
Homere (sayeth he) fayned these, and transferred humayne things vnto the gods: I had rather they had transferred thinges diuine vnto vs.
Augustine in his .2. booke of Confessions the .15. and 16. chap. complaineth and soroweth, that he being a child and younge man, learned profitable words.
Augustine. But yet in thinges vayne. I would to god (sayth he) I had beene instructed in profitable writings: I hard
Iupiter thūdring and therwithall cōmitting adoultry. The mindes and affections of men ar prone inough vnto vices: wherfore it is wickedlye done, that children and younge men should in that age be by vyle and filthye fables stirred vp vnto sins. Apologies are profitable, whych consisting both of honest wordes, and good arguments, do rightly instruct that first age.
Esope.
Esope the aunciente writer happely excercised hymselfe in this kinde, althoughe there are some which referre his Apologies vnto
Hesiodus, who was aūcienter thē
Esope. But this our Apology (wherof we now entreat) was written long before
Esope and
Hesiodus tyme. For the time of the iudges, and namelye of
Gidion, was an hundreth yeares and more, before the war of
Troy. There is an other Apology also in the .2. boke of kinges the .14. chap. where
Amasias obteyning the victory of the
Edomites, prouoked the king of Israel to make war with him. Vnto whom the king
Ioas aunswered thus: The thistle of
Labanon sent vnto the Cedre that is of
Libanon, and sayd: Geue thy daughter to my son to wife. And y
e wyld beast went out of
Libanon and trode downe the thistle. By which Apology he shewed that he was so much greter, thē
Amasia the king of
Iuda, as the Cedre excelleth the thystle, and admonished him that he should after that sort be troden down & oppressed of his host, as was the thistle by wilde beastes.
These things haue I therfore rehearsed, lest the Greke and Ethnike writers should be thought to be the first inuenters of these profitable fayninges.
The vse of Apologies. Al men agre in this, that the vse of Apologies are then to be had, when we haue to do w
t rude persons. For they vnderstand neither perfect
Sillogismes, or vnperfect, neyther are they able to perceaue inductions, so that of perticulars they cangagather vniuersals. And they passe not vpon the exāples of noble men, for that
1 they themselues are abiect and base. Wherfore when such wayes of doctrine can not take place, there remayneth nothing but fayned narrations, where beyng allured by the ne
[...]mes of the thing, they geue much heede to the thinges which are spoken, and sometimes at the length are perswaded. They are good also to help
2 memory: for things
[...] are so new & pleasaūt, do very must delight: & thinges that are so sweete, are not so easely forgotten. Farther, men will easlier suffer themselues to be reproued by Apologies, then by open wordes: for the playne truth
3 engendreth hatred. But beyng couered w
t Apologies and darke speeches it may be suffred. At the beginning the hearers know not wherto the thing tēdeth: therfore for y
t they knowe not what wilbe spoken, they tary out the end, & are at the last peraduenture perswaded. Christe finished the whole parable of the vine: and at the end the Phareseis and Scribes vnderstode that it was spoken against thē. So also among y
e Romayns
Menenius Agrippa by an Apology wōne the people, which wer departed, to adioine thēselues agayn to y
e
Patritiās. For these causes ar Parables, dreames & visiōs of Prophets very much vsed in y
e holy scriptures.
The fable of
Esope of the frogges which desired a kinge, differeth not muche from this Apology which we ar now in hand with: for to thē after the beame or post which they dispised, was geuen a dragō, which by litle & litle eat thē vp al.
And I wil begyn at y
e declaration of the fable wherin it is said:
If ye haue done rightly and orderly, reioyse with Abimelech, and Abimelech with you. But if not, let a fire come out from him, & consume you. The oliue tree, vine tree, & fyg tree is the famelye of
Gideon: and the trees which desire a king are the Sechemites.
[Page] And as among trees there are some noble and some abiect: so also amonge men there ar some noble and excellent, and some vnnoble and of no reputacion. The bramble brier signifieth
Abimelech.
Of the brāble or briar.
Plini.
Plini in his 24. booke and .14. chapt. writeth of this kind of thorn. And as touching this matter, these are the properties therof: it is a plant vile and abiect, as was
Abimelech, who was a bastard and borne of a hand mayd, so that he was not to be compared with his brethern. And as he without any vtility gouerned the Israelites, so is the brāble wont to bringforth no frute. The bramble also pricketh, euen as
Abimelech very muche hurted the Israelites. Moreouer some write that the bowes of brambles are sometimes so vehemently shaken and moued with the winde, that out of them is fire kindled, wherewith not only they thēselues burn, but y
e whole wood wherin they grow is burnte: which thinge
Iotham nowe foretelleth to come to passe of
Abimelech. Wherfore the properties do wonderfully well agree.
But here are twoo questions offred vnto the readers. The fyrst is, bycause it is said that the trees wente to the Oliue tree, vine tree, figge tree, and bramble, to create them a king, when as the Sechemites went not vnto
Abimelech, and vnto the sonnes of
Gideon, but rather
Abimelech wente vnto them. The other is, wee do not here reade that the sonnes of
Gideon refused the kingdome offred vnto them, or aunswered those thinges which the trees sayd, when they were called to raygne.
The latter question I thinke may be dissolued two wayes, sayinge, that the sonnes of
Gideon in dede answered not so: but they would haue answered so, if they had beene demaunded. Wherefore
Iotham knowyng so rightwell al their mindes and wyll, seemeth not to speake so muche from the purpose. Or els we may say, that
Gideon hymself aunswered for his sonnes, when he said: I wil not reygne ouer you, God himself shall raygne ouer you, And that we maye vnderstand, what the three noble trees ment by theyr aunsweres, this is to be called agayne to remembrance, that the kingdome was offred vnto
Gideon, not onelye for himselfe, but also for his sonne, and sonnes sonne. Wherefore he refused the kingdome for three. And hereof it commeth (as the Rabbines suppose) that ther are three kindes of trees brought in.
But as touchinge the first question, the Sechemites and Israelites came not vnto
Abimelech, to make him theyr kinge, but yet the holy ghoste so speaketh by
Iotham, bicause he is he that knoweth y
e harts, & knew that that people laboured with this desire to haue at the length a king. For they had manifestly declared it before, whē they offred y
e kingdome vnto
Gideon, & afterwarde more manifestlye they shewed it in the time of
Samuel, when they altogether desired to haue a king geuen them, as other nacions had.
What manner of argument is gathered out of this Apologye.
Argumentum a comparatis A maiore ad minus.
Maior.Out of this Apology is drawen an argument of thinges compared together. For the sonnes of
Ierubbaal are compared with
Abimelech, as farre nobler then he, euen as the olyue tree, vine tree, and fyg tree do farre excell the bramble and brier. And the reason is from the greater vnto the lesser by negation, as though it should haue bene sayd: If euen they would not raigne, and iudged that it was not lawful for them, which were most excellent, endewed with vertues & faculties, apte and mete for to raygne: much lesse is it lawful for him to reigne which wanteth vertues, and is vnapte for a kingdome. But they which were noble, & might haue raygned,
Minor. would not, neyther did they thinke that it was lawfull for them. Wherfore
Abimelech neyther could, neyther oughte, to haue bene by you appoynted kinge. The first proposition is manifest ynough by the rule of things compared: and the second most manifestly appeareth by the Apology. We maye by the like argument reason of the Ecclesiasticall state.
For if the fathers which were endued with a great spirite,
The argument is ap
[...]ed vn
[...] the Pastors of the Church. notable in wonderfull vertues, and excellent doctrine, woulde not execute the office of a Pope or Monarchy in the Church, or take vpon them principality ouer all Bishops and Churches: that is much les to be graunted vnto their posterity, which are much inferiour vnto them, yea not to be compared with them. But they woulde not: wherfore neither is it meete that those shoulde. The first proposition appeareth (as we haue already said) by the rule of thinges compared: but the
minor is proued both by
Ciprian, and also by the Counsell of
Carthage, lykewyse by
Augustine, Leo, and
Gregory.
Farthermore, by this act we gather, what euyll commeth by chaunging the state of a publike wealth, especially when it was allowed by the woord of God, as was the
Aristocratia of the Hebrues. Neither was there any cause, why they should chaunge that forme of the publike wealth:
The Churche oughte not to haue altred the forme of the gouernmēt therof for God hym selfe gouerned them, gaue them .70. Elders, and raised them vp Iudges in perillous tymes. In like maner ther was no cause why the Church should chaunge the forme of her gouernment. Neither can they which brought in the Papacy alledge any thing which the Hebrues could not haue said to defēd their peticion for hauing a king. For as these men faine for themselues, that the Church shoulde be rightlier gouerned by one, namely the Bishop of Rome, then by many Bishops, of whyche euery one fully should haue care, as touching his owne portion: So myght the Iewes haue alledged, that their kingdome shoulde be farre better gouerned by one, then by many. And they might haue spoken that with muche more likelyhood, when as the land of
Chanaan extendeth not so farre as the Church, & very many thinges as touching ciuil matters maye be better executed by a Kyng that is absent, then the Church which extendeth most largely, can be gouerned of a Pastor that dwelleth in Regions most farre.
Fire commeth out of
Abimilech,
Tirannes oppresse and gouerne not. bicause oppression taketh his beginning of Tirannes. So sayd
Samuel vnto the Hebrues, that the king would make theyr children Carters, their daughters handmaidens, and compel them both to eare and tyll their ground, and take awaye from them their best Oliue gardens and vyneyardes. Neither was that which
Samuel rehearsed, the right of a king and appointed of God, but that, which as the Prophet saw, kings would afterward vsurpe. Otherwise the law of a king is contained in
Deut. the .xvii. chap. From the Pope, as it is here said, there is come foorth a fyre, whiche hath wasted and corrupted all Churches.
But it is meete to consider what the profitable and fruitful trees answered when they were required to take vpon them a kingdome.
Holy men wyl not be promoted aboue other men. They saide they were content with their own good thinges: and therefore they would neither receaue a kingdome, or suffer anye alteration of their state. After the same maner euen holy and godly men doo.
Ambrosius very much and long time resisted, bycause he would not be created bishop of
Millane. Augustine also many wayes laboured to be no Elder or Bishop. And among the Ethnikes
Numa Pompilius long time & much deferred, before he would take vpon him y
e kingdom of Rome.
Diocletianus, although before he gouerned very tirānically & very cruelly, yet after y
t, he resigned it, & being desired to take vpon him the Empire again, he vtterly refused it.
Saul also (to turne to the holy history) hid him self among the stuffe & burthens, when he should be publikely consecrated. But now a daies, bicause we haue thornes and brambles euery where, al men with a wonderful ambicion desire to be created Bishops or Popes, and by their tumult and importunity, all Christendome is in a maner shaken. Wherfore it is the part of good men to be content with their vocation, and not rashly to demit themselues vnto that vocation which is against y
e word of God: especially when in that vocatiō, wher in they are placed of God, they may be both beloued of him, & also profitable vnto mē: as the Oliue tre, vine tree, & fig tree in this Apology testify of thē selues.
But how answered the Oliue tree, that his fruit is much made of, not onely of men, but also of God? That is therefore so said, bicause God in his tabernacle would haue lightes burning,
Oblation. which wer maintained with the purest oyle. Farthermore,
Minacha, whither it wer of meale, or of graynes, of fruite, or of fine cakes, it was cōmaūded to be ouersprinkled with oyle. Moreouer, Priests, Prophets & Kinges, wer annoynted with oyle. Also with oyle wer made many plasters, salues, cered clothes, and diuers and manifold medicines. And in many other countries, for want of aboundaunce of butter, meates are seasoned wyth oyle. And in the Psalme .104. it is said, that it is good to beautify the face. Therfore it is not absurdlye sayde,
that both God and man make much of this liquor. But in that it is said,
that wyne maketh God mery, it ought not so to be vnderstand, as though God either drinketh, or hath neede of wyne, to make him mery: but bicause in sacrifices pouringes out of wine were had. And as the
Rabbines declare: the
Leuites in the oblation of sacrifices, did then begin to sing with the voice, trumpets, and harpes, when the wyne was poured out.
¶Of wyne and dronkennes.
BVt bicause very manye vntemperate men, being reproued for dronkennes, are wont by this sentence to excuse their sinne, which otherwise is most filthy, saying that they abuse not wyne, forasmuche as they vse it to that ende, for which it was inuented, and created of God, namelye that men wyth it shoulde make them selues mery:
A diuision of that which shal be intreated of. therefore I thought it good to refell their wantonnes. Wherfore first I wil declare the iust vse of wyne. Afterward I wyll shewe the abuse thereof, teaching it to be against the law of God. Then wil I bring examples, manifestly to open that the abuse of it is a thing as wel damnable as filthy and detestable. Moreouer I wil rehearse the horrible effectes of this euyll. And lastly I wil answer to those cauillations and sophistical argumentes, by which the
Epicures defend dronkennes, and the abuse of wyne.
1 As touching the first I deny not, but that wine hath excellent properties. For it quencheth thirst,
Healthful and honest vses of wyne. which might also be done with water, but not so commodiously: bicause wine in quenching of thirst, maketh a man strong, and engēdreth
2 spirites, whereby nature is very much recreated. Farther, it is medicinable for colde and weakenes both of the stomake, and also of the other powers, whiche serue for the life of man. Wherfore
Paul writeth vnto
Timothe to vse wine for
3 the stomacke, and often diseases thereof. It is sometimes also not vnprofitably occupied outwardly for woundes. Wherefore in the .x. of
Luke it is writtē, that the
Samaritane bound the woundes of him whom he found halfe dead, and poured
4 wine and oyle in them. Moreouer wyne maketh mery, and helpeth not a lytle to driue away sadnes and heauynes of the minde. And therfore
Salomon writeth in his Prouerbs the
.31. chap. Geue strong drinke to them which ar heauy, & wyne to them that haue griefe of hart. Let them drinke and forget their pouerty, and no more remember their sorrow. And we rede in the .104. Psalme, wine reioyceth the hart of man.
The wonderful liberality of God towardes men.For so great was the goodnes of God towards men, that he would geue vnto them not onely thinges necessary to lyue by, but also largely bestow on them delicates: bicause properly and by himselfe he delighteth not in the pensiuenes, sadnes, and heauines of men, but desireth to haue them liue holilye, and godlyly, with an honest and holy mirth of hart. Wherfore he hath graunted vnto thē, not onely the vse of wine, but also oyle, and most pleasant odours, also flesh, and likewise diuers and manifold kindes of meate. Vndoubtedly the vse of wyne is sometimes profitable vnto those, which ar recouered of their diseases, & must be restored to their old health, and as a certaine Philosopher sayth, a heuines & certaine bitternes of old men are by it likewise mitigated and lenified, as hoppes, which otherwise are most bitter, become swete, being stiped in water. But we
[Page 162] must take heede that we keepe a measure,
We must keepe a measure in drinking of wyne. otherwise the gladnes which by wine is sought, is easely turned vnto most great heauines. For the intemperance of wine doth easely lose his vtility. Yea if men come to dronkennes, then is the vse of wine a very heauy thing, and ful of daunger. Wherfore it is necessarye to put a difference betwene the vse and abuse therof.
Moreouer, this is to be added, that to haue to much drinke, or to be droonke,
A distinction of dronkennes.
Marsilius Ficinus. may be taken two wayes, either properly, or Metaphoricallye. This difference
Marcilius Ficinus plainly teacheth in the argumēt of his Dialogue
de Iusto, and maketh one kinde of dronkēnes aboue the Moone, or celestial, stirred vp by drinking of heauenly drinke, wherby the minde being set without it selfe, and aboue it selfe, forgetteth al mortal diseases, and onelye considereth thinges diuine, by the brightnes wherof, first it waxeth dimme, but after that it somewhat tasteth the sauour of them, it is by a new heate chaunged from his first habite or quality, whereby whithin a while it clearely beholdeth spiritual thinges, and whilest it healthfully tasteth them, it is with great fruit nourished. Wherfore it is written in the Psalme: we shal be made drōken of the plentifulnes of thy house.
Musaeus. Orpheus. Yea and
Museus an auncient Poet saith, that the reward of vertue, is perpetual drō kennes. And
Orpheus before
Museus said, that the same was signified by the ceremonies and holy seruises of
Dionisius. The other kinde of dronkēnes he sayth is vnder the Moone, and worldlye, which is stirred vp of drinke called
Letheus, that is, carnal drinke, whereby the minde being set without it selfe, and vnder it selfe, it forgetteth things diuine, and doteth. Neither is it to be doubted, but that this kinde of dronkennes is vtterly to be auoided. Of the first kinde of dronkennes, which is Methaphorical, there is plaine mencion made in the Prouerbs of
Salomon, where wysedome stirreth vp men to drinke wine, whiche she hath set foorth on her table, plentifully and aboundantly. Yea and Christ also our Sauiour, which is the true wisdome, promiseth vs such a wyne in the kingdome of heauen. By Translation also is described the wyne of compunction and furye, which God wyl geue the vngodly to drinke, wherby they shal become mad, and according to their desertes be turned into furiousnes.
But leauing these Methaphores,
Dronkennes condemned by the holye scriptures. let vs returne vnto dronkennes properly taken, wherof we now intreate, & let vs declare by testimonies of the holye scriptures, that suche abuse of wyne is prohibited and forbidden. To the
Ephesians Paul saith: Be ye not made dronke with wine, wherein is wantōnes. But be ye filled with the spirite, speaking to your selues by Psalmes, Himnes, & spiritual songes. Vpon which place
Ierome saith:
Ierome. we cānot at one time be filled w
t wine and the holy ghost: For the Apostle putteth these thinges as contraries, euen as we cannot serue two maisters. He that is filled with the spirit, hath wysedome, meekenes, shamefastnes, and chastity: and he which is filled with wyne, hath folishnes, furiousnes, malepertnes, and filthy luste. They which are not fylled with wine, can easely sing Psalmes, Himnes, and spiritual songes: which thing they cannot do, which haue gorged themselues with wyne. The same
Paul also writeth: Haue no care of the flesh, for the lustes thereof. And Christ by expresse woordes saith vnto his Disciples: Take heede your hartes be not ouercom with surfeting and dronkennes. And in the old testamēt in the Prouerbs the .31. chap. it is written: Geue not wine vnto kinges. And in the .23. chap. Looke not vpon the wine when it is red, and when it sheweth his coulour in the cup, and goeth downe pleasantly. And in the .2. chap of
Ecclesiastes, Salomon saith, y
t he thought to geue his hart to wine and pleasant thinges, and at the length he founde that this study and purpose was mere vanity. Laughter (saith he) I thought to be errour: and I said vnto ioy, why doest thou in vaine deceaue? This mirth of wyne and pleasant thinges, ought not to be often vsed of holye men, for as muche as Christ hath taught that they ar blessed which mourne: they (saith he in
Mathew) shal receaue consolation. But in
Luke the .7. chapter it is added, that they shall
[Page] laugh. And it is the surest way, that we presently want some ioy, to laughe perpetually. In the .v. of
Esay it is written, wo vnto you which rise vp carely to follow dronkēnes, and to drinke euen til night, to be inflamed with wyne: and the harpe, and viole, timbrel and pipe, and wine are in your feastes. &c. And againe in the same chap. wo vnto you that are mighty to drinke wine, and are stronge men to mingle dronkennes.
Ioel also in the first chapter writeth: Awake ye vp which are dronken with wine. And this is not to be passed ouer, that in
Leuiticus, Aaron and his sonnes are cōmaunded not to drinke wine, before they come to sacrifice before the Lord. And
Paul twise commaundeth that the Ministers of the Church should not be geuen to much wine. And when he counselled his
Timothe to vse wyne for the stomake and diseases, he addeth that it should be but a litle, least he should let lose the bridle to dronkennes. In the olde law also the vse of wyne was forbidden the
Nazarites: and the
Rechabites are in
Ieremy commended, bicause at their fathers commaundement they abstained from wyne: at which time yet they knew that these thinges were written, which nowe in the history we haue in hand, as cōcerning wine, namely that with it both God and men ar made mery, and that also which is written in the .104. Psalme, that wine maketh mery the hartes of men. Wherfore let vs gather that these are not contrary, to vse wine temperatly and moderatly, and that it was geuen of God, to make vs mery in a due time, and in a right vse.
There are certaine tymes wherin myrthe is not cōueniēt.Neither ought we to be ignoraunt of this, that some suche tymes chaunce, wherein it is not meete for Christian & godly men to geue them selues to mirth: sometimes we must mourne for the synnes which we haue committed. And somtimes we are troubled with very grieuous miseries: and when we are vnder the hand of the rod of God, we must pray more vehemently, wherunto fastings and chastning of the body much helpeth: which thing
Paul declareth in his first Epistle vnto the
Corrinthians, when he saith, that it is lawful somtimes for the husband and wife to depart one from an other for a season, but yet with the mutual consent of them both, that they may geue themselues to fastings and praiers: although we must not for such abstinence appoint any certain dayes of the yere, but leaue the time to the prudence of the spirite. Howbeit this reason maketh much against those, which contend that we must continually drinke, that at no time we may want mirth. Yea and the same Apostle sayd of him selfe: I chasten my body, and bring it in to bondage. By which saying he admonished the
Corrinthians by his example to bridle the lustes. Ther might be manye more examples rehearsed out of the holy scriptures, manifestly to declare, that both dronkennes, and also to much vse of wyne are prohibited. But these shal be sufficiēt at this time. And this onely wyl I adde, that euen the verye Ethnikes knewe this thing also.
Plato. Testimonies of the Ethnikes.
Seneca.
Plato in his .7. booke
de Legibus, toward the ende writeth, that
Minos by his lawes prohibited the
Cretenses, that they shoulde not drinke together to dronkennes. And
Seneca saith in his .84. Epistle: Dronkēnes is nothing els then a voluntary madnes. And straight way after: The quality of dronkennes continuing many daies, is furiousnes. Moreouer, they which striue wyth cuppes, although they ouercome other in taking much wine, yet wil they or nyl they, they are ouercome of the tonnes. And it is filthy for a man to take in more then he is able to receaue, and not to know the measure of his stomake.
Hitherto we haue sufficiently declared, that the abuse of wine is both against the holy scriptures, and also humane reason. Now let vs proue the same by examples: that they which wil not beleue by the sentences before alledged, maye yet at the least be taught by these examples.
Noah a great man, iust, and loued of God,
The dronkennes of Noah. who saw two constitutions of the world (for he liued both before and after the flood) is set foorth vnto vs, as an example vtterly to auoid dronkennes, when as he hauing droonke more wyne then was meete, laye in the tabernacle most filthely naked, and his priuy partes, which wer wont to be couered, he left
[Page 163] bare and vncouered: and he which was wont to bee a schoolemaster of vertues, was a great offence vnto his children.
Cham mocked him: the other two sonnes of a better and holier nature, were sory, and very much ashamed of their fathers filthines. By this act it is sufficiently declared, that shame, derision, and offence follow dronkennes.
But of thys synne wee haue a notable example in
Lot,
The dronkennes of Lot. who vndoubtedlye dranke not immoderately, to the end he would abuse his daughters, and to commit incest, but to put away cares and griefes which hee had taken, for the ouerthrow of the .v. Cities, for the losse of his deare wyfe, and also of his substaunce. Hee woulde also comforte hys Daughters, that they shoulde not take to muche thought, specially for the losse of their mother: although he ought to haue inuented other wayes of comforting. But this I speake onely, least any man shoulde thinke that he did with his will drinke to muche, to pollute him selfe with most fylthy lustes: Yet for all that, to muche aboundaunce of drinke was the cause of hys most vyle incest, being otherwyse an olde man, and in a tyme farre oute of purpose, for asmuche as the iudgementes of God were declared agaynste the fylthy lustes of the fyue Cities. And which is wonderfull, wyne so alienated
Lot from hym selfe, that he vnderstoode not with what women hee had companyed. Wherfore rightly sayth
Seneca in his .84. Epistle before alledged:
Seneca. They whych are droonke doo many thinges, which afterward when they are sober, they are ashamed of.
Lot sought to make hym selfe mery by wine, and he incurred a perpetuall heauynes. Let them therefore which seeke to be made mery with ouermuche wyne, remember that they put them selues in to a moste present daunger, and by that meanes may easely throw them selues headlong into most greuous wycked actes.
Neither is y
t to be allowed which some alledge for an excuse, that such euents are vncertaine, so that a man cannot tel for certain, whether he which drinketh to much shal fal into these filthy thinges or no: bicause the thing is so surely knowen, that euen the daughters of
Lot being yet virgins, vnderstoode it, namelye that the olde man by wyne, might be driuen to fylthye lust, and so be deceaued, that also he had to doo euen with his daughters. Who wil therfore say that he knoweth not that which they vnderstoode?
Lot was deceaued and snared by his daughters, but such as loue to muche mirth, that is, dronken men, snare themselues, & openly fight against them selues.
God punisheth drōkēnes wi
[...]h most grieuous punishmentes. Why the holye scriptures se
[...] forth the history of Lot. Neither thinke they with themselues that God with most grieuous punishmentes, taketh vengeaunce of dronkēnes, and suffreth the abuse of his gift most precious, long vnpunished. These bibbers are wont somtimes to bring forth
Lot as a patrone of their intemperance, Neither doo they marke, that the holy scriptures do set foorth the historye of him as an horrible, and in a maner tragical example. God did not meanely punish that mans dronkennes: for he had to doo with his daughters, they conceaued by him, and the thing coulde not bee dissembled: incestious chyldren were borne,
Ammon and
Moab, of whom came the Nations of the
Ammonites and
Moabites, which were both hated of God, and enemyes vnto the Israelites.
Lot him selfe (as it is to be thought) was alwayes sory for the crime which he had committed, and was talked of, of euerye man.
And seyng that the testimony of the holy Scriptures is extant, and shall remayne vnto the ende of the world: as often as they are red, so often is noted and spreade abroade hys infamy. If so be that God spared not a man, otherwise holy, the Neuew of
Abraham, and harborer of Aungels: what will hee doo to those glottons and Hogges, which hauing no vertue, day and night, eyther lye or syt dronken? That whych we reade happened once vnto
Lot, these men euerye daye exercise it.
But that which our dronkards alledge of
Lot,
Dronkēnes obiected to Cato. the
Romanes in the old time alledged of
Cato, excusing their dronkēnes, bicause that most graue mā somtymes
[Page] in the night recreated his minde, not vndoubtedlye in bolling and bibbing immoderatly, but in sipping and drinking a litle, adding therwithall muche honest talke. Neither considered they, that that good man was sober al the whole day, labored muche in determining and iudging of causes, in consulting with other Senatours concerning the publike wealth, in hauing to do with the people, in executing the office of a Magistrate, in reading and writing. These should haue imitated these good and honest studies.
But let vs go on in rehearsing examples.
Ammon Dauids sonne was slayne of
Absalon, not assuredly when he was sober, but when in the banket hee was more mery then was meete, by drinking of to much wyne. And as it is declared in the latter end of the .1. boke of
Machab. Simon the high priest was with his .2. sonnes
Mattathias &
Iudas slayne of his sonne in law, when in the feast they wer in a maner dronken with ouermuch wine. And the history of
Iudith (although it be not found in the Canon of the Iewes) sheweth that
Holofernus, otherwyse a most fierce Captain of an host, was so ouerwhelmed with wine, that w
t smal a doo he was behedded of a woman. I might adde how
Sisera being dronken, was slaine of
Iahel, although his drinke was milke, and not wine.
And if that we wyl besides these reade ouer the histories of the Ethnikes, we shal finde many and notable examples of those, which wer most grieuously hurt by dronkēnes.
Alexander of Macedonia.
Alexander of
Macedonia, the Conqueror of the world, was most filthely ouercome with wine, and being dronke, slew
Clitus his friend, most valiant and faithful, whose diligence, industry, labour, prudence, and strength, he had in warres long time vsed, to his great commodity. Wherfore when he had slept after his wine, and being awaked, and remembring the wicked act that he had committed, he was so ashamed and sory, that he wished himselfe dead. But yet he amended not the vice of dronkennes: yea once afterwarde hee droonke so much wine in one night, that he fel into a feuer, and for that he would not temper himselfe from wine, within a while after he died. Wherefore
Seneca in his 84. Epistle already alledged, writeth that
Alexander, which had escaped so many daungers, and vanquished thinges most dificile, by intemperaunce of drinking,
M. Antonius. and by that herculaue and fatall cup, perished.
M. Antonius, otherwyse a stout and valiant Emperour, a vanquisher in many battailes, so laded hymself sometimes with wine, that euen in the Tribunall seate in the morning, before the people of Rome, whilest he was sitting to geue iudgement, he was compelled to vomite. And in
Egipt he vsed much drinking, wherby he could do nothing noblye,
The feast of the Lapithares & Centaures. but was by
Octauian driuen most filthylye to flight. What the Poetes write of the feaste of the
Lapithares and
Sentaures, it is better knowen, then I shall neede now to recite. And I thinke I haue nowe brought sufficient examples: whych beyng diligently considered, serue muche to the detestation of dronkennesse.
The effectes of dronkennes.But they which are not feared from the filthynes thereof by the woords of God, which we haue first set, and doo not abhorre it, being perswaded by the examples now alledged: shall peraduenture be wonne, and led from it, by considering of those euyls, which spring of the abuse of wyne. It is expedient that the tree be knowen by his fruites. And vndoubtedly suche a thing is dronkennesse to be counted, as the fruites are knowen, whych spring of it. But that we may speake orderlye,
The hurtes & damages comming of dronkennes. wee wyll deuide the euyls thereof by their subiectes: for it hurteth the body, vexeth also the mynde, wasteth the goods, and is hatefull to our neighbours.
As touching the body, by dronkēnes come oftentimes sodaine deathes, dissolucions of the members,
Apoplexia is, when mans sē ses are taken a way. the disease called
Apoplexia, and sundry and miserable chaunces. For the smoothe and plaine ground is vnto dronkardes a denne: for they fall, breake their legges, their armes, and sometimes their neckes: and are burnt when they fall into the fyre. The liuer is inflamed with to much drynke,
[Page 164] the head is pained, the members are made weake and tremble, the senses ar corrupted, the natural heate is ouerwhelmed with ouermuche wyne, the stomake which is ouer largely distended, is sicke with crudity or rawnes, and with intollerable paines: the whole body is in a maner inflamed, and the thirst is augmented. Dronkardes lye groueling like blockes, and so are beriued of their strength, that neither head nor foote can do their office. Wherfore it is written in the .23.
Prouerb. 33. chap. of the Prouerbs: To whom is wo? to whom is sorrow? to whom is strife? to whom is sighing? and to whom are woundes without cause? Or to whom is the rednes of the eyes? Euen to them that tary long at the wine, and to thē that go and seeke largely to poure in wine. Looke not vpon the wine when it is red, and when it sheweth his coulour in the cup, and goeth downe pleasantly: in the ende thereof it wil bite like a Serpent, and put out his sting lyke a Cockatrice. Thine eyes shal looke vpon straunge thinges, and thine hart shall speake leude thinges. And thou shalt be as one that sleepeth in the middest of the sea, and as he which sleepeth in the top of the mast of a shyp. They haue striken me, and it payned me not, they haue brused me, and I felt it not. When I awake, I wyll seeke it againe. &c. And behold with how many punishments God afflicteth drō kardes.
Esay in his .v. chapter, agreeth with
Salomon: For he also saith,
Esay 5. wo vnto those which are mighty and strong to drinke wine. And in the same v. chap. hee saith that dronkardes regarde not the woorke of the Lorde, neither consider the woorke of his handes. Moreouer, to suche men is wo:
Ierome. bicause (as
Ierome vpon that place writeth) they are most vnhappye, who being from morning to night occupied in dronkēnes, glotony, and sundry pleasures, they vnderstande not the woorkes of the Lord in them: and not considering wherfore they were created, slepe out in a maner their whole life. Wherfore
Ioel cryed out vnto them:
Ioel. 1. awake vp ye dronkards, weepe and howle all ye that drinke wine. But dronkardes are not by these cryes stirred vp, for they do not onely sleepe, but seme to be in a maner buryed. Wherefore
Vergil aptly saith of a Citye,
Virgil. that it was buryed wyth sleepe and wyne.
But now let vs see how muche the soule or mynde is hurt with dronkennes.
How much the mynde is hurte with wyne. Dronkardes are oftentimes striken with the spirite of amasednes, and are turned in a maner into furiousnes: they become like brute beastes, so that there seemeth to remaine in them no vnderstanding. It is a grieuous thing wythout doubt for a man to wounde himselfe, or to depriue himselfe of any member, but of his own free wyll to take away his minde from himselfe, it is an euyll intollerable. In
Hosea the .4. chap. it is woorthely written, that wyne and dronkennes take away the hart. And in the .xix. of
Ecclesiasticus it is written: wyne and women make wise men to apostatate, that is, to depart from right institutions, so that they are no more their own men: for they are withdrawen from their office and vertue, & also fal from the right trade of life. And in the same booke the 31. chap. it is written, wine dronken with excesse, engendreth bitternes of mind with braulinges and skeldinges. Dronkennes encreaseth the courage of a foole tyl he offend: but it diminisheth his strength. In these woords ther is an elegant
Antithesis, namely that wine increaseth the courage & spirits, & causeth greater audacitye, but it diminisheth and weakeneth the strength.
Plato. Wherefore
Plato in his .vi. Dialogue
de Iusto, at the beginning: A dronkard (saith he) hath a tirrannical hart, for he would rule all men as he lust, and not by any reason or lawe. Dronkennes also bringeth obliuion of lawes and ryghte. Wherefore
Salomon saith in his Prouerbes, that wine must not be geuen vnto kinges, least peraduē ture they drinke, & forget the law ordained, & change the iudgement of al y
e children of the poore.
Plato also writeth in his .3. booke
de Repub. y
e dronkēnes may be suffred in any mā, rather then in a Magistrate.
Plato. For a dronkē man knoweth not the groūd wheron he is. And if a Magistrate be dronk, thē hath y
e keper nede of a keper. This is moreouer to be added, y
t ther is nothing kept secret wher drō kēnes
[Page] raigneth. Bicause it openeth not onely the secrete partes of the body, but also of the minde. And in drinking ar poured out woordes vnshamefast, foolish, vnapt,
Horace. and wycked. Wherefore
Horace describing the effectes of dronkennes, sayth: What is it that dronkennes committeth not? It discloseth thinges secrete, it establisheth hope, and thrusteth foorth the vnarmed man into the battaile. It taketh away the burthen from careful mindes, it teacheth artes. Whō haue not full cups made eloquent? and whom being in extreme pouertye, haue they not made careles?
Plato. And
Plato in his first booke
de Legibus, toward the ende saith thus: When a man drinketh wine, at the first it maketh him cherefullyer: afterward the more he drinketh, the greater and better hope he is in, and feeleth him selfe stronger. Then, as though he were wyse, the man is fylled wyth that confidence, liberty and audacity, that without feare he both saith & doth whatsoeuer pleaseth him. The same
Plato in his .vi. Dialogue
de Legibus, sayth: He which is fylled wyth wine, is stirred vp with a woodnes, both of mynde and body, and both draweth, and is drawen euery where. And a dronkard is as a man out of hys wyt.
Seneca.
Seneca in his third booke of Natural questions, the .20. chap. saith, that dronkennes tyl it be dryed vp, is madnes, and with ouermuch heauines is brought on sleepe. And in his .60. Epistle to
Lucillus toward the end: One houres dronkennes recompenseth his long madnes, with the wearynes of a long time. And in the .84. Epistle: Dronkennes draweth out al vice, and kindleth it, and detecteth it. It putteth awaye all shamefastnes, whose nature is to resist euyll endeuours. Where to much power of wyne possesseth the minde, whatsoeuer euyll lay hidden, bursteth foorth. Dronkennes maketh not vices, but brinketh them to light. In dronkennes, he that is proude, his pride encreaseth, crueltye in the cruel man, malice in the enuious man, & all vices ar detected & brought to light. By it a man forgetteth himselfe, speaketh doubtful and stamering woordes, it causeth vnconstant eyes, a reeling pace, disines in the hed, and the house to seme to go round about, tormentes in the stomake, when the wyne boyleth, & it distē deth euen the bowels. Cruelty for the most part followeth dronkennes, for
M. Antonius, wonderfully reioyced at the heades and members of the banished mē, that wer brought him at a feast. Also in the .20. chap. of the Prouerbes it is written: Wine maketh a mocker, and strong drinke a troublesome fellow. Whosoeuer erreth in it, shal neuer be wyse. But bicause there are some which boast that they can drinke a great deale of wine and be stil sober, & of a sound iudgement, I desire them to harken vnto
Seneca in the Epistle now alledged, who sayth: Let such men also say that by drinking of poyson they shal not dye, and by takyng of poppy they shal not sleepe,
Barefoote. and by drinking of Elleborne they shal not cast forth and purge whatsoeuer is in the inward partes.
The discōmodities of wine when it is excessiuely dronken, which we haue hitherto rehearsed,
Dronkēnes wa
[...]eth the goods pertaine both vnto the bodye and vnto the mynde. But nowe must we adde, how it bringeth hurt vnto our substance & goods. In the Prouerbes the .21. chap. it is written: He which loueth wine and fat thinges, shal not be riche. And in the same booke the .23. chap. it is thus written: Keepe not company with wine bibbers, and those that deuour flesh. For the bybber and the glotton shall be brought vnto pouertye, and he which geueth himself to much sleeping, shal be clothed wyth torne garmentes.
Dronkards discommodious to the
[...]e neighborsAnd how muche discommodious dronkardes are vnto their neighbours, it is easye to see. They are iniurious, and rayle vpon those whom they meete. And being in their fury, they fal into filthy lustes, and so easelye polute other mens Spouses and wiues. And by horrible meanes they rage against the famelies of their neyghbours. They are an euyll example, yea and offence vnto other Citizens. And whilest they spend and consume their substaunce vpon wyne & dronkennes, they haue no regarde to prouide thinges necessary for their own house.
[Page 165] Yea, whilest they are in their dronken fury, they handle their innocent wife and children euilly, and defraude the poore of their almes, whiche if they lyued more sparingly, they might be able to bestow vpon them. They make them selues vnprofitable for the publike wealth, when as dronkardes can neither execute the office of a Magistrate them selues, nor yet wel ar they able to obey those that gouerne. They trouble also and infame the Church, wherefore they are seperated from it. For
Paul in the .1. to the
Corrin. the .5. chap. nombreth dronkardes with those, with whom we ought not so much as to eate. There is scarce anye euyll which cannot be adioyned vnto the effectes of dronkennes.
But to conclude the matter,
An aunswer to those which defend ouermuch drinkyng. first we graunt vnto those (which doo naughtely vsurpe this place which we haue nowe in hand, and lay it for a coulour to defend the vice of dronkennes) that it is lawful to vse wine for necessity, for medicine, and also for mirth, but yet it must be tempered with sobriety, neither maye it excede a meane, yea it must agree with time, place, degree, age, and kinde. After this maner let the saintes reioyce before their God, namely with geuing of thankes, and celebrating diuine prayses. Neither
Salomon in the .23. chapter of the Prouerbs, saith wo vnto those which drink wine, but vnto those which in it consume their time, which geue them selues to nothing but to drinking, contending who can drynke moste, prouoking one an other, and compelling others to drinke. These are reprehended, and not those whiche modestlye vse the gyft of God. Let men so make them selues mery with wine, that afterward they maye be more chereful to obey God, and to suffer heauy thinges, if neede bee. And let men beware they forget not them selues, that they ouerwhelme not their senses, and choke vp their strength. Neither is the holy scripture vngodlye and violently to be drawen vnto the licence of the flesh. Yea we ought so to bee readye that we may obey the Apostle, who sayd: It is good not to eate flesh, and not to drinke wine, if it should turne to the offending of the weake brethren. Let vs also remember that the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke, neither ar they commended of God, which can drinke more wyne, then the rest. The woorde of God is no defence for dronkennes, yea it detesteth it. We wil pleade therfore against these, with the doctrine of
Ecclesiasticus, the .31. chap. where it is said: shew not thy selfe a man in wine, that is, shew not thy strength in drinking. For ther are some which try how strong and mighty they are in this intemperaunce, and also with ouermuch drinking of wine, do oppresse al the powers, both of the body and of the minde. The wise man goeth forward and sayth: for wine hath destroyed many. As the fornace proueth the hardnes of the swoorde in the tempering: so doth wine the hartes of the proude when they are dronke. Wine moderately dronken, is profitable for the life of man. What is his lyfe that is ouercome with wine? But it was created to make men mery: Wyne measurablye dronken, and in time, brinketh gladnes and cherefulnes of the minde. &c. These thinges may easely teache and answer those men, which vnder the pretence to make them mery, labour to defend and maintaine dronkennes.
Let them consider with them selues, that the gyftes of God shoulde neuer be seperated from the rule of modesty and temperaunce. Let them not forget that the Apostle in the Epistle to the
Galathians, reckoned dronkennes among the woorkes of the fleshe. He also admonished the
Romanes that they shoulde not be conuersaunt in Chambers, in eatynges and dronkennes. And to the
Thessalonians he sheweth the filthinesse of thys vyce, when he sayth it pertayneth vnto the nyght. They which are droonke (sayth he) are dronke in the night: as though he would affirme it to be a thing vnwoorthy, to be seene by the light of the day. But as concernyng this thing, these are sufficient: Let vs now returne vnto the history. We haue alredy said what the Oliue and vine trees answered vnto the trees which woulde haue promoted them to a kingdome, and wee haue manyfestlye shewed how the Olyue and Vine trees serue, both for God, and for men.
[Page] Of the fig tree there is no question: for he maketh no mencion of God, but onely saith,
that he wyl not forsake hys sweetenes.
22 And Abimelech raigned .3. yeares ouer Israel.
23 And God sent an euyll spirite betwene Abimelech and the men of Sechem: and the men of Sechem brake their promyse to Abimelech.
24 That the iniury of the .70. sōnes of Ierubbaal, and their bloud might come and be layde vpon Abimeleche their brother, whyche had slayne them: and vpon the men of Sechem, whyche had ayded hym to kyll hys brethren.
25 So the men of Sechem set men in wayte for him in the toppes of the mountaynes: who robbed all that passed that waye. And it was tolde Abimelech.
Tirannye is of no long time.
Abimelech exercised his tiranny three yeares, and no longer: for violence cā not be either perpetual, or of any long time. He iudged not the Israelites in setting them at liberty, neither did he them any good, but onely raygned. God at the length tooke vengeaunce, and made the bloode of the sonnes of
Ierubbaal to redound vpon
Abimelech and the
Sechemites.
And he sent an euyl spirite betwene them, to reuenge the murther, which not onely Abimelech, but also the Sechemites committed. Abimelech was annointed king onely by the
Sechemites, but (as the history here declareth) he vsurped his tiranny ouer all the Israelites.
God required the bloud of the sonnes of Ierubbaal at the handes of Abimelech and of the Sechemites. Vnles men do with iust punishmentes punish murthers, God by himselfe punisheth them.
¶Of Murther.
BVt to make the thing more plaine, twoo thinges seeme to be intreated of. First, what maner of murther is condemned by the word of God, & ought by the Magistrates to be punished. Secondly, who are guilty of thys crime.
As touching the first, we must know, that not euerye murther is condemned. For if one kil a man by chaunce, in exercising a thing honest and lawful, he incurreth not the punishment of Homicides. Wherfore in the old law there were graunted Cities of refuge. For in verye deede he kylleth not: but as it is there written, God (wythout whose wyll nothing is done by chaunce) deliuered him to be killed. A Iudge also or Magistrate, when he punisheth flagicious men, is not therefore a murtherer, bicause it is not he that killeth, but the law, yea rather God himselfe, who hath wylled, and also commaunded that it should so be done. Farthermore, he which is set vpon by theeues or enemyes in a solitarye place, or where he can not be holpen by other: if in defending him selfe, and according to the lawes, repelling violence by violence, hee slay a robber or theefe which inuadeth him, he is not guilty of murther: for as muche as in that case he is armed both by the lawes and by the Magistrate. For the publike wealth wyl not that a Citizen should so perishe: therefore it geueth hym leaue to defende him selfe by weapons.
Cicero. By thys meanes
Cicero defended
Milo, bycause hee had slayne
Clodius, who first set vpon him by snares. Also the woman
Thecoites obtayned of
Dauid, that the Magistrate shoulde not kyll her sonne, who had slaine hys brother, falling out in the fielde. They were alone sayth she, and therefore it is not knowen whyche of them inuaded one the other first. Souldiours also, when in iust warre they slay their enemies, commit nothing vniustly.
Wherfore that murther, which is to be punished, & cōdēned by y
e lawes, is thē iudged to be cōmitted, when of purpose a mā is killed of priuate men. And they which wer to be codēned of this crime, wer not by y
e Romanes called
homicides, but
sicarii. In y
e law
Cornelia, the title is
de Sicariis & not
de Homicidis.
Sicarii. And they are so called, whiche do weare about them
Sica, that is a shorte skayne for to kil a man, and by the figure
Synechoche, by the worde
sica is vnderstand all kindes of weapons. And not onely they whiche kill are guilty of this crime, but also they whiche either in dede or counsell doo helpe, and in theyr sayings and aydes haue a respect vnto this, how to kill a man. Yea the will is to be punished,
The will is to be punished in this kynde of euill. althoughe it haue not successe: which thing in the ciuile iudgement is not vsed, but onely in three kinde of crimes, namely of manquellers, called
Sicarii, of rauishers, and of traitors. Wherfore that manqueller is to be punished, which throweth a weapon at any man, to the end he would kil hym, or hauing that mynde, woundeth him, although he dye not therof, as it is had in the digest in the same title in the law
Diuus, where
Adrian y
e Emperor answereth y
t we must haue a respect vnto the wil, and not to the euente. And that is to be vnderstand, when the will manifesteth it selfe by any tokē. But I did not without cause say that all these things are thus, as touching ciuill iudgement: bycause otherwise before God the desire and decree of the minde, as touching all kinde of sinnes, are cōdemned for sinne. Christ sayth, he that beholdeth a woman and lusteth after her, hath already committed aduoutry in his heart. And that the will in those crimes is coūted for the facte, euen the holy fathers and Canons do decree.
Ierome.
Ierome vpon
Esay (as it is in the title
de Paenitentia, distinction the first, chap.
Omnis) writteth:
Ciprian. Thou hast not killed with the sworde, but thou hast killed with the will. Yea and
Ciprianus in his Sermon
de Mortalitate writeth, y
t he which desireth martirdome, is a martyr before God. It is one thing (sayth he) for the will to want martirdome, & an other thing for martyrdome to want the wil. These thinges are had in the same destinction, chap.
Nunquid. And in the same destinction, chap.
Periculose,
Augustine.
Augustine is brought in, who sayth, y
t the Iewes did no lesse kyll Christ then the Romanes, althoughe with their handes they inuaded him not. By this destinction he conciliateth the Euangelistes, who seme to disagree as touching the houre of the death of the Lord. One of them sayth, he was crucified the third houre, & the other, the sixt houre.
Augustine affirmeth both to be true:
Augustine. For the Iewes at the third houre cried Crucify, Crucify: wherfore as touching them, they slew y
e Lord then, who yet was afterward at the sixt houre crucified by y
e souldiers of Pilate.
But
Abimelech and the
Sechemites wer murtherers and parricides, not onely in wil, but in helpe, worke, and deede, and therfore it is no meruaile if God so seuerely punished them.
Furthermore we must cōsider, how meruelously and wonderfully God vseth the vngodly. By them (as we here see) he taketh vengeaunce of other vngodly, and sometymes by their labour, he both excerciseth and correcteth the iust. What more? They are his hangmen, whom also when he hath vsed, he destroyeth also at the last, either here, or after they be departed out of this life.
He sent an euill spirite betwene them. For they were stirred vp one agaynst an other. The
Sechemites (as it is to be thought) against
Abimelech, bicause he both oppressed and contemned them. And agayne
Abimelech agaynst them, bycause (as the hystory declareth) they dispysed him.
What contēpt is. Contempt consisteth in three thynges. And it is well knowen that by contempt is prouoked anger: for it is called an action, whiche pertayneth to estimation & opinion, bycause some thing semeth to vs not worthy of estimation, when peraduenture it is not so. Moreouer despising consisteth chiefly in thre thinges: for either we contēne onely in mind, when we despise any men & their goods, or when we do thē any discōmodity, not thereby to seeke our own gayne, but onely to reioyse at theyr discommodity: or lastly when we adde wordes or deedes: whiche haue ignominy or contumely ioyned with them. These thre things may
[Page] we easely see in the
Sechemites. First, they despised
Abimelech, when they receaued
Gaalus a souldier as a captayne, hauing
Zebul appointed theyr gouerner by the kyng. And vndoubtedly they so receaued
Gaal, y
t they did put their confidēce in him. Wherfore it followeth that in mynde and estimation they despised
Abimelech. Farthermore they dammaged him, when by conspiracyes they spoyled and slewe those that passed to and fro. These, whom they iniuried, pertayned vnto
Abimelech, or at the least way, for that that he was king. Lastly they added reprochefull wordes, as we shal afterward heare.
Christ prohibited anger as the beginning of hatred, murther and destructiō, for he sayd: He that is angry with his brother, is worthy of iudgement. For anger and reuengemēt are seperate one from the other, onely as the roote & the fruit. For he that is angry with any man, if he hurt him not, that chaunceth, bycause either he can not,
Kinges are vehemētly angry
Homere. or els feareth the punishmēt of the lawes. He y
t hateth hys brother (saith
Iohn) is a murtherer. But amōg those which are counted very angry, kings aboue other are numbred, when they perceaue y
t they are despised of their subiectes. Wherfore
Homere sayth: Great is the anger of a kyng displeased.
The conspiracies of the vngodly are of no long tyme.Hereby we learne that the conspiracies of the vngodly can not continew lōg. They are in deede oftentymes ioyned together to do euill, but yet they are easely disseuered. The kings of the earth stoode vp, and the princes assembled together, agaynst the Lord and against his Christ. But the Lord whiche dwelleth in heauen, shall laughe at them, and the Lord shal haue them in derision. Theues, robbers, whoremongers, & such as conspire against the Church, publique wealthes, & princes, do oftentimes confederate together: but straightway great enemityes ryse vp amōgest them, and they betray one an other, yea and sometymes kill one an other.
Aristotle. Wherfore wisely sayth
Aristotle, that honesty is onely the sure foūdation of amity, bycause that whiche is honesty is not chaunged: but pleasant and profitable thinges, do not alwayes abide the same. Princes of our tyme, as often as they haue made league one with an other, haue afterward not only ben made enemyes, but they haue gone to warre one with an other. Wherfore
Salomon rightly writeth in y
e 11. chap. of the
Prouerbes: Although y
e vngodly cōspire, they shall not escape. Wherfore their fellowshippes are to be auoyded, and we must enterprise or go about nothyng, hauing confidence in the amity of the vngodly.
¶How Sinne dependeth of God.
NOw remayneth to examine how it is written that God sent an euill spirite betwene them. But bycause of that matter, I haue in an other place more more fully entreated, and will shortly speake more aboundauntly of it, here I will but briefly teache the thing.
The scriptures testifie, that sinnes sometymes haue a consideration of punishments: wherfore when it sayd that god punisheth & taketh vengeance of the vngodly by sinnes, he doth nothing vnmete of him selfe. For he bringeth not forth the deformity and filthynes of sinne, but is the author of iust punishment. For sinnes are to men euill, but vnto God, who vseth them, good. God planteth no new malice in the vngodly: but yet he vseth that malice whiche is in them by reason of originall sinne, and other sinnes whiche they adioyne vnto it. He suffreth it not to burst forth, but when it semeth good vnto him, he gouerneth and directeth it whether soeuer it pleaseth him.
A Similitude. As the Phisition comming vnto the sicke person, doth by medicines drawe corrupt humors out of his body, and bringeth them out either by a purgation, or by a sweate, or vomite, or letting of bloud, as he iudgeth it best, yet doth he not graft in the sicke person naughty and corrupt humors: So God causeth to be brought to light our malice, whiche was not brought forth before, but lay hid within, to make manifest his iustice, and to opē our sinnes, and yet he suffreth them not to breake forth by chaunce or rashely,
[Page 167] but ordereth and gouerneth them accordyng to his iudgement, that euen by thē he doth fulfill the limites of his prouidence. Wherfore
Esay sayth that the kyng of
Babilone was like an axe or staffe in hande of God: for he would force hym against the Iewes rather then against other nations. Wherfore y
e malice of sinne is wholy ours, but the gouernyng, successe, and effectes therof ar vnder the rule of God, so that they can accomplish no more then he will suffer. Neither can the vngodly bring to passe those thinges whiche they go about agaynst euery man, nor also at all tymes, but they are gouerned accordyng to the determinations of God, whiche are most holy and iust. Neither is it absurde that one and the selfe same action, as it is gouerned of God, is both good and holy, but as it commeth of vs, it is vicious and corrupt.
And bycause we wil not go from our history, the sinne of cruelty and ambitiō, was vtterly
Abimeleches. But that it should burst forth, and first destroy the famely of
Ierubbaal, and thē the
Sechemites: that is to be referred vnto the gouernment of GOD. Farthermore the disobedience and wicked desire of tumultes, was altogether of the
Sechemites. But that it should burst forth, when the famely of
Gideon should be punished: and that they rather chosed
Abimelech to theyr kyng, then an other: and that their fury should rage agaynst him, rather then against any other: y
t was of the gouernement of God, wherby (as the holy hystory sheweth) he sent betwene them an euill spirite, namely the deuill, by whose labour, enemities, and hatreds were on either side kindled, and wōderfully inflamed, by mete occasions seruing thereunto.
Farthermore we must consider, that God is bound vnto no man,
God is fee & geueth hys grace not being d
[...]ūe to geue vnto him his grace. For, if it shuld be geuē of dewty, then should it not be grace: & yet he neuer, either not geueth it, or els beyng geuen, taketh it away, but vpon iust cause. He in dede created man vpright, and being indewed with it: but yet he by sinning, spoiled both himself and his of it. And for as much as we are borne vnder originall sinne, and the children of wrath: to whom soeuer it is not geuen, it is iustly not geuen: and to whom soeuer it is geuen, it is freely geuen. Moreouer we dayly heape sinnes vpō sinnes: wherfore god in withdrawing it, is not to be accused of iniustice. For he cōpelleth no man to do euill, but euery man willingly sinneth: wherfore the cause of sinne is not to be layd in him.
The cause of is not to be sayd in God. For seyng he procreateth not in vs wicked desires, he ought not to beare the blame, if wicked actions doo spring out of a corrupt roote of wicked affections: yea the goodnes of God is rather to be acknowledged, whiche is present, and so gouerneth the wicked affections, that they can not burst forth, nor be hurtefull and troublesome to any, but when he hath appointed to chasten some, and to call them backe to repē taunce or to punishe them.
Neither ought we to thinke that after the sinne of the first man,
Whence ou
[...] frowardnesse springeth. God created a wicked lust, and euill affection, to corrupte all our whole kynde. It was not so done: but nature when it departed from God, fell by it selfe from lyght to darkenes, from the right way to vice, and from integrity to corruptiō. And how good so euer it was before, it nowe degenerated into euill. Wherefore let this be holden for certayn, that sinne entred into the world by men, and not by God, as
Paul testifieth to the Romanes. And in that Christ saith,
Synne entred into the world by man & not by God. that the deuill when he lieth, speaketh of his owne, it is not to be vnderstand onely of himself, but also of his members, whiche when they lye or do euill, worke not by the worde of God, neither are they moued by the inspiration of the good spirite. And they excedingly reioyce, and haue great pleasure in those thinges whiche they do, so farre is it of, that they should be compelled by any violence.
Moreouer we must note,
Of permission. that when either the Scriptures or fathers doo seme to affirme God to be the cause of sinne, this worde permission is not then so to be added, as thoughe he onely suffred men to synne, and by hys prouidence or gouernement wrought nothing as concerning sinnes. In dede he letteth thē not, thoughe he can, but vseth them, and sheweth in them his myght, and not onely
[Page] his pacience,
Augustine. whiche thing
Augustine vnderstood right well, and in disputing agaynste
Iulianus, he confuteth that sentence, wherin it is sayd that God suffreth sinne only according vnto pacience, and proueth y
t his might is also therunto to be added by the wordes of
Paul, who wrote vnto y
e Romaynes: If God by much pacience hath suffred vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, to shewe forth his anger, & to make knowē his might. And vndoubtedly there are many things in the holy scriptures, which can not alwayes be dissolued by the worde of permission or pacience. For the heart of the kyng is sayd to be in the hād of y
e Lord, so that he inclineth it whether soeuer it pleaseth him. And Iob testefieth, that it was so done as god would. But as touching the sinne of the first man, when yet nature was not viciated and corrupted,
Of the sinne of the first man. we graunt, that the cause therof came from the wil of
Adam, and suggestion of the deuil, and we say that God permitted it: bycause when he might haue withstanded and letted it, he would not do it: but decreed to vse that sinne, to declare his iustice and goodnes.
¶Whether we can resiste the grace of God, or no.
BVt now ariseth an other doubt, as touching our nature, as it is now fallen, & corrupt, whether it can resiste the grace of God, & his spirite beyng present, or no?
There ar sundry degrees of grace of God, I thinke we must cōsider that there are as it wer sundry degrees of the helpe or grace of God: for his might & aboūdance is sometymes so great, that he wholy boweth the will of man, & doth not onely Counsel, but also persuade. And when it so commeth to passe, we can not departe from the right waye, but we are of Gods side, and obey his sentence. Wherfore it was sayd vnto
Paul: It is hard for thee to kycke agaynst the prycke.
There is no violēce or coaction inferred to mans will.And yet must we not thinke that when it is so done, there is any violence or coaction brought vnto the will of man: for it is by a pleasaunt mouyng and conuersion altered, and that willing, but yet so willing, that the will therof cōmeth of God: for it is it, which willeth, but God by a stronge and most mighty persuasion maketh it to will. But somtymes that power of God and spirit is, more remisse: which yet (if we wil put therunto our endeuor & apply our will) we should not resiste: yea we should obey his admonishmentes and inspirations: and when that we do it not, we are therfore sayd to resiste him, and oftentymes fall. And yet this is not to be vnderstand as touching the first regeneration, but as concerning those whiche are regenerated, whiche are now endewed with grace and spirite. For the will of the vngodly is so corrupt and vitiate, that except it be renewed, it can not geue place vnto the inspirations of God, and admonishynges of the holy ghost: & it in the first immutatiō of mās conuersion, it onely suffreth: and before the renewyng, it continually (as much as in it is) resisteth the spirite of God. But the first parentes whilest they were perfect, if with y
e helpe of grace beyng somewhat remisse, they had adioyned theyr endeuor, they might haue perfectly obeyed the commaundementes of God. But we although we be renewed, seyng grace is more remisse, remitting nothing of our endeuor, we shall not be able constantly and perfectly to obey the commaundementes of God, but yet we may be able to containe our selues within the boundes or limites of an obediēce begon: whiche thyng bycause we do not, therfore oftentymes we sinne, and greuously fall.
Why the grace of god worketh not alyke alwayes in vs.But why God geueth not his grace alwayes to his electe after one sorte, and one increase, but sometymes he worketh in them more strongly, and sometymes more remissedly, two reasons may be assigned: First, least we should thinke the grace of God to be naturall strengthes, which remayne alwayes after one sorte. Wherfore god would most iustly alter the degree & efficacy of his helpe: wherby we myght vnderstand that it is gouerned by hys wil, & not as we lust. Moreouer it oftentimes happeneth y
t our negligence & slouthfulnes deserueth this variety.
Lastly let vs conclude the matter, that if we wil speake properly, it is not to be sayd that God either willeth or bringeth forth sinne, in that it is sinne: for what soeuer God willeth, & whatsoeuer he doth, it is good. But sinne, in y
t it is sinne, is euil. Wherfore god neither willeth nor doeth it, in that it is sinne: yea he detesteth, prohibiteth, and punisheth it by his lawes. And if at any tyme it be sayd in the Scriptures, that he either willeth or worketh sinne in men, that must be referred vnto other considerations, whiche I haue declared both in an other place, and also now here. And this is sufficient as touching this question.
And God sent an euil spirit. By an euil spirit I vnderstād either the deuill,
What is vnderstād vp an euil spirite. or wicked affections, or cruelty stirred vp to reuenge iniuryes, but the end was to take vengeaunce for the bloud of the sonnes of
Ierubbaal.
The men of Sechem layd wayte agaynst hym.
The cause of y
e lying in wayt There may be three causes of their lying in wayte. First, bycause they would slay him as he passed by. And an other was, bicause they would not haue his souldiers to go to and fro. The third was, to shake of their yoke, and to declare that they were free. This was as much as to say, as they now nothing passed vpon his kyngly power.
It was tolde Abimelech. A short sentence & cut of: wherby yet we vnderstand that
Abimelech passed not that way, for feare of fallyng into their snares.
26 Then came Gaal the sonne of Ebed & his brethren, & they went to Sechem: and the men of Sechem put their confidence in him.
27 Therfore they wēt out into the field, & gathered in their grapes, & trodde them, & made mery. And they went into the house of their God, and did eate and drinke, and cursed Abimelech.
28 And Gaal the sonne of Ebed sayd: Who is Abimelech? & who is Sechē, that we shuld serue him? Is he not the sonne of Ierubbaal, and Zebul is his hed officer? Serue rather the men of Hamor the father of Sechem. But why shall we serue hym?
29 And who will geue this people into myne hand, and I wil take awaye Abimelech? And he sayde vnto Abimelech: increase thyne army, and come out.
Here cōmeth an occasion of the euils: one
Gaal by chaunce trauailed that way: the
Sechemites hired him to be their ruler and captayne: and therefore puttyng their confidence in him,
they go out into theyr vineardes, gather the grapes, and treade them, with great security. What this
Gaal was, it appeareth not by the Scriptures
R. Salomon thinketh he was an Ethnike.
R. Salomon. The
Sechemites were so afeard of
Abimelech, that they durst not gather their grapes: wherfore they hired this man. First, now they go forth into the fielde, whiche thyng before they durst not doo:
they make great ioye and mirthe. For in the olde tyme also (as it semeth) they vsed, as they do now a dayes,
The wātōnes vsed at the gatheryng in of grapes. great wantōnes and liberty in the gathering in of the grapes: of whiche custome sprange the Comedyes and Tragedies with the
Grecians. And when
Bacchus returned a conquerer out of
India, the people led daunces in honor of him at the wynepresses. Yea and the
Chaldey paraphrast maketh mention of daunces in this place.
They went into the temple. It was also the manner among the Ethnikes, to geue thankes vnto God of their first fruites. But these men go into the temple of God, and rate, drinke, singe, and curse their kyng: and whom before they had annoynted, hym now they rayle vpon, and teare with reproches. And that in the temple, wherin before they had taken counsel for to make
Abimelech their ruler. Such are the iudgementes of God. The place might haue admonished them: for out of it they gaue him money: but forgettyng all thynges,
they curse him: Although the scripture expressedly declareth not, whether this tēple were that selfe
[Page] same, where out they tooke the money in the beginning.
VVho is Abimelech? In the feastes of their wine gathering, they mocke theyr kyng, and that he beyng absent, and aboue the rest
Gaal, much more greuously scorneth hym. Let vs marke the peruersenes of mans nature: if any sinne be by chaunce committed, it addeth not a iust remedy, but healeth mischief with mischief, & cureth sinne with sinne. They should haue called vpon the Lord, & haue repented: but these do far otherwise, they se that they haue done noughtly, & yet they go farther to reproches. This is the manner of the frowardnes of man: yea and
Dauid when he had committed aduoutry, did not strayghtway repent, as he should haue done, but slewe
Vrias. Iudas whē he had betrayed Christ, would not repent, but went and hanged himselfe, and so was author of hys owne death. So in a maner when we haue sinned, we go to worser sinnes. They ought not in deede to haue chosen
Abimelech: but when he had once gotten the dominion of things, they should not so haue cursed him. Before the victory they sing a song of victory. There is nothyng more foolishe, then to contemne an enemy: for an enemy is not to be contemned, vnles he be ouercome. But this
Gaal goeth childishely to worke. He exhorteth and prayseth the
Sechemites, bycause they had shaked of their yoke. And he composeth his oration of thynges compared together.
A cōparatis. He compareth
Abimelech with
Hamor the prince of that Citye, whom the sonnes of
Iacob slewe by guile.
VVho is Sechem? Sechem in this place is not the name of the City, but of the chief man, namely the sonne of
Hamor.
VVho is Abimelech? He is the sonne of Ierubbaal. He hath in vs neyther right, nor iurisdiction. Let hym goo and bragge amonge his owne.
Sechem was in the olde tyme Lorde of this Citye, hym we ought to haue obeyed. But we slewe hym, howe then can we obeye this man? This comparison is nowe manifest youghe. But to increase the contempt more,
Zebul (sayeth he)
is the seruaunt of Abimelech, knowen well ynough vnto vs, whome he hath made ruler ouer hys Citye. Therefore we shall haue two Lordes. And we whiche woulde not obey the Lord of
Sechem, shall we nowe obeye a seruaunt? It is an vnworthy thyng.
The sēse of the oratiō of Gaal. Wherefore this semeth to be the sense of hys oration. If we shoulde haue serued, we should rather haue serued
Sechem. But we haue not serued him: therfore neither will we serue this
Abimelech.
Serue the sonnes of Hamor. As though he should haue sayd, serue them rather whiche were the auncient Lordes of this Citye: and if we haue not serued them, why should we serue
Abimelech &c.
And who wyll geue thys people into my hande? The other parte of the oration contayneth an exhortation, wherein he exhorteth them, to make hym ruler ouer the people.
VVho will geue? This forme of speakyng expresseth an affection of one y
t wisheth. I (sayth he) if I were your ruler, would easely take away
Abimelech.
All the Sechemites were not of one opinion. Hereby it appeareth y
t al the
Sechemites were not of one opinion▪ There were many which thē also wer on
Abimeleches side. Wherfore, I would to God sayth he, y
t all you were of one mynd, I would thē easely take away the tyranne.
[...] is a turnyng of a speache to some person.
And he sayd vnto Abimelech: Increase thyne army. He vseth an Apostrophe to
Abimelech beyng absent: for it is easy to rayle vpon one being absent. He speaketh very
Thraso lyke. It is as thoughe he should haue sayd: increase thy power how thou wilt, I set nothing at all by it.
30 And when Zebul the ruler of the Citye hearde the wordes of Gaal the sonne of Ebed, he was very angry.
31 And he sent messangers vnto Abimelech guilefully, saying: Behold Gaal the sonne of Ebed and his brethren be come to Sechem, and beholde they fortefy the City agaynst thee.
[Page 169]32 Nowe therfore aryse by night, thou and thy people that is with thee, and lye in wayte in the fielde.
33 And ryse vp early in the mornyng as soone as the Sunne is vp, and thou shalt assaulte the Citye, and when he and the people that is with hym, shall come out agaynst thee, do vnto them what thyne hande can finde.
Zebul was ruler vnder
Abimelech, & when he heard these reproches agaynst his Lorde, he could not suffer them. Hereby let vs marke how foolishly the
Sechemites behaued themselues, when they go about to fall from
Abimelech, they retayne yet still his ruler in the City. So god oftētymes striketh men with madnes. Neither want there exemples of this thing euen in our tyme.
He sent messangers guilefully. The Hebrew word is
Miremah or
Tomah: and it signifieth nothyng els, but that he sent letters priuely, the summe whereof was:
Gaal is chosen captayne agaynst thee, the
Sechemites fence the City, that they may both defend thēselues within, and also exclude thee without. And such is the subtility of
Zebul, that he not onely telleth what was done in the City, but also geueth Counsell what
Abimelech should doo.
VVhen it is mornyng. The Hebrewe worde
Tischim in the coniugation
Hiphil from the roote
Schacham signifieth to ryse early, the Grecians say
[...]. And where in
Luke the 21. chap. toward the end it is sayd,
Turba mane conueniebat ad eum: that is: The people gathered vnto him in the morning: the old translation was (as
Augustine also hath noted vpon this place of the Iudges (
Populus manicabat ad eum. But that worde is barbarous and straunge.
Augustine. Manicare. In Greeke it is rede,
[...].
And assalte the City. This is the Counsell of the ruler, that early in the mornyng he should besiege and assaulte the City by guile.
Do as thine hand shal find. By this Hebrewe phrase is signified nothyng els, but that so do thou as occasion shall serue.
34 And Abimelech rose vp early, and all the people that were with hym by nyght: and they laye in wayte agaynste Sechem in foure bandes.
35 Then Gaal the sonne of Ebed came out, and stoode in the entryng of the gate of the City. And Abimelech rose vp and the people that were with him, from lying in wayte.
36 And when Gaal sawe the people, he sayde to Zebul: Beholde there come people downe from the toppes of the mountaynes. To whome Zebul aunswered: The shadowe of the mountaynes semeth men vnto thee.
37 And Gaal spake agayne and sayde: Beholde there come people down from the nauel of y
e earth, and one Captaine commeth by the waye of the playne of Moonenim.
Their lying in wayte was distributed into foure bandes, & when
Gaal should go forth of the city,
Zebul was together with him, & as far as we may coniecture,
Zebul vsed double fraude: for first he sent a messanger vnto
Abimelech, & signified vnto him, what he thought good to be done: & afterward he ioyneth himselfe deceatfully vnto
Gaal, as though he would be on his side, that he might the safelyer do those thynges whiche he thought to doo, & that
Gaal should not mistrust hym, Wherfore
Gaal goeth forth, being nothing afeard of priuy enbushements, and together with hym went
Zebul.
Thou seest the shadow of montaynes. Zebul derideth him, saying: They be shadowes
[Page] whiche thou thinkest to be men.
Out of the nauel of the earth. This is a metaphoricall kynde of speache, for as the nauell appeareth aboue the belye, so are the mountaynes aboue the earth. Wherefore by the nauell he vnderstandeth the mountaynes from whence
Abimelech descended with his company. And when he came from the mountaynes, it is very lykely (whiche thyng yet is not here mentioned) that he ouercame the guarrisons, whiche the
Sechemites had put in those places.
38 And Zebul sayd vnto him: Where is nowe thy mouth, that sayd: Who is Abimelech that we should serue hym? Is not thys the people that thou haste despised? Go out nowe I praye thee, and fyght agaynst them.
39 And Gaal went forth before the men of Sechem, and fought agaynst Abimelech.
40 But Abimelech pursued hym, after he began to flye before hym, and many were ouerthrowen and wounded euen to the entryng of the gate.
41 And Abimelech dwelt at Arumah: and Zebul thrust out Gaal and his brethren, that they should not abide in Sechem.
42 And on the morowe the people went out into the fielde. And it was tolde Abimelech.
43 And he tooke the people and deuided them into three bandes, & laid wayt in the field, and looked, and behold the people were come out of the City, and he rose vp agaynst them and smote them.
44 And Abimelech, and the bandes that were with hym, rushed forwarde, and stoode in the entryng of the gate of the City: and the two other bandes ran vpon al the people that were in the field, and slewe them.
45 And when Abimelech had fought agaynst the City all the day, he tooke the City, & slew the people that was therin, and destroyed the City, and sowed salt in it.
Zebul coulde not holde hymselfe, but that he must nippe that
Thraso. Thou didst contemne (sayeth he)
Abimelech: nowe
come out agaynst hym, and shewe howe valiaunt thou art.
VVhere is thy mouth? This worde
Aphoh is ambiguous: for it signifieth
where, and sometymes it signifieth
now. But bycause it is before sayd where, it is mete to be taken here for Now, & so let vs say: Where is now thy mouth: vnles we will haue it a repetition, to say: Where, where is thy mouth: & by the figure
Metonumia a mouth signifieth wordes:
The manner of feareful men. for we speake with y
e mouth. He vp braydeth him with the maner of feareful men: for cowardes are wont before the daunger stoutely to bragge: but when they come to the daunger, they are wonfully afrayd: but contraryly stoute men bragge not much, neither do they rashely thrust themselues into daungers. But in daungers they are most constant.
He went forth before the princes of Sechem. Gaal fighteth, but peraduenture not prepared, for
Abimelech came vpon him vnlooked for. Yet
Gaal goeth forth agaynst him, least peraduenture he should seme to be a coward.
And he fled before him. Abimelech followed hym when he fled, euen to the gates of the City, where he slewe many.
Gaal thought he should haue ben receaued into the City, and for that cause he fleeth vnto the gate. But
Zebul thrust hym out of the Citye. But thou wilt demaunde, by what meanes he coulde be excluded the City, whē as the
Sechemites had made hym theyr ruler?
Kimhi answereth, first that all the
Sechemites stoode not against
Abimelech: the people also
[Page 170] (as they were of an inconstant mynde) when they sawe
Gaal flye, turned theyr purpose, and fell to
Abimelech. Hereby we gather howe foolishe it is to trust vnto men.
Ieremy sayeth very well and wisely: Cursed be euery one, that putteth hys confidence in man, and maketh fleshe hys strength. The
Sechemites put theyr confidence in
Gaal, and at that very instant vsed hys ayde.
Gaal on the other side putteth hys confidence in the
Sechemites, and was thrust out of the City by them, in whom he did put his confidēce. This is the nature of the people, when fortune a lyttle fauoreth, strayght way they forsake them whō before they followed. The common people altogether depende vpon chaunce. Here may we see also an other foolishenes of the
Sechemites, who thought that when they had cast out
Gaal, Abimelech had straightway ben satisfied. For
they goo forth into the fieldes, to excercise theyr rusticall workes, to gather in theyr grapes, I saye, or to tyllage. But it happened farre otherwise. For
Abimelech placed two bandes to lye in wayte, and he hymselfe with hys hoste came vnto the Citye, that neyther they whiche were in the fieldes, coulde get into the City, nor they which were in the City coulde come out, to helpe theyr men in the fieldes. This pollecy of warre vsed
Abimelech. They thought he had nowe bene pacified, but the anger of kynges are not straightwaye asswaged.
And he sowed salte. These moste miserable chaunces happened vnto the people, they whiche went forth into the fieldes, were killed, the Citye it selfe was besieged and conquered, the Citizens slayne, the Citye defaced and vtterly ouerthrowen. But
Abimelech stomachyng the matter more then was meete, sowed salte in the Citye: whiche was a token of a wildernes and deserte.
What the sowyng of salt signifieth. For salte dryeth the grounde, and maketh it vnfruitefull. In Hebrewe
Malach signifieth salte. Thereof commeth the verbe
Malach whiche is, to salte: but in the coniugation
Niphal, Nimlah, is a verbe, whiche signifyeth to destroye, to breake downe and to waste. That woorde
Ieremy vsed in hys
14. chap. and
Dauid in hys 107. Psalme, GOD turneth a fruitefull lande into a saltishe grounde, that is, maketh it waste and deserte. In the yeare .1165.
Fredrike Oenobarbus the Emperor ouerthrew
Millane, and sowed salte there. For that City tooke parte with
Alexander the thyrde being Pope, agaynst
Cesar: whiche thyng
Fredrike tooke in very yll part.
46 And when all the men of the tower of Sechem hearde it, they came to the castle of Thelberith.
47 And it was told Abimelech that al the men of the tower of Sechem were gathered together.
48 And Abimelech went vp to mount Zalmon, he and all the people that were with hym: and Abimelech tooke axes, and cut downe bowes of trees, and tooke them and layd them on his shoulder, and said vnto the people that were with him: That whiche ye haue sene me do, make hast, and do as I haue done.
49 Wherfore all the people cut downe euery man his bowgh, and followed Abimelech, and put them to the castle, and set the castle on fire with them. And al the men of the tower of Sechem dyed, about a thousand men and women.
50 Then went Abimelech vnto Thebez, and layde siege to it, and tooke it.
That tower of
Sechem was a bulwarke of the Citye. Wherefore when the City was takē, the princes distrusting themselues, entred into an other inward holde, where also was a temple: and it was called the house of the couenaunt of God: for the Israelites forsaking the couenant of the true God coupled themselues
[Page] vnto straunge Gods.
And it was told Abimelech. Mount
Zalmon was nighe vnto that hold, whether
Abimelech and his people got them vnto: for he had determined to burne that castell and temple whiche was in it. Neither ought we to meruaile, that y
e temple was so fensed,
Temples were wont to be builded in castels. when as it was the maner so in the old tyme. For Rome, when longe a go it was taken and burnt of the
Senones, the
Capitolium, where in was the temple of
Iupiter, remayned safe. Yea and
Iosephus sayth that when
Ierusalem was besieged of
Titus, the temple was a strong bulwarke for y
e City. But the cause why the
Sechemites got them thether, was not onely bycause the place was so well fensed, but also bycause they had a supersticious opinion of
Baal: for they thought that he would be with thē, & defend his temple. So foolish men, when they haue in deede no religion in their mynde, yet they put their confidence in holynes of places, and wōderfully trust in images & temples, & also in reliques of saintes. But thereby they are nothing holpen, but to their destructiō they are slayne euen in temples, as we rede it happened now vnto these men.
[...].
And by them they set the castle on fire. There is in these wordes
Alleosis of the gender, for the Masculine gender is put for the Feminine, for as much as this relatiue
Eos that is them, is referred to the bowes, which in the Hebrew is a word of the Feminine gender. Mencion is made of the vtter destruction of the Citye, for it was not onely ouerthrowen, and strawed with salte, but also the princes were slayne with fire and smoke.
Abimelech in this warlike pollecy shewed not vnto all, what he would do, he onely biddeth the people to follow hym.
Gideon also when he tooke the pitcher, fire brand, and trompet, commaunded the other to do the same: so
Abimelech tooke a bowe on his shoulder, and the other did the like. He kindleth fire, and burneth all them which were in the holde, otherwise he could not haue conquered the tower. Some thinke y
t
Gaal also perished here, & that beyng put to flight by
Abimelech,
Why the vngodly obtayne victoryes. he got him to this holde. After this sorte God tooke vengeance vpon the
Sechemites. And
Abimelech, althoughe he were an vngodly and cruell tyranne, obteyned the victory: so also god gaue
Nabucadnesar power, to afflicte the Iewes, and to leade them captiues to
Babilone. And likewise vnto
Tiglathphalasar to oppresse the ten tribes. All these men had the victory, and yet was their cause nothyng the better. This rule god vseth oftentymes to punishe the euill by euill, although he do not straightway punish them all. Some he punisheth before, and other some afterward: and there are some also, whose vengeance he reserueth for the world to come.
Abimelech triumpheth as thoughe he had better cause: but yet this hys ioye is of no longe tyme:
A Similitude. for the hande of the Lorde abydeth hym also. In Comedyes, the strength of the Poete is not perceaued by the Prologe, nor by one acte or two, but we muste wayte for the ende and the conclusion of the whole fable. So if a man wyll geue iudgement of an Image, or of any other fayre Picture if he onely marke the Knee or Legge, he shall easely be deceaued: for he must consider the Armes, he Shoulders, the Sides, and proportion of the whole body. After which selfe same maner, if we will vnderstand the iustice of God in his workes, we muste tary tyll the ende, and then shall we see the iudgementes of god full.
Augustine sayeth ryght well that god,
Augustine. when he punisheth any certayne wicked acte, doth signify that he hateth all wicked actes. And when he differeth the punishementes of the vngodly, he admonisheth vs, to thinke vpon an other lyfe. Wherfore if Papistes,
A comforte in the felicity of the vngodly. if Turkes, if Tyrannes are not punished in this world, let vs with a patient minde wayte for the last acte, and last iudgement of god: for they shall not go vnpunished.
Dauid sayeth in his 73. Psalme: My feete were almost moued, and my steppes had welnye slypte, bycause I freated at the wicked, when I sawe the peace of synners. For there are no bandes in theyr death, and they are lusty and stronge. They ar not in trouble as other mē, &c. And I sayd, doth god know these things,
[Page 171] and is there knowledge in the most highest? For so doth our flesh iudge, when it seeth y
e vngodly liue in prosperity: when the matter is so. is there (sayth he) knowledge in the moste highest? Wherefore I haue clensed my harte in vayne, and in vayne I haue washed my handes in innocency, in vayne was I punished all the day, and it was paynfull to me, to know this. For they are moste harde to vnderstand, and I began in a manner to dispayre, vntill I went into the sanctuarye of God, and vnderstood theyr last end. For who may not easelye be deceiued in the rich man and
Lazarus? When as the one in mans sight semed to haue bene most blessed, and the other most miserable. Therfore (sayth he) it was paynefull vnto me, vntyll I was broughte into the sanctuary of God, & beheld theyr last iudgement. But as touching
Abimelech, the prophesy ought to be fulfilled whiche
Iotham pronounced: Let a fire come out of
Abimelech and destroy his enemies.
God suffreth
Abimelech to excercise his tiranny three yeares, in which space be semed to tary for his repentance. But he heaped vp vnto him self angre in the day of anger. For if he had ben wise he would easly haue thoght thus with him selfe after the victory: The
Sechemites sinned thoroughe my perswasion: if they ar now so seuerely hādled, what shalbe be done to me at the lēgth? But he being blinded that he could not se these thynges, at the last was filthily slayne. So the vngodly ar dronken with prosperous fortune, and god semeth to fede them vp, as sacrifices, which are first fed and fatted, before they be killed. In whiche sense
Esay in the .34. chap. writeth: The Lord hath a sacrifice in
Bozra. Wherfore
Abimelech, by all the things that he saw, is made neuer a whit the better, yea rather he was made the more insolent, and attempteth other thinges more tirannical. In the boke of
Ecclesiasticus the 8. chap. it is writtē. Bicause sentence agaynst the euill is not executed spedely, the childrē of men do without any feare perpetrate euil thinges. Therfore are men made so hedlong to sinne, bicause they abuse the goodnes of god: & it is so far of, y
t the vngodly, when he seeth an other corrected, should amend, y
t he alwayes becōmeth worse & worse, and alwaies endeuoureth to goe on farther in wickednes. Whiche thinge I woulde to God we woulde follow in vertues and good deedes.
Abimelech had ouercome the Sechemites, neither was that sufficient for him: then tooke he the holde, neyther was that ynough for him: he conquered the citye of
Thebez, and yet did not this suffice him. He will go on farther yet: and is most filthyly slayne. As concerning the city of
Thebez, Kimhi sayth, that it also fell from the gouernment of
Abimelech.
Dauid Kunht.
51 But there was a strong tower within the citye, and thither fled all the men and wemen, and all the chief of the city, and shutte it to them, and went vp to the top of the towre.
52 And Abimelech came vnto the towre, and fought against it. And went hard vnto the doore of the towre to set it on fire.
53 Then a woman caste a piece of a milstone vpon Abimeleches heade, and brake his skull.
54 Who streightwaye called his page that bare his armoure, and said vnto him: Draw thy sword and slay me, lest men peraduenture say of me: A woman slew him. And his page thrust him thorow and he died.
55 And when the men of Israell saw that Abimelech was deade, they departed euery man to his owne place.
56 Thus God rendred the euill of Abimelech, whiche he did vnto his father, in slayinge his brethern.
57 Also all the wickednes of the men of Sechem did god bring vpon
[Page] theyr heads, and vpon them came the curse of Iotham the sonne of Ierubbaall.
The menne of
Thebez closed and sensed the outwarde partes of the Tower verye well: And kepte themselues within, hauinge all the gates and entrances shut vp.
They ascended vpon the toppe. This Hebrewe woorde
Gag sygnifieth the toppe of the house, not sharpe poynted, but playne, for vpon it they might walke. And bycause it was dangerous, leaste a manne shoulde fall from the toppe, it was commaunded in
Deutronomye, that a cyrcuite or a stay should be added to the roofe of the houses.
To burne the gate. Bycause he hadde so good successe before to conquere by fyre, he thoughte now also to had the like fortune.
A woman threwe a stone. Abimeleche puffed vppe with victories, setteth an example before oure eyes, that wee shoulde not to muche put confidence in presente felicity. By his luckye successe he thoughte his cause was good, and that they whome he had destroyed, had theyr rewarde for theyr wickednes. Such is the iudgemente of menne, they thinke that accordinge to the wayghte of the punishments, so are the sinnes of the afflicted, and theyr euil deserts, so that they whych are greuously vexed, seeme to haue greiuously sinned. And vndoubtedly the booke of
Iob is all whole in a manner of that argumente. For his friendes did therefore gather that he was an euill man,
The argumēt of the booke of Iob. bicause he was so grieuouslye afflicted. But yet oughte wee not so to thincke: For there maye be other causes why GOD wil haue the sayntes oppressed in this world. Christ teacheth vs in the 13. chapter of
Luke (when certayne tolde him, that
Pilate hadde mingled the bloud of y
e
Galileians w
t sacrifices, & they loked that Christ should haue cried out vpon the crueltye of the President) howe wee oughte to take profite by the punishments of other men.
We ought to take perfect by the punishmēts of other. For he aunswered: do you thinke that those
Galileians sinned aboue all the reast, bicause they suffred these thinges? No verilye, I tell you, but excepte ye repente, ye shall all likewise perishe. Or thinke ye that those 18, vpon whome the Tower in
Siloi fell, were sinners aboue all men that dwel in Ierusalem? No verely, I tell you, but excepte ye repente, ye shall all lykewise perishe.
Abimelech also shoulde rather thus haue sayd wyth himself: If these things haue chaunsed vnto them, what shall then happen vnto me? Let vs also speake thus with our selues. If by the Turkes and Saracenes so grieuous thinges haue happened vnto the Grecians, Hungarians, and Africanes, what shall then become of vs at the length? Excepte we repente, wee shall lykewyse peryshe.
The names of two milstones.
A peece of a milstone. Thys Hebrewe woord
Rachab signifieth a milstone. But there ar two milstones, namely that that is aboue, and that that is beneath. The higher is he, which is called
Rachab, bicause it is put vpō the other, and after a sort rideth vpon it. The other is called
Schachab, bycause it semeth to lye still. By what meanes the woman hadde a peece of a mylstone in the vpper parte of the house, it appeareth not. Howebeit it is verye likelye, that they caryed vppe stones, and greate heauye peeces of rockes into the vpper partes of the houses, to haue them in a redinesse to beate backe the enemy.
And hys page thruste him thorowe, and he died. This is the ende of a most cruel tiranne. He is killed of a woman, and when he saw that he must nedes dye, he studieth to put away the infamye, neyther would he haue it sayd of him, that a woman slew him. What madnes is thys? He is at the poynt of death
[Page 172] and he vaynelye thinketh vpon glorye: He thinketh it a reproche to be killed of a woman, and is nothinge carefull for the soule, nor for the other life: he onelye careth for his name and fame. And god when he hadde vsed thys mannes cruelty to afflicte the
Sechemites, at the laste destroyed him also. He entred in by euell artes: He raygned cruellye and tyrannouslye, and died moste filthylye.
And when Abimelech was dead, euery man returned into his country. Neither was the tower which he assaulted, conquered. And least any man should thinke that these thinges happened by chaunce, but that all menne myghte vnderstande that they were doone by the prouidence and counsell of god, the cō clusion is added:
Thus God rewarded. Herebye we are very well taught, that if at anye time the like thinges doo happen, wee muste not attribute them to fortune, but onely vnto the prouidence of God.
Achab the kinge when he went on warfare, chaunged his apparell, and woulde not be knowen to be the kinge, but be counted a raschall souldiour: yet was he slayne wyth an arrowe, whiche was shut at auenture, whiche thinge myghte haue seemed to haue bene done by chaunce, when as yet God in very deede gouerned the shafte. And in like manner as
Plutarch telleth,
Pirrhus was slayne of a moman in besieging of
Thebez,
Plutarch. she throwing downe a tyle from the house toppe. Verye many suche thinges are doone in oure time, whiche seeme vnto vs therfore to haue happened by chaunce, bycause wee knowe not the causes of thynges, and iudgementes of God.
Moreouer by thys conclusion thys we profitablye gather, that GOD at the length reuoketh all thynges to hys tribunall seate and iudgemente. If wee shoulde demaunde, why the
Sechemites were so myserablye afflycted, and why
Abimeleche was so fylthylye slayne? The holye Ghoste aunsweareth, God reuenged the ingratitude of the
Sechemites toward
Gideon, and the
Parricide of
Abimeleche, who slewe his bretherne. For the bloode of so manye bretherne cryed no lesse vnto the Lorde, then the bloode of
Abel, as is written in
Genesis. Lastlye let vs note, that there are hitherto some good Iudges spoken of, among whome is put
Abimeleche, a moste cruell tyranne, that theyr vertue by a comparison, or an
Antithesis myghte be made more noble. But happye was that publyke wealthe whyche amonge manye good, had onelye one tyranne, but we amongest manye euell, haue scarce one good Prince. And vndoubtedlye God gaue not vnto the Israelites thys tyranne, neyther raysed he hym vp after the manner of the other Iudges: but they elected him themselues.
¶The .xi. Chapter.
1
ANd Iiphtah the Galaadite was a mightye man, the sonne of an harlot: and Gilead begat Iiphtah.
2 And Gileads wyfe bare hym sonnes, whiche when they wer come to age, thrust out Iiphtah, and said vnto hym: thou shalt not inherite in our fathers house: For thou art the sonne of a straunge woman.
HEre is set foorth vnto vs
Iiphtah, a man abiect and obscure, not as touching his Tribe: for he was of the Tribe of
Manasses, but as touching his mother: for he was the sonne of an harlot. Wherefore his brethren
[Page 177] thrust him out as a bastard. The name of his father was
Gilead, who seemeth to haue bene so called by the name of the mounte and citye. And that man had not onely this bastard to sonne, but also he had other which wer legitimate children. Wherfore though
Iiphtah had a noble man to his father, yet that nothing profited him, bycause he was a bastard, and not borne in lawful matrimony. Wherfore by the ciuil law of the Hebrewes, it was not lawful for him to haue place in the congregation of Israell. For in
Deut. it is written:
Bastardes had not place in the congregation of Israell.
Mamzer shall not enter into the congregation or assembly.
Zor is in Hebrew a stranger. And a bastard is so called, bicause he pertaineth not vnto the famely of the father.
She that bare
Iiphtah was not a wife, but a harlot. This Hebrewe word
Zonah signifieth two thinges. Firste a vitler, that is suche a one as selleth thinges pertayning to victuales, for
Zon signifieth to fede or to bring vp. It signifieth also an harlotte. Paraduenture for this cause, bicause vitlers are oftentimes euill spoken of, as touching chastity. As it appeareth by a certayne lawe of Constantine, which is had in the Code
ad. l. Iuliam, de adult. And vndoubtedly eyther signification may aptly be applyed vnto this place. Some of the Hebrewes thinke that
Iiphtah was not the sonne of an harlot, but only the sonne of a concubine, whych was not espoused with wedding tables or bonds, and a dowry.
The mother of Iiphtah was not a Concubine. But that semeth not very wel to agree. For the Hebrewes called not a concubine
Zonah, neyther had it bene lawfull for his brethern to haue thrust out
Iiphtah as a straū ger, if he had bene the sonne of a Concubine. For the hauinge of Concubines of that sorte, was with the Iewes true Matrimonye. Farther, wee muste knowe that the Hebrewes had an other word, which signified an harlot. And that is
Kedashah, as though a man would say,
sancta, that is holy, as
Virgill sayth: The holy hunger of gold.
This word
Kadash signifieth to prepare. For as godly men prepare and sanctify themselues to the worshipping of god: so do harlots prepare themselues vnto the decking and gayne of the body.
And in
Deut. the .23. it was commaunded, that no such whore should be in Israell. And it is added, that the hire of
Zonah, that is of a whore, shoulde not bee brought into the sanctuary: wherfore we may therby gather that
zonah and
Kedashah, are taken both in one signifycatiō. In the .21. of
Leuiticus it was not law full for a prieste to haue such a one to wife. Thou wilt say peraduenture, what should it auayle to make such a lawe, if there were no harlots in Israell?
Why bastards were not admitted vnto the pub. wealth. What not to enter into the congregation signifieth. I aunsweare, that god in dede commaunded there shoulde be none, but the people obeyed not. But why would not god haue a bastard to come into the congregation? Not bicause that he shoulde be the worse man, if he shoulde liue vprightly: but that the people might know, that god detesteth whoredom. And not to enter into the congregation, was nothing els, then to be made vnapt for the executing of an office, either ciuil or holy. Although otherwise he had to his father, eyther a priest or a ruler. Wherfore it was not lawful for bastards to execute the office either of a Tribune, or of a Pretor, or Magistrate, or prieste.
Why therfore doth god now make a bastarde ruler ouer his people? Bycause he prescribed the law vnto men, and not to himselfe. An other cause is, least they which are so borne, shoulde be therefore straight waye discouraged. Farther, that they myghte remember that they are not excluded for theyr owne faulte, but for theyr fathers faulte. But nowe to returne vnto
Iiphtah, hys brethren coulde not haue thruste hym oute, excepte he hadde beene borne of an harlotte. Otherwise a Concubyne was a lawefull wyfe, and the chylderne of
Iacob whyche were borne of hys Concubynes, abode wyth theire other bretherne,
[Page] and wer inheritors together with them. But thou wilt say:
Abraham did thrust out
Ismael. That was done before the law, and by the singular wil of God, that the whole and perfect inheritance myght come vnto
Isaac. Otherwise by the ordinary lawe of the Hebrewes, the children of Concubines, were not vtterly excluded from al inheritance.
¶Of bastardes and children vnlawfully borne.
A diuision of children.BVt to make the thing more plaine, we wil thus deuide children: namely that there are some which are lawfull, and not naturall, as they that are adopted. Other some there are which were naturall, and not lawfull, as they whiche are born of Concubines. (But here I speake of Concubines after the manner of the Romaynes: For as touching the Hebrewes, they which wer born of them, wer legitimate).
What childe is called a bastard And there are other which are both legitimate and natural, as they which are borne in iust matrimony. Lastly, ther are some which ar neyther legitimate nor naturall, as are bastardes. A bastard is he, whiche can not tell who is his father, or if he can tell, it is one, whom it is not lawefull for him to haue to his father, as it is written in the Digestes
de statu personarum, in the lawe
Vulgo concepti. There is a greate difference betweene the condicions of children: but we, as touching this matter that we haue in hand, will neyther entreate of children adopted, nor of children legitimate naturall, but onely of naturall children, and bastardes, which seme to be more obscure then the other.
Children natural not legitimate, may be made legitimate, as it is in the Code
de Naturalibus filiis. Legē Anastasii. And the wayes how they might be made, ar described in y
e same Code, in y
e law
Si quis. But bastards could not be made legitimate. If we wil speak of the childrē of Cōcubines after y
e maner of the Iewes, they wer legitimate, as we haue before taught. But the Romaynes counted thē not as legitimate, onely this they ordeined, that they might be made legitimate. Farther, bastards are not in the fathers power, neither can they be: but they that are naturall, may be, if they be made legitimate. These things I speake, that we mighte vnderstande in howe greate a miserye bastardes are. Wherefore
Iiphtah could not atteyne to the inheritaunce of his father. And these lawes were made, that men might be plucked from whoredome, if it were but onely for the ignominy of theyr children.
Chrisostome. For when they do beget bastardes, they hurt them without hope of recouery. Wherfore
Chrisostome vpon the epistle to the Romayns (whē he enterpreteth these wordes: Now is the houre for vs to rise from sleepe) vehemently inueygheth agaynst whoremongers. Why dost thou sowe (sayth he) that which is not lawfull for thee to reape? Or if thou doo gather, it is ignominious vnto thee? For infamy wil therby come, both to him which shalbe borne, and to thee also. For he as long as he liueth, shalbe ful of ignominy, and thou, both whē thou art liuing and when thou art dead, shalt alwaies be noted of filthy lust, &c. Wherfore it is ordeined by the lawes, that bastardes should not be admitted to the inheritance of theyr fathers.
The father when he dieth, may geue somewhat vnto natural childrē, yea they succede, though they be not put in the will, when there ar no other children. But yet they succede not in the whole, but onely in two twelue partes, as appeareth in the Code
de Naturalibus liberis,
The ecclesiasticall cannons. in the law
Licet patri. But the bastard was so farre of from succeding the father, y
t he could not desire of him so much as should serue to finde him, as it is in Code
de incestis nuptiis, in the law
ex cōplexu. But the Ecclesiasticall Cannons deale somewhat more gentlye: for they permitte that a bastard should haue somewhat geuen him to find hym withall, as it is:
Extra, of him which maried her, whom before he had polluted with aduoutry in the chapter
Cum haberet. And herein both the lawes of god and man do agree. Neyther
[Page 178] as I haue before sayd, were these lawes written of hatred or cruelty agaynst bastardes, but that at the least by this meanes the filthy lustes of men should be kepte vnder.
Howebeit this I will not ouerpasse, that by the lawes of the Romaines, the bastarde myght succede his mother, as it is had in the Digests
ad Senatus consultum Tertul. L. 1. he may also complayne of his mother, if she leaue him out of her wil, as it is had in the digests
de inofficioso Testamēto.
L. 29. which is to be vnderstand, except the mother be noble. And why bastardes are not counted in the steede of children, and ar depriued of their fathers inheritance:
Augustine.
Augustine besides these reasons which I haue before brought, bringeth also an other out of the holy scriptures. For it is writtē in
Leuit. the
.20. chap. He y
t commeth to the wyfe of his vncle, shall dye wythout children. But (sayth he) many ar born also of incest, whose parents are not childles. He aunswereth, that the Lord so speaketh in the lawe, bycause such ar not counted for children. Wherfore theyr fathers are iustly sayd to be without children, althoughe they haue children: bicause it is al one, as if they had none. And bicause such children are contēned of the father,
Bastardes proue oftentimes worse then other children.
Chrisostome.
Plutarche. neyther are they rightly brought vp nor chastised, oftentimes they proue worse then the other.
Chrisostome vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes the
.12. chapter, in his
29. Homely, exhorteth the people, to think that god doth like a father when he chastiseth vs: for the father neglecteth vnlawfullye begotten children and bastardes. Wherefore god when he chasteneth, doth part of a true and lawfull father.
Plutarch in his Problemes the
.103. Probleme, saythe that the Romaynes had foure surnames, so that some were called
Cnei, and other some
Caii, and those names they noted by two letters onely, or by three. Wherefore he demaundeth, whye
Spurius y
t is a bastard, was written by these two letters
Sp. bicause sayth he, the fyrst letter
S, signifyeth
Sine, that is without, &
P, Pater that is, a father, bycause he was borne of an vnknowen father. Althoughe that maye also be applied vnto
Posthumos, that is such as ar borne after theyr father is dead: but to them it was not cōtumelius to be called
Spurii. For.
Sp. Melius, Sp. Cassius and other of that name were very notable citisens. We haue harde the law of God, and the ciuill law, now let vs see the Cannons.
In the decrees distinction
.56. chapter.
Presbiterorum,
What the Cannons decree of bastardes.
Chrisostome. bastardes are not suffred to be admitted vnto holy orders, vnles they wer first brought vp in monasteries, as though by this meanes they might be amended. But the Canons which afterward follow, are somewhat more gentle.
Chrisostome vpon
Mathewe in hys
.4. Homely, as it is in the same place recited, chapter
Nunquam, teacheth y
t so to be borne, ought not to be hurtful vnto the children. For if a man haue bene a thiefe, a whoremonger, or a murtherer, and then repent him, his former life shal not be hurtefull vnto him: much lesse oughte the sinne of the father to be hurtefull vnto the child, yea rather if the child behaue himselfe wel, he shal be so much the more notable, and worthye of more prayse, in that he hath not followed the steppes of his father.
Ierome.
Ierome in his Epistle
contra Ioannem Hierosolomitanum ad Pammachium, as in the same decrees appeareth in the chapter
Nascitur. Bastardes sayth he, are not to be contemned: for they haue the hande of god to make them,
Gregory neyther did god disdayne to make them, and to geue them a soule. &c.
Gregory also in the same place in the chapter
Satis peruersum, sayth, that it is a thinge vnworthy, that the child should be so punished, for the pleasure of the father, that he shoulde not be promoted vnto the holye ministerye.
Ierome in the same place chapter
Dominus. If Christ in his genealogy vouchsafed to reckē bastards, why shall not we then admitte them to the ministerye. &c?
After these Cannons whiche are somewhat fauorable vnto bastardes,
What the father hindereth bastardes, is brought out a stronge argument on the contrarye parte. Whoremongers (saye
[Page] they) do seme to poure in a certayne power into the seede, whiche power passeth also into the children, wherof follow euill inclinations, and therof are they iudged to be worse then other, bycause when they ar children, they are not corrected. Wherfore if they be promoted vnto the holy ministery, the churche shall receaue dammage. Yet at the last it is added, in the chap.
Cenomanensis, if there be any that are notable, they maye be admitted vnto holye orders: but yet not that it shoulde be a generall rule of all, but onelye a priueledge. And these thinges are written in the decrees.
But in the decretalles
de filiis presbiterorum it is had, that bastardes if they be made Monkes, may come vnto orders, but in suche sorte that they be not promoted vnto dignities, and be not made eyther Abbottes or Priors. But if they liue without the monastery, the bishop may ordeyne them, and geue them small benefites, but that is by his authority, and (as they commonly cal it) by dispensacion. But ecclesiasticall dignities must not be geuen them, but by the Pope: for that power he kepeth to himselfe alone.
The iudgment for promotinge of bastardes must be left vnto the church. But suche releasinges of Popes and bishops tend onely to gayne. The iudgemente of these thinges shoulde haue beene left vnto the churche: which ought herein to haue a respect to two thinges, to her owne necessitye, and to the excellent vertues of him whome it will promote. If the Church shall haue greate neede, and he excell in vertues, the manner of his byrth shall nothing let him.
For
Paule to
Timothy and to
Titus, when he diligently writeth of the election of bishops and priestes, forbiddeth nothing of thys kynd of men. But thou wilt say, in the olde lawe bastardes were excluded from the ministerye. I graunte that, but we ar not now bound to that law, & it was made onely for the detestation of aduoutry. But nowe if they can much profite the churche, theyr election is not to be prohibited. And it is vayn which is writtē in the decretals, that legitimates maye be chosen,
A trifling diuision of the decretals. but bastards oughte to be reiected, except with dispensation, as it is had in the title
de electionibus. For these couloures and deceates the Romayne Byshoppes haue inuented to amplyfye theyr dominion. But the sentence whiche I haue allowed, agreeth with charitye: and we may gather the like of it out of the ciuil law, wher it is entreated of
Decuriones, for these wer ciuill Iudges for priuate cities and townes.
Bastardes might be made Decuriones. Wherfore it is decreed that bastardes might be made
Decuriones, if necessity so required. In the Digests
de Decurionibus in the lawe
generaliter, paragrapho. Debet enim. The lawe therefore woulde haue that order namely of
Decuriones to be ful. Howbeit if an other legitimately borne, were a suter to gether for the same, he shoulde be preferred before the bastard. So thinke I must we do in the churche, that if anye man be as good and as apte for the ministery, being legitimately borne, let vs haue no regard vnto the bastarde, who muste geue place in that lawefull case. It is added in the lawe: If they be honest and good, the faulte of the byrth nothinge hindereth them. In the same tytle in lawe
Spurios, and in the lawe followinge. These thynges haue I therefore mencioned that we myghte vnderstande, by what ryghte
Iiphtah was of hys bretherne thruste oute, and to see howe the Cyuyll lawes agree with the law of God.
¶Whither the sonne shall beare the iniquity of the father.
BVt in this place ariseth a question wayghtier and farre more hard, bycause it seemeth that the sonne beareth the iniquitye of the father. For he that is borne, playd not the whoremonger, but the father, whom he could not let. More ouer in
Deutronomy the .5. chap. it is writen, and also the same thinge is founde
[Page 179] in
Exodus, I wil visite the sinnes of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third and fourth generatiō. And the same did God repeate vnto
Moses, when he passed before him. For among his Prophetes this also is added: visiting the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third I say, and fourth. And it semeth meruelous, by what meanes that may be numbred among the titles of mercy. This thing the Heretikes, as the
Martionites, Valentinians, and
Carpocratians,
What y
e Heretikes reproue in the old testament. left not vnspoken of, who for that cause reiected the old testament, and affirmed the author therof to be an euil God, as he whiche spared the fathers that sinned, and punished the innocent children, being so far from mercy, that he can not forget sinne, but reserueth anger, euen to the third and fourth generation. The Iewes also tooke that in euill parte, who in
Ezechiel the .18. chap. sayd: Our fathers haue eaten sowre grapes, & the childrens teeth are set on edge. That was as much as if they should haue sayd:
Ieroboam erected calues,
Manasses setforth idolatry, & must we be punished for them? But the Lord aunswered by the Prophet: Al soules are mine, both the soule of the father, & also the soule of the sonne. The soule that sinneth, it shall dye, and the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father. These thinges seme not very well to agree together.
Some thinke that here must be vsed a distinction of euils and punishmentes.
A distinction of punishmentes. For there are some punishementes say they, whiche pertayne vnto eternal damnation: and there are other, whiche dure but for a tyme. And they vnderstand the place of
Ezechiel before alledged of the first kinde of punishementes: for as touchyng eternall saluation or damnation, euery one shall beare his owne burthen. And agayne the soule whiche hath sinned, it shal dye. Neither do they otherwise vnderstād a place of
Ieremy in the .31. chap. But as touchyng punishments which dure but for a tyme, as are sicknes, pouerty, banishement, death, &c. they affirme that it is not agaynst the iustice of God, but that w
t these kinde of punishmentes he maye punishe the sonne together with the father, and the people with the princes. And in that sort they expounde that which is sayd in the law: I will visite the sinnes of the fathers vpon the children, vnto the thirde and fourth generation.
Augustine semeth sometymes to haue allowed this distinction.
Augustine. For in his questions vpon
Iosua the 8. question, when he reasoneth concernyng
Achan, whiche had hidden some of the thinges that were cursed, for whose sinne all the Israelites were miserably afflicted, and for the same cause not onely
Achan was punished, but also his sonnes and daughters were put to death together with him:
Augustine (I say) sayth there, that those punishmentes may both profit, and also hinder, which thing God hymselfe knoweth, and therfore he tempreth them accordyng to his iustice. For god so moderateth thē, that they do both afflicte the wicked, and are not hurtfull to the good. For such is his prouidence, that those thinges whiche seme euill, he can make good: but as touching eternall punishementes, bycause they alwayes are hurtfull, euery man worthily suffreth them according to his euil desert. No man (saith he) suffreth these punishments for an other mans faulte. The same
Augustine writeth agaynst the aduersary of the lawe and the Prophetes in his .1. boke and .16. chap.
A diuision of men into regenerate and into those that are not yet regenerate. There is no doubt (sayth he) but that in this life one is vexed for an other. And agaynst
Iulianus the
Pelagian is his .6. booke the 12. chap. he maketh a diuision of the estate of people, and sayth that some are regenerate in Christ, but other some are not yet regenerate. And the sinnes of those that ar regenerate, are visited vnto the third and fourth generation, that is, vpon all their posterity. And he alludeth it vnto originall sinne, whiche was by
Adam sowed into all his posterity. But thou wilt say, why is it visited vnto the third and fourth generation? The same father aunswereth, in his 42. question vpon
Deut. bycause thre ioyned with fower make seuen, whiche is a number of fulnes, so that to say vpon the third and fourth generation,
The nomber of seuen is a tokē of fulnes. is all one, as if he had sayd vpon all generations. Which kind of speakyng
Amos vsed, saying: For three transgressions, and for foure I will not turne to it. Wherfore
[Page]
Augustine vnderstandeth these woordes of the lawe, for visityng the iniquityes of the fathers vpon the children vnto the thirde and fourth generation, as touching those that are not regenerate. For the lawe (sayeth he) entreated of those whiche were vnder the lawe. But
Ezechiel and
Ieremy entreate of menne regenerate, and of the gift of regeneration whiche should be geuen by Christ. But men that are regenerate shalbe iudged euery mā according to his own desertes, and not accordyng to other mens synnes. And so y
e sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father, but the soule whiche hath sinned, it shall dye. But before regeneration, originall sinne infecteth and destroyeth all posterityes.
This distinction of
Augustine I disalow not, but I doubt whether it be sufficiently applyed vnto the meaning of
Ezechiel and
Ieremy.
Ezechiel and Ieremy wrote both the selfe same wordes in sundry places. Both those Prophetes wrote these selfe same wordes. The fathers haue eatē sower grapes, and the childrens teeth are set on edge, when as yet the one was in Iewry, and the other caried away into
Babilone. Whiche is a manifest argument, that they spake both with one and the selfe same spirite. But
Augustine sayeth that the exposition of
Ezechiel is to be sought for in the .31. chap. of
Ieremy. For there after the same wordes it is added: Beholde the dayes will come, and I will make a new couenaunt, &c. Wherfore that place is wholy to be applied vnto regeneration: and therfore by these wordes of
Ieremy, the wordes of
Ezechiel are to be interpreted of those that are regenerate. In this manner that father thynketh this question is fully aunswered.
But when I more attentyuely doo weighe the chap. of
Ezechiel, I thinke that he speaketh of the punishmentes and afflictions of this lyfe. For why complayned the people, saying, that the fathers had eaten sower grapes, and the childrēs teeth were set on edge? Did they complaine of the payne of hell? No vndoubtedly, but bicause they were led away captiue into
Babilone and lyued in seruitude. They complayne that God semeth to deale to hardly with them: bycause for as much as their fathers were idolaters, yet they which had not sinned, were punished. For those punishementes the people lamented: wherfore it was necessary, that the Prophet should aunswere them of the same punishementes. The soule of the father is myne, and the soule of the sonne is myne. The soule whiche hath sinned, it shal dye. These wordes therfore haue a respect vnto the punishmentes of this lyfe. Although I do not deny, but that it may also be transferred vnto spirituall punishmētes:
Argumentum a minori ad maius. but not, vnles it be by an argumēt from the les to the great. And that after this maner, God doth not for an other mans sinne punishe, with paynes which dure, but for a tyme, those whiche are vtterly innocent, therfore much les will he punishe them with spirituall and eternall punishmentes.
Ierome.
Ierome when he interpreteth this place of
Ezechiel, hath the solution, which
Augustine also afterward followed, as in his place we shall declare. But the interpretations do vary, bycause it is a thing obscure, and the difficulty hereof ryseth, bycause it can not be denyed, but that God doth vexe some for other mens sakes. For although
Cham vncouered the filthines of his father, yet the curse was transferred to
Chanaan his sonne. And when the
Sodomites had grieuously sinned, the children were also burnt together with the fathers. And when
Dauid had committed aduoutry, God caused that the sonne whiche was borne of y
e aduoutry to dye. Wherfore in a thing so obscure
Ierome bringeth his owne interpretation, but he declareth also other mens iudgementes as touchyng this question.
An Allegorical exposition of some. First he sayth that there were very many, which did vnderstand this place of the lawe. (That God will visite the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third & fourth generation) allegorically of euery singular soule, or man.
1 For there are in vs certayn naturall passions,
Foure degrees of sinnes. impulsions and violences to euil,
2 or (as other say) first motions.
[...]. Then followeth deliberation, when a man determineth
3 with himselfe to do euill. Thirdly is performed that whiche was determined.
4 Fourthly, followeth boastyng of the wicked acte, when he reioyseth and hath a pleasure in his sinnes. So in a maner are numbred foure generatiōs: but
[Page 180] God is so gentle, that in the first and second generation, that is in the first motions, and in deliberation he sayth nothing, and winketh at it, but the third and fourth, that is the perpetrating & boasting he punisheth, when a man both doth euill, and gloryeth in his sinnes, and will not repent. Wherefore they say that God reuengeth vpō the bowes and not vpon the rootes. For mā, as they thinke, if he neither do euill, nor boast of his euil, may be saued, althoughe otherwise he both lusteth, and deliberateth to commit euill. And in that maner they interprete
Paul vnto
Timothe, when he sayth that the woman shalbe saued by procreation of children, so y
t they abyde in the fayth, &c. that is: The soule shalbe saued, if it worke that which is good, althoughe it haue euill motions and cogitations.
This interpretation do not I allowe: first bycause it is Allegoricall,
The impulsiōs and first motions of y
e minde are sinnes. when as God especially in the law speaketh simply and manifestly: moreouer bycause if the wordes of God should be applied vnto allegoryes, they should be made vtterly vncertayne: lastly, bycause that whiche is sayd is not true. For these impulsions, and first motions are sinnes, bycause both they are agaynst the law of God, and also they are condemned of Christ, when he sayth in the Gospell: He whiche seeth a woman and lusteth after her, hath committed fornication already in hys harte. And he whiche is angry with his brother, is worthy of iudgement. For God doth not so regarde the
[...]ctes, but that he much more hath a respect vnto the mynde.
Moses at the waters of contention sinned grieuously, and yet if we diligently weighe that hystory, we shall finde nothing that he committed euill outwardly. But God saw the incredulity of his heart, and tooke great vengeance of hym. Wherfore those motions and deliberations of the minde are not onely sinnes, but also are grieuously punished of God. Wherfore let vs leaue this interpretation, whiche
Ierome also bringeth not as his owne.
But now to make the matter playne, as touchyng punishmentes of this lyfe,
As touchyng punishementes which dure but for a tyme y
t no man suffreth whiche he hath not deserued. no man can say he suffreth that which he deserueth not: bicause no man is pure, no not the childe that is but a day old: there is none whiche hath not deserued euē death, why then should men say: Our fathers haue eaten sowre grapes, &c. whē as euery man shall beare his owne burthen, either as touching this lyfe, or as touchyng eternall lyfe? But God doth not alwayes send these euils which dure but for a time, as paynes and punishmentes,
God doth not alwayes send those euilles which dure but for a tyme as punishements. but hath very oftentymes a respect vnto others endes, as Christ in
Iohn aunswered of the man borne blynd: Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parentes, that he should be borne blynd, but y
t the glory of God should be made manifest. Also
Peter and
Paul, when they were put to death, could not complayne that they had not deserued death. Although God, when they were killed, had not a respect vnto this, to punishe thē,
What God regardeth in the martyrdome of his sainctes. but that by their bloud might be left a testimony of the Gospell of his sonne. Wherefore seing the matter is so, and we be al subiect vnto sinnes, there is no cause why we should complayne, that God dealeth to seuerely with vs, if we be afflicted for the sinnes of our parents. For God can so directe those troubles,
The scourges of the children, profite sometymes the parentes. that they shall pertayne not onely to hys glory, but also to the saluation of our parentes. For oftē tymes he punisheth the parents in the children, and the prince in the people. For the parentes are no les grieued for the punishement of their childrē, then if they themselues wer afflicted. If the children dye for the parētes cause, they haue no wrong done vnto them: for death, is also dew vnto then, & they should otherwise haue dyed. Wherfore if God will so vse their death, he may doo it iustly.
The grieues of the children are the grieues of the parents. Which thing also we may affirme of other calamityes. For if the sonne be vexed with sickenes, he deserued the sickenes: & if he haue lost money, thē hath he lost thinges transitory and vnstable, and which were geuen hym on that condition, that they mought easely be taken away agayn.
God as touching the regenerate turneth punishmēts into medicines. Wherfore if god will with these kindes of calamityes punish the parentes in the children, he can not be accused of iniustice.
Wherfore
Augustine in his questions vpon
Iosua the 8. question: by originall sinne (sayth he) many punishements are dew vnto vs, which yet God conuerteth
[Page] into certayne medicines, and maketh them very much to profite vs, although they seme vnto vs euil. For if the sonne had lyued, peraduēture he would haue followed the euill steppes of his father, or els committed woorser things. Wher fore if God take him out of this life, he can not complayne that he is ill delt with. For through the benefites of god his death redoundeth to his profite. For he is taken away, least by malice his heart should chaūge. And vndoubtedly we must suffer easy euils, to atteyne vnto great good thyngs. For so the Phisitions with a bitter purgation trouble the throte, to restore the sicke person to hys former health. In lyke maner when we haue deserued punishmentes, God yet turneth them to good.
By this means discipline is kepte in the worlde. And by this meanes (saith
Augustine) a certayne discipline is established in the world. For vnles it were so, men would continually proue worse and worse. A certayne coniunction also and society of mankinde is declared, whē one after this maner is punished for the sinne of an other. For they whiche pertayne vnto one kingdome or City, or Churche, are after a sorte one body among themselues. And in the body one mēber suffereth for an other. Wherfore seyng thys is so in the body, it is not absurde, that the same do chaunce also in the society of men.
Plutarche.
Plutarche in his booke
de Sera numinis vindicta, hath very well taught this: The eye (saith he) is sicke, & the vayne of y
e arme is cut, so the father hath sinned, and the sonne is punished: the prince hath behaued himselfe ill, and the people is vexed: and such compassion or suffring together is there in things humane. That author iustly accuseth the rashenes of men,
[...]. whiche as often as these thynges doo chaunce, do complayne that God dealeth cruelly. For the father (sayth he) is either good or euill. If the sonne of a good father be peraduenture afflicted with euill, straightway they crye out that God doth vniustly, neither is it meete that the sonne should be so miserably handled, which had so good a man to his father. But if the father be euill, and the sonne come into misery, agayne they make exclamation, that here also god is vniust. For the sonne ought not to haue ben punished, when as the father sinned, wherfore the common people thinke that the sonne should by no meanes be afflicted. But what if the father be euill, and yet all thinges go prosperously with the sonne? here also they cōplayne (as he sayth) of the iniustice of god. For they deny it is iust that then the sonne should lyue prosperously, whiche hath so euill a father. These thinges this man, thoughe he were an Ethnike, writeth very godltly.
Children are certayn partes of the parentesMoreouer we must consider, that children are as certayn partes of the parētes, and haue somewhat of the parentes in them. Wherfore it is not absurde if God punish y
e part of the parentes in the children. But I will returne to
Augustine, who saith, y
e god by this meanes setteleth discipline in the world, in the publique, wealth in the Churche, and in the famely. Whose saying in any iudgement can not be discōmēded: for if the children be punished for the sinnes of their parētes, they haue nothing wherof to complayne. They owe vndoubtedly this duty vnto their parentes: for of them they haue that they are. Wherfore if they leaue theyr lyfe for them, they haue no wrong done them. For they render vnto them that whiche they receaued of them. If god shoulde saye vnto them: I will vse your punishment to the saluation of your parētes, they can by no right refuse it.
Iohn sayth: that euery one ought so to loue his brother, to be ready to lay euen his life for him. And if we must geue our life for our brother, how much more ought we to geue it for our father? God vseth sundry instrumentes, wherwith he draweth men vnto him. Why then should he not vse either the sickenes, or death of the children either for the chastenyng, or for the saluation of the parentes?
Augustine in his .8.
Augustine. The lesser part iustly suffreth punishment for the greater. question vpon
Iosuah, whiche I haue oftentymes alledged, sayeth: That it is iust, that the lesser part suffer punishement for the greater, as in that hystory it happened, bycause of the sacrilege whiche
Achan committed. A fewe fel in the battaile, and the whole multitude was absolued. Hereby we vnderstād
[Page 181] how great the anger and vengeance of God would haue bene, if the whole multitude had sinned, when as the sinne of one manne was so excedingly punished. And
Plutarche in that booke, whiche a little before I brought: This thing (sayth he) also the Capitaynes doo in their hostes. If there be any thyng commonly committed of all, they put the tenth manne to death, that by the punishment of a fewe, the rest may be absolued: and so one is punished for an other mans faulte.
The maner of punishing the tenth souldier. But GOD, as it is sayde, doth no manne iniurye: for he whiche dyeth, was subiecte vnto death, and GOD directeth hys death to a good ende, namely to helpe other, that is, that by thys meanes, eyther the parentes or the prynces maye bee reuoked vnto repentaunce, or to establyshe discipline. But those thynges whiche we haue sayde, can by no meanes bee vnderstande of spirituall and eternall paynes. For as touching them euery man shall suffer for hys owne faulte.
Nowe lette vs expounde the woordes of the lawe. I (sayeth he) am a Ielous God, visityng the iniquity of the Fathers vpon the chyldren, vnto the third and fourth generation, of them that hate me.
Ierome.
Augustine. These last woords
Ierome vppon
Ezechiel the .18. chapter diligently noteth. And
Augustine vpon
Iosua in the question before alledged. Of those, sayeth GOD, which hate me: as though he should haue sayd, I wyll not touch the innocents, but will take vengeaunce of their iniquity, which imitate euill Fathers, and hath me. After the same manner he promiseth to doo good vnto children, and chyldrens chyldren, euen vnto a thousande generations. But to what chyldren? Euen to those, (sayeth he) that loue me. Wherefore thoughe the Father bee vngodly, and the sonne good, the iniquitye of the father shall nothyng hurte hym. But if the father bee good, and the sonne wicked, the godlynes of the father shall nothyng profyte hym. And therefore
Ierome sayeth: He auengeth the iniquitye of the Fathers vpon the children, not bycause they had euyll parentes, but bycause they imitate theyr parentes. The woordes themselues doo sufficiently declare, that the lawe is not to bee vnderstande of Originall synne, but of that synne whiche they call actuall. For then shall the sonne beare the iniquitye of the Father, when he lykewyse synneth as dyd the Father. Also the wordes of
Ezechiel can not bee vnderstande of Originall synne, as that whiche followeth easely declareth. Although thys sentence, that the soule whiche sinneth, it shal dye, maye bee vnderstande of Originall synne.
Euery manne hath in himself his proper originall sinne. For euery manne hath in hymselfe a corrupte nature, and a prones vnto euill. Wherefore euery manne beareth hys owne synne. For althoughe that vice were by originall drawen of the parentes: yet nowe is it made ours.
But thou wilte saye: seyng in the lawe it is sayde, Of them whiche hate me: and infantes, for as much as they hate not God, therefore it can not pertayne vnto them. I aunswer. That in act in dede they hate not God, but by corruption of nature, and prones vnto euill. So a woolfe that is at full age deuoureth a sheepe. A younge woolfe whiche is but a whelpe doth it not, not bycause it hath not the nature of the father, but bycause it is not able. And thus muche as touching the wordes of the lawe.
But why it is sayde vnto the thirde and fourth generation, and not vnto the fyft and sixt, we haue hearde what
Augustine hath aunswered. But in my iudgement we maye saye muche more commodiously, that the parentes may lyue vnto the thirde and fourth generation. GOD woulde therefore so punyshe the Fathers in the thirde and fourth generation, that by that punyshement of theyr posterity, some feelyng myght come vnto them, they beyng yet on lyue, & that they myght see the miseryes of theyr neuewes & childrens chyldren. For thys cause the holy Scripture extendeth those generations no farther. When the posteritye are euill, and are punished of GOD, there is no doubte but that the parentes are punyshed also in them.
Chrisostome vpon
Genesis the.
[Page] 29. Homely when he interpreteth these woordes: Cursed be
Chanaan, &c. But he synned not (sayeth he,) but hys father
Cham. That is true in deede, he aunswereth: but
Cham was a greate deale more sharpely touched with that curse, then if it had bene pronounced agaynste hymselfe. Thys is the powre and fatherly affection, to bee more vexed with the afflictions of theyr chyldren, then with theyr owne. Wherefore
Cham dyd not onely see that hys sonne should be euill and subiecte vnto the curse: but also he sawe that he hymselfe shoulde bee punished in hym.
This nowe resteth to bee declared, why amonge the Proprietyes of the mercye of GOD, this also was recited before
Moses: Visityng the iniquitye of the Fathers vpon the children, when as this seemeth rather to pertayne vnto seuerity. But it is not so, yea rather if we looke more narrowly vpon the place, we shall vnderstande that it is a pointe of mercy. For where the sinne was firste committed, he myght strayghtwaye if he woulde, iustly bee reuenged. But he is so good that he wyll defer the vengeaunce vnto the thirde and fourth generation, and in the meane tyme calleth backe the father to repentaunce, by admonitions of the Prophetes, by sermons and benefites, and many other wayes. At the laste, when the thirde and fourth generation is come, and he made neuer a whitte the better, he goeth to stripes, and yet he doth not then vse affliction, as the laste punishement, but rather as a medecine. Who seeth not that all this is a woorke of greate mercye? Wherefore iustly and woorthily are these wordes numbred amonge the proprietyes of mercye. And it can not bee denyed, but that the Prophetes were oftentymes afflicted together with the people. For
Ezechiel and
Daniel were led awaye into captiuity, and
Ieremy was caste into prison, and wonderfully vexed in the tyme of the siege: and afterwarde goyng with the Hebrues into
Egypte, he was slayne. For God will haue the thyng in thys manner ordered, that good men, may not onely ryghtly gouerne their own lyfe, but also in suffryng thynges greuous, they may admonishe and bryng to amendement the euill. For they are conuersant together with them in the same publique wealth and Churche, and are after a sorte members of one body.
It profiteth the iust y
t they are wrapped in the same punishmentes with the wicked.Wherfore the good ought thus to thinke with thēselues: If God afflicte the euill, we also shalbe vexed together with them: we shall all be wrapped with the selfe same punishement. Therefore we must see, that we labour for them, in reprouyng and prayng for them: for theyr saluation beyng neglected, shall bryng euilles also vnto vs. After thys sorte we muste vnderstande
Augustine, when he sayeth, that GOD by thys meanes establysheth discipline amonge men. Bycause if the people bee afflicted for their kynges, and the sonne for the father: then must they labour and trauayle one for an other. Neither yet do good men so lyue without sinne, that God can finde nothyng in them to punishe. Althoughe the afflictions whiche happen vnto the godly,
The afflictiōs of the godly ar not properly punishmentes. can not as it is sayde, be properly called afflictions: but rather excercises of fayth. For so God trieth theyr fayth, and whatsoeuer he doth in them, he turneth it to their good. Moreouer he wyll haue thē to expresse in themselues their first begottē brother Iesus Christ, whiche suffred in hymselfe other mens synnes. For this also is a certayne portion of the Crosse of Christ, althoughe they are not so innocent, as Christ was: neither serueth their crosse any thing to redeme sinnes.
Daniel in his captiuity after this manner confessed hys sinnes. We haue sinned (sayth he) and done vniustly, &c. He sayd not: They haue sinned, but we. And Esaye sayeth: All our righteousnes are as a cloth stayned with floures of a woman. There is in deede in holy menne a certayne ryghteousnes, but not such a righteousnes as they can boast of, before the iudgement seate of God. Wherfore if they suffer any thing, they haue no iust cause to complayne.
But thou, wilt saye: Why is it sayd y
t God in thē punisheth the sinnes of other mē, when as they also sinne? We should say rather y
t he punisheth their sinnes,
[Page 182] and not the synnes of their parentes. I answere: Bycause when god hath much and longe tyme wayted, that their father should repent, and it nothing profited, and in the meane tyme it is come vnto the third and fourth generation, at the length he poureth out his anger vpon the children, whiche therefore are sayd to suffer for their fathers, bicause vnles the malice of their fathers had gone before, their affliction might haue ben deferred till farther time. But now bycause they haue fallen into the third and fourth generation, the consideration of the iustice of god wil not suffer the punishement to be deferred any longer. And althoughe they themselues also haue deserued those euils, yet bycause they are so corrected in the third and fourth generation, they owe that dewty vnto their parentes.
And so God feareth the parētes, that they should temper themselues from wicked actes: and thoughe they will not for gods sake, or for their own, yet at the least for theyr posterities sake. It also maketh the children afrayde to imitate the sinnes of their fathers, least the punishmēt due vnto their fathers be required of thē. Neither is it vniust that y
e children suffer somthing for their fathers sake: for by their fathers they receaue inheritances, and are aboue other honored and exalted. For god did not onely make fortunate
Dauid, but also for his sake fauored his posterity. For the kyngdome perseuered in his famely y
e space of .400. yeares. But as touching eternall life,
As touchyng eternall life the childrē are not punished for y
e sinnes of the fathers. neither shall the father be punished for the sinnes of y
e children, nor the children for y
e sinnes of y
e fathers. Howbeit children obteine many spirituall giftes by good fathers. For
Paul in his .1. Epist. to the
Cor. the .7. chap. sayth: Otherwise your children should be vncleane: but now they are holy. Wherfore the children haue of holy parentes, some holynes, and some spirituall gift, as that place teacheth. And on the contrary part,
Childrē obtein some spirituall giftes for their parentes sake. by euil parentes many such good giftes are hindred: neither are they heard of God beyng euill, and not repentaunt, when they desire spirituall giftes for their children. Yet by the prouidence of God it oftentymes commeth to passe,
Euil parentes doo sometymes hinder theyr children of god spiritual gifts. that of good parentes are borne noughty children: and of euill, good, as
Ezechias a good kyng, had to his father
Achaza a wicked kyng. And contrarywise the same
Ezechias beyng a very godly prince, begat
Manasses a very vngodly and cruell kyng. The same also myght I saye of
Iosias. Thys therefore commeth so to passe, least wickednes shoulde increase without measure,
Why good childrē ar borne of euil parētes, & euill of good. if of euill parentes shoulde continually bee borne euill children. God putteth to hys hande, and maketh the sonne borne of an euill father, a member of Christe. And therewith all he sheweth that his goodnes can not be hindered by the parentes, thoughe they be neuer so wicked. Farthermore euill children, are borne of good parentes, that grace should be the better knowen. And that the goodnes of the childrē should not be attributed vnto nature, whiche they haue drawen of their parentes. For god will haue it knowen to be his gifte, that we are saued.
This one thyng onely is to bee added vnto the foresayde question:
It is not lawfull for men to punishe the sinnes of the parentes in the children. That it is in dede lawfull for god (as it is sayde) to punishe in the children the synnes of the fathers: but y
t is vtterly vnlawfull for men to doo. For in
Deut. the .24. chap. it is commaunded: That the fathers should not be punished for the children, nor the children for the parentes. Whiche is to be vnderstande, so that the father consent not vnto the sonne, or the sonne vnto the father. Wherefore
Achan if he had bene called vnto tryall and to the iudgement seate, he should be the ordinary lawe haue peryshed alone, and not hys chyldren with hym. But GOD hath thys hys proper law, who would haue it otherwyse done, although sometymes he obserueth thys also. For in the booke of
Numbers: the 26. chap. When
Core conspired agaynste
Moses, he was destroyed: but hys chyldren were not together with hym extinguished,
Samuel came of the posterity of Core. yea rather they were kepte for the holy ministerye, and of their posteritye was
Samuel borne.
Amasias the kynge was praysed, who slewe the murtherers whiche killed his father, and slewe not their
[Page] children: for he had a regard vnto the law of God. The cause of this prohibition
Augustine bringeth:
Augustine. God (sayth he) may punishe the sonne for the father: bycause although he afflicte hym in this worlde, yet he can saue hym in the worlde to come. And this can not man doo. Farther, god seeth that the children are not innocentes: but man seeth not that. Although the ciuill lawes are herein a great deale more seuere, and do punishe the children for the fathers sake, as it is in the digestes,
In treason the children are punished for the fathers. and in the
Code, ad I. Iuliam maiestatis: yet they put not the sonne to death for the father, but depriue hym of all hys fathers goods, dignityes, and honours. Howbeit they lefte some parte for the doughters, whiche parte was called
Falcidia, to mary them withall. Otherwise the ciuile lawes agree with the lawe of god. For in the
Code de paenis in the lawe
Sancimus, it is commaunded that the punishement be not transferred vnto other, either to kinsfolkes by affinity, or to kinsfolkes by bloud, but onely to be layd vpon the author of the crime. And yet as wel this law as the other before, were ordeyned both of the self same Emperours
Archadius and
Honorius. But the cause why it was so seuerely decreed agaynst treason, seemeth to be this, to feare men away from this kynde of wicked crime. Yet the lawes of god decree no suche thing of that matter: but this by expresse woordes they commaunde, not to kyll the sonne for the father. But for goods they ordayne nothyng. But our aduersaryes haue transferred thys ciuill lawe of treason vnto Heretikes. For they doo not onely punishe the father whiche is an Heretike, but also they depryue hys children of all his goods: howe iustly, I will not nowe tell. Of these thinges I haue made mention the more largely: bycause
Iiphtah was thrust out of hys fathers inheritaunce, and thereby seemed to beare the iniquity of hys father. Nowe wyll I returne vnto the Hystory.
3 Then Iiphtah fled from his brethren: and dwelt in the lande of Tob: and there gathered idle fellowes vnto Iiphtah, and went out with hym.
4 And in processe of tyme the chyldren of Ammon made warre with Israell.
5 And when the Ammonites began to fyght with Israell, the Elders of Gilead went to set Iiphtah out of the land of Tob.
6 And they sayd vnto Iiphtah: Come and be our captayne, that we may fight with the children of Ammon.
7 Iiphtah answered the Elders of Gilead, did not ye hate me, and expell me out of my fathers house? and why then come ye nowe vnto me, when ye are vexed.
8 And the Elders of Gilead sayde vnto Iiphtah: Therefore we turne agayne vnto thee now, that thou mayst go with vs, and fight agaynst the children of Ammon, and be our head, ouer all the inhabitantes of Gilead.
9 Then answered Iiphtah vnto the Elders of Gilead: If ye bring me home agayne to fight against the chyldren of Ammon, and if the Lord deliuer them before me, shall I be your head?
10 And the Elders of Gilead sayd vnto Iiphtah: The Lord heare betwene vs, if we do not according to thy woord.
11 Then Iiphtah went with the Elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and captayne ouer them. And Iiphtah spake al his woordes before the Lord in Mizpah.
The land whereunto
Iiphtah fled, was called
Tob,
Why the land
[...] was called Tob. namely of the name of the possessor therof, otherwise
Tob signifieth good. But here it is the proper name of the Lord of that land.
Idle men. That is vaine. This woord signifieth poore men, and such as were oppressed for debte. So also there came vnto
Dauid, when he fledde from
Saule, men that were in debt, and heauy of harte.
And they went out with him. Namely to warre agaynste the enemyes of the people of God: and they liued of the spoyle. For
Iiphtah beyng a man banished and dryuen oute of hys countrey, hadde nothynge wherewyth to maynetaine souldiers.
And the children of Ammon foughte. We haue tolde that the
Ammonites made warre agaynste the Israelites, whiche is vnderstande to haue beene after
Iiphtah departed from his fathers house: and when he shoulde goe into the land of
Tob, he moued warre agaynste those
Ammonites, and oute of theyr borders tooke praies and booties. Therefore, when the
Gileadites wer oppressed, they came vnto
Iiphtah, to bringe him home agayne, and by hys conducte to defende the city from theyr enemyes. They desire to haue him to be theyr head: bycause when they wer grieuously oppressed of theyr enemies, they iudged it expedient, that there shoulde be one to gouerne their thinges. And firste they had decreed among themselues, (as we haue heard) that he shoulde be theyr captayne, which fyrst shoulde fyghte againste theyr enemyes: but whither they did that by theyr owne iudgemente and ciuill reason, or by the oracle of God, the historye mencioneth not. But the act or cōdicion which the
Gileadites ordeined, was fulfilled by
Iiphtah: for he with a few souldiours assayled his enemies. Therefore they seyng that they were bound to stand to theyr couenant, came vnto
Iiphtah and chose him captayne, bicause he fyrste of all beganne the battayle agaynste the
Ammonites.
This is worthy to be marked, that the
Gileadites call not
Iiphtah kinge,
Iiphtah a
[...]oli
[...] ted captayne, & not kinge. but only captayne or ruler. Wherfore they are not to be accused as the Sechemites were. For they did chuse
Abimelech kinge, but these men constitute
Iiphtah captaine, to fight against theyr enemies now for the presente time, and also hereafter when oportunity should serue. And vndoubtedly they do wel and wisely in choosing
Iiphtah: for he was a man expert and valiant in warres.
But god had with himself before in secret decreed, that he shoulde be iudge ouer all Israell, whiche manifestlye appeareth by those woordes whiche we shall afterward heare:
And the spirite of the Lord came vpon Iiphtah. Farther, we must consider, that
Iiphtah therfore fled, bicause his bretherne had thrust him out of his fathers inheritance, neither left they him any thing to defend his life with all: wherfore he had rather fly, and liue in exile, then to liue with ignominye in his country. This vndoubtedly came of a noble stoute courage, that he woulde not liue there, where he continuallye hearde his byrth vpbraided vnto him, and where al men counted him for a bastard. Therfore he got him to an other place, and exercised the arte of warrefare. It is also possible, that that matter came in controuersy, and the Iudges, to gratify the legitimate bretherne, did not onely iudge that he should be depriued of his fathers goods,
The law commaunded not to banish bastardes. but also be thruste oute of the citye, and seemeth to me verye probable. For when the
Gileadits came vnto hym, and of theyr owne accorde offred vnto hym the pryncipalytye, he aunsweared:
Did not ye expell mee oute of the citye? These woordes declare that
Iiphtah was handled more seuerelye, then the lawe commaunded. For the law commaunded not to banishe bastardes. The
Gileadites aunsweare that they did so in dede, but as before they coulde expel him, so also nowe it was in theyr power, to call him home againe and make him ruler.
But nowe, sayth
[Page]
Iiphtah, you call me agayne when ye are in miserye. As thoughe he woulde haue saide, otherwise yee woulde not haue called me againe.
It is so, saye they,
and therfore we come vnto thee, that thou maist fight against our enemies: bicause we are afflicted.
But in that it is written
we are turned againe, we muste not so vnderstande it, as though they had before bene with
Iiphtah, but to turne again, is in this place to be referred vnto the mind: as though it should haue bene sayd, we haue chaunged our counsel & purpose. Then
Iiphtah, like a wise mā, would not be satisfied with these words, but required the couenants of the principality to be cōfirmed
If
I sayth he,
shal put my selfe in daunger, and god shal geue vnto me the victory, shall I be your hed? He did not streyght way geue credite to theyr firste woordes: bicause he feared least they would not kepe promise, which had before doone him such hurt: nether worketh he these things priuely with them, but in a place most famous,
What place Mizpa was. namely in
Mizpa. There in the olde time the kinges of
Chanaan assembled against
Iosua, whom when he had vanquished, & returned w
t the victory, he built in the same place an aultar to the Lord. Whefore it was a custom frō that time, that they which should take warre in hand should assemble thither: wherevnto this also is to be added, y
t
Iiphtah (as we shal afterward vnderstand) dwelled there. He would also haue them to sweare, that the promises might be the more certayne, as by that appeareth whych foloweth:
God heare betwene me and you. For to sweare is nothinge els, then to call God for a witnesse of those thinges, which eyther we affirme, or deny.
But the requeste of
Iiphtah is not ambicious. For that vice then hath place, when the office of a magistrate is sought by bribery,
Iiphtah is not guilty or ambicion. deceite, corruption and euil artes. But when a man seeth himselfe to be called vnto it, and that he may profite the pub. wealth, and vnderstandeth that he can obtayne the office of a magistrate vpon an honest condicion, it can not be sayde that he doth it ambiciouslye.
Iiphtah is now chosen, to endaunger himselfe for his country, to fight agaynste the enemies of god,
A comparison betwene Abimelech and Iiphtah. he vseth no bribery nor deceat: Wherfore he is far from ambition. But
Abimelech did far otherwise behaue himselfe, he slew his bretherne, did violence vnto the Sechemites, and tooke away the holy mony.
But
Iiphtah although he were reprochfully handled of his owne friendes, yet he slayeth them not, neyther didde he sollicyte the
Gileadites to create him ruler, onely he promiseth that he will go to the battayle, so that they woulde performe that which of theyr own accord they offred.
A question, whether these mens doyinges were lawfull.But here may iustly be demaunded, how it was lawfull for them to geue the principality vnto
Iiphtah, or for him to take it vpon him, being
Mamzer. For the law commaunded that no
Mamzer should not enter into the congregation of god which was, eyther to take vpon him any sacred ministery, or els the office of a magistrate. Vndoubtedly none of the Hebrewe, Greke and lattin interpreters, that I know of, once marked this doubte. But I thinke herein may two reasons be alledged. Firste, although the lawe seemeth to be violated, yet god, who was the author of the law, would at thime time by this priueledge haue infringed. And we may vnderstand that they wer admonished by an oracle, to chuse him prince, which should fyrst set vpon the enemies, whatsoeuer he were. This if they receaued by the inspiration of god, then were they free from the lawe: for they myghte thinke with themselues, that God made the lawe for men, and not for hymselfe. This is a singular priueledge of god, wherein he commaunded that whosoeuer fought first, should be made the head.
Iiphtah fought: Wherfore by the couenant and iudgemente of God, it was necessarye that he shoulde be chosen the heade.
[Page 184] But what if without any oracle they had determined this thing onely by iudgement among themselues? Sinned they or no in making a bastard their captain? No verely. For this is to be obserued in all preceptes,
What is to be done when two preceptes for one time are cō trary one to an other. aswell ceremoniall as iudiciall and morall, when two preceptes of god do seme to be contrary one to an other, so that the one is a let vnto the other, that they cannot both be obserued at one time, yea rather it is necessarye that the one of thē be for that time omitted, then that which shalbe iudged to be more weyghtye and better is to be retayned. And yet in the meane time is not that other which is counted of les value violated: because there in is nothing done against the will of god. The law commaundeth euery man to defende the helth of his neyghbour, & if a man be magistrate,
A similitude. to defend his city by municions. The same law commaūdeth not to labor on the Sabaoth day. The enemye beisegeth the city and that on the Sabaoth daye, bycause he knoweth that that law is layd vpon the citizens. Here seemeth contrariety of preceptes: for on the one parte health is to be defended, and on the other part the Sabaoth is to be obserued. The Machabites iudged it best to fighte, bycause the health of the publike wealth seemed greater and of antiquitye,
An other similitude. then the ceremony of the Sabaoth. Also the law is to feede the hungry, and an other law commaūdeth, that the shew bread should be eaten of none, but of the priests onely.
Dauid being hungry cometh vnto the priest, he hath nothing but the shew bread: wherfore two contrary preceptes come together. But the wise priest followeth and obserueth that which is the greater, namely to feede the hungrye, and bringeth forth the shew bread, and helpeth
Dauid. Also ther is an other law,
The iii. similitude. that we muste minister weapons vnto the Magistrate, For he muste be holpen of his subiectes. And it is contrarily ordeyned that thinges consecrated vnto god shall not be transferred to other vses.
Dauid the kings sonne in law, and his captayne which made warres for him, as the chiefe of his warrefare, was then vnarmed, the priest had no wepon at hand, but onely the sword of
Goliath. Here ar two precepts which seme contrary, the priest followeth the one, & geueth vnto the magistrate the sword, bycause he iudged it better to arme the magistrate, then to obserue the ceremony. There is also a law that the church shoulde not be without ministers, so that it shoulde be destitute of them.
The fourth similitude And there is an other lawe in
Paule that
Neophytus, that is, a man newelye entred into Christian relygion, should not be made a byshop. The church of Myllan was without a byshop, neyther could it finde a mete bishop, which was both pure from the sect of the
Arrians, and there withall had also greate authoritye and doctrine of god. There is none but
Ambrose, but he is
Neophitus & Catechumenus.
Ambrose a Neophite and newly instructed in religiō is made a byshop. Here doo twoo lawes mete together, which in shew seme contrary: but it was mete that the lesse law should geue place vnto the greater. For Christ so taught, when by the sentence of the prophete he sayd: I will haue mercy and not Sacrifice. And yet he doth not say that he will not haue sacrifice, but if two preceptes meete together, whereof the one is of mercy, and the other of sacrifice, he testifieth that he had rather haue mercy then sacrifice. So it seemeth was now don as touching
Iiphtah, that whē two lawes vrged, the one to defend the city from straungers: and the other that a bastard should not be made a Magistrate, that law was to be obserued, which serued best for the safety of the city.
12 Then Iiphtah sent messengers vnto the kinge of the children of Ammon, sayinge: what haste thou to doe with me that thou arte come agaynst me, to fyght in my land?
[Page]13 And the kinge of the children of Ammon aunsweared vnto the messengers of Iiphtah: bicause Israell tooke my lande, when they came from Egipte, from Arnon, euen to Iaboc, and vnto Iarden, now therfore restore them with peace.
14 Yet Iiphtah sent messengers agayne vnto the kinge of the children of Ammon.
15 And sayd vnto hym: Thus sayth Iiphtah, Israell tooke not the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon.
16 But when Israell came vppe from Egipte, and walked thorowe the wyldernesse, euen to the Sea Suph, then they came to Cades.
17 And Israell sente messengers vnto the kinge of Edom sayinge: Let me, I praye thee, goe thorowe thy lande. But the Kynge of Edome woulde not consente. And also they sente vnto the Kynge of Moab, but he woulde not. Therefore Israell abode in Cades.
18. Then they wente thorowe the wildernes, and compassed the Lande of Edome, and the Lande of Moab, and came by the Easte syde of the Lande of Moab, and pytched beyonde Arnon: neyther came they wythin the coaste of Moab. For Arnon was the border of Moab.
19 Wherefore Israell sente messengers vnto Sihon kinge of the Ammorhites, and king of Hebron, and Israell sayde vnto him: Let vs passe, we pray thee, by thy land into our place.
20 But Sihon trusted not Israell, to go thorough his coaste, but Sihon gathered together all his people, and pitched in Iaaz, and fought agaynst Israell.
21. And the Lorde GOD of Israell gaue Sihon and all his people into the handes of Israell, and they smote them: so Israell possessed all the lande of the Ammorrhites, the inhabitantes of that countrey.
22 And they possessed all the coaste of the Ammorhites from Arnon euen to Iaboc, and from the wildernes euen vnto Iordan.
23 Nowe therefore the Lorde GOD of Israell hath caste oute the Ammorhites before his people Israell, and shouldest thou possesse it?
24 Wouldest not thou possesse that whiche Chemos thy God geueth thee to possesse? So whomesoeuer the Lorde our God driueth out before vs, them will we possesse.
25. And arte thou now farre better then Balac the sonne of Zippor king of Moab? Did not he striue with Israell? Did not he fyght agaynste them?
26. When Israell dwelte in Hesbon and in her townes, and in Aroer, and in her Townes, and in all the Cities that are by the coastes of Arnon .300. yeares? Why did ye not then recouer them in that space?
[Page 185]27 Wherefore I haue not offended thee: but thou doest me wrong to warre agaynst me. The Lord the Iudge be Iudge thys day betwene the chyldren of Israel, and the chyldren of Ammon.
28 Howbeit the king of the children of Ammon hearkened not vnto the woordes of Iiphtaph, which he had sent hym.
When
Iiphtah by his messengers saith vnto the king of
Ammon: what hast thou to do with me? he vseth a phrase very much vsed of the Hebrues. He inquireth the cause, as though he woulde haue sayde: why inuadest thou our landes? what discord or iniuries are there betwene thee and me? The king of the
Ammonites answered, that he therefore made warre, bicause the Israelites did hym iniury, which tooke away his landes, namely from the borders of
Arnon, euen to
Iaboc and
Iarden. He complayneth that all that coast was taken from hym, which was betwene those riuers. This he pretendeth to be the cause of the war. And he desired that they would restore peaceablye, that is, without warre, that which they had taken away from him. He seemeth to promise that he will leaue of from warre, if the Israelites woulde performe this.
Iiphtah denieth that the thyng is so:
VVe haue not taken away (sayth he)
your land. And bringeth a reason:
Bicause when the Israelites came vp out of Egipt, they of their owne wyll sent messengers vnto the kyng of Edom, that they might haue leaue to passe throughe his borders: which thing he would not let them doo: so farre is it of that wee dyd them iniury.
The people abode in Cades: so muche tempered they themselues frō violence and weapons.
They went on the syde of the land of Edom: for the
Edomites would not permit Israel, to go straight through the middest of their country. Wherefore my people rather iourneyed with great labour, then that they were troublesome vnto any man.
And pitched beyond Arnon. There were the endes of
Moab Wherefore ye can not complaine that we did anye man iniurye. Therfore when the Israelites saw that they could not leade their host throughe the borders of
Edom or
Moab, they sent vnto Sihon king of the Amorhites: But he would not: neither did he onely denye them passage through his borders, but also assembled an host, and pursued them. And the battaile beyng ioyned, God deliuered him in to the handes of the Israelites.
The Israelites possessed y
e land by the righte of warre. Wherefore (sayth he) we haue done thee no wrong: for this land we possesse by the right of warre.
Sihon assayled vs with his power, and the victory fel on our syde: wherfore both he, and all his land by the right of warre came into our power.
And the Lord delyuered. Wherfore, forasmuch as Israel by the ryght of war succeded
Sihon, that land which thou desirest, is not thine, but in the olde tyme pertained vnto
Sihon the king. Therfore when we occupied this land, thou diddest not possesse it, but the Amorhites.
Neither do we possesse this land by the right of warre onely,
They also possessed it by the gift of God. but also by the gift of God: for the Lord our God, which is Lord of al kingdomes, hath geuen it to vs, and deliuered it into our power. This is the second reason that
Iiptah vseth: for by the first he onelye sheweth that those places came vnto him by the right of warre, without any wrong doing. But some man might say:
It is well perceiued that god gaue it bicause he draue out the Ammonits. how knowest thou y
t God gaue thee this land:
Bicause (saith he)
he expelled the old inhabiters the Amorhites before vs: and wylt thou succede the Amorhites? as though hee would say, by what right? He bringeth an argument
a simili, that is from the lyke.
You (sayth he)
worship the God Chemos, and you thinke you haue your lād by his benefite, and ye beleue that ye possesse it by very good right: So we haue receiued our land, not from an idole as you haue, but from the true God,
Chemos the god of he Ammonites.
and we retayne it by very good ryght. He calleth not
Chemos god, bicause he beleued that idole to be a god: but speaketh in this maner, bicause they iudged that it was so.
Art thou better then Balac the sonne of Zippor?
They possessed also by the right of prescription. Thys is the thyrde reason. We possesse it (saith they) not onely by the right of warre or gyft, but also
[Page] by the right of prescription: for we haue had it nowe in our handes this
.300. yeares, and
Balac though he were a mighty Prince, and other also, neuer required it againe: wherfore then doest thou demaund it againe, especiallye seing we haue had it so long time? That which we translate,
Art thou better? in Hebrue it is
Tob tob. For bicause they want the comparatiue degree, they vse in steede of it a repeticion of the positiue degree.
Why Balac fought agaynst the Israelites.
Balac of whom he speaketh, was he which hired
Bileam to cursse the Iewes. And when he fought against the Israelites, he did not therefore fight, bicause he would wrest from them that land: this was onely his entent, that they shoulde not enter into his borders.
Hesbon.
Hesbon was the kingly Citye of
Sihon. There dwelled Israell and in all her townes .300. yeares, and now at the last demaundest thou it agayne? If a man wyl count the number of the yeares euen to this time, he shall not fullye finde
.300. yeares, but onely
.270. But so vse they to doo which prescribe any thing by time, to adde somwhat aboue the iust number. Although the scripture also is wont in supputacions, many times to follow the greater number. And
.270. yeares come nere vnto
.300. yeares, then to
.200. yeares. And for that cause it seemeth that the number should be put whole.
Wherfore
Iiphtah concludeth after this maner:
I
haue not offended thee. Bicause thou art the occasion of the warre, and haue shewed thee my reasons: now resteth to put the matter in Gods hand, he wyll iudge best. Thys was the message of
Iiphtah.
We must fyrst entreate by messengers, before we go to weapons.
Titus Liuius.This Oration, as farre as it appeareth, pertaineth vnto the iudicial kynde, and entreateth of possession, and the reasons are layde foorth. But nowe let vs marke that
Iiphtah before he moueth battail, sendeth messengers before. That is a custome verye laudable: For
Titus Liuius writeth in his first booke, that it was the maner of
Rome, that before warre was proclaymed againste their enemies, messengers were sent to complaine of the iniuries, and to require againe the thinges taken away. And if by their message they nothing profited, they returned vnto the Senate: who vnderstanding the matter, proclaimed war by the publike assent. For wise men iudged it not best, rashlye and sodainlye to fall to warres. So
Iiphtah, though he were a warlike and valiant man, yet woulde he gouerne the matter wisely and moderatlye: For he was not so light brained as many now adayes are, who firste prepare them selues to battaile, and make a bragging, before any man know that there is any warre proclaimed. God thus ordained in the
.27. chap. of
Deut. when thou shalt come to any Citye, thou shalt firste offer peace. So
Iiphtah assayeth firste to compose the matter by woords, before he goeth to hand strokes. The king of
Ammon alledgeth a cause in dede, but it is but a fained cause: for first it was not the lād of
Ammon, but of
Moab, and the
Amorhites draue them out, as the second chap. of
Deut. testifieth. For Israel had none of their landes. For God had before said that he woulde geue nothing vnto the Israelites, of that which pertained either to the
Edomites, or to the
Ammonites, or to the
Moabites: and when they offred no wrong vnto anye man,
Sihon the king of the
Amorhites pursued them with an host, and assayed to destroy them: but God gaue the victory, wherin both
Sihon was slain, and his kingdome came to the Israelites. Wherfore it can not seme that they did wrong vnto the
Ammonites: for that land at that time longed to the
Amorhites, which they before had taken away from the
Moabites.
Whither the Israelites sent messengers vnto the Moabites or no.But in this place ariseth a doubt: for it is written that the Israelites sent messengers vnto the
Moabites, and that is not found in the
.21. chap. of
Numb. The Hebrue interpreters say, that that may be gathered out of the
.2. chap. of
Deutr. where it is after this sorte written: I sent messengers vnto
Sihon the king of the
Amorhites with woordes of peace, saying: Let vs passe throughe thy lande, and we wil go by the high way, we wil not decline neither to the right hande nor to
[Page 186] the leaft. Sel vs meate for money, for to eate, geue vs water for money to drink. Onely, geue vs leaue to passe through, as did the children of
Esau, which dwell in
Seir, and the
Moabites which dwel in
Arre.
Ther are three principal pointes in this message:
What wer the chief points of I phtahs me
[...] sage. for first
Iiphtah answereth that he possesseth this land by the right of war, secondly by gift, & lastlye by prescription, I thinke it good to examine these thinges singularly and aparte.
¶Of things whych are taken by the ryght of warres.
AS touching the first, we learne that it may be, that some thing may be claymed by the right of warre, which maye be confirmed both by mans lawes, and by the lawes of God. But I wyl begyn with mans lawes. In the Digestes
de captiuis et postliminio reuersis in the law
Postliminium:
Postliminium, a law by
[...] we receaue agayn
[...]
[...]hich
[...] we lost
[...] in warres. The thinges that we haue lost in war, or in affaires of war, if we afterward recouer the same again, we shal possesse them by the law
Postliminium. For so long as they are not recouered, they are possessed of our enemies. And thys ryghte is towarde those, whyche are declared to bee enemyes. But suche were declared to bee enemies, against whom the people of
Rome publikelye proclaimed warre, or they which publikely prohibited warre against the people of
Rome, as it is had in the same title, in the law
Hostes. For Pirates or theues cannot by this meanes attaine to be owners, or possesse any thing by the law of warre. For warre ought to be made, to the ende to attaine something by the right of warre. And in the Digestes
de acquirendo rerum dominio, in y
e lawe
Naturale, paragrapho the last. Such thinges as are taken from enemies, by the common law of all men, agreing vnto naturall reason, are straightwaye made theirs which take them. And thus the lawes of man as touching this thing, are very manifest.
So is it also by the lawes of God.
Abraham, as it manifestlye appeareth in the booke of
Genesis the .14. chap. made warre against the .v. kinges, whiche had led away
Lot prisoner. The battaile being finished, theyr praye came into the handes and power of
Abraham: which maye easelye bee proued, bicause of that pray he gaue tithes vnto
Melchisedech. But it had not bene lawfull for him to haue geuen tithes of an other mans goods: therfore they wer his own, of which he gaue. Wherfore we must beleue that that pray was truelye in his possession. For in that he gaue it to the king of
Sodom, it was of his mere liberality: for he was not therunto compelled by the law. I coulde make mencion, what thinges
Iosua, Othoniel, Dauid, Salomon, and manye other mo possessed by the ryght of warre. For when those Princes had the victory,
Warre is a iust woorke to attayne possessiō the thinges taken from their enemies, came into their possession. But it is not sufficient to make warre, to clayme something by the right therof, but the warre also must be iust. Bycause vnles it be iust, it is not warre, but robbery.
But how shal we know when war is iust or vniust?
Whereby iuste war is knowē from vniust.
Augustine.
Augustine (as he is alledged in th .23. Question .2. chap.
Notandum) writeth that his war betwene
Sihon and y
e Israelites was iust. For they desired to passe wythout hurt, through his kingdome, which thing by humane fellowship should not haue bene denyed them, especiall seing they had faithfully promised, not to be troublesome to any man. This sentence of
Augustine, the Gloser goeth about to defende, and that by ciuill lawes. In the Digestes
de aqua pluuia cohercenda, in the lawe
in summa, in the Paragraphe
item varus, somethyng is permitted in an other mans ground, so that it be done without the hurt of the possessor. And in the Code
D
[...] Seruitutibus, in the law
per agrum, Maximianus and
Diocletianus doo thus ordaine: That no man can prohibite thee to vse the common high waye. And that thing onely did the Israelites desire: wherfore being repulsed, they iustly tooke warre in hand. So much sayth the Gloser,
Whither a wa
[...] ought to be geuē vnto an ho
[...]t whose reason doth not so fully satisfy me. For that which
Augustine speaketh of priuate men, may easely be admitted, and these thinges which are brought out of the ciuill law, do seeme also to
[Page] be written concerning priuate men. But if a man wil leade an host through an other mans country, and if they faithfully promise, not to be troublesome, yet, whether a way ought straightway to be graunted him, or whether he ought to be beleued, it is not certaine. They promise (thou wilt say) that their host shal do no harme, but if they stand not to their promises, then shall the lande be in theyr power. Vndoubtedly
Iulius Cesar would not permit the
Heluecians to passe thorow his Prouince, although they promised, that they woulde passe without doing iniury or hurt.
The Israelits tought iustly against Sihon. But I say that the warre which the Israelites made against
Sihon, was iust, but not therfore bicause he denied them leaue to passe throughe his country, but bicause he came out of his borders with his host, and willinglye offred wrong vnto the Israelites. For euery man ought to defend both himself and his against violence. That which
Augustine bringeth, hath some shewe, yet his reason is not firme. For how could
Sihon know certainly, whither the Isralites would do him no hurt, especially they being so many in number? For ther were sixe hundred, three score & sixe thousand armed souldiours, & wel appoynted to the battail. He might peraduenture haue permitted them to haue passed. and that safely, although not al of them together, but by bandes. But seing the first reason before alledged is sufficient, wee must not muche labour for
Augustines sake.
What maner of warre is iuste.But now I wil generally declare, what maner of war is counted iust. Such a war is counted iust, whiche is taken in hande at the commaundement of the Magistrate, either to demaund things againe, or els to put away iniuries, or to reuenge them, as it is had in the .23. question, the .2. chap.
iustum, and they ar the woordes of
Isidorus.
Isidorus For first we must beware that war be not taken in hande by the authority of a priuate man. But the causes wherfore war may iustlye be made, are these, to require thinges taken away, or els to repulse iniury. Wherunto is agreable that which
Augustine writeth in the same place in the chapter
Dominus:
Augustine. Iust war is that which is taken in hand to reuēge iniuries. After this maner war is iustly proclaimed against Cities, when they wyll not either render thinges taken away, or amende those thinges which of theirs was vniustly done. For if they wil not punish the guilty, it is lawful for other to make warre against them. So al Israel tooke war in hand against
Beniamin, that a most filthy wicked crime should not remaine vnpunished. But
Augustine addeth, that those warres also do in especial seme iust, which are taken in hande by the commaundement of God, as are many which were done in the old Testament. For if God commaunde once to make warre, wee muste not seeke for anye other cause of iustice. For God knoweth very well what is to be rendred vnto euery man. For then both captaine and souldiours are not so muche to be counted authors of the warre, as ministers of God & of his law. And therfore when the people are after this maner called to war, they ought not to neglect the cōmaundement.
Augustine Wherfore the same
Augustine in his .205. epistle to
Bonifacius the Earle, a mā of war, which at that time gouerned
Affrike vnder
Cesar: Thou oughtest not (saith he) to thinke, y
t they which with weapons serue the publik wealth, cā not please God. This was the propositiō, wherof afterward he bringeth reasōs. For
Dauid saith he, made many wars, and yet was he dearely beloued of God.
And vndoubtedly I could bring forth very many examples out of the old testament. But the Anabaptistes cry, that the old Testament pertaineth nothing vnto vs. I wil therfore make mencion of those thinges whych
Augustine alledgeth out of the new Testament. The Centurion came vnto Christ, and desired him to heale his seruant which was sicke: but Christ said he would come to hys house. The Cēturion said: I am not worthy that thou shouldest come vnder my roofe: but onely say the woord, & my seruant shalbe healed. And other woordes which are red in the .8. chapter of
Mathew. At the last Christ answered, that he founde not so muche faith in Israel, no not in those whiche seemed most holye.
[Page 187] And the same man was a Centurion, and had soldiours vnder him: vnto whom for all that Christ ascribeth a very good and most excellent faythe. In the Actes also of the Apostles, the .x. chapter, it is written that
Cornelius so lyued in warfare, that the Angell testified of hym, that hys prayers wer heard of God. Yea & God also so regarded hym, that at
Peters hande he hearde the Gospell, was baptised, and receaued the holye ghost. And the Soldiours when they came vnto Iohn, to be baptised of him, as it is in the third chapter of
Luke, asked what they should doo. Iohn aunswered, ye shall doo violence vnto no man: bee ye content with your wages. Neyther called he them backe from warfare, but rather confirmed them, when he commaunded them to be content wyth their wages. The same
Augustine againste
Faustus in his .xxii. booke, and .lxxiiii. chapter saythe: The Lorde was tempted of the
Herodians, whither it were lawfull to geue tribute vnto
Cesar, and he aunswered: Geue vnto
Cesar that whych is
Cesars, and the thinges that are of God, to God. By which woordes he woulde signifye nothing els, but that tributes are to be geuen vnto Princes. And tributes are geuen, that Princes should vse the swoorde, defend the right of the publike welth, and make warre, when neede shall require. Which thing if it had not bene lawfull, the Lord would neuer haue commaunded them to pay tributes vnto them.
But to returne to the Epistle of
Augustine. In making of iust war, saith he,
What thynges are to be taken heede of in iuste warres. many thinges are to be taken heede of. For it is not sufficient that the warre be iust, except also the warre be iustly handled. Wherefore he admonisheth hys Earle: when, saythe hee, thou puttest on thyne armour, remember that thy strength is the gyft of God, and determine wyth thy selfe not to abuse that gift against God. Yea rather doo thys, fyght for hys lawes and name, let promises be kept euen with enemies, but muche more with friendes, for whom thou makest warre. By which woordes hee reprehendeth those Soldiours, whiche are more grieuous in Cities, then the very enemies, of which we see in our dayes a great many mo then we would, which when they are in their places where they wynter, it is wonderfull to see how they handle the Citezens, and the men of the country: it is horrible to see what filthy and abhominable things they commit. He addeth also the thirde caution. Thinke with thy selfe that warre must not be made but for necessity. Wherefore let the minde alwaies be enclined vnto peace. Make warre, bicause thou canst not otherwyse doo: but if thou canst make peace, refuse it not.
Warre is taken in hand onely to amende thinges amysse. Yea, and the Apostles afflicted certaine, that they might become the better.
Paul sayd vnto the
Corrinthians, deliuer suche a one to Sathan to the destruction of the fleshe, that the spirite may be saued. And to
Timothe he sayth of
Hymeneus &
Alexander, I haue delyuered them to Sathan, to learne not to cursse. So oughte they also to restrayne Princes, that they maye bee made better.
Augustine also in his .xix.
Augustine. booke
De ciuitate dei, sayth, that warres though they bee neuer so iust, yet vnto godly men, they seeme both troublesome and grieuous: for besydes other things which the nature of man escheweth, they shall see the iniquity of their aduersaries syde, for which they are compelled to fyght: and they cannot but be sorye for it. And in the Epistle before alledged: Rage not, saythe hee, nor waxe not insolent agaynst those that submyt them selues, but shewe mercye to those that are ouercome. Wherefore
Virgil sayth: Spare them that submit them selues,
Virgil. and destroye the proude.
Moreouer he admonisheth the same Earle, to beware of vyces, whyche are wont to followe hostes, namelye of fylthye luste, of rauenous pyllynge, and of dronkennesse. For it is a thyng moste vyle for thee therefore to make warre, to amende the vices of others, when as thou in the meane tyme art a great deale more vicious, and muche more art ouercome bothe wyth affections
[Page] and diseases, then they are whyche are ouercome.
For in warre we reproue not the ende, but the desire to hurt, the crueltye of auengement, the outragiousnesse of rebelling, and the lust of bearing dominion. These thinges saith he, are condemned. For they, which forsaking suche vices doo make iust warre, are the Ministers of God and of the lawes. The same father against
Faustus Manicheus: This order saith he, is to bee kept, that the war be proclaimed, either of God, or of Princes, to breake the pryde of man, and to came the stubburne.
Farther, the Souldiours oughte to bee perswaded, that the warre is iustlye made, and not taken in hande againste the woorde of God: otherwyse let them not fight. Neither doo I to this ende speake these thinges, bicause I woulde haue Soldiours to vnderstand the secretes of Princes, but that knowing & wittingly they suffer not themselues to fight against true and iust causes. Yet it may be (saith
Augustine) that the Prince may make warre againste his conscience, and yet his Soldiours nothing offende, so long as they obey the ordinarye power. For the people must obey their Prince. And in their so doyng, it may be doubtfull vnto them, whether their Prince make warre contrarye to the commaundement of God. But they are excused, so long as they obey their owne Prince in a doubtful cause, their own Prince I say, and not a straunge Prince. Wherefore those hired Soldiours can not be excused, which hauing no respecte vnto the cause,
Againste hyred Soldiours. but onely for mony and rewardes sake do serue straunge Princes. Wherefore
Iiphtah thus reasoned, as touching the first point of his Oracion, we haue taken the land by the right of warre: therefore thou vniustly requirest the same of vs.
The next poynt is, our God hath geuen it vnto vs, whiche is the Lorde and distributer of all thinges humane. He brinketh his argument from the gyfte of God.
God is y
e distributer of kyngdomes.
Virgil. And that God might geue and distribute kingdomes, the verye Ethnike authours also sawe. And therefore in
Virgil Eneas doth so often boast, that hee by the commaundement of God went into Italy, and for that cause would not abide either at
Carthage, or in
Sicilia, when he mought haue obtained either of those kingdomes.
Augustine
Augustine in his .v. booke
De ciuitate dei, the .xxviii. chap. Of kingdomes sayth he, and Prouinces it is certaine that God distributeth them, both when, and how muche, and to whom hee wyll: and that by secrete iudgementes, but not vniust. In the booke of
Genesis, God promised vnto
Abraham and his posterity, the land of
Chanaan: but hee promised it after foure hundred yeares. Now, saith he, I wyl not geue it, for as yet the synnes of the
Chananites are not full. I wyll not cast them out now, but I wyll tary tyll their iniquitye be come to the hyghest: afterward I wyll bring you in. Also in the seconde chapter of
Deutronomy, it is written that the
Horites dwelled in mount
Seir, which were men experte in warres and very valiant, whom God sayth he draue oute of those mountaynes, that the Chyldren of
Esau myght possesse the lande. And in the same chapter he testifieth that he dyd cast out the people of
Emim, & gaue their kingdomes vnto the
Ammonites, and draue out
Zanzumim oute of theyr places, and placed the
Moabites there.
If thou wylt say, that thys was done by God peculiarly agaynste these nacious, bycause the
Edomites had their ofspring of
Esau, the
Ammonites and
Moabites of
Lot, which was kynsman vnto
Abraham, and had together with hym accomplished most daungerous viages: I aunswer, the same may be saide also in the same place of other nacions, which came not of
Abrahrm. The
Capadocians draue out the
Heuites whyche were the first inhabiters, who going out of
Capadocia,
How regions are sayde to bee deuided by lot. destroyed them, and in their place inhabited those Regions. And in
Deuteronomy the .xxxii. chapter it is wrytten, when God by lot deuided the Gentiles, and the people according to the number of the Chyldren of Israell.
[Page 188] In that it is sayde to be done by lot, al that is to be referred vnto our vnderstandyng, whiche see not the causes of thinges. But wyth God nothing is done by lot. God hath distributed the nacions according to the number of the chyldren of Israel. For the Israelites were not yet increased, when God put the people in those Regions, who at the laste gaue place vnto the Israelites when they came.
Neyther ought we to be offended, if by this distribution oftentimes fertil and fat landes happen vnto the vngodly. For
Augustine in hys .4.
Augustine. booke
De ciuitate dei, the .xxxiii. chapter, sayth: That giftes whiche dure but for a tyme, happen both to the iust and vniust. For God maketh his sunne to shyne, both vpon the good and the euyll, and rayneth vpon the iust and vniust. But by this common benefite the godly haue this commoditye onely, that they vnderstande that these thinges are not the chiefest gyftes which wee oughte to looke for, bycause these are common both to the good and to the euyll. But the godlye wayte for other more excellent, which are not common to the good and euyll. Yea and
Danyel saith: The name of the Lord be blessed for euer: for it is he whiche transferreth kingdomes, and driueth out the first inhabiters, and bringeth in other. Neither doth he onely bring men into Prouinces, but also setteth Aungels to rule ouer them, as we there reade of the Prince of the
Persians and
Grecians. And he hath not onely deuided men by landes, but also by tounges and manners. Farther, we must remember that these mutacions were not done onelye at the begynning, but also in the latter times. For the Frenche men possessed
Gallia, and the Englishe Saxones
Britane. but the Britanes heing cast out by them, found new places in
Gallia by power and violence, and that part whiche they obtayned, they called
Britane of them selues. The men of
Gallia also of late, going out of their own borders, possessed a great part of Italy. The
Hunnes subdued vnto themselues the
Pannonites, and called the Countrey
Hungaria. So God distributeth kyngdomes, casteth out some, and bringeth in other some, as it seemeth good vnto his iust iudgement, which is secrete. For the earth is the Lordes, and the fulnes thereof. This distribution chaunced euen from the beginning to the sonnes of
Noe, and afterwarde to those whych builded the Tower of
Babel: for God dispersed them throughout the whole world.
Now I wyl declare by what meanes God is wont to geue kyngdomes.
God distributeth kingdom
[...] of his mere liberality. He geueth them of his owne liberalitye, no right compelling him thereunto. That is the true manner of gifte, which otherwyse is not a gift, vnlesse it be free. And yet nothing letteth, but that God by the dutyes and obedience of godlye men, may be prouoked to geue. He geueth in deede often tymes manye thinges vnto godly men, but yet of no dutye. For there hath bene none at anye tyme so godlye, that he coulde desyre any thing of God, as his owne by right. For hee muste doo hys dutye, though God geue nothing. And yet is a gyft a certayne reward, which although it be free, and geuen wythout any right compelling thereunto, neuerthelesse, bicause it is after a sorte bestowed vpon duties, it hath a shewe of a rewarde. So in
Ezechiel God gaue a gift vnto the king of
Babilon. Bycause (sayth he) he laboured in the siege of
Tire, I wyll geue vnto hym the lande of
Egipt.
Ther ar also amongest men recompences,
A gift in way
[...] of reward, when one office is recōpenced with an other office. These also are voluntarye, neyther can they bee demaunded by iudiciall action, and therefore they are counted among giftes. But we haue nothing which we can geue vnto him.
We haue nothinge to geue vnto God. Wherfore if we attempt to bring any thing vnto him, we render vnto him his owne. And therfore there is no respect of merite to be referred in vs towarde him. Wherefore God geueth liberally, no law compelling hym thereunto.
Giftes maye be reuoked.But it may be demaunded, whether suche giftes maye bee reuoked? Why should they not? when as the giftes of men also are sometimes reuoked, as it is in the Code
De reuocatione donacionum. First, if they haue condicions annexed to them, whych haue not bene performed. And after that manner vndoubtedlye God gaue the lande of
Chanaan to the Chyldren of Israell, namelye that they shoulde woorshyppe hym, not onely in ceremonies, but also in good manners and holynes. But seing thys condicion was not performed, God iustlye reuoked hys gyfte, and ledde them awaye captiue, and gaue the lande vnto the
Babilonians, Assirians, Egiptians, and
Romanes.
A great ingratitude also of hym that is endued wyth the gifte, debilitateth the gyft: for if he be so ingrate, that he wyll bee contumelious and reprochefull vnto the geuer, the gift is then reuoked. So God in
Ezechiel complayneth: I haue clothed thee with vestures and garmentes of sundrye coulours: thou haste made those proper vnto Idolles, and haste geuen them to
Baal. Therefore wyll I take away my garmentes from thee,
Giftes of God are wythout repentaunce. and my clothings of sundry coulours. &c But thou wylt say, the giftes and vocation of God are wythoute repentaunce, as it is wrytten to the
Romanes. I graunt that: but the chaunging is in vs, and not in God. For if we shall continue thankefull, and stande to the condicions, the gyft shoulde be firme and ratefied. Farther,
Paule in that sentence spake of gyftes and calling, whych come vnto men by the eternal predestination of God, and not of those which are geuen but onely for a time. Wherefore seing God had not for the causes before rehearsed, cast out the Israelites from the lande of
Chanaan, the gift remayned ratefied and whole. And
Iiphtahs argument drawen of it, hath his strength and sure foundacion. Moreouer it may also seeme that God gaue that lande vnto the Israelites in the name of a dowry: for he woulde after a sorte wedde vnto hymselfe the Churche of the Iewes,
The land was geuen vnto the Israelits with out any iniury to the Chananites. and geue vnto it somewhat for a dowry. And yet gaue he not that lande vnto them, to the iniury of the
Chananites. For they were vngodly, and defiled with most grieuous wicked actes, as it appeareth in the .xx. chap. of
Numbers. Neither coulde they complaine that they were cast out wrongfullye: wherefore
Iiphtah doth verye well make his argument from the gift of God.
He addeth farther the third argument, deriued from prescription:
VVe haue now (sayth hee)
possessed thys lande three hundred yeares. Therefore thou doest vs iniury, in requiring it now of vs at the last.
¶Of Prescription.
Why the lawe of prescription was brought in
HEreby we gather that the right of prescription is no newe thing, but a thing grafted of God hymselfe in the hartes of men.
But why it was founde out, I wyll in fewe woordes declare. It may be, that a man may possesse an other mans thing vnwittinglye. As for example: There is an heyre whiche succeedeth him that is deade, and among hys goodes he findeth somethinges that were vsurped by the former, while he lyued, or receaued for a pledge, which he being ignoraunt of, possesseth all those things with a good mynde. And so being ignoraunt and vnwitting, possesseth an other mans thing as his owne. What then? shal the heyre neuer seeke for the iust possession thereof? If the true owner doo neuer require his thing, ought the ignoraunt to defraude the heyre for euer, that he shoulde neuer possesse againe that thing as hys owne? For if the owner neuer demaunde hys owne thing againe, that is to be ascribed vnto his owne slothe and slouggishe negligence. Wherefore in detestacion of suche slouggishnes, and in commendacion of an vprighte fayth, and lastly for publike peace sake, the lawe of prescription was found out.
Iiphtah nowe vseth thys lawe agaynst the
Ammonites.
We saith he, haue possessed thys land this three hundred yeares. Why then doest thou make this garboyle and tumult agaynst vs? Except some certayne time were appointed, within the space whereof, and not beyonde, thinges myght be demaunded agayne, the possession of all thinges should be vncertaine: but from that humane thinges doth wonderfullye abhorre. Wherefore this euyll is remedyed by the right of prescription.
The difinition of prescription. And it is defined in the Digestes
de vsucapionibus, law .iii. that it is an addiction or claime of dominion by continuacion of possession, by the time appointed by the lawe. The difinition is plaine and manifest. But in these daies they make a difference betwene prescription and
vsucapione, when yet in the Digestes, and among the olde Lawyers they wer not seperated.
In the tyme of
Antonius Pius (as I remember) these beganne fyrst to bee seperated, so that
vsucapio taketh place in thinges moueable,
What differēce is betwene prescription and vsucapio. and prescription in thinges vnmoueable. But thus much by the way. But in our historye this is to be marked, that
Iiphtah doth wisely deuide his argumentes: for he doth not first place the lawe of prescription, but before all thinges hee obiecteth the right of warre, afterward the gift of the true God: and his cause beyng so confirmed, at the last he vseth the lawe of prescription. And that hee doth therefore, bicause a possession continued, doth not by it selfe and alone prescribe:
What thynges are required to the right of prescription. but it hath neede of a good title, and an vpright faith. A good title is, that the thing bee gotten by right order and lawfull manner. For he that hath gotten anye thing by theft or rapine, although he haue long possessed it, yet it prescribeth not. But if both the title be good, and his faith vpright, and continuance of tyme bee added, the prescription is firme and good. If we haue gotten any thing, eyther by bying, or by gift, or by inheritaunce, or suche lyke wayes, the tytle is good: but farther wee haue neede of an vpright fayth, whereby we are assured in our selues, that no mans right is iniured, and that we know that there is nothing which maye by iust meanes let vs. Wherefore
Iiphtah hath a good tytle, the ryght of warre, and the gyft of God. He possesseth also with an vpryght fayth, bycause hee meaneth neyther fraude nor rapine. Wherefore he very well vseth the lawe of prescription.
But the tyme of prescription in thinges moueable,
Of the tyme of prescription. is as touching our ciuill lawes three yeares: but in thinges vnmoueable, tenne or twentye yeares, if ignoraunce happen not. For if the owner knowe that it is his owne thyng which is possessed of an other, and he hold his peace so long, hee cannot afterwarde demaunde it againe. And the lawe seemeth iustlye to punishe suche negligence. But if the owner be ignoraunt, the tyme is farther proroged, namely to thirtye or fortye yeares. And this is done when ignoraunce happeneth, and that he possesseth it for himselfe, and not for an other: otherwyse it is no prescription. Howbeit thys we must knowe by the waye, that the Ecclesiasticall Canons, as touching prescription, doo differ from the ciuill lawes. For they, as we haue sayde, doo appoynt thirtye yeares, though the possessor be of an euyll fayth. For they determine that euyll faythe cannot let prescription. But as it is had in the .vi.
De regulis iuris, chapter
Possessor. A possessor of an euil faith, prescribeth by longnes of tyme. For we should haue a respect vnto the woorde of God, and wyth what conscience a man may possesse any thing. These thinges haue I alledged, that we might vnderstand, how
Iiphtah vseth the law of prescription.
¶Of Custome.
NOw bicause althinges are certaine and manifest, I might returne vnto the history. But yet I thinke it good somwhat to speake, although briefelye, of Custome, bicause it hath great affinitye with prescription, and bicause our aduersaries doo styrre vp great tumultes, bicause of it, and woulde vtterlye oppresse
[Page] vs with Customes.
What custome is firme.Custome (as it is had
Extra. de Consuet. chapter the last) ought to be agreable vnto reason, and lawfully prescribed. The ciuil lawes assigne vnto custome ten or twenty yeares, the Canons, thirty or forty yeares. But most firme is that custome,
Custome against the word of God, is of no force. the memorye of whose beginning is not extant amonge men. And this ought to be firme, that those thinges which are against the woord of God, do by no meanes prescribe. Wherfore that which the Papistes affirme, namelye that the Communion hath bene geuen but vnder one kinde thys foure hundreth or fyue hundreth yeares: bicause it is manifestlye against the woorde of God, they cannot proue that it is prescribed by custome. For suche a thyng is not (as you would say) prescriptable. By whiche selfe same meanes they can not bring the custome of the sole lyfe of Ministers, as prescript: for it was at the begynning extort by violence,
Hostiensis. and it is against the woorde of God: althoughe
Hostiensis saith, that the power of Custome is so great, that it compelleth Priestes to sole lyfe,
What custome is vicious. in the distinction .xxiii. chapter
Placuit. But, as the ciuill lawes determine, that Custome is vicious, which eyther is against nature, or els agaynst the common lawe. But that which I haue affirmed, hath hys foundacion in the holye Scriptures. For when Christ sayd vnto the Phariseis: Hipocrites, why violate ye the commaundement of God, bicause of your own tradicion? For God saith: Honour thy father, and thy mother. But you say: whosoeuer sayth to father or mother: The gyft. &c. they might haue prescribed vnto hym custome, but it was not lawful, bicause it was manifestly against the woord of God.
In the country of
Taurus there was a custome, to kyll straungers and gests. The
Persians had a custome, neuer to deliberate of waighty matters, but in feastes, and when they were dronke. Among the
Sauromates there was a custome, that when they were drinking, they solde their daughters. These prescribe not, when as they are manifestly vicious and euyll. But that custome prescribeth, which is neither against the woord of God, nor the law of nature, nor the common law. For the right of custome commeth of the approbation, and secrete assent of the people. Otherwise, why are we bound vnto lawes? but bicause they were made,
What differēce is betwene a lawe and a custome.
Aristotle. the people consenting and agreing vnto them? For this is the difference betwene a custome and a lawe, bicause in the one is a secrete assent, but in the other an open assent. Wherfore such customes cannot be reuoked wythout daunger.
Aristotle in
Politicis admonisheth, that men which haue learned to doo sinister thinges, ought not to be compelled to do thinges dextere. Wherefore in thinges indifferent, and of no great value, custome is to be retayned. It is an old Prouerbe,
[...], that is, Law and Country. For euery region hath certaine customes of their owne, which cannot easelye be chaunged. But as it is sayde, when they are againste the woorde of God, or againste nature, or the common lawe, they do not prescribe. For then are they not customes, but beastly cruelties.
It is very wel read in the Digestes,
De legibus & Senatusconsultis, in the law
de quibus:
Augustine. Custome without reason, hath no force. And in the decrees, distinction the .viii. chapter
Veritate, Augustine sayth: The truth being founde out, let custome geue place: let no mā presume to preferre custome before truth and reason. And in the next Canon, Christ sayd: I am the way, the truth and the life, he said not,
Ciprian. Aquarii were they whiche in the Eucharist, vsed water in steede of wyne. I am the custome.
Ciprian against y
e *
Aquarii. Let al custome, thoughe it be neuer so auncient, geue place vnto the truth, otherwise
Peter when he was reprehended of
Paul to the
Galathians, myght haue claymed custome, but he assēted rather, that custome should geue place vnto the truth.
Ciprian in the same Epistle agaynst the
Aquarii: Custome (sayth he) without truth, is the auncientnes of error: and the more it obteyneth, the more grieuous it is. Let the Papistes therfore cease to bragge of their customes, which are altogether ful both of error and also of vngodlines.
Moreouer to establish a custome it is not sufficient, that some men do a thyng, or that a thing be often done, vnles it be so done, that it be receaued into a vse,
What establysheth custome. & an institucion to be obserued. For many thinges are done either rashely or of necessity, which yet we wil not haue drawen into a custome. In the digestes
de Itinere, & actu priuato, in the law
.1. and last. Graunt that I go thorough the fielde once, and agayne, and the thyrd tyme, bycause peraduenture the hyghe way is so foule, that a man can not passe thoroughe it. Whither, bycause I sometymes go and returne thorough thy field, do I therefore get vnto my selfe in it the right of dominion & seruitude? No: for I entended not with that mynde to go thoroughe thy field, but bycause I was of necessity compelled thereunto. In the decrees distinction the
.1. chap.
Consuetudo: Custome is said to be a certain right, instituted by manners, whiche is taken for a law, when a lawe fayleth.
What custome is. When in the first tymes of the Churche, when tyrannes persecuted Christian religion, godly men thorough feare were cōpelled to assemble together in houses and caues by night, and in the darke, thys assembly was by a certaine right & maner then instituted, counted lawful. But if we would, now that the Church is constituted, worshyp God after the same maner, we should both be derided & laughed at, & also it wer not to bee suffred. For they vsed not that manner, to the end they would haue it drawen into a custome, or that it should be an institutiō which other men should followe.
Ambrose beyng
Catechumenus, that is, newly conuerted to the Christian faith, and not baptised, was chosen Bishop of
Millan, and
Nectarius of
Constantinople and peraduenture other. Yet is it not lawfull for vs now to followe the same custome, and to elect a Bishop, which neither hath seene sacred seruices, nor hath ben washed with the water of Baptisme. But they did so. They dyd so in deede, but compelled by necessity: bycause they had no other, which were both learned & endewed with authority, whō they might oppose against the
Arriās.
So is that easely confuted,
An answere to an example of Eusebius. whiche they are wont to bryng out of the Hystory of
Eusebius, for the communicatyng vnder one kinde, that
Serapion sent a child, and commaunded the bread to be dipped in the wyne. I could in deede expounde that place otherwise: but at this tyme it shalbe sufficiēt to say, that that was not therfore so done then, thereby to bring in a custome which should be imitated of others. Wherfore custome is not made by examples, but by the assent, approbation, and institution of the people. Otherwise ther are in many places dronkēnes and night robbynges. But these things, bicause they are not allowed of the people, as institutions to be obserued, haue not the power of a custome.
And that the thing may the better be vnderstand,
An other definitiō of custome.
Hostiensis. I wil bring a definition of custome, which I foūd in
Hostiensis, in the title
de Consuetudine. It is an vse (saith he) agreing with reason, allowed by the cōmon institution of them that vse it, whose begynnyng is tyme out of mynde, or whiche is by a iust tyme prescribed and confirmed, so that it is by no contrary acte interrupted, but allowed with contradictory iudgement. This is (as he thinketh) a full definition. But in that he saith: That that vse ought to be agreeing with reason, it is not sufficient, but first it is to be sayd, that it ought to agree with the worde of God, for that is to be counted for the chiefest reason. Afterward, it must be allowed by the institution of the people: for as much as it is not sufficient, that it be done ether rashly, or of necessity, or for some other cause, but it ought also to be allowed by the assent and institution of the people, and of whose beginnyng there is no mention, or that it is prescribed by a iust tyme, and appoynted by the lawes, neither is interrupted by any contrary action. For if the iudge or prince shal geue iudgement agaynst it, the custome is broken, as it also happeneth in prescriptiō, when a mā is cast out of his possessiō, or y
e matter is called into law, & the matter is in plead, the prescription is broken. Also the allowyng of the contradictory iudgement ought to be had, that is, that when one part alledgeth the custome, and an other part denyeth it, if it be pronoūced on the custome side, that doth confirme it. But
[Page] all these thynges, as I haue before sayde must be reuoked vnto the rule of the woorde of God.
A custome that is burdenous to the Church is not to be suffred.
Augustine.Now this onely is to be added, whiche is had,
Extra de Consuet. chap.
1. that a custome can not be suffred, if it be burdenous to y
e Church.
Augustine also cōplayned, that in his tyme were so many new ceremonyes & rites brought in, that the Church was greuously burdened, and the state of Christians, at y
e tyme was nothing at all more tollerable then in the old tyme the state of y
e Iewes was. That also we laye agaynst our aduersaryes: that the Churche should not be burdened. This is their owne lawe. Why do they not acknowledge their owne wordes? These things haue I therfore mencioned that we might vnderstand how firme an argument
Iiphtah vsed of Prescription, namely that the Israelites possessed that land
.300. yeares: whiche is much more firme and of greater force, then if they had possessed it but
.30. or
.40. yeares. Now let vs go to the other part of the chap. wherin
Iyphtahs victory agaynst the
Ammonites is described.
29 Then the spirite of the Lord came vpon Iiphtah: and he passed ouer to Gilead, & to Manasseh, he passed ouer also Mizpa Gilead, & from Mizpa Gilead he went to the children of Ammon.
30 And Iiphtah vowed a vowe vnto the Lorde, and sayd: If thou shalt deliuer the children of Ammon into myne hand.
31 Then that thing that commeth out of the dores of my house to meete me, when I returne in peace from the children of Ammon, shall be the Lordes, or I will offer it for a burnt offring.
32 And so Iiphtah went vnto the children of Ammon, to fight agaynst them, and the Lord deliuered them into his handes.
33 And he smote them from Aroer, euen till thou come to Minnith, twenty Cityes, and euē to Abel, a very great region of vineyardes: Thus the children of Ammon were humbled before the chyldren of Israell.
Two Mizpas
Mizpa Gilead, is an other City, differyng from that
Mizpa whiche lay in the tribe of
Iudah. The spirite of the Lord, which is sayd to haue come vpon
Iiphtah, was the spirite of strength. For there are sundry gifts of the spirite, as of Wisedome, of Vnderstandyng of Counsell, &c. Among which, also is reckened the spirite of strength. Wherfore the Lord gaue vnto
Iiphtah this spirite, that is, all warlike might, as well of the minde as of the body, that he might valiantly execute that warre. But we knowe that those giftes, whiche in schooles are called
gratuita that is free giftes,
Fre gifts iustify not. do not iustifie: for they happen as well to the euill as to the good. But the spirit of god is three maner of wayes in men. First, in that he is god: for so he is infinite, & is euery where. Secōdly he is in men by fre gifts, namely of miracles,
The holy ghost is thr
[...] maner of wayes in mē wisedome, strength, &c. And these two wayes he is as wel in the euill as in the good. But the third way he is men by sanctification, and renouation. And this dwellyng of the spirite of God is to be wished for of all the godly. God had before ordeyned
Iiphtah to he head ouer al the people of
Israell: but y
t was vnknowen vnto the people. And y
e
Gileadites when they made
Iiphtah theyr captayne, thought nothyng of a Iudge whiche should gouerne all
Israell. Here God sheweth his iudgement, when he inspired hym with the gift of strength, y
t all men might vnderstand that God had chosen him to be captayne. Neither yet do I thus say, that
Iiphtah had the spirite of strength, as thoughe he had not also the spirit of sanctification, for as much as he might haue both. But being moued with this spirite of strength, he went out with a great courage, and finished the thing valiantly.
Captaines w
[...]r wont to vowe. But before he went to handstrokes, he vowed a vow vnto god, as the History declareth. It was the maner of Captaines, that when they should
[Page 191] make any great warre, they vowed something to God, so that they got the victory. In
Leui we rede oftētymes, y
t the Romayne Captaynes vowed riche spoiles, prayes, temples, and such like, either vnto
Iupiter, or vnto
Apollo, or to other Gods. So the people of god (as it is written in the boke of
Numbers:) when king
Adar inuaded them, they vowed to make his land
Cherem. Nowe also
Iiphtah voweth: but his vowe is confused, and defineth no certayne thing.
VVhat soeuer (saith he)
shall come forth, that shalbe the Lordes, and shalbe sacrificed. There are some expositors, whiche thinke this letter
Vau otherwise a copulatiue, to make in thys place a disiunction: as thoughe he should haue sayd: Either it shalbe sacrified vnto the Lord, if it be of that kynd, that it may be sacrificed: or if it be not, yet it shalbe the Lordes, that is, it shalbe dedicated vnto the Lord. And in deede
D. Kimhi is of that opinion.
Kimhi. The like manner of speakyng is there in these wordes: If a man strike father and mother, he shall dye the death: for there also
Vau is a disiunctiue. And the meanyng is. If a man strike either father or mother, &c. Herein what I thinke I do not declare, I will afterward intreate more largely of this matter. It is not gathered by these wordes,
Iiphtah vowed not by the inspiration of the holy ghost. y
e
Iiphtah made this vowe by the inspiration of the holy ghost. The spirite in deede moued hym, valiantly to atchieue the enterprise, yet we rede not that it moued hym, to make a vowe.
The Latine translation hath:
That whiche shall first come forth, but y
e worde first is not in the Hebrew, but must nedes be vnderstand: otherwise he had bound all thinges that should come forth of his house. But as I haue said it is an ambigous & confused vowe. For what if such a thyng should haue met him as myght neither haue ben sacrificed, nor dedicated to the Lorde? What if a dogge had met
Iiphtah at his returne, as it is a louing beast, and oftentymes meeteth his Lord returnyng home. But it is an vncleane beast, neither may it be sacrificed, nor redemed with any price. It is wonderfull that so great a Captayne was so ignorāt of the law of God, that he vowed not more distinctly. It may be sayd that the Israelites had so longe tyme worshipped
Baal vnder the
Ammonites, and other nations, that they had forgotten the worshipping of the true God. But especially
Iiphtah which was both a bastard, and a banished man, and also a man of warre, which kinde of men do not so much thinke vpō the lawes. Wherfore he voweth, but not according to the prescript of the lawe.
It was lawful to vowe mē also vnto God. But we must knowe that it was lawfull for the Iewes to vowe menne also vnto GOD, and to dedicate them vnto hym. Yea and the redemption of manne is seased in the lawe by the variety of kynd and age.
Hanna the mother of
Samuel dedicated him from a childe to the deuine worshyppyng, and it is very likely that
Helkana her husbande allowed the vowe.
But that which Interpreters say of the virginity of the daughter of
Iiphtah, it cannot be gathered by the woordes of the history. Yea rather it is not true: although some Rabines were of that opinion, but yet without example and testimony of the woord of God, I know that that
Hanna, of whom
Luke maketh mē cion, was dayly in prayers, and other women for praiers sake, watched continually at the Tabernacle, and that the sonnes of
Hely accompanied with diuers of them, but the scripture testifieth not of any that vowed chastity, neither did God in the olde Testament euer speake anye thing of thys kynde of vowe. Wherfore this sentence:
And
I wyl offer it for a burnt offring, is an interpretacion, for it expoundeth and contracteth the first part of the Oration:
It shalbe the Lordes. How shal it be the Lordes? He declareth howe, when hee addeth: And I wil offer it for a burnt offring. Other make
Vau a disiunctiue,
The vowe of Iiphtah was vnwarly made as I haue before touched. But that is not certayne. Neither is the vow therfore excused, but that it was vnwarely made. For there mought easely haue met him a dogge (as I before admonished) whiche could neither be sacrificed vnto GOD, nor dedicated vnto hym.
He went forth and smote. The victory is not here onely described, but also amplified, namely that there fell many in that battayle, and that he ouerthrewe twenty Cityes, and subdewed vnder him the
Ammonites.
34 Then Iiphtah commyng to Mizpa to hys house, beholde hys daughter came out to mete him with timbrels and daunces which was his onely child, and of hym selfe he had neither other sonne nor other daughter.
35 And when he sawe her, he rent his garmentes and sayd: Alas, Alas my daughter, thou hast brought me lowe, and thou art amōg them that trouble me. For I haue opened my mouth vnto the Lord and can not go backe.
36 And she aunswered hym: My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth vnto the Lord, do vnto me as thou hast promised, seyng that the Lord hath auenged thee of thine enemies the childrē of Ammon.
37 And she sayd more ouer vnto her father. Do thus much for me: suffer me two monethes, that I may go downe to the mountaynes and bewayle my virginity, I and my friendes.
38 And he sayd. Go: And he sent her away two monethes. So she went with her frendes, and lamented her virginity vpon the mountaynes.
39 But after the ende of two monethes she returned to her father, who did to her accordyng to the vowe, whiche he had vowed. Wherfore she had knowē no man, and it was a custome in Israel.
40 The daughters of Israell went frō tyme to tyme to lament the daughter of Iiphtah the Gileadite, fower dayes in a yeare.
When he had gotten the victory agaynst his enemyes, he returned home to
Mizpa: for there he dwelled. And therfore we heard before how he made the couenant with the
Gileadites before the Lord in
Mizpa. Here let vs note with howe great a moderation godly princes in those tymes made warres, they prolonged them no longer then necessity required, but as soone as their enemyes wer tamed, they strayghtway returned home. So also the dictator among the Romaynes, his enemyes beyng vanquished and all thinges accomplished accordyng to his minde, he straight way forsooke his office of a Magistrate.
Iiphtah is sayd not
to haue had other children of himselfe: bycause peraduenture he had by his wyfe children in lawe. Yea and he might haue children whiche were adopted. Of him selfe he had begotten onely this daughter. And this is put in, that we might vnderstande howe hearde and bitter it was vnto hym, to slaye hys onely daughter.
Things nobly done of princes wer publiquely songe.
She went out to mete her father by the waye with timbrelles and daunces, to reioyse for hys victory, and to singe a songe of victorye, for so were the thynges that were nobly done by prynces wonte to be celebrated with daunces and songes. The mayden also when
Saul returned, came and met hym with reioysing. And vndoubtedly suche reioysinges were nothyng elles then publique geuyng of thankes.
In that it is sayd,
thou hast brought me lowe, In Hebrew it is expressed by this verbe
Caraa: as thoughe it should haue ben sayd, thou hast thrust me done or thou hast humbled me: of late I was puffed vp with the victory whiche I obteyned agaynst myne enemyes, but thou hast thrust me downe, yea rather thou hast vtterly destroyed me and brought me to nothyng, for as muche as my posterity is vndone, myne enemyes did grieuously vexe me: and now thou my daughter also
[Page 192] art one of them whiche trouble and afflicte me.
I haue opened my mouth. This is a circumscription or description of the vowe. He tare hys garmentes, after the manner of the Hebrues, when they sawe that they were ouerwhelmed with any greuous calamity vnlooked for,
What the fearyng of garmē tes signifieth. they tare theyr garmentes, signifyeng that they were now subiect vnto the anger of God, and not worthy to be couered with garmentes.
I haue opened my mouth (sayth he.) The lawe of God in the booke of
Numbers, the
.30. chapter intreatynge of Vowes, vseth such a forme of speakyng, whereby myght be vnderstande,
What to open the mouth in vowyng signifieth. that the vowe was conceaued, not onely in mynde and purpose, but also outwardly expressed by wordes. Wherefore they were called calfes of the lippes, whiche a man had promised to God, not onely in mynde, but also in voyce.
And
I can not go backe (sayeth he.) It is meruelous why he should say so. For in the last chapter of
Leuiticus are many thynges wrytten of the redeemyng of vowes, whiche I wyll thus gather into a fewe. If any had vowed a man, it was lawfull to redeme hym with a pryce, and there was an estimation set. And therefore it was called the vowe of estimation. For they vowed either themselues, or theyr seruauntes, or theyr children, and it was lawfull for euery manne to vowe them which he had in hys power. From twenty yeares vpwarde to sixty, they payd for the male fifty sicles, for the female
.30. From fyue yeares vpwarde to twenty, for the male they payd twenty sicles, and for the female tenne. If a manne had vowed a house vnto GOD, and would redeme it, the house was estemed, and the redemer added the fifth parte besides the pryce. If a manne had vowed a fielde, the estimation was taken of the seede thereof, an Homer of Barly was esteemed at fifty sicles of Siluer. And how much nearer the yeare of Iubile was, so muche the more was there abated of the pryce. A cleane beast beyng once vowed ought vtterly to be sacrificed, neither mought it be redemed: but if it had ben vncleane, it might haue ben redemed.
Wherefore seyng GOD did so diligently prouide for the redeemyng of vowes, howe doth
Iiphtah saye, that hys vowe can not be reuoked? This maye bee aunswered two wayes. Firste it myght bee, that
Iiphtah as he was a man of warre, so was he ignoraunte of this manner of redeemyng of vowes.
Note the two manner of vowes. An other waye it maye bee aunswered, that he promised not the vowe of estimation, but
Cherem, that is a curse. And thys kynde of vowe neuer returned to hys owner, neither could it be conuerted to a prophane vse.
Two kynds of the vowe Cherem. A fielde after thys manner dedicated, was alwayes appoynted for the tabernacle: yea and asses and horses serued the Lorde, neyther could they be redemed. So if a man had vowed to be a Nazarite all hys lyfe tyme, he was neuer redemed: althoughe that were not in vse. And vnto thys kynde of vowe pertayned, if a man had made himselfe
1
Cherem, bycause he neuer returned into libertye. With suche a vowe was the City of Iericho bounde, neyther was it lawfull for the Iewes to touche any of the thyngs that were without life, pertaynyng to the City whiche were vnder this vowe. Therefore
Achan sinned most grieuously, whiche tooke to hymselfe some parte thereof. But there was an other kynde of
Cherem, whiche was not vowed but vowed to the death vnto the Lorde, and what soeuer was after this
2 maner vowed vnto the Lord, the same ought without redemption to be slayn: so were the
Amalekites vowed, and
Saul most bitterly reprehended, bycause he had spared
Agag their kyng, and saued some of their oxen on lyue. Wherfore it may be that
Iiphtah vowed, that whatsoeuer thing met hym firste out of hys house when he returned, should be slayne. But he was very much deceaued: for thys kynde of vowe had not place, but in wicked men, and such as were declared to be the enemyes of God: therefore he was not bounde by this lawe of vowes to slaye hys daughter. Wherefore in that he sayeth,
I can not call backe, if we vnderstande it generally of vowes, it is not true, bycause it was lawful to redeme them, but if we haue a respect vnto
Cherem, the person vowed ought to be slaine,
[Page] if the vowe had ben of force: whiche thing could not haue place in this mayden, bycause she was not declared to be the enemy of God.
My father, If thou hast opened thy mouth. The godlynes and obedience of this doughter is very much commended: she obeyeth her father, and confirmeth the vowe.
Do (sayth she)
as thou hast promised. For this was a great obedience, and therefore she is praysed of the fathers,
Augustine. Ambrose.
Augustine I saye and
Ambrose. She mought haue iustly not obeyed, seyng her father had vowed so rashely, but it easely appeareth, what she had a respect vnto, for it is added:
Seyng the Lord hath auenged thee of thine enemyes. She had a regard onely to the glory of GOD, as thoughe she should haue sayd: Seing the Lorde hath geuen thee the victory ouer thyne enemyes, it is not greuous to me to dye. And God, seyng he hath heard thee, seemeth to haue allowed the vowe.
But here aryseth a doubt: Why God heard this vowe, when as it was vnaduisedly vowed. I aunswere. I doubt not but that God gaue the victory: but that it was geuen for the vowe, it is not founde by the wordes of the Hystory: otherwise we should be compelled to allowe this vowe. The daughter doth in deede obey the father, but in the meane tyme she requireth a litle space, namely of two monethes, that she might together with her fellow virgins comfort her self, and bewayle her virginity. But how is it sayd:
That she would discend to the mountaynes? For we go vp to mountaynes, & not go downe. Peraduenture
Iiphtahs house was situate vpon a mountayne, and the mayden desired leaue to discende to the litle hilles vnder it: or peraduenture she asked leaue to go to an other moū tayne, vnto whiche she should go by a valley, and so we must vnderstande that she first discended,
What was the bewayling of virginity. and then afterward ascended.
She bewayled her virginity. Bycause that seemed a heuy and lamentable thing, that a virgin should dye, leauing no children behynd her. For it was a certayne curse, if any dyed without children. God had at the begynnyng commaūded men to multiply and fill the earth. Farther, the Hebrues endeuored to augment the holy publique wealth. They hoped also that Messias should be borne of their stocke.
Ambrose. Two frendes of Pithagoras schoole.
She returned at the tyme appoynted. Ambrose sayth: That those two
Pithagorians were muche to be praysed, of whiche the one gaue hym selfe for a pledge for hys fellowe, whiche was condemned to death: and the other for hys friendes sake faythfully returned to death at the tyme appoynted: but muche more is thys mayde to be commended, whiche after two monthes returned to her father, to be slayne, bycause she seemed to do that onely of a zeale to godlynes, and the worshippyng of God.
And it was a custome in Israell. The Hebrewe woorde is
Choke and it signifyeth a lawe not written, but a custome vnwrytten.
From tyme to tyme. That is from yeare to yeare: for it was a certayne yearely assemblye. This Hebrewe woorde
Littenoth signifieth to speake, to mourne, and to comforte.
The doughters of Israell went euery yeare and bewayled, and seemed to lamente, bycause that mayden was slayne: for they would not haue so great a thing to be put in obliuion. And peraduenture they did it to admonish the parentes, not to binde themselues hereafter with such a vowe.
¶Of the Vowe of Iiphtah.
Whether Iiphtah sinned in vowyng.HEre seemeth to be demaunded, whether
Iiphtah sinned in so vowyng, and in fulfyllyng hys vowe. It is a heard question, bycause it pertayneth not to the lawe, but to the acte. We knowe that in those tymes it was lawfull to vowe, but what is to be thought of this acte, nothyng can be gathered by the woordes. It is possible that he so vowed by the inspiration of GOD, whiche being a singular example, ought not to be dryuen into imitation. As there are very many of this kynde in the holy Scriptures. There are whiche contend that
Iiphtah dyd
[Page 193] not in very dede offer his daughter, but only punished her w
t ciuile death, namely in separating her frō the cōmon cōuersatiō, so y
t she liued onely to god, geuing her selfe to prayers onely, and liuing a parte from other men. And they seeme to affirme that y
e vow was
Cherē, but not such, that the maydē should be bounds to be killed: but y
t she should lyue dedicated to God, and should continually geue her selfe to y
e worshipping of god. And euen as a field or house vowed with this vowe
Cherem, could not be reuoked vnto the first owner: so say they, thys maydē being once dedicated vnto the Lord, could not returne to her old estate.
Dauid Kimhi in defēding this sētence bringeth these reasōs. First he weigheth the wordes of
Iiphtah, what soeuer cōmeth out of my house, shalbe y
e Lordes, & I will offer it for a burnt offring. This letter
Vau being a cōiunction copulatiue, as we haue before said, he thinketh to make a propositiō disiūctiue: as if it should haue ben sayd: If it be such a thing as may be sacrificed, it shalbe sacrificed: but if otherwise, it shalbe the Lords, & it shalbe dedicated vnto him. Farther he sayth y
t y
e maydē desired space, to bewayle her virginity: neither is it written to bewayle her soule or life. Wherfore it seemeth y
t she bewayled this onely, that she should wāt a husbād & childrē. But if she should haue ben offred vp, she ought chiefly to haue lamēted for her life. Lastly saith he y
t y
e very wordes of y
e history declare this thing. For it is not sayd y
e
Iiphtah sacrificed her: but did accordyng to hys vowe. If he had killed her, it should haue ben writtē, And he offred her a burnt offring to the Lord. Of the same opiniō is R. L. ben
Gerson, & he addeth,
R.L. ben Gerson. y
t it is written in the texte, And she knew no man. As though hereby might be vnderstād, what kind of sacrifice y
t was. And he thinketh y
e
Iiphtah builded a house for her, where she should liue a lone, & he permitted her fellowe virgines once in a yeare to go and se her, and bewayle her virginity together with her. And afterwarde he addeth that a man so dedicated, ought not to lyue without a wyfe, bycause the man is not subiect vnto the wyfe.
Samuel, although he were dedicated vnto the Lord by the decree of hys mother, yet had he wyfe and children. But a woman beyng so dedicated coulde not marry: bycause it was necessary that she shoulde serue her husbande, and if he remoued any whether, she should go together with hym. And therefore it is written, that
Iiphtah dyd vnto her accordyng vnto hys vowe, and she knewe no man.
The same sentence
Lyranus embraceth,
Lyra. and there are of the newe wryters whiche are of greate learnyng, whiche doo followe this interpretation. But
Lyranus pondereth these wordes. And the spirite of the Lorde came vpon hym, and he sayth. That that spirite would not haue suffred
Iiphtah to committe this murther. Farther he wryteth, that there were two monethes space geuen, so that he mought aske counsell of the Priests. But it is, not very likely, that he asked not then Counsell of so weighty a matter, or that they tolde hym not that he myght haue redemed hys vowe. Neither is it probable that thys
Iiphtah constituted any thyng rashely. when as the Epistle to the Hebrues calleth hym holy. If thou wilt saye: He did vnto her as he had vowed, but he had vowed a Sacrifice, and to offer what soeuer mette hym, they wyll aunswere: He vowed in deede, but vpon this condition, so that it were lawfull. But when his daughter met him, either he learned, or els he vnderstood y
t it was not lawfull. Wherfore if he had killed her, he had not accōplished his vowe, but should haue contaminated hymselfe. But on the contrary part it seemeth wonderfull that he was so abashed, and rente hys garmentes, if the mayden shoulde not haue bene offred vp. Farther, what shoulde the virgines haue lamented her? For if she shoulde not haue bene slayne, there seemed no iuste cause of mournyng. Moreouer if her virginitye shoulde haue bene offred vnto GOD, it shoulde haue bene geuen wyth a wyllynge mynde and not wyth an vnwyllyng mynde:
What is chiefly regarded in vowes. and in rendryng vowes thys thyng was chiefely regarded, to render them wyllyngly and with a chierefull mynde. Besides these thynges,
Iiphtah had no example
[Page] in the scriptures, y
t it was lawfull for the father to binde his daughter by a vow, to kepe her virginity: but God contraryly promiseth aboundaunce of children vnto the obseruers of the law, in
Deuteronomy the .7. and
Exodus the .23. Wherfore that which God promised in the place of a great benefite, the same could not be hyndred by a vowe. Farthermore, the arguments of the
Rabines are cold and weake, as afterward shalbe more aboundantly declared.
Paul in his .1. Epistle to the
Corinthians the .7. chapter writeth: If the father shall determine firmely in his hart, hauing power ouer his owne will, to keepe his virgine vnmaried, he doth well, &c. Why writeth he hauing power ouer his owne will? If the mayden her selfe will, the father may kepe her vnmaried, so that she consent. But
Iiphtah knew nothing of the will of his daughter, whē he vowed, wherfore he ought not to thinke his vow to be ratified, when his daughter met him. And if this kynd of vowe was not firme in the new testamēt, it was of much les value in the olde Testament, where the vowe of virginity was not knowen. But of this thing I haue spoken more in my litle booke of Vowes.
There were other whiche thought that
Iiphtah did in very dede offer y
e mayden, which in these tymes ought not to seme so new and vnaccustomed a thing. For God required of
Abraham to offer his sonne, and such a vow was thought of many to be most acceptable vnto God, and that opinion also did spread abrode among the Ethnikes wherfore, this sentence is often spoken: Thou hast asswaged the windes with bloud, & with y
e virgin slayne. There are workes of Poetes whiche make mencion of
Pollixena &
Iphigenia: & also Historyes of the
Curtians and
Decians. And vndoubtedly with this exposition agreeth the
Chaldey Paraphrast, which among the Hebrues is in a maner in the same estimation and authority that the holy scriptures are in. That Paraphrast sayth, that the mayden was immolated: & reproueth
Iiphtah, bycause he asked not counsell of the hyghe priest. And the same thing do al the auncient
Rabines thinke, which also reprehēd the highe priest, bicause he of his own accord went not vnto
Iiphtah. Iosephus also is of their opinion.
Iosephus.
Chrisostome. Ierome.
Chrisostome also writeth many thinges of this matter, but altogether farre from the History: he followeth allegories, so that in a maner no certaynty can be gathered out of him. But
Ierome writeth agaynst himselfe. In his Epistle to
Iulianus, he sayth that
Iiphtah was numbred among the sayntes, bycause he offred his daughter. But in his .1. boke agaynst
Iouinianus he writeth, after the minde of the Hebrues, that bycause he made an euil vowe by the dispensatiō of god, he felt his error in y
e death of his daughter. For there mought haue met hym either a dogge, or an asse, whiche had hen wicked to haue offred: and so in one place he prayseth that, whiche in an other place he dispraiseth.
Ambrose.
Ambrose in his .3. booke
de Virginitate sayth, y
t the mayden was in very deede immolated, & he writeth y
e
Iiphtah vowed not before the battaile, but in the fight, & in the very conflict, when things were doubtfull. And he addeth: I do not allow y
e murther, but I se a laudable feare, y
t he would not violate his promise y
t he had made. And he saith moreouer, y
t this act is to be cōferred w
t the worke of
Abrahā. For
Abrahā, when he was about to kill his sonne, the Lord cried out vnto him: Now I know, y
t thou louest me. And he concludeth, y
t after the same maner may
Iiphtah be praised, bycause he shewed by his example, y
t the oracle of god, wherin he cōmaunded y
e vowes should be performed, was to be preferred before childrē, although the onely begotten child should be killed. But he demaūdeth, whether God haue a respect vnto persons, whiche letted
Abrahā, y
t he should not offer vp his sonne, but with stoode not
Iiphtah. He denieth y
e God accepteth persons, but it behoued (saith he) to declare vnto
Abrahā, y
t he delighted not in humane sacrifices. Afterward succeded the law, which in
Deut. &
Leui. prohibited the immolatiō of children. Wherfore the will of god was already declared both in
Abrahā, & in the law, wherfore there neded no new oracle, or new prohibition. Farthermore, he noted that in
Iiphtah was not that perfection whiche was in
Abraham.
[Page 194] For
Abraham wept not, tare not his garmentes, deferred not two monethes, but strayghtwaye went, and
Isaac followed hym. Therefore it is no meruayle (sayth he) if God prohibited not
Iiphtah, for so muche as he woulde punishe hys longe taryeng.
And in his thyrd booke
de officiis the .12. chapter, he writeth: I will neuer be persuaded but that
Iiphtah vowed vnaduisedly, for so muche as he afterwarde repented. And he addeth that in deede he alloweth not the acte, but he sayeth that in a godly feare he fulfylled his vowe, but in suche sorte, that he appointed his posterity to lament it. He sayeth farther, I can not accuse the mā, bycause it was necessary for hym to paye that whiche he had vowed, but it is a miserable necessitye (sayeth he) whiche is payed with parricide: and it is better not to vowe, that thyng whiche he wyll not, vnto whome thou vowest. And strayght way he saith: All promises are not to be kept: for euē god also sometymes chaungeth his will. By which wordes he alludeth vnto the place whiche is written in
Numbers the .14. chapter, of the prayers of
Moses.
Wherfore
Ambrose is vtterly of that sentence, to thinke that the mayden was offred: and for that cause (as I haue sayde) preferreth her before the two
Pithagorians. And of her he sayeth in hys exhortation to virgins: She payed with her bloude the vnaduised vowe of her father. And vpon the firste Epistle to the
Corinthians the .15. chapter he sayth: In a thyng whiche could not be acceptable, he was founde faythfull, offryng his daughter, as he had foolishely vowed. And agayne. The acte is not allowed, but the perseueraunce of fayth is worthy to be brought foorth for an example to followe.
But these wordes of
Ambrose are not so lightly to be passed ouer:
What thynges are to be noted in the woordes of Ambrose. for they can not be simply allowed, and as they be spoken of hym. Yet haue I brought them, to shewe that he thought that the mayden was offred in very deede. But in hys woordes thys firste I marke, that he affirmeth a certayne godly feare to be in
Iiphtah, whereby he was led to performe his vowe: and that children were not to be preferred before Religion: thirdly that
Iiphtah was found faythfull in that thyng, whiche coulde not be acceptable vnto God. Lastly that hys perseuerance of fayth is brought foorth for an example to followe.
As touchyng the first, I knowe not, how that may seeme a godly feare, which
1 driueth a man to parricide: for he calleth that kyllyng parricide,
Godly feare driueth not a man to commit parricide. and that three or foure tymes. Ther are in dede affections in vs which are grafted by god, but yet to vertues, and to do well. A feare, to eschewe sinnes. An anger, to punishe wicked actes, &c. Wherfore feare, when it is applied vnto vertue, may be called godly: but if it serue for vice, it can not seme godly, yea rather,
What affections are to bee coūted godly. it hath a certayne maner of vngodlines. Otherwyse y
e endeuor of Idolatrers might be praysed: for we see them diligently labor to worship god, but bycause they apply not themselues to the sincere worshippyng of God, their endeuour can not be called godly. So when that feare of
Iiphtah draue him to commit parricide, howe could it be godly? If thou wilt say that by parricide he vnderstādeth not the sinne, or the wicked acte, but y
e immolatiō of his daughter: I will demaūd, why he sayth y
t he alloweth not the acte? vndoubtedly if he cā not allowe it, then perceaueth he y
t it is sinne.
But in that he sayth: That the loue of children is les to be estemed them Religion. That is true: but that was no religion, but a foolishe vnaduised, and rashe vowe. Neither is the loue of children to be les estemed then such religion.
Thirdly he sayeth, that he was founde faythfull. But what fidelity is there in that thyng, whiche coulde not be acceptable to God? If my seruaunt should do that whiche I had forbidden hym, can he therin seme faythfull?
But in that he calleth the vnchaungeable mynde of
Iiphtah constancy, in my iudgement he erreth, when as rather it was wilfulnes, wherby he would nedes fulfill that whiche he had vnaduisedly vowed: neither can perseuerance in an euill thyng bee called constancy. He attributeth vnto hym a feare, whiche also he
[Page] calleth a godly feare, and yet afterwarde he sayth that he repented. If he repented hym, he dyd agaynst his conscience: but no man ought to doo any thyng agaynst it. For what is not of fayth, is sinne. Farther, if he repented, why amended he not hys faulte? For if any thyng had ben done rashely, that ought to haue ben amended. If GOD (as he sayeth) doo sometymes chaunge his sentence, why then is it not lawfull for vs to chaunge a sentence that is not ryght? Afterwarde he sayth: he can not but prayse
Iiphtah. But what will he prayse? An vncircumspect vowe? But that ought rather to bee reprehended. What, wyll he prayse the performaunce of the vowe? But that he calleth parricide, neyther can that bee praysed. I saye therefore that
Ambrose affirmeth, that the mayden was in very deede immolated: and yet are not al hys wordes to be allowed.
Augustine.Let vs heare nowe what
Augustine sayeth of thys thyng. In hys question 29. vpon thys booke he writteth that out of this place, the enemyes of the olde Testament, snatche occasion to speake euill of GOD the creator of the world. For they called hym both an euyll GOD, and a cruell. Suche were the
Maniches, Valentinians, Marcionites, and suche lyke pestilences. When he delighteth (saye they) in the bloude of manne, howe can he not but bee cruell?
Augustine aunswereth:
God reioyseth not in bloud. So farre is it of that GOD reioyseth in the bloude of man, that he reioyseth not euen in the bloude of beastes: onely he suffred for a tyme that sacrifices of beastes shoulde be offred, by lytle and lytle to instructe men. But what the Sacrifices of the Elders signified, whiche serued to theyr erudition in that place,
What the sacrifices of the Elders signified. he declareth not, but I will in fewe woordes shewe it. First was set foorth in those Sacrifices, that the rewarde of sinne is death. And that dyd he after a sorte testifie, whiche brought the Sacrifice, namely that he had deserued to be kylled, but by the goodnes of GOD hys death was transferred to the Sacrifice. By thys meanes were the Elders instructed, that they should eschewe synnes. Farther, those Sacrifices directed the myndes of menne vnto Christe, and they were certayne visible sermons of hym, and taught that Christ shoulde bee that Sacrifice whiche shoulde take awaye the sinnes of the worlde, and vpon whom our death and damnation should be transferred.
God mought haue required humane sacrifices.Wherefore GOD of hymselfe delyghted not in bloude, but by thys schoolyng he instructed his people. Yea if he had delyghted in Sacrifices, he mought haue required them of the number of menne. For what should haue letted hym, or what iniury shoulde he haue doone vs, if he woulde haue had Sacrifices of menne offred vnto hym? For manne must needes sometymes dye. Wherefore to preuent the tyme one yeare or two, it woulde not haue bene so grieuous, neither shoulde he haue doone vs any iniurye, chiefly when we shoulde vnderstande that with hym we shoulde lyue for euer. Vndoubtedly in thys thyng no manne coulde haue accused GOD as cruell. But nowe seyng he hath remoued all those holy seruices, he manifestly teacheth that he reioyseth not, neither in the bloude of menne,
God woulde haue the firste borne of menne redemed, and not sacrificed. nor in the bloude of beastes. Yea the firste borne of menne, when they were bounde vnto hym, he woulde not haue them Sacrificed, but redemed with a price: whiche he woulde not haue doone, if he had taken any pleasure in bloude. In
Deuteromy the .12. chapter he sayeth: The Nation whiche I wyl expell before thee, doo Sacrifice theyr sonnes and daughters: but see that thou do not so.
Certayne kyllynges of men are acceptable vnto God.But
Augustine demaundeth farther, whether there be any slaughter of men whiche is acceptable vnto GOD? Hee aunswereth that there is. But what slaughter? When menne (sayeth he) are kylled for ryghteousnes sake: not that the death of Martyrs of it self pleaseth GOD, but bicause faith towardes God & piety is by that,
Martyrdomes are lyke sacrifices. both declared and also kept. And the death of Christ so pleased God, that it redemed the whole worlde: and the death of Christians whiche they suffer in Christes name, may be called after a sorte a Sacrifice. Wherefore
Paul in the .2. to
Timo. the last chapter writeth,
[...], that is, I sacrifice, &c. in
[Page 195] whiche saying he calleth his death an immolation. And to the
Phil. the .2.
[...] that is,
The martirdomes of men make not satisfaction for sins. but if I offre in an oblation and seruice of our fayth. And yet do not such sacrifices make satisfaction for sinnes: for that doth the death of Christe onely. But the death of Martirs are acceptable, because the cause is thankefull.
Augustine was baptised of
Ambrose: and being wōderfully affectioned toward him, he followeth his opinion as his Scholemayster, asmuch as he may, but somwhat more warely. He cō pareth
Iiphtah with
Abraham: but he putteth a difference, whyche
Ambrose noted not.
Abraham, saythe he, had the woorde of god to sacrifice his sonne, so had not
Iiphtah, yea rather he had the law against him, that he shoulde not sacrifice. And in
Abraham not the death pleased god, but the faith. Farther, there is great difference, for a man to do any thinge of himself, and to haue a will to doo those thinges that are commaunded him. And
Augustine doth subtilly admonish,
Iiphtah vowed an human
[...] sacrifice, as Augustine thinketh. that
Iiphtah vowed an humane sacrifice, not deceaued, but willinglye. Whatsoeuer sayth he, shall come out of my house, I will offer it for a burnte offringe &c. Doo we thinke that beastes woulde come forth to meete him returninge home? Men vse to go and mete such as haue the victory, and to reioyse. Wherfore he vowed an humane sacrifice.
The scripture only maketh mencyon of this acte, but praiseth it not: as also it is there written that
Iudas had to do with his daughter in law, but it is not allowed. So there can nothing be gathered by these wordes,
The rashenes of the father is punished in the death of the children. why the acte of
Iiphtah should be praysed. Farther
Augustine thinketh with
Ierome, that god woulde punish the rashenes of the vow in the father, by the death of hys daughter. But there are two places, sayth he, why I cannot reprehend
Iiphtah. Because in the Epistle to y
e Hebrewes he is numbred among the saints, & in this place it is written, that the spirite of the Lord was vpon him. But those holy men which are rekoned vnto the Hebrewes, did they neuer sinne? Vndoubtedly their sinnes also ar set forth in the holy scriptures.
Gideon, who is in y
e number, a little before his deth made an Ephod, which was y
e destructiō both of himself & of his house. But as touchinge the other place: The sprite of the Lorde came vpon hym. But this nothing letteth, but that afterward he might fall. But
Iiphtah thou wilte saye had the victory, but
Gidion after that acte, nothing went well with him. Yea rather sayth he,
Gideon did before after a sort tempt God, & yet he had the victory. So much of
Augustine.
But I would say otherwise. For I agree not with
Augustine, to thinke that
Gidion tēpted God. Therfore I would aunswere after this maner:
Dauid cōmitted aduoutry, & straightway afterward obteined y
e victory, & toke y
e city
Rabath-Ammon, in whose siege he prepared that
Vrias should be slayne.
Saule persecuted
Dauid, in the meane time there were brought him messengers from the
Philistians. He leauing
Dauid, went to war, and obteined the victory.
Moses sinned at the waters of strife: the people also hadde sinned many waies, and yet they obteyned the victorye agaynste
Sihon and
Og moste myghtye Kynges. Wherefore wee will graunte that
Iiphtah was numbred amonge the Sayntes, and yet he mighte sinne, and althoughe he synned, he obteyned the victorye. And we wil graunt that the sprite of the lord came vpon him, but we haue alredy interpreted that it was the spirite of strength. And although the sprite of the Lord was vpon him, yet is it not of necessitye that he did all thinges by that spirite. For we also which are Christians, haue the sprite of Christ, when as yet none of vs is renewed in all partes, yea rather we all very oftentimes sinne.
Augustine addeth moreouer, that although the fathers sometimes sinned, yet if nothinge letteth, but that god maye vse theyr sinnes, to signifye those thinges whych myght instructe the people. For god is so good, that euer of sinnes he picketh out laudable commodities, and maketh them alligorically to declare what
[Page] semeth profitable vnto hym. As in that
Iudas played the whoremonger with his doughter in law, it signified that god would couple vnto himself y
e church, which before was an harlot: so also maye it be, that by this acte of
Iiphtah he signified, that god so loued mankinde that he would geue his onely begotten sonne vnto the death for it: for he did not in vaine, and without any cause suffer such a thing to be don by the fathers. Although they greuously sinned, yet god could vse their actions to the instruction of his people. They were amased at the sacrifices of beasts, neither did they as it was mete, lift vp y
e eies of their minds vnto christ. Wherfore god would by this meanes stirre vp the sluggish, that they should be enduced by the humayne sacrifice of
Iiphtahs daughter to thinke vpon Christ. For he should geue his lyfe, and be made a sacrifice for mankinde.
Farthermore,
Augustine toucheth a reason whereby he defendeth the acte of
Iiphtah. It may be said, saith he, that he was moued by the sprite of god to make a vow, and led by the same spirite to performe it. Wherfore he is the more worthy of prayse, so far is it of, y
e he shoulde be reproued. But y
e cannot be gathered by the wordes of the history. But that whych some saye, as we haue before touched, he wepte, tare his garments, and was excedingly sorye: therefore he was not moued by the sprite of God:
God so requireth obedience that he withdraweth not affections. this I saye doth not muche moue me. For god so requireth of vs the duties of piety, that yet he withdraweth not frō our minds humayne affections. Christ himself when he should willingly go to dye for our sakes, sayd for all that: my soule is heauye euen to the death. He prayed also, father, if it be possible, let his cup go from me. But
Augustine intendeth to declare how
Iiphtah might be defended: which I also would gladly do, if I had any part of the history to helpe me. But that which followeth in
Augustine, is spoken to imitate
Ambrose.
The error of Augustine. For he writeth: The error of
Iiphtah hath some praise of faith, which thinge (as I haue before shewed) can not be receaued. For if it were an error, then can it not be ascribed vnto the mocion of the holye ghoste. Farther, if it were sinne, what praise of fayth can there be in it? Because he feared not to render that which he had promised. What if the vowe were not lawfull? Can fayth be there praysed? Moreouer he saith: He declined not from the iudgemēt of God, and he hoped that he would haue prohibited him, frō killing of his daughter. He would rather vtterly performe the will of god, then contemne it. These thinges were well spoken, if he had bene assured of the wil of God. But he was not assured of it: yea rather god had otherwise prohibited it in his lawe. Wherefore if it were an error, it ought not to be praysed. But if the spirit moued him, then was there in it no error. That which he afterward addeth is moste true, and maketh on my syde. Firste he sheweth, that it was prohibited that a man shoulde kill his childrē, both by the example of
Abraham and by the law. Farther, why the maidens wept, he bringeth the same reason that I brought, namely, both that the fathers should beware, not to bynd themselues with such a vow, and that so great an obedience of this mayden should not be put in obliuion. These thinges wee haue out of
Augustine, by which woordes appeareth, that he thoughte that this virgin was in very dede immolated, and not compelled by the vowe of chastitye to liue alone. Which sentence I my selfe also do altogether allow.
They which think otherwise, haue not passing two or three authors, but I haue many which are on my side, and especially the auncient Rabbines, whyche liued at that time, wherin the Chaldey Paraphraste, and the writinge of the Thalmut was made.
Reasons which confirme the interpretation. For the Chaldey Paraph. affirmeth, that the mayden was slayne.
Iosephus, Ambrosius, and
Augustin are of the same opinion. And we haue reasons
1 not to be contemned. First, bicause there was no law in the old time, that maydens should vow chastity: yea rather it was a curse, if a womā had died without children and baren. Yea and god promised vnto the hebrewes, if you obserue my law there shalbe no barren woman among you. Neyther is it very lykelye, that
2 holy men would by theyr vow hinder this promise. Farther in all the scriptures
[Page 196] reueled by god, there remayneth no example of such a thinge. Also by this interpretacion,
3 we should seeme after a sort to confirme monasticall vowes, which ar playnly against y
e holy scriptures. For
Paule admonisheth y
t he which cannot containe,
4 should mary a wyfe. I wil not speak how
Iiphtah taried not for the consēt of the mayden before he vowed, without whiche (as I haue before shewed) the vowe of Virginity could not be ratified. I haue opened my mouth (sayth he) vnto the Lord, and I cannot go backe. Wherefore he vowed not the Virginitye of the mayden, when as he asked not counsell of her. To this also serueth the weeping
5 of the Virgins, and therewithall the weepinge of the mayden herselfe. For she desired, that shee mighte with her fellowes bewaile her Virginitye. But if it were a vow, why should she haue lamented it? We vse to bewayle our sinnes, & not our vowes. But the cause that moued the
Rabbines, Kimhi &
Ben Gerson, was this, because they wil eyther allowe or excuse the acte of
Iiphtah. But wee must not labor for that: not that we would willinglye vncouer the defaultes of the fathers, but because we see that thinges whiche are not well doone, are not to be excused. Moreouer, also this doth not a litttle moue me, bicause y
e Iewes at
6 this day haue not this vowe of Virginity among them. Wherefore al these reasons lead me to think that the daughter of
Iiphtah was in very dede immolated.
But if it be demaunded, whyther he sinned or no in doing this,
The question aunswered two wayes. it may be aunswered two manner of wayes. Firste, bycause as he was a man, so moughte hee seme, as very many of the elders fel. Secōdly, it may said, y
t he did this by the impulsion of the holy ghost, not as though god would haue other men to imitate this act, but that men might by it vnderstand, that Christ should dye for their saluation. It is indifferent for euery man to chose eyther of these aunsweres. But I thinke rather he fell. Nowe resteth to confute the argumentes of the
Rabbines.
In that they say the mayden was not killed of her father, but only punished w
t ciuil death, namely that she should liue a part from the followship of men with out a husband and children, it is not wel sayd: bicause it can not be proued by the holy scriptures that there was any such kind of vow in the old time. I know that there were
Nazarites, whiche abstained from wyne and stronge drinke, and all drinke which would make one dronke: but they abstained not from matrimony.
Samuel and
Sampson beyng either of them a
Nazarite, had wiues, and
Samuel had children, as the holy history declareth. But departinges from the companye of men, are not altogether to be disalowed, so that of them come some fruite vnto the church. Christ departed .40. dayes, and fasted:
How departings from the company of men are allowed or disalowed. but afterward he returned to instruct the people.
Iohn Baptiste went a parte, but yet for certayne dayes, & baptised and preached. So some of the fathers went sometime a part, wher they gaue themselues both to prayers and godly meditations, wherby they might returne the better instructed to preach. But I can in no case allow the perpetuitye of solitarye life: for wee are not borne to oure selues, but to other also. But that in the olde time there were some whiche were
Nazarites for euer, that was not don by the institution of man, but by the commaundement of God: which thing is written to haue happened to
Sampson and
Iohn Baptist. Otherwise
Nazarites vowed but onely for a time. Wherfore that which the
Rabbines clayme, is false: for there was no ciuill death by the law, whereby men or women were for euer depriued of matrimonye.
Kimhi sayth that this letter
Vau maketh somtimes a proposition disiunctiue. I graunt that the same is found in certayne places of the scripture. But it is not a fyrme argument, if we shall say: It is thus founde in some places, therfore it is so also in this place. But rather for the most part
Vau maketh not a disiunctiue proposition, but a copulatiue. And vndoubtedly here it is brought in by exposicion. It shalbe the Lords sayth hee. After what manner? For I will offer it for a burnt offringe.
Farther they reason: The mayden desyred space of time, wherin to bewayle her virginity: neither saith she, her soule or life. This argument hath a shew, but no strength. For if death be to be lamented, vndoubtedlye then is it muche more to be lamented when it hath a bitter condicion annexed wyth it. The mayden was sure to dye at some certaine time, but that seemed vnto her very hard, that she should dye without childrē. Therfore that condicion is expressed, which made the cause more miserable. He sayth moreouer: It is not writen that
Iiphtah offred her for a burnte offringe, but onelye that he dyd accordynge to hys vow. I aunswere. That there is sufficientelye sayde, when it is sayde that he did according to his vow. And it is often sene, that in narrations the sharpest thinges are not expressed. And althoughe the woordes be not all one, yet is it sufficient, if they be equall.
Leui Ben Gerson reasoneth of this, that it is written, and shee knewe no man. Therfore sayth he, she liued, but maried not. But this reason hath no force. For this sentence is an exposition of the wordes that go before. For why did the virgins bewayle her? Because she was vnmaried, and was not coupled to anye manne.
But
Liranus sayth: The sprite of the Lorde came vpon
Iiphtah, wherefore he vowed not his daughter for a burnt offring. This reason
Augustine (as we haue hearde) aunsweareth. That spirite vndoubtedlye was the sprite of strength and warrelike knowledge. Neither can al that
Iiphtah afterward did, be said to haue come from the same spiryte. Moreouer sayth
Liranus, ther was twoo monethes space betwene, wherin he asked counsel of the priestes, and thei gaue him counsell to saue his daughter a Virgin. Yea but the auncient Iewes affirme that he was so stubburne that he woulde not aske counsell of the priestes. And for that cause he is reproued by the Chaldey Paraphrast. Neither is it any newe thinge, that men somtimes sinne, because they thinke not that they haue nede of counsel, and that is wont most of al to happen vnto princes. For they haue a high mind and proude stomackes, wherfore they think that they haue counsell inough. But he is numbred among the sayntes. To this
Augustine aunsweareth also, that other were also numbred amonge the Sayntes, whiche yet greuouslye sinned. Lastly he saith: If he had sacrificed his doughter, he should not haue fulfilled, but contaminated his vow. I graunt that. Neither is it any maruaile, that he erred, seyng he was a man, and might fall.
Now shoulde remayne to declare what I thinke of vowes in vniuersall: but bycause of that matter, I haue written aboundauntly in an other place, namely in my Apology against
Smith, therefore I remitte the reader to reade ouer that booke,
¶The .xiii. Chapter.
1.
BVt the Children of Israel continued to cōmit wickednes in the syght of the Lorde, and the Lorde deliuered them into the handes of the Philistines fourtye yeares.
2 And ther was a mā in Zorah, of the family of the Danites, named Manoah, whose wyfe was barren, and bare not.
3 And the Angel of the Lord appeared vnto the woman, and sayd vnto her: Behold nowe thou art barren, and bearest not. But thou shalt conceaue, and beare a sonne.
4 And now therfore beware that thou drinke no wyne, nor strong drinke, neyther eate any vncleane thyng.
5 Bicause lo thou shalt conceaue and beare a sonne, and no rasor shall come on hys heade: for the Childe shalbe a Nazarite vnto God from hys byrth, and he shall begyn to saue Israel out of the handes of the Philistines.
This affliction of the Israelits is longer then the other.GOd afflicted the Israelites, and deliuered thē to their enemies, bycause they returned to their old nature, and forgetting the Lord their God, woorshypped Idoles. And this affliction dured
fourtye yeares. We reade of none longer then this. From the death of
Abdon the last Iudge, euen almost vnto
Hely this affliction endured: bicause
Samson did not fully deliuer the people. He in deede smote the
Philistines, but he did not vtterlye repell them from oppressing of the Hebrues. This woorde
Zorah is a name of a place, and not of a famelye, as we shal afterward vnderstand, towardes the ende of the chapter.
Of the Tribe of Dan. The learneder sorte doo to this place referre those thinges which are written in the booke of
Genesis the .49. chapter. There
Iacob when he was ready to dye,
The prophecie of Iacob as touching Samsō. foretolde what should happen vnto his children after long time. And when by order he came vnto
Dan: Dan (sayth he) shall iudge hys people, and he shal be a Serpent in the way, and an Adder in the pathe, byting the horses heeles, so that his ryder shall fall backward. For
Samson after a sorte did byte the foote of the horse, when he ouerthrew the pyller, that is, the foote of the parler, & laid the rider on the ground, that is, the company of the
Philistines, with the fal of the wal. These thinges I therfore make mencion of, that it might appeare, that they were no small or vulgare things, when as
Iacob so long time before prophecied of them.
Samson was of the Tribe of
Dan, when as the nexte Iudge before him was of the tribe of
Ephraim. God vsed not at y
e tyme any ordinary Magistrate,
Onely Samsō appoynted a Iudge before hys byrth. neither dyd the Children succeede the Parentes in this kynde of gouernment. There was no Iudge vnto this tyme of the Tribe of
Dan. And there was none of all the Iudges, but onelye
Samson, whom God appoynted, and as it were published a Iudge, before he was borne.
And hys name was Manoah, whose wyfe was barren. When God decreed to sende any notable and excellent man,
Many excellēt mē borne of baren mothers. he verye often tymes styrred hym vp out of a barren woman, whiche thing also wee see came to passe in
Samson, lykewise in
Samuel, and in
Iohn Baptist, and in very many other, that it myght manifestly appeare to be altogether the woorke of God. Barrennes among the Hebrues was a thyng ignominious: but God bycause he woulde declare, that of thynges most contemptible, he can bring foorth thinges excellent, hath very often tymes done after thys manner. And that faulte of barrennes was in thys place in the woman, and not in the man. For sometymes it may be in both: but
[Page 201] the scripture here pronounceth it of the woman, and not of the man.
He shall beginne (sayth he)
to saue Israel. Here is signified that
Samson should not fully deliuer the people: for Israell did not vnder him fight in battayle against theyr enemies: he alone assailed thē, & somtimes greuously afflicted them. The Aungell appeared vnto his mother a part, when her husband was awaye, and shewed her of the sonne which she should beare. Also the Aungell appeared vnto
Mary the mother of Christ when she was a lone.
Iosephus in his bookes of Antiquities addeth,
Iosephus. that thys
Manoah somewhat suspected his wife: and thought that it was not an aungell, but some man, & that his wifes chastity was assaulted, but eyther doubt was taken away, whē as at the last when he made sacrifice, y
e angel vanished away in the flame. So
Ioseph, whē he somwhat suspected
Mary, herd of the Aungel:
Ioseph, be not aferd to take
Mary thy wife, for that which is conceiued in her, is of the holy ghost. God woulde haue his, not onely borne lawfullye, but also cleared from all suspicion. But in
Samuel there could be no such suspicion: for when
Hanna prayed softely,
Heli the priest rebuked her, and counted her for a dronkard, who yet when he vnderstode how diligently and earnestly she prayed at the tabernacle of the Lorde, he promised vnto her issue.
But here besides the promise of the sonne, is added also a precepte. For the Aungell commaundeth her to
abstaine from wine, and stronge drinke,
Why such an abstinence was commaunded the moth
[...]s.
and all thinge that might make her dronke. There is also a reason added:
Bicause he shal be a Nazarite vnto the Lord. Wherfore the mother also is commaunded to abstayne from wine, stronge drinke, and euerye vncleane thinge, that the childe shoulde not be nourished with thynges vnlawefull, no not in the wombe of hys mother.
¶Of the vow of the Nazarites.
ANd as touching the vow of the
Nazarits it is manifestly set forth in the .6. of
Numb: But those thinges whiche are there written,
The summe of the vow of the Nazarites. maye all be reduced to three principall poyntes. The firste was, that they shoulde drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, nor any thinge that might make them droonke. An other was, that they should not pole theyr hed: but all that time the
Nazarite shoulde let his heare grow. The third was, that they should not defile themselues with mourninge for buriales, no not at the death of theyr father or mother. These thinges were to be obserued, but not for euer, but onelye for some certayne time. For he vowed to bee a
Nazarite, but for certayne number of dayes, or Monethes, or yeares.
But why did God institute these thynges?
Why god gaue the institution of the Nazarites. There may be many causes geuen. Fyrste, because menne were so prone to chuse vnto themselues certayne kindes of lyfe, whereby they mighte easely fall into superstition. Therfore God would after this maner bridle them, as though he should haue sayd: Forasmuch as ye are so prone to your own studies, and to inuent newe woorshippings, yet shall ye not do what ye liste your selues, but what I prescribe vnto you. And so geuinge vnto them the lawe of a
Nazarite, hee kepte them in doynge theyr dewtye.
But what mente these thinges?
1 They ought to keepe theyr heare growinge till the ende of theyr vow. For then in offring sacrifice, and burninge the fleshe in fire, they did cut of the heare, and burned it in the same fire. And frō that time they were free and returned to theyr old manner of life, which was common also vnto other.
Some referre these thinges vnto an Allegorye, that when the heares were
[Page] increased, the
Nazarites should consider, that vertues also oughte to increase in the minde. But me thinketh there may be an other cause rendred, namelye that men should abstayne from to much trimming and deckinge of the body. For the clipping of the eare much adorneth the body. For
Paule sayth in his 1. Epistle to the
Corrinthians the .11. Chapter, that to menne it is vncomelye if they let theyr heare growe. Althoughe other reasons of other menne are not to bee contemned.
Cyrillus Procopius.
Cirillus and also
Procopius vpon the booke of Numbers, say that these thinges were instituted of God, to reuoke men from the idolatrous worshippinges and rites of the Ethnikes, that that which they gaue vnto idols, y
e Iewes should geue vnto him. So also whereas they sacrificed vnto Idols, he would haue these men rather to sacrifice vnto himselfe, not that god so much regardeth sacrifices, but to wythdrawe them from idolatry. We reade that the Ethnikes sometimes suffred theyr heare to growe, that they mighte afterward consecrate it, ether vnto the
Nimphes, or to
Apollo. Wherefore
Apollo was by them called
[...] that is a nourisher of the heare. Yea and
Theseus (as it is written in
Plutarche) went to
Delphos there to dedicate his heare vnto
Apollo.
Plutarche. And children at Rome when they were paste childehode, offred theyr heare and beardes to some God.
Sophocles writeth that
Oreftes put his heare in the tombe of his father.
Sophocles
There may also be an other cause rendred, and that not vayne. For the
Nazarites ought alwayes to be pure, and although they were not of the tribe of
Leui, yet they so behaued themselues all that time, as if they had beene priestes of the tribe of
Leui. And the Leuites and priestes were prohibited in the .21. chapt. of
Leuiticus from polinge theyr head. Which thinge maye also be perceaued by the .6. chapter of
Baruch. Ye shall see (sayth he) priestes in Babilon with theyr heades shauen,
The priests of the Hebrewes shaued not theyr heades. and theyr garmentes cutte. And they were priestes of idoles. Wherfore we see that by the commaundent of God, the priestes of the hebrewes had not theyr heades shauen.
In the booke of Numbers the 6. chapter, god calleth the heares of the heade a crowne, or as other translate, it a seperatiion. But contrarilye the Papistes call theyr shauing of the head a crowne: so do they peruerte all thinges as they liste themselues. But what shoulde a man speake of them? They care not what they doo. They will haue lights and censing in the temples. If thou aske them why? Because say they God vsed them in the olde testamente. But in the olde lawe priests had wyues: these wil haue none. They suffred the heares of their head or beard to grow: but these men shaue both theyr head and beard. Although at this day there is a great contention among thē about a long beard, bicause the counsell of Carthage in the .44.
Concilium Carthaginense. chap. is sondry waies alledged. For in exāplers it is writen
Comam non nutriant nec barbā that is, They shal not suffer theyr heare to growe, nor theire beard, but in others it is red:
Nec barbam tondeant, that is: They shall not clip theyr beardes: whether of these two sentences will these men follow? For they wil not suffer to haue a long beard, least any part (as they say) of the sacrifice should stick in it. O holy mē: they fel y
t theyr sacrifice for thre halfe pens,
Why the sacrificing Papists will haue no beardes. & then least it should stick in the beard, they diligently prouide. Is not this to streyne at a gnat, & to swalow down a Camel? Howbeit some of them, leaste they should seme to do not very wisely nor with any reason: The cutting of (say they) of the heares, signifieth that a priest muste cutte of all superfluous thinges. This is the religion of these men, to haue the signes, when as they haue not the thinges signified. But I rather referre that shauinge of our papistes to softnes or wantonnes.
Suetonius. For
Suetonius in the life of
Otho sayth that he was wont oftentimes to shaue his beard, and to behold his face in a glasse, whither it were trim inough. I wil not speake of other which did not shaue the heares, but plucke thē
[Page 202] out, to haue the softer skinne.
2 The next thing was, that the
Nazarites should abstayne from wyne, and not from wine onely, but also from vineger, from grapes, and from strong drinke, called
Sicera.
What Sicera is.
Ierome. This
Sicera (as
Ierome writeth to
Nepotianus) was a kind of drink much like vnto wyne, which was made eyther of wheat, or of apples, or of dates, or els of other fruites. Farther they were prohibited to eat the huskes of grapes or kernels, which are taken out of the wine presses. They wer also commaunded not to drinke
Mishereth, which was nothing els then the washing of the grapes. For the wine being pressed out, there was water powred vpon the grapes that were pressed, which when it was purified, retained som sauor of the wine. That we call the second wine. But the Chaldey interpretation caleth
Sicera old wine. And it is manifest inough, why the
Nazarites wer forbidden to drinke both wine and strong drinke: for these thinges trouble the heade, and stirre men vp to lust, as
Salomon in his 20. chapter of Prouerbs admonisheth, wine maketh a mocker, and strong drinke a troublesome fellow, and whosoeuer is deceaued therby, shal neuer be wise.
Paule saythe also to the Ephesians the 5. chapter: Be not dronke with wine, wherin is excesse: but be filled with the sprite. Farther the priestes in the old law were prohibited to drinke wine before they came to holy seruices. Wherefore the
Nazarites, forasmuch as they were like priestes, ought also to abstayne from wyne.
3 The third thing was, that they shoulde not defile themselues with any mourninge for the deade. For as we are with ioy to muche lifted vp, so sometimes are we greuously troubled with heauines and mourninge. But God woulde haue his ministers to be voyde of affections, especiallye of the vehementer affections, when as by them men are more greuously moued then is mete. Neyther yet wer these obseruations merites, wherin they constituted righteousnes, but they were rites onely and excercises, whereby they should after a sorte be kepte in doinge theyr deuty. For the vow of a
Nazarite was a certayne seperacion from other mē. But what they did in the meane time, it is not prescribed: howbeit many thinke that they were commaunded, to endeuour themselues to the contemplacion and knoweledge of the lawe, and to worshyppe and call vpon God purelye and sincerely.
We se that god by this kind of vowe would instruct the people with singuler wisedome. The Philosophers write that a manne muste contende, to be able to beholde highe thinges, and wyth his knowledge to embrace whole nature. And that they saye canne neuer be done, vnles the affections in vs be tempered, otherwise we are verye often caried awaye by anger and luste. Wherefore God would haue his to be voyd of these affections, namely of mourninge, pleasure, to much care and vexation about the decking of the bodye. For these do not a little hinder the tranquility of the mind, and spirituall cogitations therof. Wherfore in the olde lawe he instituted in a manner to prepare his, that they shoulde not come vnapte and vnmete to higher thinges. Vndoubtedly they which are indewed with the knowledge of God, oughte to frame and prepare themselues, before that they come to heare the woorde of God, or to receaue the Sacramentes.
Ieremy in his 4. Chapter hath very wel admonished vs: Breake vp your fallow ground, and sow not among the thornes. And they vowed this kind of vowe (as we haue sayd) for a certayne time, either for a yeare or for a moneth, or as euery man thought it most profitable for himselfe: for the natures of menne are oftentimes chaunged, and the studies of piety do waxe feable. Therfore they oughte by some meanes to be restored. Hereof sprange the departures of the Elders, into solitary places for a time. So they whyche gouerned the publike wealth, when they were wery with matters, kept themselues close oftentimes
[Page] in fieldes or manors, not to sleepe, or to geue themselues to sluggishnes and idlenes, but to refresh theyr mindes, and that they might returne the more prompte and better instructed to accomplish thinges. And the most noble Rhethoricians being wearied with pleading causes of the law, went sometimes into the country, to heare, to talke, to reade somwhat, to peruse ouer the oracions before herd, and so by that meanes to returne more learned and readye to the place of iudgement: So the
Nazarites for a certayne time departed from the companye and felloweshippe of other menne, that they mighte be the better and holier afterwarde to execute the duties of life. Chryste also in the nyghte tyme departed to the mountayne: But in the daye tyme he returned vnto the people. And when the Apostles returned, whom he hadde sente foorth to preache, he led them a way for a little while into a deserte, that they mighte there be quiet, and refresh themselues.
The instituciō of Lent.For this cause peraduenture was Lent first instituted, that men which had al the yeare bene occupied with ciuill businesse, might at the leaste at that time renew piety. This is the pretence of the Papists.
But graunt that the thinge was at the first institued for this cause, let them consider what it is now fallen to at the lengthe, vndoubtedlye into mere superstition, whereby nothing els is obtruded vnto the people, then choise of meates, olde wyues fables, vngodly songs, and pilgrimages (whych they commonly call stations) very prophane and idolatrous. In the meane time there is no mencion made for the abolishinge of couetousnesse, luste, lecherye, and other wicked actes. Farther, menne oughte by so longe a fast to haue beene made better, but they are made much worse after Easter.
Paul tooke vpon him y
e vowe of a Nazarite.But to returne to the vowe of a
Nazarite, Paule seemeth to haue vowed it, when as in the .18. chapter of the Actes of the Apostles, he poled his heade in
Cenchre. And in the .21. chapter he was perswaded of the Elders to doo it. There are here (say they) foure menne, whyche haue a vowe: Thou shalte bee with them. There the shauinge of the head declareth, that that vowe pertained vnto a
Nazarite. For as it is wrytten in the lawe, if it had happened that the
Nazarite in the time of the vowe whyche he hadde taken vpon hym, hadde defyled hymselfe vpon the deade, or by anye other meanes, then the vowe was violate. And the
Nazarite oughte to come vnto the Tabernacle, and to declare vnto the priestes what hadde happened, and to cutte of hys heare, to offer sacrifice, and so to begynne the vowe of a
Nazarite a newe agayne. For what soeuer he hadde before obserued, it was counted as defyled and of no force. So
Paule, as thoughe some thynge hadde happened vnto hym amonge the Gentiles where he had beene conuersant, woulde be purified in the Temple, as thoughe he shoulde haue begonne the obseruation of hys vow agayne.
A fayned tale of the Moonkes.The Papystes crye that by this vowe of the
Nazarites, there was a certeyne shadowe at that tyme of theyr religious Moonkery, neyther consider they that the vowes of the
Nazarites were instituted by the woorde of God. Let them shew on theyr side the commaundement of God for moonkry, which thing if they cannot do, then resteth there nothinge but that we may say, that the institutions of Moonkes are not the vowes of
Nazarites, but of superstitious men, and a certayne ridiculous imitation or an euill zele of the olde vowe of the
Nazarites. So also in the olde tyme superstitious men, when they sawe that
Abraham would haue offred his sonne,
Whereof began drawing of children throughe the fyre. and that for the same cause he pleased God very well: They also would nedes offer their sonnes, and draw them thorough the fire. By whiche most wicked institution they greuously offended God. But our worshipping ought to leane vnto the worde of God. In dede ciuill institutions, yea euen without the expresse word of God, may be receaued, so that they be not
[Page 203] agaynst the worde of God:
Agaynst the vowe of religious men. but worshipping and religion ought not to come frō any other thyng, but onely out of the word of God. But I pray you, let them tel, whence they haue that vowe of perpetuall sole life, or how can it agree with the
Nazarites? First it is contrary to the creation of man, when as it was sayd vnto the first parentes: Increase and multiply. Farther, it is agaynst the oracle, which
Paul wrote: He whiche contayneth not, let him mary.
They vowe pouerty also. But what manner of pouerty? forsoth to lyue of beggyng. A trimme vow, to be maintayned with the labours of other men. Vndoutedly that is agaynste charitye, when as
Paul sayeth vnto the
Ephesians: He whiche stole, let him steale no more, but let him labor rather with his handes, that he maye haue wherewithall to geue vnto hym that suffereth necessitye. But thou wilte say that of the Monkes ther are some which are riche. I graunt that, but they also do contrary to the word of god, wherin it is commaunded: He whiche laboreth not, let him not eate. Farther, they vowe obedience. But to whom? To certayne men, when as
Paul expressedly writeth: Be not ye made seruauntes of men. But they say: I am of
Frances, I am of
Dominike, I am of
Benedict, where as
Paul would not suffer that Christians should saye: I am of
Paul, I am of
Apollo, and I of
Cephas.
They agr
[...] not but are contrarye to the Nazarites. Why then do they cry that they agree with the
Nazarites? Let vs diligently examine euery thyng. The
Nazarites shaued not the heare: but these men do shaue it. The
Nazarites did drinke no wyne: but these mē glot themselues with wyne. The
Nazarites came not to funerals: but these men desire nothyng so much as the funerals and obsequies of the dead. But I will ouerpasse these things. One thing only wil I adde: Although in the Iewish religion the vowe of the
Nazarites was the principall vow,
Origene. yet were they not forbidden to mary. In other vowes (sayth
Origene) they gaue either a shepe, or a a gote, or an oxe, or some other thing. But in this kynde of vow, they offred thē selues, and yet their state agreed well ynough with matrimony.
But let vs returne vnto
Samson. He proued a most strong young man. Who would haue thought that this could haue come to passe? The parentes were not cōmaunded to instruct hym in the arte of warfare, or to send him forth to warre. A mā would thinke much rather that he should be brought vp as a Monke, & not as a souldier. But God would shewe, that all the strength whiche should be in
Samson, should be deriued from his spirite. But that he should be a
Nazarite all his life tyme, as
Samuel also was, it was peculiar, and aboue the common institution of others, by the deede I say and not by the ryght or vowe of the parentes.
Samson ought to haue obeyed, althoughe he had not vowed,
Whether it was lawful for Hanna
[...]o vow for her sonne. bicause it was done by the word of god. Howbeit of
Hanna the mother of
Samuel it may be doubted, how it was lawfull for her to vow for her sonne. For it may scarse seme iust that the sonne should be bound by the vowe of the parent. It was demaunded in the tyme of
Benedict, whether the children offred by the parentes vnto monasteries, when they came vnto mans state, might mary.
Gregorius.
Gregorius Magnus to
Augustine a Byshop of England, aunswereth, that it is vtterly vnlawful. Whiche is a verye hard saying, and agaynst the word of god. For
Paul sayth, it is better to mary then to burne. And he whiche can not conteyne, let him mary.
Conciliū Carthaginense. In the counsell of
Carthage the .3. wherat
Augustine also was present, it was decreed, that childrē offred vnto y
e Church, when they came to mans estate, should either mary, or els vow chastity. This also was rough ynough. For who shuld require this at y
t age, being vnskilfull of thinges, & not certayne of his own strēgth? But these things I speake, that we might knowe that decrees are contrary to decrees. But to returne to the matter, I saye that
Hanna mought vowe for her sonne: for as touching the performyng of the vow, as longe as he was brought vp by his parētes, she might easely prouide, that he should not drinke any wyne, nor cut of hys heare, nor be at any funerals. But after he came to lawfull age, it was
Samuels duty to obserue these things, not in dede in respect of the vow, but bycause of the
[Page] obedience whiche he ought vnto his parentes. For children ought to obey theyr parentes in all those thinges which are not agaynst piety & the word of God. So the
Rechabites (as it is in
Ieremy) whē they obeyed their father
Ionadab,
The Rechabites. who cō maunded them to drinke no wine all their lyfe tyme, or to dwel in Cityes, were for the same cause praysed of God. Howbeit
Hanna vnles she had had a peculiar inspiration from God, she could not haue vowed, that
Samuel should all his lyfe tyme haue ministred at the tabernacle of the Lord: for as much as the law of god absolued mē frō the ministery at a certaine space of yeares, namely in y
e .50. yere.
Magister sententiarum.But that which I haue sayd, that it was lawful for
Hanna to vowe the vow of a
Nazarite for her sonne, it semeth not to be firme with y
e definition of a vow, whiche is thus brought of the Master of the Sentences: A vowe is a testificatiō of a willing promise made vnto God,
The definition of a vowe. of things which pertayne vnto God. But a vowe which is vowed by the parent for the sonne, can not seme willing. Yea but it is: bycause the parentes vowed not being compelled, but of their owne fre will: farther, it is mete for the children to obey the will of their parentes freely & of their owne accorde, especially when they commaunde no vngodly thyng, or contrary to the worde of God.
By this place some gather that
Samson was sanctified in the wombe of hys mother: whiche selfe same thyng is beleued both of
Ieremy and also of
Iohn Baptiste.
How some are sayd to be sanctified frō the wombe. And they will haue him so to be sanctified, that afterwarde he committed no mortal sinne, as they call it. But this is false and vayne. Neither to sanctifye in this place is anye thyng els, then to appointe one to the execution of some certayn worke.
Samson therefore was sanctified, that is, appoynted of God to deliuer his people. So was
Ieremy ordeyned to Prophesie. And
Iohn to be the voyce of a crier in the wildernes. Neither of this kinde of sanctification doth it follow, that these holy men neuer sinned. For euery mā is a lyer, & also there is no mā sayth
Salomon whiche sinneth not. Farther, what shal we say of
Samson: Did he neuer sinne? He fel vndoubtedly, and that greuously.
Paul also, who sayth to the
Galathians that he was himselfe separated from his mothers wombe, and yet he persecuted the Churche of God. Moreouer the children also of Christians are called holy, for as muche as God is not our God onely, but also the God of our seede, according to that saying of
Paul to the
Corinthians: Your children are holy, who yet no man doubteth, but y
t they afterward fal and grieuously sinne.
If the vow be against charity it is to be broken.One thinge remayneth to be spoken of, and afterwarde I will returne vnto the history. When the father voweth, and the sonne desireth to performe y
e vowe of the father, what if the vow be a gaynste the health of the sonne? He shall peraduenture fal into some disease, and he must nedes drinke wine, or cut away his heare, what is to be done in this case? I haue in an other place admonished that the preceptes of god ar of diuers sortes, so that some ar greater, and some easier. As touching god whiche is the commaunder, all are equall and like one to an other. But as touching y
e thinges which are cōmaunded, there is some difference. Wherfore the lesse precept must geue place vnto the greater. For whiche cause Christ sayth by the wordes of the Prophet, I will haue mercy and not Sacrifice: not as thoughe God vtterly contemned Sacrifices, which he had commaunded, but bycause he more estemed mercy. And Christ also admonisheth in the Gospell in the .5. chapter of
Math. that if thou offer thy gift at the alter, and there remēberest that thy brother hath somewhat agaynst thee, thou must go first and reconcile thy selfe vnto thy brother, and then returne, and offer thy gifte. Whereby he declareth that he altogether wil haue the les precepte geue place vnto the greater. Wherfore we must thus aunswere vnto the question. God commaūdeth the
Nazarites to absteyne from wine: he also commaundeth euery man to defend his life by good meanes. Here when as the sicke man can not preserue both the preceptes, it is necessary that he preferre the greater before the les. For so dyd the
Rechabites the sonnes of
Ionadab behaue themselues. For althoughe theyr father
[Page 204] cōmaunded them, that they should not dwel in Cities, neither drinke any wine, and were also commended of God, bycause they obeyed the preceptes of theyr father, yet at that tyme when
Ieremy wrote these thinges of them, they dwelled at
Ierusalem, contrary to the precept of their father. For the
Chaldeyans had wasted all the fieldes. Wherefore they perceaued that there was then no place for their fathers precept. But in monasteryes they doo contraryly. For if the father be sicke, the sonne is so bound by religion, that he can by no meanes helpe him.
6 And the wife came, and tolde her husband saying: A man of God came vnto me, and the looke of hym was lyke the looke of an Aungell of God very terrible, and I asked hym not whence he was: neither tolde he me his name.
7 And he sayde vnto me: Beholde thou shalt conceaue and beare a sonne. Now therfore thou shalt drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, neyther eate any vncleane thyng: for the chylde shalbe a Nazarite to God from his birth, to the day of his death.
8 Then Manoah prayed vnto the Lord, and sayd: I praye thee my Lord let the man of God whom thou senttest, come agayne vnto vs and teache vs what we shall do vnto the childe when he is borne.
9 And God hearde the voyce of Manoah. For the Aungell of the Lorde came agayne vnto the wife, as she sat in the fielde, but Manoah her husbande was not with her.
10 And the wife made hast and ranne, and shewed her husbande, saying vnto hym: Beholde the man hath appeared vnto me, that came vnto me to daye.
11 And Manoah arose and went after hys wyfe, and came to the man, and sayd vnto him: Art thou the manne that spakest vnto the woman? And he sayd: Yea.
12 Then Manoah sayd: Nowe let thy saying come to passe. But what shalbe the iudgement of the childe, and his worke?
13 The aungell of the Lord aunswered vnto Manoah: The womā must beware of all that I sayd vnto her.
14 She may eate of nothyng that commeth of the wine vine tree, that is, she shall drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, nor eate any vncleane thing: let her obserue all that I haue commaunded her.
The woman thought that it had bene some godly man whom she had sene, or a Prophete: for she knew not that it was the aungell of God.
His looke (saith she)
was terrible. The Hebrewe worde is ambiguous: for it may be turned both terrible and wonderfull. And vndoubtedly the thinges whiche are wonderful, especially deuine things, doo strike into men a feare. She faythfully sheweth vnto her husband these thinges, and doth the dewty of a good wife.
What matrimony is. For Matrimony is an vnseperable society, hauyng the communion both of thynges deuine & humane. And this matter pertayned partly to thinges deuine, bycause it was shewed in the name of God, and partly vnto humane thynges, bycause it was a matter as touchyng the receauyng and education of a child.
She sayth, she asked him not whence he was: bycause in such visions men are so amased, that they are attentiue onely vnto the thynges which are spoken, neither haue they any leasure to enquire of more thinges. So the mother of y
e Lord, when the Aungell saluted her, asked hym not what his name was, or from whence he came.
Gideon also when he receaued the oracle of the Aungell, for
[Page] the delyuering of the people, was altogether so astonished, that he was nothyng inquisitiue, what his name was. But the woman speaketh these thynges by anticipation: for she thought that her husbande woulde heare, and inquire of hym the truth. Althoughe
Iosephus in hys booke
de Antiquitatibus (as I haue before admonished) sayeth, that when he hearde the wordes of his wife, he somewhat suspected her of euill.
Ambrose. Howit
Ambrose in hys .70. Epistle, where he very diligently entreateth of this Hystory, denieth that to be very lykely. For if (sayeth he) he had ben gelious, God would not haue sent an aungell vnto hym. But me thinketh
Ambroses reason is not firme. For
Manoah might otherwise be a good man, although he were touched with suspition. Very good men also haue oftentymes some suspition of such things. For euen
Ioseph the husband of
Mary, whō the holy Scripture testifieth that he was a iust man, somewhat sinisterly suspected hys Spouse, to whom yet the Aungell appeared.
Wherefore I rather beleue that
Manoah, was eyther altogether without gelousy, or elles not very muche gelous. For he accused her not abroade, her repudiated her not, neither vsed he the publique remedy of the lawe: For then was in force that lawe whiche was geuen by GOD, that if a manne suspected his wife of aduoutry, he should bryng her to the doore of the tabernacle, where the Priest should searche out the honesty of the woman by solemne waters, and by a bitter curse.
The cause of the lawe of gelousy. For God would that maryed folkes should lyue together with a mery, quiet, and not suspitious mynde. But
Manoah dyd not onely not vse these remedyes: but also he by no meanes rebuked his wyfe. But strayghtwaye prayed vnto the Lorde, that that man of God would returne the seconde tyme, wherby he myght vnderstand, how the child should be brought vp. Neither dyd he tempt god by hys prayers. In deede no man ought to desire a signe, y
t he may beleue the articles of fayth. For those thynges whiche are contayned in them, are already before sufficiently proued and confirmed by the worde of God, and by miracles. But if there happen any newe and singular reuelation, bycause there may bee deceates and guiles of deuilles, who transforme themselues (yea euen into the aungelles of lyght) if we require a signe of the Lorde or instruction, we sinne not. That a baren woman shoulde beare, or that a childe shoulde set the people at liberty, it was a certayne singular thyng. Wherefore
Manoah prayeth for nothyng curiously, and therefore GOD hearde hym. He afterwarde demaunded the name of the aungel, but bycause he demaunded it curiously, he was not hearde.
The aungell came agayne vnto the woman the selfe same daye, as all interpreters doo agree. And vndoubtedly it might be, that first he came in the mornyng, and the second tyme, either at noone, or about the sunne set.
Manoah asked,
VVhether he were the manne whiche spake with hys wife: whiche thing whē he affirmed vnto hym, he sayde:
Let thy sayinge come to passe. It maye be an oration of one that wisheth, as if he shoulde haue sayde: I woulde to GOD it myght come to passe. Or it may by supposition, as if it shoulde haue bene sayd: If it come to passe as thou haste sayde,
VVhat then shalbe the iudgement of the child? When he saith
iudgement, he asketh not Counsel of Astronomers, which aunswere by the starres, what shall come to passe of a childe. He onely demaundeth what GOD had decreed of the childe. Neither ought the decree of GOD wherof he inquireth, to be referred vnto the merites of the child, but onely vnto the mercye of GOD. For
Mischpat is very well turned a decree, for a decree is of mercye and not of merite. The Aungell repeateth vnto hym all those thynges, whiche he had before commaunded the woman to take heede of.
She maye not eate (sayeth he)
of any thynge that commeth of the wyne grape.
Certaine wine
[...]rees beare not wine. These woordes declare, that there are also other kyndes of vynes, out of whiche is not gathered wyne. But when the Aungell sayeth:
Neyther shall she drynke
[Page 205] wine, nor stronge drinke, hys aunswere seemeth not to make muche to the purpose.
Manoah demaundeth of the childe, and the aungell aunswereth of the mother. But it is all one, as if he had sayd: That whiche I haue sayd of the mother, I haue sayd it bycause of the childe: Wherfore seyng god wyll haue the mother obserue these thynges, muche more ought the childe to keepe the selfe same things. Howbeit the cōmon trāslation (I cā not tell how) referreth these things vnto the childe, but yet not rightly: bycause in the Hebrewe the feminine gender is kepte still.
Augustine is his questions vpon this booke demaundeth,
Augustine. why the mother is commaunded to absteyne from all vncleane thynges, when as that was already before sufficiently forbidden by the lawe of God? He aunswereth: After that the
Philistines possessed that lande, Religion among the Iewes was feabled, and the people did without choyse eate thyngs vncleane and forbydden by the lawe. By these wordes
Manoah easely perceaued that his wife did rightly vnderstande the wordes of the angell, and that the child should be a
Nazarite as longe as he lyued.
15 And Manoah sayd vnto the aungell of the Lorde: I praye thee let vs retayne thee, and we will make ready a Kid for thee.
16 And the angell of the Lord aunswered vnto Manoah: Though thou make me abyde, I will not eate of thy bread: and if thou wilt make a burnt offring, offer it vnto the Lorde: for Manoah knewe not that it was an aungell of the Lorde.
17 Agayne Manoah sayde vnto the Aungell of the Lord: What is thy name, that whē thy saying is come to passe we may honor thee?
18 And the aungell of the Lorde aunswered hym: Why askest thou thus after my name, whiche is secret?
19 Then Manoah tooke a Kid and an oblation, and offred it vpon a stone vnto the Lord. And he wrought a miracle whilest Manoah and hys wife looked on.
20 For when the flame came vp toward heauen from the alter, the aungell of the Lord ascended vp in the flame of the alter. And Manoah and his wife beheld it, and fell on their faces to the ground.
21 So the aungell of the Lord did no more appeare vnto Manoah and hys wyfe. Then Manoah knewe that it was an aungell of the Lorde.
Whē they had heard these wordes, they would haue retayned this mā of god, & haue made him a banquet. Vnto whom he aunswereth:
Although ye make me to abide, yet will
I not eate of your bread. This Hebrew worde
Lechē signifieth not onely bread, but sometymes meate in vniuersall, yea & sometymes flesh also. Hereof was inuented y
e subtility of y
e Papistes: to whō when we say, y
t the bread remayneth in y
e Eucharist, & proue it by y
e which
Paul writeth: The bread which we breake, is it not y
e cōmunicating of y
e body of Christ? They answere: y
e bread in that place may signifie fleshe, as it doth oftētymes in the holy scriptures. But they ought to remember y
t
Paul wrote these words in Greke & not in Hebrew. But
[...] y
t is, bread in Greke, cā not signify flesh, as
Lechem may in Hebrew. Farther in the holy supper the flesh of Christ is not broken, but they ar simboles or signes whiche are broken.
VVe will make a Kid. So some reade it, and doo thynke that to make,
Sondry readyng. is in this place nothyng els then to Sacrifice. Peraduenture
Manoah thought that that aungell was a Priest. And in peace offringes one parte was burnt vnto God, an other parte was geuen vnto the Priest, the thirde parte they dyd
[Page] eate which offred the sacrifice, and so they banqueted together before the Lord. Wherfore they would entertayne the Aungell with a banquet. But other rede in this place, not to make, but simply to prepare.
If thou wilt make a burnt offring, offer it vnto the Lord. He declared that he looked not for a banquet, bycause in burnt offrings, al things were consumed with fire. But in y
t he saith:
Sacrifice it vnto the Lord, he putteth him in remēbraunce of the true God: bycause the people at that tyme woorshypped the Gods of the gentiles.
The wilynes of y
e Papistes, whereby they affirme that y
e Masse is a sacrifice. The Papistes cry that to make, is to sacrifice: & that this worde
Facere, that is to do or to make, is properly applied vnto sacrifices. And therby they labour to proue, that their Masse is a sacrifice, bycause Christ sayd in the Supper,
Hoc facite, that is, do or make this, which they thinke is nothyng els, thē sacrifice this. Neither do they cite these places onelye, but also very many other, whiche are founde in the olde testament. They say also that the Latin Poetes vsed this word after this maner,
Virgil. as
Virgil when he sayd: When I make a calfe for corne, come thou. Amitte it be so. But how shall we vnderstand the certayne signification or strength of this word as ofte as it cōmeth? And whē shal it signifie this, & when that?
From whence significatiōs of wordes ought to be gathered. For otherwise to make a garment, shalbe to sacrifice a garment, and to make a fire, shalbe to sacrifice a fire: if that word as oft as it cōmeth shal signify to sacrifice, vndoubtedly what y
e worde signifieth may be easely be vnderstād by the thyng it selfe, and circumstances of the place, as that in
Virgil which they haue alledged, where it is read: When I make a calfe, it is certayne that there is mention made of haruest Sacrifices. And so it oftentymes happeneth in the olde Testament. But in the supper, what was it that Christe would Sacrifice? what oblation? what bloud? Take (saith he,) eate, drinke. Do this whiche I haue sayd, namely to eate and drynke, for a remembraunce & monument of my death. But the Papistes bring forth these vayne & friuolous things, bycause they haue no better, as they whiche haue no wood vse to burne strawe.
Whether it were lawfull to sacrifice in any other place, besides the tabernacle.But to returne vnto the Hystory, this semeth wonderful, when as the law cō maūdeth that sacrifice should be done but onely in the place which the Lord had chosen, how it should be lawful for
Manoah to sacrifice at his own house.
Dauid Kimhi answereth, that this was done by the authority of the man of God, by a certayn extraordinary meane. For
Elias also sacrificed when he was among the ten tribes, y
t is, in the kingdome of
Samaria. But those things he saith were peculiar, neither might they be drawē into an exāple of others. But I thinke y
e whilest the arke of the Lord was yet wandryng, & whilest it had not yet founde any certayne place, y
e precept of the Lord had not yet his full strength. For thus the Lorde had cōmaunded, after that I shall bring you into the lande whiche I haue promised you, ye shall not sacrifice vnto me, but in y
e place which I wil shew vnto you. Wherfore although before it was permitted to sacrifice any other wher, yet after y
e
Salomon had built the tēple, it was not lawful to offer out of it: wherfore the highe places were to be takē away, & they should sacrifice no where but at
Ierusalē. But of al the kings, onely
Iosias &
Ezechias toke away y
e high places: so hard a thing was it to leade y
e people to y
e true obediēce of god. But
Elias was moued by a certayne peculiar inspiration of God to Sacrifice other where.
Manoah demaundeth after the name of the Aungell, neyther dyd he that so simply as hys wyfe dyd. But that he should not be thought to demaund it curiously, or without a cause, he addeth a reason of hys request.
That if that come to passe whiche thou hast sayd, we may honour thee, that is w
t some reward. But I cā not recōpence thee, vnles I know who thou art, & where thou dwellest. This Hebrew worde
Peli is ambiguous to the Hebrues,
R. Salomon. Aungels ar named of those things whiche they worke. & signifyeth both wonderful, and also secrete.
R. Salomon sayeth that the names of aungelles are secrete, so that they themselues knowe not their owne names. And he addeth also that the Aungelles haue no names of their owne, but onely haue surnames geuen
[Page 206] them of those thynges whiche they are sent to take charge ouer. Whiche thyng also the Epistle to the Hebrues toucheth, when it calleth them ministryng spirites.
R. Salomon bryngeth examples out of the holy Scriptures. An Aungell was sent vnto
Esaye, and bycause he dyd put a burnyng coale to his lyppes, he was called
Seraphim, of this verbe
Seraph, whiche signifieth to burne. So maye we saye of
Raphaell, that he was so called, bycause he had healed
Tobias, as thoughe he were the medicine of GOD.
Gabriell also, after the same manner, was called the strength of GOD. Also thys woorde
Peli signifieth wonderfull: for therefore came the Aungell, to woorke a miracle. And vndoubtedly it was very wonderfull, to bryng fire out of a rocke, whiche shoulde consume the Sacrifice. And it may bee y
t the Aungell would not open hys name, bycause menne at that tyme were prone vnto Idolatrye, and they would easely, when they had hearde the name of an Aungell, peraduenture haue woorshypped it to muche religiously.
That which we haue called an oblation, in Hebrew it is
Minchah. But what manner of oblation that was, is vnderstoode by the
.2. chapter of
Leuit. There wer diuers kindes therof, but it euer consisted of corne, but yet not alwayes prepared after one manner, & it was so offred, that some part of it was burnt vnto the Lord, the other part was left for the Priestes. The Papists babble that
Minchah was a shadowe of their bready Sacrifice, whiche thinge they haue fayned most impudently. But hereof we will intreate in an other place.
Manoah layd the Kid and Minchah vpon the rocke. Manoah myght not Sacrifice vnto the Lord by the lawe, bycause he came of the tribe of
Dan, and not of the tribe of
Leui. Wherefore he deliuered the fleshe vnto the aungell, whom he thought to be a Prophete, that he should sacrifice it. For Prophetes had an extraordinary vocation, that althoughe they were not of the famely of
Aaron, yet it was lawfull for them to sacrifice: as we rede of
Helias and
Helizeus. For whē religiō was decayed in y
e Priests, god suffred others to minister their office. But the aungell, when the fleshe was put vpon the rocke, wrought wonderfully.
He raysed vp fire out of the stone, whiche consumed the offring. Whiche thing we rede also was done in
Gideon. Althoughe it be not herein expressedly shewed that fire was drawen out of the rocke, as it was openly sayd in
Gideon, yet is no mention made of fire y
t was brought by
Manoah, & at the last it is sayd that the angell vanished away in y
e flame, therfore it is credible y
t fire was striken out of y
e stone.
The angell ascended into heauen, as though he vsed the flame for a chariot. He dissolued the body whiche he bare, and vanished away into the flambe: whiche was a notable miracle.
They fell to the ground for feare: for they were wonderfully amased and astonished, when they sawe that it was an aungell, whom before they thought to haue ben a man.
22 And Manoah sayd vnto his wife: We shall surely dye, bycause we haue sene God.
23 But hys wife sayde vnto hym: If the Lorde would kill vs, he woulde not haue receaued a burnt offryng and an oblation of our handes, neither would he haue shewed vs all these thinges, nor at this tyme told vs such thynges.
24 And the wife bare a sonne, and called his name Samson. And the childe grewe, and the Lord blessed hym.
25 And the spirite of the Lord began to strengthen hym, in the host of Dan, betwene Zora and Esthaol.
In dyeng we shall dye. That is, we shall moste assuredly dye. For the Hebrues in doublyng the woordes doo earnestly affirme.
Bycause we haue sene the Lord. Whereof this opinion sprang, I haue tolde in the Hystory of
Gideon, where also I haue declared, how God was sene of the fathers.
The opiniō of R. Leui ben Gerson. Wherfore it nedeth not to repeate them in this place. But this will I not ouerpasse, that
R.
Leui ben Gerson writeth, that this was not an aungell, but a man of god, and a Prophet, namely
Pinhas the sonne of
Eleazar. But he was called angel bycause
Manoah and his wife thought hym to be so. For after the same maner
Ezras, although he was a man, yet was he called an aungell. And Christ whiche is very man, is called the aungell of the Testament. But how he being a man vanished awaye in the flambe,
Leui ben Gerson declareth not. But I more simply doo iudge him to haue ben an aungell in dede. For
Pinhas had not a secret name, but a name well knowen in his tyme, and the wordes of the texte do tend to this,
Of the name of Elohim, to teache that it was an aungell.
VVe haue sene the Lord. In Hebrewe it is
Elohim, which althoughe it be the name of GOD, yet is it communicated to aungelles, yea and also to prynces and Prophetes, accordyng to that saying: I haue sayde, ye are Goddes. And Christe in the Gospell sayeth: If they are called Goddes, vnto whome is come the woorde of GOD, why doo ye meruayle. &c?
This woman seemeth to be of a stouter courage them the man: for she comforteth her husband. Whose Oration is grounded vpon two argumentes. The first is,
I
do not thinke we shall dye, bycause God would not haue accepted our sacrifice, if he would haue destroyed vs. Wherfore seyng our sacrifice was acceptable vnto him, he counteth not vs as enemyes. But whereby knew she that that sacrifice was acceptable vnto GOD. Firste, bycause the Aungell had commaunded it to be done, which vndoubledly he would not haue don, vnles he had vnderstoode that it should be acceptable vnto God. Farther, bycause the flambe had consumed the Sacrifice, and the angel therewithall flewe away, as though he caried vp the sacrifice with him into heauē. An other argument is:
He would not haue taught vs so many and such thyngs, if we should perishe. He came vnto vs once or twise, and instructed vs of thynges whiche we should doo. Wherfore be of good comforte, we shall not dye.
¶Of Sacrifice.
The offerer is more acceptable vnto God then the Sacrifice.VNdoubtedly the womans argumentes are good: out of whiche may some thynges be gathered, whiche are not vnprofitable. And firste that God more accepteth hym that offreth, then he doth the Sacrifice: yea the oblations please not hym, but for the offerers sake. This sentence
Irenaeus proueth by the scriptures in his fourth booke, and .34. chapter. For God had a regarde vnto
Abel, and to his giftes, but vnto
Cain and his giftes he looked not, bycause of the disposition of them that offred. For looke what manner of will he that offreth hath towardes God, the lyke will hath God to the oblation. Christ also sayth: If thou bryng thy gifte vnto the aulter, and remembrest that thy brother hath somwhat agaynst thee, go and reconcile thee first vnto thy brother: and then come and offer thy gifte. As thoughe he should say: If whylest thou art euill, and enemy vnto god, thou doest offer, thyne oblation shall not be acceptable vnto God. Wherfore
Irenaeus concludeth,
Irenaeus. that they are not sacrifices whiche sanctify, but the conscience of him that offreth. And he addeth a reason: bycause God nedeth not our Sacrifice. Among men, the euill may oftentymes be absolued: bycause men are sometimes couetous and nedy, and are easely wonne with money. But if it happen the Iudge to be both iuste and good, he will reiecte the money, neither wyl he suffer his equity after that manner to be blotted. So God, bycause he can not be wonne by flattery, obserueth the mindes of men, and not the Sacrifices. In
Esay the .66. chapter, he sayth: He that sacrificeth a shepe, is as if he slewe a dog: not that god hateth sacrifices in vniuersal, but bycause he alloweth not y
e oblations
[Page 207] of euill men. I haue the largelier spoken thinges, bicause the papistes boast, that in masses they offer Christ vnto God the father: which thinge if it should be graūted, then must god the father more esteme a noughty sacrificer, then he doth his sonne. But this woman reasoneth most wittely. God hath receaued our sacrifice, therfore he is not angry, neyther wil he destroy vs.
We count the sacrifices of christians to be a contryte heart, prayers,
The sacrifices of Christians. geuinge of thankes, almes, mortifienge the affections of the fleshe, and suche like. These are lefte vnto vs after the abrogation of the carnall sacrifices, that wee shoulde offer them as the fruites of our faythe, and testimonies of a thankefull minde. But as touching the pacifieng of God, Christe offred himselfe once vpon the crosse, neither is there any nede that any man should offer him againe. For by an oblation he accōplished al thinges. Now remayneth, that we embrace his sacrifice with fayth, and we shall haue God mercifull vnto vs, who of his goodnes will by Christ accept those sacrifices which we haue now made mencion of. But
Augustine contra literas Parmeniani, in his .2. booke and .8. chapter seemeth at the fyrst sight to make agaynst vs.
Augustine. For the
Donatistes woulde not communicate with the other Christians, because they counted them defiled and vnpure, and they cited a place out of
Iohn: Wee knowe that God heareth not sinners. Your men, sayd they, haue betrayed the holye bookes, haue burnte incense vnto Idoles, haue denied god, how then wil god heare them?
Augustine aunswereth, that it may be, that an euill minister, although he be not hearde for his owne cause, yet when he prayeth for the people, he maye be hearde. And he confirmeth his sentēce by the example of
Balaam: for he being a most wicked man, prayed vnto god and was heard. But if a man diligentlye examine these thinges, he shall finde that
Augustine is not against vs, although at the first sight he semeth a little to presse vs.
When he had sayde that the euill ministers also are heard,
The publike prayers of the minister are the prayers of the Church. hee strayghteway addeth, that y
t is not done for their wickednes sake, but bicause of the fayth and deuotion of the people, whereby wee gather, that althoughe the minister be the guide in woordes, yet are they not his prayers, but the prayers of the Churche. For there muste bee one certayne manne, whiche maye conceaue the prayers for the reste, leaste in the multitude shoulde rise a confusion or tumulte, if euerye manne shoulde by his owne woordes poure out prayers aloude in the Church. Wherfore the minister is a certayn mouth of the church.
The Myniste
[...] is the mouth of the church. Therefore if he bee euill, it is not he which is heard, but the faythfull people, which speake by his woordes. This thinge taughte
Augustine when he writeth that an euill minister is hearde, not for his wickednes, but for the fayth and deuotion of the people. Hereby are we admonished, that whilest we are presente at publike prayers, wee muste take verye diligente heede, and determine that those prayers whyche are recited, are ours.
How it is sayd that Balaam was heard. But
Balaam by a certayne forme of prayer prophesied, and therefore his woordes are called a blessinge, bycause he prophesied happye thinges vnto the people of god. And hee was not moued vnto these prayers of his owne will, but by the sprite of god. Wherfore hee was not hearde, but the holye ghoste was the true authour of hys woordes.
That whiche is alledged out of Iohn: God heareth not sinners,
Augustine sayth that that was not the saying of Christ,
Whyther God heareth sinners but of the blind mā which was no
[...] yet fully illustrate. Wherefore he affirmeth that sentence not to be true in vniuersal. For (as they define) the prayers of peruerse ministers ar somtimes hard, because they are of the church. But as touching the oblation of Christ, I do not think that the papists wil graunt, y
t the whole church offreth it, whē as they wil
[Page] haue that to be peculiar to the massemongers. And though they should graunte that, yet is not the whole Churche greater or more acceptable vnto god, then Christ: bicause he is not acceptable vnto god for the churches sake, but the church is acceptable vnto god for Christes sake. But to returne to the saying of
Iohn, that God heareth not sinners, addinge a profitable distinction, we maye thus expound it.
A distinction of sinners. There are some sinners whiche fall of weakenes, or sinne of ignorance, which yet afterward acknowledge themselues, are sory, and repent faythfully. But there are other, which sinne without conscience, want fayth, neyther are they led with anye repentance. The fyrste sorte, bicause they haue fayth, are heard, the other, forasmuch as they want fayth, do in vayne poure out theyr prayers.
What manner of one the publicane was when he prayed. But if a man will obiecte the Publicane, who being a sinner, prayed vnto god and departed iustified. I aunswere, that that publicane was in suche sorte a sinner, that yet when he prayed, he was not without fayth, yea rather he prayed with fayth, otherwise god would not haue heard his prayers. And vndoubtedly
Iames doth right wel admonishe vs, when he sayth: Pray, hauing faith. In sum, that sentence is firme and perfecte wherin it is sayde: whatsoeuer is offred vnto God for a sacrifice, the same is acceptable vnto him, if faythe and iustification of him that offreth, go before.
A verye subtile cauilacion.Some do cauile of the fyrst acte of fayth, whereby we begynne fyrst to assente vnto god, and they doubt, whither it be acceptable vnto god or no. Vndoubtedly before it, he is an enemy, which now beginneth to beleue. Then say they, if that fyrst consente be acceptable vnto God, then accepteth he the gifte of an enemye. But if it be not acceptable, then it iustifieth not. To this I aunswer two wayes: Fyrst that men are not iustified of the worthinesse of the acte of fayth, but of the firme promise of god, which faith embraceth. Farther, when any man first assenteth, and beleueth, then is he first made of an enemy a friende, and although before he was an enemy, yet so sone as he beleueth, he is made a friend, and ceaseth to be an enemy.
Plato. But that which we haue before concluded, that he which offreth is more acceptable vnto God, then the gift, the Ethnikes also sawe. For
Plato in Alcibiade maketh mencion, that the
Athenienses vpon a time made war againste the
Lacedemonians, and when they were ouercome, they sente messengers vnto
Iupiter Ammon, by whom they sayd that they marueiled for what cause, where as they hadde offred so greate giftes vnto the Godes, and theyr enemies on the contrary side sacrificed sparingly and sclenderly, and yet had they the victorye ouer them.
Ammon aunswered, that the gods more estemed the prayers of the
Lacedemonians, then the moste fatte sacrifices of the
Athenienses. For when they burnt Oxen vnto theyr Gods, in the meane time they thought nothinge of theyr soules. So in
Homere Iupiter speaketh, that the Gods are not moued with the smoke and smel of sacrifices, when as they hated
Priamus and the
Troyanes. Wherfore the
Ethnikes vnderstoode, that which the Papists at this day see not, which thynke that theyr blinde sacrificer, though he be neuer so vnpure and vngodly, doth yet with his hands, offer vp Christ vnto god the father.
Now let vs see the other argument of this woman. God would neuer haue shewed vs these thinges, if he woulde haue killed vs: Forasmuche as hee is not wont to make hys enemies of his coūcel. Thus the wife of
Manoah comforteth her fearefull husband. But this argument seemeth somewhat obscure, when as
Balaam, althoughe he were vngodlye, was not ignorante of the Councelles of GOD. Chryste also sayth: Manye shall saye vnto mee in that daye, haue wee not Prophesyed in thy name? To these thynges I aunsweare, that GOD didde not onelye foretell vnto them thynges that should
[Page 208] come to passe for the deliuerye of the people, but also of the childe whiche they should receaue, and of his education. Wherefore seying he vsed them as fellowe workemen, it was a certayne argument, that god had not appointed strayghteway to kyll them. Neyther speaketh she here of eternall life, but of this earthlye and corruptible life.
And the childe grew, and his name was called Samson. Hereby we know that
Zorah was the name of the place where
Samsons fathers was borne.
Samson. This Hebrew word
Shemesch signifieth the sunne, being therefore so called, as though he wer of the sunne: but for what cause he was so called it is not known. I meruaile that
Iosephus interpreteth
Sampson for stronge or mightye,
Iosephus. vndoubtedly such an Etimology agreeth not with the Hebrew word. But he oftentims goeth from the historye. And in this place also he sayth that the woman prayed, when as that is not founde in the text.
God blessed Samson. That is, bestowed and heaped benefites vpon hym.
The sprite of God. That is the sprite of strength and mighte began to strengthen him.
In the host of Dan. The history speketh thus by reason of those times. The tribe of
Dan had not yet obteined possession in the land of promes, but they wer in tents, and fought against theyr enemyes.
R.D. Kimhi.
R.D. Kimhi sayth that they did thē besiege the city of
Lais. Wherefore he being a younge man, was together w
t thē in the hoste. The Hebrew worde is
Paam, and it signifieth to be moued, & to be striken at certayne tymes, not perpetually, but by courses. He being a yonge man was moued, and waxed hote, to fyght the more vehemently against his enemies. And his impulsions, bycause they were of God, therefore are they ascribed vnto the spyrite. But bicause wee are alreadye come vnto the ende of thys chapter, before we enter into the next, there are certayne thinges whych are to be marked.
Fyrst, hereby we gather a most sure argumēt with how singuler a care god gouerneth his church. For although the Iewes had greuously sinned, yet had god a regard to theyr health, & sendeth thē a captain, which should deliuer them, & foretelleth what things should come to pas, least they should seme to haue happened by chaunce. Farther he woulde haue the childe to be a
Nazarite,
Outward thynges are not to be neglected. and to haue his heare to grow, and to abstaine from wine and stronge drinke. Wherefore we are taught that these outward thinges are not vtterly vaine, but may be applied vnto the glory of god. Men are wont sometimes to say, when they are admonished of outward thinges: What, doth god regard these thinges? In dede we know also that in those thinges is no holinesse to be put. Howebeit we muste take heede that both in liuinge, and in apparell, and in going also in all gesture and in habite, we behaue our selues comely, both before God, and also before the churche, not superstitiously but holily, that our modesty may aduaunce the kingdome of Christ and his holy Gospel. Farthermore let vs here consider that the wife helpeth the husband with her councell. For although by the ordinarye lawe it is not lawfull for women to preach and teache in an assembly: yet are they not so destitute of the gratious gifts of God, but that they may instruct theyr husbands with good counsels.
¶Of the visions of Aungels.
THe nexte thinge, is that I somewhat intreate of the visions of Aungels. For as we haue now heard an Aungel appeared vnto
Manoah, and oftentimes
[Page] in other places (as the scriptures declare) aungels haue bene sene of men, But it may be demaunded, howe they appeared, whither with any bodye, or els onely in phantasye? And if it were with a bodye, whither it were with theyr owne body, or with a straunge body? & if they toke a body, whither they were for a time or for euer?
The opinion of Platos secte.Of these things, there are diuerse opinions of men
Platos sect do say that the mindes, that is, the intelligences are so framed, that certayne of them haue celestiall bodies, some haue fyry bodies, some ayry, some watry, and some earthlye. And some they affirm to be darke
Demonia, which do continually abide in darknes and mist. Of these thinges
Marcilius Ficinius hath gathered many things in his.
The Peripatetikes.
The schole deuines men. 10. bookes
de legibus, and in his argument of
Epinomides. The
Peripatetikes affirme that there are certaine intelligences which turne and moue the celestiall orbes, neyther make they mencion of any other. But the scholedeuines, do determine that those mindes & intelligences are altogether spiritual, and y
t they haue no bodies. And this is the reason that leadeth thē thus to think, bycause these intelligences must nedes excell the soules of men, whose most perfect faculty consisteth in vnderstanding. Wherefore as they thinke, in this acte of vnderstanding it behoueth that these intelligences do much excede thē, and y
e commeth to passe for that these heauenly mindes haue no nede of images, or of senses: and bicause the case so standeth, they shoulde haue bodies in vayne.
The fathers
Origene.But of the fathers there are some which affirme farre otherwise.
Origene in his bokes
[...] (as
Ierome hath noted in his Epistle
ad Pammachium, de erroribus Ioānis Herosolymitani) saithe that those spirituall mindes, as often as they do offend, slide and are thrust into bodies, but yet not straightway into the vilest bodies, but fyrst into starry bodies, then into firy and ayry, afterward into watrye, and lastlye into humayne and earthlye. And if then also they behaue not themselues well, they are at the laste made deuils. But if they will at least wayes then repent, they may by the selfe same degrees come to theyr olde estate. And this we ought to vnderstand (saith he) by that ladder, wheron
Iacob saw aū gels ascending & descending.
Ierome. And
Ierome also to make the thinge more plain, addeth a similitude. A Tribune (sayth hee) if hee gouerne not well, is deiected from his degree, and is made the princes chief Secretary, afterward a Senatour, a captayne ouer 200. men, a ruler ouer fewer, a watcheman, a horseman, and afterward a souldier of the first degree. And although a Tribune were once a commō souldier, yet is he not made of a tribune a younge Souldier, but the Princes chief Secretary. But these thynges are absurde, and very worthye to be laughed at. And vndoubtedly
Origene in those thinges speaketh more like a
Platonian, then a Christian.
Against the translation of soules into bodies after Origines faining. That which he first taketh that soules are thruste into bodies, as into punishmentes, is manifestly false, for as much as god hath adioyned the bodye vnto the soule for a helpe, and not for a punishmente. Neither doth he well to geue hope of saluation to come vnto the deuil, when as Christ hath contrarywise taught, saynge: Go ye cursed into euerlasting fyre, which is prepared for the deuill and his Aungels. Neyther can we interpreate it that this word
eternum is ther set for this word
diuturnū, that is euerlasting, for a long seasō. For Christ most apertly expoundeth his sentence, when he sayth: Their worme shall not dye, and theyr fire shall not be quenched. Neither doth he truly affirme that the soules fyrst offend before they come into bodies, when as
Paule writeth of
Iacob and
Esau, before they were borne, and had done neither good nor euil, it was said,
Iacob haue I loued, and
Esau haue I hated: The greater shall serue the lesser. Wherefore thys sentence of
Origene is woorthely to be reiected of all menne.
Augustine seemeth in many places to attribute bodies vnto Aungels,
Augustine. namely in his second booke
De trinitate. chap. vii. and in the third booke, chap. 1. which thing the Schoolemen perceauing, haue excused him, saying that he spake not according to his own opinion, but after the opinion of other men. Which thing I also could well allow, for as muche as I see that that father (in his. viii. booke
De ciuitate dei, the .xvi. chap.) after the opinion of
Apuleius, Madaurensis, &
Porphyrius, defineth, that Demones are in kinde
animalia, that is, hauing sense, in soule passiue, in mynde reasonable, in body ayry, in time eternal. Vndoubtedly, herein he followeth the doctrine of
Platoes sect. But in the places before alledged he semeth to speake altogether of himselfe. Yea,
Bernhardus. and
Bernhardus also vpon
Cantica Canticorum, as it appeareth, is of the same opiniō. Wherfore the schole men are compelled to inuent an other excuse, and they say that Aungels, if they be compared with men, are spirites: but if with God, they haue bodies, bycause they fayle from the vnity and simplicity of God.
Tertulian de carne Christi,
Tertulian. affirmeth that Aungels haue bodies. But that is not so much to bee marueiled of him, for he attributeth a bodye also vnto God him selfe. But he calleth a bodye whatsoeuer is. For he had to do with vnlearned and rude men, whych thynke y
t whatsoeuer is not a body, is nothing. But the schoolemen say that Aungels are in very deede spirites, but when they come vnto men, they take vpon them ayrye bodies, and thicken them and make them grose, whereby they may be sene, touched, and felt aboue the nature of ayre. Ther are some also which say, that some earthly or watrishe thing is mixed with them: and yet wil they not that there is there a perfect mixture, that they should not be compelled to put generaciō ther. There were some also, which thought that Angels sometimes tooke vpon them dead karcases. But this seemeth vnto the greater parte a thing vnworthy, so to thinke of holy Angels.
Here some man wil say that it is absurde,
Whither it bee conuenient for Angels to take vpon them the shape of man. to ascribe vnto Angels fayning & lying, as to faine thē selues to be men, when as in very deede they are not men. Yea and this seemeth also to weaken the argument of Christ, whiche he vsed after his resurrection, to teache that he had a true body. Feele (saith he) and see, for a spirite hath not fleshe and bones, as ye see me haue. For the Apostles being afrayde, thought that they had seene a spirite: wherfore Christ to put them out of doubt, bad them to handle and feele his body. But the Apostles might haue said: That which we feele is a fansye: it seemeth in deede to be Christ, but peraduenture it is not. For Angels also seeme to haue bodies, and to be touched and felt, when as yet in very deede they haue no bodies. Also this sentence may debilitate the argument of the Fathers, as touching the flesh of Christ, against
Marcion. For he did eate (say they) he dranke, he was hūgry, he slept, he did sweate. Wherfore he had a true and humane bodye. Vnto these thinges might be aunswered: that these selfe same thinges haue happened vnto Aungels, when as yet they had not bodyes.
I answer: That which they first say,
Not whatsoeeuer is fayned, is a lye. that it is absurde to attribute lyes vnto Angels: they ought to consider, that not whatsoeuer by anye meanes is fayned, is straightway a lye. Christ appeared vnto his Disciples as a straunger, and yet he lyed not: he appeared also vnto
Mary lyke a Gardiner, and for al that he lyed not. So Aungels, althoughe they semed men, when as they were not men, yet wer they not lyers. For they came not therfore, to proue them selues to be men, but onely that they might come to men, and talke with them.
To the argument of Christ touching his own body, I thus answer.
Aungels when they semed mē, lyed not. First the apostles thought it had ben a gost which had appeared. And Christ to refel that, saith: feele and see, bicause a spirite hath not flesh & bones. By the feeling might be perceaued, that it was a true and perfect bodye which was present, and not a vayne fansy. But thou wilt say, that it was a true body in deede, but yet taken for a tyme, and suche a bodye, as sometimes Aungels are wont to put on. But
[Page] how coulde it be taught, that that was the same body, which laye before in the sepulcher? In this thing the authoritye of Christ and of the scriptures ought to be of force. For the scriptures teache manifestly inough that Christ shoulde dye, and afterwarde rise againe the third daye:
Tertulian. Thomas Aquinas. but nothing can rise againe, but that which before fel, as
Tertulian hath most learnedlye written. And this thing the schoolemen vnderstoode: wherefore
Thomas Aquinas sayth, that vnles certayne other thinges were added, this is no firme argument. The same thing maye be answered vnto the reasons of the fathers against
Marcion. Many in dede of the actions before alledged, may agree with Aungels, or with the bodies taken, but yet not all. For to be borne, to be nourished, and to dye, and to feele, happen neither to Angels, neither to bodies that are taken. But the scripture most apertly testifieth that Christ was both borne, and that he grew till he came to age, that he was hungry, that he dyed, and was true man. But of these thinges I wyll speake more largely afterwarde.
There are very many other thinges in the schoole deuines, as touching these matters:
What maner of bodies the angels take vpon them. but bicause they are not so profitable, therfore I ouerpasse them. But this thing I demaund, whither Angels may take vpon thē true bodies, & that natural, which bodies also had their being before, & vse them at their liberty, as the Deuyl did put on the Serpent, and by him deceaued
Eue, the Angell also spake in the Asse of
Bileam. Why then can not an Angel after the same maner, possesse an humane body, and speake in it? Vndoubtedly it is written in
Zachary the prophet: The Angel of the Lord which spake in me. Wherfore it semeth that Aungels may vse the bodies of men and beastes.
Augustine.
Augustine in his .2. booke
De Trinitate the .1. chapter, sayth that this is a very hard question, whether Angels vnto their owne proper bodies ioyne other bodies, and chaunge them into sundrye formes, as we are woont to doo garmentes, or also to chaunge them into verye nature, as we reade that Christ chaunged water into wyne. This thing he saith is not impossible. For thus he writeth: I confesse it passeth the strengthes of my capacity, whither Angels retayning stil the spiritual quality of their own body, very secretely woorking by it, doo take of these more grose inferiour elementes, any thing which being framed vnto them they doo chaunge, as a garment, and turne it into al corporal formes or shapes, yea euen into the true thinges themselues, as true water was turned by the Lord into wyne: or whether they transforme their own proper bodies into what they wyl, being framed to that which they haue in hand to doo. But whether soeuer of these it be, it pertayneth not to thys question.
But I say, if the bodies of Angels were true bodies, then was Christes argument firme, and I wil willinglier graunt to this, then to saye as some doo, that Aungels deceaued the senses of men.
A subtiltye of the Papists cō cerning trāsubstantiacion. For after this sorte they striue agaynst vs, when we say that in the Eucharist remayneth bread, which is both sene and touched, they answer that it seemeth bread in dede, but it is not, as the Aungels semed men, when as they were no men. For I deny not, but that the senses maye sometimes be deceaued.
A distinction of sensible things. When the senses maye be deceaued, & when not. But I affirme in the meane time, that there are twoo kindes of those thinges, which are perceaued by sense. For there ar some things common vnto many senses, and other are proper to some one sense. For figure, magnitude, and number, are perceaued of manye senses. And vndoubtedlye in such thinges the sense may sometimes be deceaued, as
Carneades was woont to dispute of an ore in the water appearing broken, and of the bygnes of the bodye of the Sunne. But in sensible things proper vnto one sense, the sense is neuer deceaued, vnles there be some fault in the body, or ouer much distaunce, or some suche lyke let. Wherfore seyng in the Eucharist the sense iudgeth that the bread remayneth, there is no neede to fayne that the sense is therein deceaued.
But to appoynt a certayne compendious way of this disputacion, there are
1 three maner of wayes, whereby Angels may seme to haue appeared. For either
[Page 210] they were sene in fantasy, so that they were thought to haue bodies, when they had them not. Which reason cannot be firme, for they illuded not the senses, neither were they sene of any one onely, but very often times of many, & they were so sene, that
Abraham washed their feete, and
Iacob wrastled with an Angel the whole night. Or els they appeared with a true body in dede, which yet was not
3 such a body, as it was thought to be. Either els they had the self same body truly
2 and in very deede, which they semed to haue.
Tertulian Of this thirde kinde
Tertulian hath written most learnedly in his booke
De carne Christi. Thou hast sometyme red and beleued, saith he, that the Aungels of the creator were turned into the shape of man, and that they caryed suche a truth of a bodye, that both
Abraham washed their feete, and also
Lot was by their handes deliuered from the
Sodomites: an angel also wrastled with a mā, and desired to be losed from the wayght of the body, by whom he was holden. That therefore, which was lawfull vnto Angels that are inferiours vnto God, that they being turned into the body of a man, not withstanding yet abode Angels, doest thou take away thus from God which is more mightie, as though Christ putting on man in very dede wer not able to remayne God? Thus
Tertulian fighteth against the
Marcionites:
The errour of y
e Marcionites for they affirmed that Christ seemed to haue a humane bodye, but in verye deede hee had none.
Tertulian obiecteth against them: and if ye graunt this (saith he) vnto the Aungels, that they had true bodies, why doo ye not rather graunt it vnto the sonne of God? And he addeth: Or did those Angels appeare in fantesy of fleshe? But thou darest not say so: for if it be so, that thou count the Angels of the creator as Christ, then shal Christ be of the same substance as the Aungels are, and the Angels shal be suche as Christ is. If thou diddest not sometimes of purpose reiect, and sometimes corrupt the scriptures which resist thy opinion, the Gospel of
Iohn shoulde haue of this confounded thee,
Of the Dooue wherin the holi gost appeare
[...] whiche declareth that the spirite comming downe in the bodye of a Dooue, sat vpon the Lorde, which spirite being that he was, was as truly a Dooue, as he was a spirit: neither the contrary substance taken, destroyed the proper substance.
I know there are some of the schoolemen which thinke that it was not a very Doue, which discended vpon the head of Christ, but onely that it was an ayry & thicke body, which appeared to be a Dooue.
Augustine. Yet
Augustine de Agone Christiano writeth the contrary, namely that it was a very Doue: for to expresse the property of the holy ghost, a thing (sayth he) serueth better then a signe, euen as Christians also are better expressed in Sheepe and Lambes, then in the lykenes of Sheepe and Lambes. Also if Christ had a true bodye, and deceaued not, then t
[...]e holy ghost had in very deede the body of a Dooue.
Tertulian addeth: Thou wilt demaund where the body of the Doue became,
What beca
[...] of the Doue wherin the holy go
[...] appeared. when the spirite was taken againe into heauen, and likewise of the Aungels. It was by the same meanes taken awaye, whereby it was made. If thou haddest seene when it was broughte foorth of nothyng, thou shouldest also haue knowen when it was turned to nothing. If the beginning was not visible, no more was the ende. Farther, he remitteth the reader to
Iohn. Was he also (sayth he) a fantasy after his resurrection, when he offred his handes and feete to be seene of his Disciples? saying: behold that it is I, for a spirite hath not flesh and bones as ye see me haue. Then Christe is brought in as a Iugler or Cuniurer. And in his third booke against
Marcion. Wherefore his Christ, that is, Christe of the true God, bicause he should not lye, neither deceaue, and by that meanes paraduenture should be counted the Christ of the creator, was not that which hee appeared to be, and fayned to be that thing which he was, flesh, and not flesh, man and not man, wherefore Christ is also God, and not God. For why shoulde he not also cary the fantasy of God? Shall I beleue him as touching this inwarde substance, that is ouerthrowen as touching his outward substance? Howe shall he be counted true in a secrete thing, that is found so false in an open thing? And
[Page] afterwarde: It is inoughe for me to affirme that whiche is agreing vnto God, namely the truth of that thing, which he obiecteth to three senses, to sight, touching, and hearing. Againe in the booke
de carne Christi: The vertues (sayth he) proue the spirite of God, the passions proue the flesh of man. If vertues are not without spirite, neither shal passions also be without flesh. If the flesh with his passions be fayned, the spirite also with his vertues is false. Why doest thou by thy lye take but halfe Christ? He is al whole truth.
The opinion of Apelles.
Apelles the heretike, being in maner ouercome with these reasons, graunteth that Christ had in dede true flesh, but he denieth that he was borne, but brought from heauen: and he obiecteth that the bodies, which were taken by Angels, wer true bodies, but they were not borne. Suche a body (sayth he) had Christ.
Tertulian answereth hereunto: They, sayth he, which set foorth the fleshe of Christ, after the example of the Aungels, saying that it was not borne, namelye a fleshye substaunce, I would haue them to compare the causes also, as well of Christ as of the Aungels, for which they came into the flesh. No Aungel did at anye tyme therefore discende to be crucified, to suffer death, and to rise againe from death. If there was neuer any such cause why angels should be incorporate, then haste thou a cause why they tooke flesh, and yet wer not borne. They came not to die, therefore they came not to bee borne. But Christe beyng sent to dye, it was necessarye that he shoulde bee borne, that he might dye: for none is woont to dye, but hee whiche is borne. He addeth moreouer: And euen then also the Lorde himselfe appeared among those angels vnto
Abraham without birth, namelye with flesh, for the same diuersity of cause. Afterward he addeth: That the Aungels haue their bodies rather from earth, then from heauen. Let them proue saith he, that those angels receaued the substance of flesh of the stars. If they proue it not, bicause it is not written, then was not the flesh of Christ thereof, to whych Christ they apply the example of Angels. And in his third booke against
Marciō: My God, saith he, which hath reformed it, taken of the slyme in this quality, not yet of seede by mariage, and yet flesh, might as wel of anye matter haue framed flesh also vnto Angels, which also framed the world of nothing, into so manye and suche bodies. Againe in his booke
de carne Christi, hee saith: It is manifest that angels cary not flesh proper of their own, as substāces by nature spiritual, and if they haue any body, yet it is of their owne kinde, and are transfigurable for a time into the flesh of man, that they may be sene, and haue fellowship with men. Farther, in his third booke against
Marcion: Know thou saith he, that this is not graunted vnto thee, that the flesh in Angels was putatiue, or by imaginacion, but of the very and sound substance of man. For if it were not hard to geue vnto that putatiue flesh the true senses and actes of flesh, much more easyer was it to geue a true substance of flesh, to true senses and actes, euen for that he is the proper authour and woorker therof. For it is a harder thyng for God to make a lye, then to fayne a body. Last of al, thus he concludeth: Therfore are they truly humayne bodies, bicause of the truth of God, who is far from lying and deceate. And bicause they can not humanelye be handled of men,
The summe of the opinion of Tertulian. but in the substaunce of men.
I could rehearse mo thinges out of
Tertulian, but these seeme sufficient for this present purpose. In summe, he thinketh that Aungels haue bodies, but yet straunge bodies, and not their own. For their proper bodies (as he thinketh) pertaine vnto the spirituall kinde. Secondlye, he sayth that those straunge bodies which they take, are created either of nothing, or els of some matter which shall seme good vnto God. Thirdly he affirmeth that they were true, perfect, and humane bodies, and not vayne or fayned, but of a true flesh, and not of a flesh onely appearing, so that of men they might be both touched and handled, to the end he might both remoue dissimulation from God, and also confirme the veritye of humane flesh in Christ. Wherby is concluded, that the humane senses wer not
[Page 211] deceaued concerning these thinges: as the Papistes contende that the senses are deceaued concerning the bread and wyne of the Eucharist.
But
Origene in hys booke
[...] (as he is cited of
Ierome agaynste
Iohn byshop of
Ierusalem) thought farre otherwise.
Origene. For wher we say that the visions of Aungels may be imagined three maner of wayes, namely either in fantasye, or in body, but not humane, or lastly in a true and humane body: he taketh a certaine meane, and sayth that the bodies of Aungels wherein they offer them selues to be sene, are neyther perfect nor humane, nor also fantasticall, but onelye bodyes, and that he applyeth to them that ryse agayne. For in the resurrection sayth he, we shall haue bodies, but yet onely bodies, not bones, not synewes, not fleshe. And in deede there is some difference betwene a bodye and fleshe:
Al flesh is a body, but not euery body is flesh. for all fleshe is a body, but not euery body is flesh. Suche a difference touched
Paule to the
Collossians, saying: Being reconciled in the body of hys fleshe. And in the seconde chapter: In the spoyling of the body of the flesh of synne. And in the Symbole also we say, that we beleue in the resurrection of the fleshe, and not of the bodye.
Origene sayde that he sawe twoo extreme errours. One was of them which sayde there is no resurrection, suche as were the
Valentinians and
Marcionites, suche also was
Alexander, who as
Paule testifieth, taught that the resurrection was already done: and suche also as at this day the Libertines are sayde to be, who babble I cannot tell what of that matter, both vngodl
[...]ly and vnlearnedly. An other errour is of those which thinke that the perfecte and true bodyes shall ryse agayne with fleshe, synewes, and bones, whych thing (as hee saythe) is not possible: bycause fleshe and bloode shall not possesse the kyngdome of heauen. But
Origene ought to haue considered what followeth afterward in
Paul. For he addeth: Neyther shall corruption possesse incorruption. Wherefore hys sentence is, that the corruptible body cannot possesse the kingdome of God. But
Origene to retayne that hys meaning, confessed that the bodyes shoulde ryse in deede, but not thycke and with bones, but spirituall, as
Paule hath sayde: The body shall ryse spirituall.
But
Origene in those woordes marketh not that
Paule calleth it a spiritual bodye, not bicause it shoulde vtterlye bee chaunged into a spirite, but bycause it should haue spiritual condicions, namely incorruption, and most cleare brightnes. But bycause he perceaued that the body of Christ, which after his resurrection he offered vnto hys Disciples to be touched and to be felt, was against hys doctrine, therefore he sayth: Let not the bodye of Christe deceaue you, bycause it had manye synguler priuiledges, whiche are not graunted vnto other bodyes. Farther, that by this dispensacion he might prooue that he verelye was rysen, he would after hys resurrection haue a true bodye, not that other bodies in the resurrection shoulde be lyke. But he shewed the nature of his spirituall body in
Emaus, when he vanished awaye from the sight of hys Disciples. And an other tyme when he entred to his Disciples, the doores being shut.
Ierome thus opposeth himselfe agaynst these thynges:
Ierome. If Christe (sayth he) after hys resurrection dyd eate in verye deede, then had he also a true bodye: but if not, how prooued he by a false thyng the truth of hys body? But in that he vanished awaye from the syght of the Disciples, that was not by the nature of the body, but by the deuine power. For in
Nazareth when the people woulde haue stoned him, he wythdrewe himselfe from their eyes. And that whiche might bee done of a Cuniurer, shall we thynke that the Sonne of God cannot doo? For
Apollonius Thianaeus,
Apollonius Thianaeus. when hee was brought into the Counsell before
Domitian, foorthwyth vanished awaye. And that that thyng in Christe was not by the nature of the bodye, but by the power of GOD, it is declared by that whyche wente before in the same Hystorye. For when hee was in the
[Page] way wyth hys Disciples, their eyes wer holden that they coulde not know hym. But in that
Origene sayth, that the body of Christ was spirituall, bicause he entred in,
Now the body of christ entred, the dores being shut. the doores being shut,
Ierome aunswereth that the creature gaue place vnto the Creator. &c. Wherefore the bodye of Christe pearsed not throughe the myddest of the boordes and postes, so that twoo bodies were together in one, and the selfe same place, but herein happened the miracle, bicause the very boordes of the doore gaue way vnto the body of Christ.
The bodye of Christ wēt not out of the sepulchre, it beyng shut.
Leo. Farther, that which some obiect, that the body of Christ went out of the Sepulchre, it being shut, that also is not of necessitye to be beleued, but wee maye thinke that the stone was roled away before he went foorth. And least a man shoulde thynke that I fayne those thynges, lette hym reade the .lxxxiii. Epistle of
Leo, ad Episcopos Palaesthinos. The fleshe, sayth he, of Christ, whych went out of the Sepulchre, the stone being roled away.
The bodyes of angels wherin they appeared, were true and humane. &c. Nowe to returne to the purpose, bycause I haue sayde that the bodyes of Aungels may be thought to haue bene eyther fantasticall or spirituall, or els perfect and in verye deede humane, & the twoo first partes are reiected: then resteth that the bodies of Aungels wherein they appeare, are true and humane. Whiche thing I affirme onelye to bee true, for as muche as Aungels were so sene,
The visions of Prophets wer somtime imaginatiue. that they wrastled wyth men, and offered their feete to be washed. Neyther doo I iudge that it is lawfull there to saye, that the humane senses were deceaued, when as the thinges were outwardlye done. But I doo not denye, but that there somtimes happened imaginatiue appearinges vnto the prophetes, when as they sayd that they sawe God, or the Cherubin, or other suche lyke thinges. For that, for as muche as it was in their mynde or imaginatiue faculty, it might well be done by formes, images, and visions.
Angels appearing in humane bodyes wer not men.Nowe remayne there twoo thynges to be diligently wayghed. One is, whither Aungels, when they after this sorte put on humane bodyes, maye bee called men. I thynke not. For if we vnderstande humane fleshe, whiche is formed and borne of a reasonable soule, vndoubtedlye Aungels after that maner cannot be sayd to haue humane fleshe. What then, wyll some man saye? Were the senses deceaued when men sawe them? Not so. For the senses iudge onelye outwarde thinges, and suche thinges as appeare. But what inwardlye impelleth or moueth those thinges which they see, they iudge not. That longeth to reason to seeke and searche out. Thys also is to be added, that Aungels dyd not continually retayne these bodies, bicause they were not ioyned vnto them, in one and the selfe same substaunce: So that an Aungell and a bodye were made one person.
The holy ghost was not the Dooue, nor the Doue the holye Ghost.The holy ghost also, although it was a true Dooue, where he descended, yet was not he together one substaunce with it. Wherefore the Dooue was not the holye ghost, nor the holy ghost the Dooue. Otherwyse Aungels may (as we haue before taught) enter in deede into a bodye before made, and whiche before had hys being, as it is read of the Aungell whiche spake in the Asse of
Baalam, and of the Deuyll, which by the Serpent talked wyth
Eue. But at thys present we dispute not of that kynde, but onelye saye, that Aungels woorking in thys manner in the bodies of creatures, are not ioyned vnto them in one and the selfe same substaunce. Wherefore the Asse coulde not be called an Aungell, neyther was the Aungell an Asse, euen as the serpent was not in very deede the Deuyl, neyther was the Deuyll the Serpent.
The sonne of God, is God & man.But the Sonne of God, for as much as he tooke vpon him humane nature, was man, and man was God, bycause of one and the selfe same substaunce, wherein were twoo natures. But before when he appeared vnto
Abraham, and to the Fathers, although he had true fleshe, yet bycause it was not ioyned vnto hym in one and the selfe same substaunce, he could not be called fleshe, neither was flesh, God. But afterwarde, when he tooke vpon hym both fleshe and
[Page 212] soule, so that there was onely one substance or person, then man was God, and God, man. Whereby it came to passe, that he shoulde trulye bee borne, that hee should dye, and redeeme mankinde. Wherefore he dyd truely call hym selfe the sonne of man: and in
Iohn he sayth, ye seeke to kyl me, a man, whiche haue tolde you the truth. And in the Scriptures it is sayd: Made of the seede of
Dauid. And
Peter in the Actes: ye haue kylled, sayth he, a man appoynted you of God. And
Esay: Behold, sayth he, a virgin shall conceaue and beare a Sonne. These words haue great force. For vnlesse Christe had bene true man, a Virgin coulde not haue conceiued him, neither haue brought him foorth, nor called him her sonne. This thing
Tertulian prudently marked. If he had bene a straunger, sayth he,
Tertulian. a Virgin coulde not either haue conceaued him, or borne him. The Aungell also saluted
Mary after this maner: Be not afraid sayd he, thou shalt conceaue. &c.
Elizabeth sayd: How happeneth this to me, that the mother of my Lorde shoulde come vnto me? If she had Christ onely as a Straunger, she coulde not be called hys Mother. The Aungell also sayde: Blessed be the fruite of thy wombe. But how could it haue bene sayde, the fruite of her wombe, if he had brought a body wyth hym from heauen? And in
Esay it is wrytten: A rod shall come oute of the roote of
Iesse, and a floure shall ascende out of his roote.
Iesse was the stocke,
Mary the braunch, but Christ is the floure which tooke his body of her.
Mathew also thus beginneth his Gospell: The booke of the generacion of Iesus Christe, the sonne of
Dauid, the sonne of
Abraham. If Christ brought a bodye from heauen, how was he the sonne of
Abraham or
Dauid? Farther, the promise made to
Abraham of Christ, is in this sorte: In thy seede shall all nacions be blessed.
Paul intreating of these woordes to the
Galathians: He sayde not, sayth he, in seedes, as though in many, but in thy seede, whych is Christe. And in the Epistle to the
Romanes wee reade: Of whom is Christe according vnto the fleshe. All these thynges prooue most apeartly, that Christ was true man, and in hym was one substaunce of God and man. These thinges cannot be sayd of the Aungels, neither of the Sonne of God, before he was borne of the Virgin: although whylest he appeared, he had true fleshe (as we haue before sayde:) but yet not ioyned vnto hym in one and the selfe same substaunce: neither could it be sayde of the holy ghost, that he was in very deede a Dooue, althoughe that wherein he once appeared, was a true Dooue. And in this sense wrote
Tertulian those thynges whych we haue before cited, whych thinges being not wel vnderstoode, might breede either error or offence vnto the Readers.
Now resteth the other question:
Whither Aungels did in very deede eate & drink whē they appeared.
Scotus. Whyther Aungels clothed wyth bodyes taken, dyd in verye deede eate and drinke. Of the Schoolemen some thinke that they dyd eate in verye deede, and other denye it.
Scotus thynketh that to eate is nothyng els, then to chawe meate, and to conueyghe it downe into the bellye. And thys thyng dyd the Aungels, wherefore he gathereth that they dyd eate in very deede.
Other thynke that to eate, is not onely to chawe the meate, or to conueyghe it downe into the bellye, but moreouer to conuert it into the substaunce of hys bodye, by concoction thoroughe the power of vegitacion. Thys, for as muche as the Aungels dyd not, therefore they dyd not eate in very deede.
The booke of Thobias. The booke of
Tobias is not in the Canon of the Hebrewes, but yet it might be applyed vnto our purpose, but that there is variaunce in the copyes. For in that booke which
Munster set foorth in Hebrue, in the .xii. chapter,
Raphael the Aungell sayth: I seemed to you to eate and to drinke, but I dyd not eate, neyther drynke. The common translacion hath: I seemed to you to eate and to drinke. But I vse inuisible meate and drinke. Neyther text denyeth, but that the Aungell dyd after a certayne maner eate.
Augustine.But whatsoeuer may be gathered of those woordes, me thinketh the interpretacion of
Augustine is to be receaued, in his .iii. booke
de Trinitate, the .22. chap. where he thus writeth: The Angels did eate in very dede, but not for neede, but to contract custome and familiarity with men. Wherefore when in the one text it is said that
Raphael did not eate,
What is the meate & drinke of Aungels. it must not so be vnderstand, as thoughe he did not eate at al, but bicause he did not eate after the maner of men. But thys is there chiefly to be marked, when the Angel answereth that he vseth spirituall meate and drinke, that spiritual nourishment was nothing els, then an apearte and manifest knowledge of the true God, and execution of his will, as Christ also sayd, that that was his meate, to doo the will of his father. The same also is our meate, although it be not after the same maner. For they see God manifestly, but we see him by a glasse, and in a riddle. Whereunto thou maiest adde that they which beleue in Christ,
Who eate and drinke the body and bluode of Christ.
The fleshe and blood of Christ are neither included nor poured into the simboles or signes.
Augustine and doo assuredly perswade them selues, that he died for their sake, they I say, doth both eate the flesh of Christ, & drinke his blood, to which vse the simboles or signes, for that they styrre vp the senses, are verye much profitable: not that the flesh and blood of Christ are poured into the bread and wyne, or are by any meanes included in those elementes, but bicause those thinges are of the beleuers receaued with a true faith. For they are an inuisible noorishment, which is receaued onely in the mynde, as
Augustine hath faithfully admonished, saying: Why preparest thou the teethe and the belly? Beleue and thou hast eaten.
¶The .xiiii. Chapter.
1
ANd Samson went downe to Thimnath, and saw a woman in Thimnath, of the daughters of the Philistians.
2 And he came vp and told his father and his mother, & said: I haue sene a womā in Thimnah, of the daughters of the Philistians. Now therefore geue her me to wyfe.
3 Then his father and his mother sayd vnto him: Is there neuer a wyfe among the daughters of thy brethren, and among al my people, that thou must go to take a wyfe of the vncircumcised Philistians. Samson sayde vnto hys Father: Geue me her, for she pleaseth me well.
4 But hys Father and hys mother knewe not that it came of the Lord, that he should seeke an occasion agaynst the Philistians: for at that tyme the Philistians raygned ouer Israel.
NOw are we come to the warlike feates of
Samson, whiche he wrought for the health of his people, and first is set foorth vnto vs, how he sought hym a wyfe.
He went downe to Thimnath. But why he went thither it is not written. Some say that he went down to a certaine solēnity or feast day. But it is more likely y
t ther was thē some assembly, either ciuil or warlike, as it is accustomed. At that time the
Philistians raygned ouer the Hebrues.
And he saw ther a mayd, and desyred earnestly to haue her geuen hym to wyfe. This thing to doo he was moued by fayth: for the woord of the Lorde did to that styrre vp his minde. For (as we shal afterward know) these thinges were done by the wyll of God. The Epistle to the Hebrues numbreth
Samson among those whiche pleased God by fayth. This is notable and woorthye to be marked, that a young man, although he exceedinglye loued the mayden, yet durst he not speake anye thing of matrimonye, wythout the knowledge and wyl of hys Parentes. He returneth home, he prayeth them to geue her hym to wyfe. Thys was to honour hys Parentes.
Some thinke that
Samson was minded to marye this mayden, but vpon this condicion, to make her first a proselite, otherwise it had not bene lawfull for him to haue maried with a straunger. But in our history there is no such thinge red: vndoubtedly this seemeth to me to be a certaine singuler thing, and done by the instinction of god, as shalbe afterward more apertly vnderstand. Wherefore we must not curiously search for that matter.
But
Samson neded no longe Oration to his parentes. They obiected vnto him the kinred of the woman, and admonished him, that he ought rather to seke a wife in his owne nacion: Howbeit they fulfill his mind, and wente forwarde with the mariages, as it shal afterward be sayde. But contrarywise amonge Christians it oftentimes happeneth, that the children take them wiues againste theyr parentes wil: Of which thinge
Esau remaineth as a most wicked example, who against the will of his parent, maried wiues of the
Chananites, whose sight and conuersation they could not abide. We must not regard that which is commonly sayd, we mary wiues for our selues, and not for our parentes. But we muste rather thinke that God woulde after this manner prouide for miserable younge men, that theyr rashe and vnaduised age should not deceaue them. Howbeit parentes on the other side ought to see that they vse not tirannycall power towardes theyr children, or marye them to suche whome they canne not abyde. But of these thynges wee wyll speake more aboundantlye afterwarde.
Moreouer wee muste note, that the Parentes of
Samson when they call the
Philistians vncircumcised, doo after a sorte vpbrayde vnto their sonne, that hee would mary a wife borne of strangers and idolatrers. Yet they speake nothing roughlye vnto him, they thrust him not out of the dores, nor cast him out of their fauor. For that they saw his minde very fyrme and bente to that purpose. And although it be not written in the history, yet is it probable that
Samson shewed vnto his Parentes the misterie, namely that he was by the impulsion of god instigated to this mariage: otherwise it had not bene lawfull for them to haue assēted vnto theyr son, to mary one of a contrary religion.
His father & his mother knewe not at the beginninge, that this was the will of God, that he shoulde seeke occasion against the Philistians. That is, that by them some begynninge of iniurye myghte springe, whiche he afterwarde myghte seeme by good ryghte to prosecute.
5 Then went Samson and his father and his mother downe to Thimnah, and came vp to the vineyardes of Thimnah, and behold a Lions whelpe roared vpon him.
6 And the sprite of the Lorde came vpon him, and he deuided him, as one shoulde deuide a Kidde, neyther was there anye thinge in his hande. And he tolde not hys Father nor his Mother what he had done.
The Parentes when they knew and vnderstode their sonnes wil, and paraduenture had knowledge of the instinction of god, do not onely assent, but also follow him, that the wedding might be the more honestly accomplished, the parentes not onely requiring, but also being presente. In this place appeareth the will of God both hidden and manifest. The will of God was declared by the law that a Iewe shoulde not take to wife a straunger,
The will of god hid and manifest. but by his secrete and hidden wyll he contrarily decreed of
Samson. But we must followe the will of God expressed by a common rule, and sealed by his lawe: to that will wee muste directe both life and manners. For the other will we must not be to much carefull, vnles
[Page] we feele it most apertly. And we must with great diligence take heede, that when we thinke we are ledde by the impulsion of the holy Ghost, we be not led by our affections. Of the secrete wil of God
Paule intreated, when he made mē cion that of
Iacob and
Esau, before they had done any good or euill, it was sayd:
Iacob haue I loued, but
Esau haue I hated. This will of God is obscure and hidden from the eyes of men: therfore no man can rendre a reason of it. Wherfore when we heare any thinge of it, we muste say with
Paule: O the depth of the riches of the wisedom and knowlege of God, &c. But by the will reueled we may vnderstand that we are acceptable vnto god, when we trust in him, when we detest vices, and renew our life and manners by the grace of god, not bicause these thinges are the causes of the goodnes of God towardes vs,
These two willes in god are not in very dede seperated. but bicause they are certayne sure tokens therof. But how these two willes are not in very deede seperated in God, but are one and a simple will, we shall declare more oportunely in an other place,
In that it is now written that
Samson, or rather
God soughte occasion of the Philistians,
Of the occasion which God sought. it seemeth verye obscure. And what occasion was there to bee soughte for? Was not this cause sufficient inough, that they by violence withhelde the land promised vnto the Israelites, and had put them to Tributes and taxes?
Liranus
Liranus thinketh that betwene the Hebrewes and the
Philistians there were certayne couenauntes made, whiche were not rashlye to be violated. I also adde this, that
Samson was a priuate man, as farre as anye man knewe of hym then. And therefore God woulde haue an honester occasion for hym to fyght, so that if he being by them contumeliouslye handled, shoulde againe somewhat endamage them, he shoulde seme to reuenge his owne priuate iniuries, and not the publike.
And vndoubtedlye it seemed that matrimonye after this manner contracted, should rather haue caused peace to follow. But contrarywise there ensued greuous war, which happened not by the default of matrimony, but of men. So also now are not a few found, whiche to possesse kingdomes and to gette them other mens riches, do abuse matrimony. Wherefore we ought not to meruayle, if suche mariages haue verye ill successe. For oftentimes by them doo happen both warres and also ouerthrowinges of publike wealthes. But by whose fault (thou wilt say) sprange this warre?
What sinnes happened in this matrimonye. By the faulte of the woman whiche was maried, and also of her parentes, and corruption of the publike wealth. And these woulde God vse to bringe to lighte theyr sinnes and to punishe them. The mayden ought to haue estemed her husband aboue all men. But she betrayed him, and shewed his riddle to her citizenes, so that
Samson was fayne to paye vnto them a greate rewarde. His wiues father also did him no small iniury, for he tooke away from him his wife, and gaue her to an other. Thys thynge oughte he not to haue doone, for matrimonies oughte to be firme and ratified. But the coruption of the publike wealthe of the
Philistians maye hereby bee knowne, bycause suche a wycked offence was not openlye reproued and punyshed, as thoughe it hadde euerye where bene lawefull to haue doone it.
By the waye
Samson turned a syde from hys Parentes, whome a roaringe Lion mette, and mette hym beinge vnarmed: so that he myght easely haue killed him. But that we should vnderstande, that
Samson by the power of the sprite of God preuayled agaynst that wild beast, it is added:
And the sprite of the Lorde came vpon him,
Fowre names of Lions amōg the Hebrewes.
and he deuided the Lion, as one shoulde rente a kidde. There are foure names of Lions amonge the Hebrews according to the diuerse decrees of theyr age. The first is
Gor, when hee is yet a whelpe, The seconde is
[Page 214]
Cepher, when he is somewhat growen in age. The third is
Ariath, when he is strong and myghty. The fourth is
Liba, when he is waxen olde: althoughe he bee called also
Lisch, when he is very olde. That whiche is now written, is called
Cephir, that is growen in age, & fyerce ynough, to thend a man should not think that he was a whelpe of the first age. Neyther was he tame and gentle, as sō times they are wont to be, but he ranne roaring to inuade
Samson.
Why God would haue Sāson to fight with the Lion. God would geue vnto
Samson an experience of the strength that he had geuen him, that he shoulde enterprise greater thinges afterward. So also he excercised
Dauid from his youth, before he shoulde fighte agaynste
Goliath. Wherefore he sayde vnto
Saule: There came a Beare and a Lion, and thy seruant rent them.
Plini. Lions ar very common in
Siria as
Plini affirmeth.
¶Whither it be lawful for children to mary without the consente of theyr parentes.
NOw shall it be good to see, whither it be lawful for children to contract matrimony without the consent of theyr parētes. Vndoubtedly
Samson would not, and it is a matter of much honestye and gratitude towardes the parentes, if matrimony be not contracted without theyr consent and knowledge.
Examples of the Elders. At the beginninge
Adam did not chuse himselfe a wife, God was his father and broughte vnto him
Eue. Abraham when
Isaac was now a man, sent his seruant to his kinred, to seke out a wife amongst thē for his son.
Isaac also sent
Iacob into
Masopotamia to his vncle, to the end he might get him a wife there.
The law of God. Afterward succeeded the law geuen of God by
Moses, that Children should honoure theyr Parentes. But the honour which is to be geuen vnto them, is not only to vncouer the hed, to geue the vpper hand, and to rise vp (although these thinges also are to be performed, but yet ar they not sufficiēt) but they must also norish theyr progenitors if nede shalbe, and shew themselues humble and diligent towards them. Wherfore the power of the father is defined to be a bonde of piety,
What is the power of a father. wherewith the children are bounde vnto the parentes, to performe the offices of humanity and gratitude. If children in other things ought to obey theyr parentes, vndoubtedlye they ought chiefly to do it in contracting of matrimony.
Of this thing there is a peculier law in
Exodus, the 22. chap. If a maidē which is not betrouthed, shalbe deceaued, hee that hath defiled her oughte to geue her a dowry, and to take her to wife. But it is added, if the father will: otherwise hee shall onely geue a dowry, neyther shall he haue the mayden to wife againste the fathers will. And in the booke of Numbers the .30. chapter, if a mayden vowe a vowe, and the father heare it, and letteth it not, the vowe shalbe firme: but if he gainsay it, it shalbe in vain. But what is a vow? A promes made vnto god. But matrimony is a promise which is made vnto mā. If god permit a vow made vnto him to the iudgement of the father, much more wil he permit matrimony vnto hym, when as it is a promise made betwene men. In the seconde booke of
Samuel, Thamar aunswereth vnto
Ammon her brother: If thou desire me of my father, he will not deny me vnto thee? The custom was then that the doughters were desired of the parentes. Here I dispute not whither it was lawfull for
Dauid to geue to
Ammon his sister to wife. This shalbe entreated of in his conuenient place. Farther
Paule sayth to the
Ephesians: Children obey your Parentes in all thinges. He excepteth nothynge when he wryteth so, but he sayth in all thynges, namelye whyche they commaunde not against the woorde of God.
[Page] And in his first Epistle to the
Corrint. the 7. chapter is most manifestly declared, that it longeth to the Parentes to place theyr daughters to husbands. And that was known not onely by the law of God, but also by the light of nature, which thinge also the Comedies of
Terence and
Plautus manifestly declare.
Euripides And in
Euripides a mayden aunswered: Of our mariages my father shall haue charge, for that iudgement pertayneth not vnto vs.
Ambrose.Whiche verse vndoubtedlye so pleased
Ambrose, that he rehearsed it in hys booke of the
patriarches. Farther it serueth very much for domesticall peace: for the daughter in law ought to be to the father in law in stede of a doughter: Contrarily of rash mariages rise great discords at home. And forasmuch as the father ought to helpe the sonne with his goods, it is right, that the son agayne in contractinge matrimonye obey the father. In other ciuill contractes the sonne can doo nothynge wythout the consente of the Father, as appeareth in the Digestes
De mutuo, ad senatus consultum Macedoniarum. Wherefore in a thynge farre greater it is meete that the iudgemente of the Father be had.
What the ciuil lawes iudge in mariage of children.The ciuill lawes haue decreed this selfe same thinge.
Iustinian in his institutions, in the title
de Nuptiis, wil not that mariages should be firme, without the consent of the Parentes. And in the Digestes
De statu hominum in the Lawe
Paulus: If a sonne mary a wife against the will of his parentes, the childe which shalbe borne of those mariages, shall not be legitimate, &c. And in the Code
De Nuptiis in the law
Si proponis, the case is diligentlye to be marked. The daughter marieth by the consent of her father, shee afterward complayneth of her husband, and departeth from him. Afterward he cōmeth into fauor agayne, and shee marieth him againe against her fathers will. It is aunswered, that that matrimony is not lawfull. Hereby appeareth how much the lawes estemed the power of the father. Afterward in the law
Si furiosi: Children, if peraduenture their parentes bee mad or bestraught of theyr wittes, bycause they cannot vse their consent in contracting of matrimony, shall vse the consent of theyr tutors.
What the cannons iudged.Wherfore it semeth meruelous, how Christians at this day determine that mariages are lawefull without the consente of the parentes, and for that thinge they lay for an excuse the Cannons: of which I thinke it good brieflye to declare some. And firste I will make mencion of the better Cannons whiche were more aunciente: For the later they were decreed, the more corrupte they were.
In the decrees .30.
quest. 5. chap.
aliter: Matrimonies are then lawfull, when the maydens are desired of their parents, and deliuered openly. Otherwise they are not matrymonies, but whooredomes, vnhonest companieng, aduouteries, and fornications.
Euaristus. Nicolaus. Thus decreed
Euaristus. Nicolaus also at the consultacion of of the
Bulgares in the .30.
quest. 5. chap.
nostrates. Those matrimonies are firme which are ioyned with the consente of those that contracte them, and of those in whose power they are.
Leo also the fyrst in the .30.
quest. 5. chap
qualis: Then it is to be counted matrimony, when the mayden is by her parentes deliuered vnto her husbande.
Leo And in the 31.
q. 2. chapt.
non omnis. A woman whyche marieth by the consente of her father, is without blame, if anye man afterwarde shall fynde faulte withall,
Gratianus And thus
Gratianus concludeth that place, that he sayth, in contractynge of matrimonye, the consente of the Parentes is alwayes required.
Ambrose.Farther,
Ambrose entreating of a place of
Genesis wher it is writen, that the seruaunte of
Abraham came into
Mesopotamia, and founde a wyfe for hys
[Page 215] masters sonne, the parentes of y
e mayden, when they labored to retayne hym longer, & he would not abyde, they called y
e mayden, & asked her whether she would go with him. After this maner he sayth, as also it is declared, in the, 23. q. 2. chap.
honorandum. They asked not her (saith he) touching y
e weddyng, but onely whether she would go with him. For it pertaineth not (sayth he) to maidenly shamefastnes, to chuse vnto her selfe a husband. And the same thing affirmed he of wydowes which are yonge. Althoughe to speake the truth, I can not in this thing graunt vnto
Ambrose, y
t the mayden was not demaunded the question whether she would mary hym, neither do I doubt but that she was asked the question of either cause. For in the .30. q. 2. chap.
vbi non est, it is had:
The consent of childrē is required in spousages. That there can be no matrimony, where is not the consent of those that contract, yea in mariages of children, which are but .7. yeares of age, bycause at that age they are thought to vnderstand somewhat of matrimony, the consent of those that contract is necessary. And bycause there is mention made of spousages, this semeth good to be noted by the way, y
e children so contracting, ought to be seuen yeares of age, otherwise the parents can promise nothing for thē. The same children, if afterward, being of more yeres, they shal contract an other matrimony, the same is of force, and not the spousages: whiche yet is to be vnderstand if the parentes consent to the second matrimony. Moreouer in the .31. quest. 2. chap.
tua, Hormisdas answereth, that children when they contract after this maner, ought to stand to y
e will of their parentes. And
Extra de sponsatione impuberum. chap.
tua, it is ordayned that children when they come to ripe age, ought to obey their parentes, for as much as also they gaue their faith, and consented.
I thought it good also to bring somewhat of the counsels.
Counsels.
Concilium Toletanum the fourth .32. q. 2. chap.
hoc sanctum, decreeth: If widowes wil not professe chastity, let thē mary to whō they will: and the same thing it decreeth of a mayden, but it addeth, so y
t it be not agaynst the will of y
e parentes or her own. Such an addition we se that
Nicolaus the second added, as it is had in the .27. quest. 2. chap.
sufficiat, where he writeth after this maner: To ioygne matrimony, the cō sent of those whiche contract, is sufficient, & it followeth, according to the lawes matrimonyes of children are not acknowledged, if they be made without the cō sent of y
e parentes. Yet the glose referreth not those wordes vnto y
e ciuile lawes but to the Canons, bycause (as the Canonist say) the ciuill lawes are sometimes corrected by the Canons. But oftentymes happeneth that those Canons are in very deede
[...], that is rules without a rule, as,
Extra de coniugiis seruorum,
A discord of the Canons and of the ciuill lawes as touchyng y
e matrimony of bondemen. chap. 1. if bondemen contract, yea agaynst the will of their Lordes, such matrimonyes shalbe ratified. Beholde, sayeth the Glose, the Canons amende the ciuill lawes. For in them it is forbidden, that a bondemā should mary a wife agaynst the wil of his Lord, yea if a free man haue very much resort vnto an others mās bonde woman, he is made a bondeman, & a free woman if she haue much accesse vnto an other mans bondeman, she also loseth her liberty. The glosse saith more ouer, that more is attributed vnto matrimony, then vnto holy orders: bicause it is not lawfull to bring a straunge bondeman into orders, but it is lawfull to cō tract matrimony with him. Wherfore it manifestly appeareth that y
e latter Canons were viciated and corrupted, whiche tooke away from mariages the consent of parentes, as necessary.
But nowe let vs see what reasons they pretend.
Extra de sponsalibus, chap.
cum locum, it is sayd: There ought in contracting of matrimony to be most full liberty. And in the same chap.
veniens: If there should be there any feare, the matrimony ought to be voyde, and there is geuen a reason, bicause she can not long please hym of whom she is hated. And bycause such contractes haue oftentymes an vnlucky end, and also bycause that is easely contemned whiche is not loued: Yea the Canons seme so to haue loued liberty in contracting of matrimony, that the Counsel of
Paris (as it is had in the .30. quest. 2.) decreed: That it is not lawful
[Page] to desire a wife by the letters of a kyng. Although the same thyng also be decreed in the
Code de Nuptiis, in the law .1. chap.
si nuptias ex rescriptio. The reason is, bycause the letters of princes are in a manner commaundementes and threatninges. Neither do I dissalow that: althoughe I do not a litle meruayle, that the Canons haue proceded so far, that they haue decreed that matrimonye may be cōtracted betwene hym y
e steales away a mayde, & her that is stolē.
Extra de Raptoribus & Incendiariis, chap.
cum causa. A mayden that was stolen awaye out of the house of her father, had contracted matrimony with hym that stole her, y
e father withstandeth such a mariage. Here the good Pope aunswereth, for as muche as the mayden consenteth, she can not seme to bee stolen. Wherefore he decreed that matrimony to be good. And in the next chap.
Accedens: If a man had stolen away a mayden, not onely agaynst the wyll of her parentes, but also agaynst her owne wil, whiche mayden yet, if she afterward consented with hym that stole her, he decreed that firme matrimony may be contracted betwene thē. The same thyng seemeth to be decreed in y
e .36. q. 2. chap.
in summa, where is entreated of the stealer and her that is stolen, & it is decreed: If she y
e is stolen shall consent with y
e stealer, matrimony may be contracted betwene them; but yet in such sorte, that first they do some penance. But bycause some Canons make against this decree, therfore they thus moderate the matter, that wheresoeuer they rede that matrimony cā not be contracted betwene such persons, that they vnderstand to be sayd for some one of these thre causes, either bycause she that is stolen did not consent, or els bycause she was betrouthed before vnto an other by words (as they vse to spake) of y
e presēt tense, for I say not of y
e future tense, for y
e husbād was not cōpelled to mary one defiled, or bicause she was not marigeable.
But in the
Code it is farre otherwise decreed for stealers away of virgins, namely that matrimony can by no meanes be contracted betwene those persōs, yea althoughe the father cōsent vnto her that is stolen, and
Iustinian also in his Authentiques, Collation .9. in the title,
que raptoribus nubunt, decreeth the same to the detestation of so great a crime. But our Canonistes, in gods name do thinke that matrimonyes are lawful euen against the parētes wil, wherfore in the .32. q 2. chap.
Mulier, the glose sayth, y
t the power of the father is broken as touchyng an othe and matrimony, when rype age cōmeth, which sentence the schoolemen also haue followed. Of this matter they dispute in the .4. boke of Sentēces dist. 28. where they define that a man, euen the sonne of the father of the house, hath a certayne dominion ouer his owne body, neither is so bound to his parentes, but that he may at his owne liberty dispose of it, as touching matrimony. And when they rede in the Canons that the consent of the parentes is required for the contractyng of matrimony, they by theyr interpretation corrupte them, and say that
Euaristus,
How the Papistes require the consent of the Parentes.
Nicolaus, and
Leo when they so decreed, dyd iudge that the consent of the parentes is required as touchyng the honesty of matrimony, but not as touchyng the necessity: whiche thynge peraduenture they drewe out of the glose
Extra de desponsa. impuberum, in the lawe
tua, whiche is after this sorte: That the good will of the parentes is to be required, but rather for the comelynes of the mariage, then for the necessitye, so that if the parentes will not assent, yet are the children free, and maye contracte matrimony at theyr owne liberty. Yea and the Master of the Sentences also in the distinct .28.
The master of the scholemen. The consent of the parentes (sayeth he) serueth for the comelynes and honesty of mariages, and not for necessity. And he bryngeth the woordes of
Euaristus, but he sayeth there is a difference betwene those thynges whiche are required to the substaunce of mariages, and those thynges which serue for the honesty and comelynes. And the good will of the parentes as he sayeth, pertayneth not to the substaunce of mariages, he thynketh that without it chyldren maye lawfully contracte. And for as muche as hee maketh matrimonye a Sacramente, hee wylleth that
[Page 216] in such mariages should be the vertue of matrimony, and not the honesty.
But bycause they very much presse the wordes of
Euaristus, when he writeth that mariages contracted without y
e good will of the parentes, are whoredomes, fornications and aduoutries: the master of the sentences aunswereth that that is true, not bycause such mariages are in very deede such, but bycause they assemblyng together secretly among thēselues, & priuely without the parents knowledge, are wont to be counted as whoremongers and adulterers, but yet the matrimony abideth ratified and is firme, bicause of the wordes of the present tense which wer therin vsed. Also
Thomas Aquinas in the same place,
Thomas Aquina
[...]. is of the same iudgement, and vnto that whiche is brought out of
Paul vnto the
Ephesians (where he sayth, children obey your parentes in al things:) He answereth that that is to be vnderstand of those things, wherin the children haue not any liberty, namely as touching familiar and domesticall things. And this reason he addeth: bycause matrimony is a certayne kynde of seruitude, which the childe is not compelled to take vpon him agaynst his will. And in that it is written of
Abraham, that he sought his sonne a wife out of hys kinred, he aunswered that that happened, bycause he knewe that that lande was promised vnto hys posterity, and that God had decreed to take it awaye from the
Chananites. Wherfore he would not haue hys sonne contract matrimony with them.
These fellowes in deede speake many things, but they bryng not so much as one word out of the holy scriptures: they stil contend that children ought to haue most ful liberty left them, as touchyng mariages. But that is a mere inuention of theirs, whiche by no meanes hath his foundation vpon the worde of God.
The old fathers were of our opinion: but of them it happened, as of the Canōs,
What the olde fathers iudges
Tertullian. for the more auncient they were, the more sincere they were, and the more new, the more corrupte.
Tertulliane in his .2. booke to his wife, as touchyng the mariages of Christians with Ethnikes, writeth very wel, neither alloweth he mariages betwene persons of a contrary religion. God sayth he, deliuereth thee to a spouse. And he addeth: No not in earth cā daughters right and iustly mary with out the consent of the parentes. How therfore wilt thou mary without the consent of thy heauenly father?
Chrisostome vpon
Genesis and vpon
Mathew,
Chrisostome. when he entreateth of mariages, remitteth the matter vnto the exāples of the fathers in the olde Testamēt: neither is it of great necessity to rehearse his wordes, whē as the same father vpon the first Epistle to
Timo. in his .9. Homely, entreateth very manifesty of that matter: there he exhorteth parents, bicause of the slippery age of their childrē, to ioyne them in matrimony, but he exhorteth not the children that they should chuse vnto thēselues husbandes or wyues, but by Apostrophes he conuerteth his oration vnto the parentes, that they should prouide for them as touchyng matrimony: & he addeth a very notable sentence: If (saith he) they begin to playe the whoremongers before they be maryed, they wil neuer be faithfull in matrimony. I wil note also by the waye, what he writeth in y
e place of weddyng crownes or garlandes. For euen at that tyme they vsed crownes or garlandes in weddinges. What (saith he) signifieth the crown or garland? Forsoth that the husband and the wife should declare, that euē to that tyme they had ben vanquishers of lustes: if thou hast ben an adulterer or whoremonger, howe wearest thou a crown or garlād?
Augustine in his .133. Epistle,
Augustine. beyng desired to make y
e mariage betwene a manchilde & a womāchild, I would do it (sayth he,) but the mother of the child is not present, and thou knowest that to contract the mariage, her good will is necessary. In this place
Augustine writeth more seuerely then the ciuill lawes. For they will not haue the childe to be in the power of his mother. Of
Ambrose I will speake nothing nowe: I haue sufficiently spoken of hym before. Wherfore seyng the lawe of God and the law of nature, the ciuill lawe and eoconomical lawe, the fathers and sincere Canons do affirme, y
t the consent of the parentes is necessary, and the examples of the faintes declare
[Page] the same, what should let but that we should be of y
e same mind? Neither ought this to seeme griuous vnto children: for it was for theyr commodity so appointed by God and by lawes. For young persons in such thinges, and specially wemē, prouide very yll oftentymes for themselues.
It is mete the children should require the consent of their parentes. Wherefore it is written in y
e
Code de sponsalibus in the law
si pater: When a father hath betrouthed his daughter, if he afterward dye, y
e gouerner or tutor cānot vndoo the couenant of the father, and a reason is added: bycause tutors sometymes are wonne with money, and women thorough weakenes fall to their owne discommodity. The example also of Christ ought to moue vs, whiche was geuen of his father a husbande vnto the Churche, and he alwaye sayd that he did not his own will, but the will of his father, of whō he was sent. Farther, how great a discorder ariseth in y
e publique wealth of this deprauation and abuse? how great a window is opened vnto fylthy lustes? He that can first haue carnall fellowship with y
e mayden in some places, hopeth to obteyne her to wife, yea euen against her parentes good wil.
To the reasōs of the aduersaryes.But now must we answere the reasons whiche the contrary party alledge for themselues. First, as we before sayd, they cry that in contractyng of matrimony, there ought to be full liberty. But I pray you what liberty? Of the fleshe, or of the spirit? Vndoubtedly that liberty of the spirite is the greatest, when we obey the cōmaundemētes of god,
The chiefest liberty is to obey the commaundements of god who if he would haue vs obedient vnto our parētes in other thinges, why not also in contractyng of matrimony? Wherefore they breake the lawe of God, which obey not the parents also in this thing. Farther, if they will haue the liberty of contracting of matrimony to be so great, why doo they themselues prohibite so many degrees of mariages, whiche God neuer prohibited? Once the Popes would not suffer matrimony to be cōtracted, euē vnto the seuenth degree, but now they contayne within the fourth: moreouer why do they forbid mariages vnto the ministers of the Churche? Farther, why did God himself forbid matrimonies betwene persons of contrary religion, if in mariage there ought to be so great a liberty as they fayne to be? But they adde: Children for feare of their parentes will saye that that matrimony pleaseth them, whiche pleaseth them not. But the sonne is not compelled so to say: nothyng letteth but that he may answere, that that wife pleaseth him not, and that such a matrimony he can not abyde. And in deede without his consent matrimony can be by no meanes contracted. In the digestes
de ritu nuptiarū, in the lawe
non cogitur, we rede y
t the sonne cā not be cōpelled to mary a wyfe,
& de sponsalibus, in the lawe
sed ea, if y
e doughter hold her peace, she seemeth to cōsent vnto the father: & there are two causes ascribed wherfore the doughter may resiste her father, if either y
e father offer her a wicked husband, or a disfigured husbād. Otherwise, if there be none of these causes, it is required of her to loue him whom the father hath chosē. If she wil not assent, when the husbād hath neither wicked maners, nor is mishapen,
The punishement of ingratitude. she incurreth the crime of ingratitude: whiche is so great that the father may disinherite her for it. And in y
e title
de ritu nuptiarum, in the law
si cogente patre. Although the sonne haue assented for feare of the father, yet bicause he had rather assent then offend his father, such a matrimony ought to be firme and ratified. I would adde vnto the former cause the third, if the father offer a husband whiche is of a contrary religion: and I would euer counsell the parentes to gratifie their children,
What may bee done against to streight parēts vnles they see them to obstinate and vniust. But when the parentes deale to tyrānically with their children, & compell them to mary wiues whom they cā not abyde, the matter ought to be brought before the Magistrate, whose office is to heare the cause, and to delyuer the sonne from iniury, if he be to cruelly oppressed. Then if the sonne mary a wife by the authority of the Magistrate, yea agaynst the will of the father, he can not seme vtterly to haue maried without his fathers cōsent.
The Magistrate is the father of the coū trey. For the Magistrate is the father of the coūtrey. The same thing semeth to be decreed
de ritu nuptiarū, in the lawe
qui liberos. And methinketh the schoolemen haue not well sayd, that the children of the householde
[Page 217] haue dominion ouer their owne body. For as much as they owe vnto their parentes that they are. They ought not to be compelled to mariages agaynst their wil, but that they should mary without the consent of the parentes, it can not be graunted thē. And when they so often obtrude vnto vs liberty,
The doughters of Zalphead. & alledge y
e dominiō of their body, we lay against it y
e answer of god as touching y
e daughters of
Zalphead, who sayth of them: Let them haue heritage among their brethren, but let them mary in their own tribe. These wemē are compelled to mary their nyest of kynne, neither had they that liberty whiche these men fayne. And the brother was sometymes compelled to mary the wyfe of his brother beyng dead, neither could she mary an other: therfore so great liberty is not necessary in mariages, as these men pretend. And by the ciuill lawe,
It is permitted vnto the parentes to sell theyr children. so great is the power of the father ouer the sonne, that he may sell hym if he fall into greuous necessity. And least that should seeme barbarous vnto any man, the same thyng is permitted by the lawe of God in
Exodus the .21. chap, but yet adding certayne cautions, whiche I thinke not good here to repeate. Wherefore they did not rightly argue, when they sayd, that matrimony is a kynde of seruitude, which the sonne ought not to take vpon him at the appointement of his father.
5 And in that they saye, that the consent of the parentes is required for the honesty
3 of matrimony, and not for necessity, it is friuolous and vayne. For what greater necessity can there bee, then that whiche the lawe and commaundementes of God bryng with them? Children are commaunded to honour father and mother. Also
Paul the Apostle prescribeth them to obey their parentes in all thinges. And the same thyng writeth he vnto the
Phillipians the .4. chapter. That whiche remayneth brethren: What soeuer thynges are true, whatsoeuer are honest, whatsoeuer iuste, whatsoeuer pure, whatsoeuer profitable, whatsoeuer lucky, these thinges do ye. &c. By these woordes appeareth that the thynges whiche are honest, muste not bee separated from the commaundementes of God. Wherefore looke howe necessary it is to obey the commaundementes of God, so necessary is it not to mary without the consent of the parentes. And that whiche they adde that the consent of the parentes is in deede
4 required, but yet if they will not consent, the matrimony may be firme: That is nothyng elles then to deride the parentes. For what contumely is it, for the sonne in suche sorte to desire the consent of hys parentes, that thoughe he be agaynst it and gaynesay it, yet notwithstandyng will he abyde in hys purpose, and execute it? It were muche better not to desire it, then to desire it with that mynde. This also seemeth wonderfull vnto me, that the master so peruerteth the woordes of
Euaristus: that when
Euaristus sayeth that matrimonyes contracted without the consent of the parents are whooredomes, and fornications, and not matrimony, he dare expounde that the matter is not so in deede, but bycause they so assemble rogether, as whooremongers and adulterers vse to doo. But the sentence of
Euaristus is manifest. They are not (sayeth he) matrimonyes, and he addeth what in deede they are, namely fornications, adulteryes, and whooredomes. And he sayeth not that they seeme to be these thynges, but that they are.
6 There are other whiche obiecte vnto vs the booke of
Genesis, where it is wrytten that
Esau maried
Chananitishe wyues, whiche his parentes tooke in very yll part, for he had maryed them contrary to their cōmaundement. And yet the Scripture calleth them wyues. Wherefore it seemeth that matrimony may be contracted euen agaynst the parentes will. I graunt in deede that in the holy Scriptures they are called wiues. But yet for that cause, bycause he so coūted thē, & bycause the nations amōg whom he dwelled, counted thē for wyues. But hereby is not gathered, y
t the scriptures do confirme such matrimony. The same forme of speakyng vsed
Paul in the firste to the
Corinthians the eyght chapter: Euen as there are many gods and many Lordes. He sayeth that there are many
[Page] gods, not y
e there are so in deede (for there is but one God,) but bycause the most part so beleued, and publique persuasiō thought y
t there was an infinite nūber of goddes. Therfore he sayth many goddes, but to vs that thinke rightly, there is but one God,
The scripture so calleth thīgs as they are cō monly called of men. & one Lord Iesus Christ. It is no vnaccustomed or straunge thyng in the scriptures so to call thinges as men vse cōmonly to speake: yet in an other place, when they speake properly, they call euery thing by his owne name. But thou wilt say, we neuer rede that y
e children of
Esau were not legitimate. I answere, that
Esau had in dede a greate posterity, but whether it were legitimate or otherwise the Scripture declareth not. Wherunto adde, that with those nations among whome he dwelled they were counted legitimate. For they had not the worde of God, wherein it is commaunded that that should not be doone: and they had wonderfully corrupted the lawe of nature.
7 Other crye: What shall we thinke of our elders? what also of many whiche lyue nowe, and haue contracted matrimonyes without the consent of their parentes? Shall we call them mariages or adulteryes? And shall we counte theyr children for legitimate or for bastardes? I aunswere, when such mariages were had in those darkenes before the new light of the Gospell, those men were not in dede excused from synne (for it was not lawfull for them to be ignoraunt of the law of God) but yet bycause they were done publikely, & the Magistrate permitting them, I am persuaded that such contractes are firme and ratified. If they obiect that in such mariages the consent of the parentes wanted, I aunswere that it was there, & not there. For the Magistrates had made their ciuill lawes subiect vnto the Canons, whiche vndoubtedly they ought not to haue done. And in this thing all mē agree. And for as much as the Magistrate hath authority ouer the people, if he consent to any thing, there after a sorte is the publique cōsent of the people. As at this day in assemblyes, when they assēble, that some summe of money should be payd, although some priuate mā of the people do take it in euill part, yet bycause it is agreed vpō by the Magistrate, he ought to seme to haue cō sented: So the father would not that the matrimony of his sonne should be firme without his cōsent, yet bycause he hath made his owne wil subiect vnto the iudgement of the Magistrate, he ought to seme after a sorte to haue consented. But now the truth of the thyng beyng knowen, the Magistrates ought to reuoke the errour. Wherfore the matrimonyes whiche haue bene hitherto, that is in darknes contracted agaynst the will of the parentes, ought to bee firme, and the children borne of them ought to be counted legitimate. But if the lawe should afterwarde bee reuoked, then should they not be matrimonyes, but onely be presumption, but in very deede fornications, whoredomes, and aduoutryes, as
Euaristus ryghtly iudgeth. But whylest the lawes whiche are nowe of force, are not abrogated: I doo not dissolue the matrimonyes whiche are so contracted, neyther doo I saye that the children borne of those mariages are bastardes: but I declare what seemeth more agreable vnto the woord of GOD, and vnto honesty. But
Euaristus myght iustly write so, bycause in hys tyme the
Romane lawes were of force, whiche counted not suche coniunctions for matrimonyes. Farther, I adde that fathers are not to bee obeyed, when they let the mariages of their children, onely for religion sake, bycause in that case God is to be obeyed aboue all thynges, who is the chief father of all men.
7 He went downe I say, and talked with the woman, which pleased the eyes of Samson.
8 And within a fewe dayes when he returned to receaue her, he went aside to see the carkase of the Lyon. And beholde there was a swarme of bees, and hony in the body of the Lyon.
[Page 218]9 And he toke therof in his handes, and went eatyng, and came to his father & to his mother, and gaue vnto thē, & they did eate: but he told not them that he had taken the hony out of the body of the Liō.
10 So his father went downe vnto the woman, & Samson made there a feast. For so vsed the yonge men to do.
11 And when they sawe hym, they tooke 30. companions, and they were with him.
In this place the Lion is not called
Cepher as he was before, but
Ariah: bycause that difference whiche I haue before shewed is not alwayes obserued. The matrimony of
Samson is celebrated: wherein the prouidence of God prepareth occasion, whereby he should doo some violence vnto the
Philistines. And that occasion was, bycause as he returned he remembred the Lyon whiche he had slayne.
He went a litle aside, to looke vpon the carkase of the Lyon. And he founde therein a swarme of bees, and a combe of hony. And this is such a straunge thyng as hath not bene heard of: for it is in no other place, that I wot of, eyther shewed or red, that bees haue made hony in the carkase of a Lion.
Pliny. Virgil.
Plutarche.
Pliny and
Virgil in his .4. booke of
Georgiques teache that of dead bullockes or oxen doo come bees, as of a horse Waspes, and of an asse Hornets.
Plutarche in the lyfe of
Cleomenes saith, euē as of a horse do engēder Waspes, of an asse Hornets, of an oxe bees: so also of the carkase of a man, and especially of the marow & humor which falleth vpon the earth, are brought foorth serpentes. For that cause the elders wer wont to consecrate serpentes vnto noble men. But we neuer rede any such thing of a Lion, wherfore this ought we to iudge, y
t this was done by y
e singular prouidence of God.
Ambrose.
Ambrose thinketh that the place where
Samson had cast the Lion, was a pleasaunt and fertile place, and the bees flyed thether for flowers, and made hoony in the carkase of the Lion. But I (as I saue sayd) doo attribute all this vnto the prouidence of God.
Pliny in his .7. booke sayth,
Pliny. that bees vse not to make hony, excepte it be in the hyue, or in a tree, or in caues vnder the earth, & he affirmeth y
e aboue al things they flye frō euill sauors. Farther, he saith y
e hornets and waspes doo eate dead carkases, but bees touche thē not.
Ambrose sayth that
Samson turned aside to y
e Lion, to take his skinne, that beyng clothed with it, he might come vnto the feast as a great valiant man, as afterward did
Hercules. But bycause he sawe that that apparell was not very handsome for wedding apparell, he tooke rather thereout the hoony combes, of the which he myght geue part vnto his parentes, and parte vnto his wyfe.
They tooke thirty companions. Some thinke that these thirty companions were ioyned vnto
Samson for to doo hym honour. But some of the Hebrewe interpreters suspecte that the
Philistines, when they perceaued that he was a strong and valiant man, brought these men to be kepers for hym, least thorough the shewe of mariage, he should make some commotion.
12 Then Samson sayd vnto them: I wil now put forth a ridle vnto you: and if ye can declare it me within seuen dayes of the feast, I will geue you 30. sheetes, and 30. chaunge of garmentes.
13 But if ye can not declare it me, then shal ye geue me .30. sheetes, and .30, change of garmentes. And they aunswered hym: put foorth thy ridle that we may heare it.
14 And he sayde vnto them: Out of the eater came meate, and out of the stronge came sweetenes: and they coulde not in three dayes expounde the rydle.
The elegācy of y
e riddell consisteth in contraryes, for he which eateth, & he y
e geueth meate,
What the ridle of Samson signified. & he y
t is fierce, & he that is swere, are contraryes. Such a ridle was not onely put forth to quicken the wittes, but also the holy ghost would by it signify things to come. At that time the
Philistines ruled ouer the Iewes, & oppressed them with tyrāny, & after a sort deuoured them. Therfore by the ridle is signified that at the length they should be ouercome, & be eaten of the Iewes: & for as much as they were most fierce, they should be at y
e last not hurtfull, but great cōmodity vnto y
e Hebrues.
Augustine.
Augustine vpon y
e .70. Psalme referreth these things vnto an Allegory of Christ & princes of the earth. For when y
e Gospel begā first to be preached, princes ran vpon Christiās, like Lions, withal their might to deuoure them. But our sunne, that is Christ, was present, & toke away the Liōs, whom yet he did not so deiect that they should not be, but that for deuourers of the flocke, they should be noorishers of the Church, and defenders of the Gospel. This is a very elegant allegory, and the foundation therof, is the kylling of the Lion, wherby we first vnderstād what should happen in the people of y
e Iewes, & then what should come to passe in Christ.
Ambrose. Why ridles were put forth in feastes.
Ambrose demaundeth the cause why
Samson put out this ridle, and he aunswereth: bycause in feastes men are sometymes wont when they haue well dronke, to be somewhat full of talke, & somewhat to intemperatly to rebuke others, which things turneth for the most part into braulyngs & chidinges. And to auoyde that, graue mē wer wont to put forth ridles or problemes, omitting dangerous talke, & turning their mind to the exposition of the things put forth. Whose example
Samson followed, & set forth a reward for him, which should expound his question: as though the knowledge and sharpenes of the minde ought to be rewarded, & contraryly punishmēt is instituted for ignoraūce & sluggishenes. The Ethnikes also in the old tyme were wont so to do.
A Fable of Sphing. Wherfore the Poets fable that
Sphing was wont to set forth a reward, namely if a mā had absolued his ridle, he should haue ben let goo free. But if he had failed, he should haue ben throwen hedlong downe a rocke. What y
e Poetes would by this fable signify, I will not at this present declare. This thing euery man may easely vnderstand, that the witte of mā is so composed by nature, that it is not easely stirred vp, but either by setting foorth rewarde, or daunger. Whiche also we may easely see in children. Farther, let vs note that it is one thyng to put a mans money to hasard or chaunce, and an other thing to contend for wyt. But in this contention whiche
Samson instituted, there was no place for chaunce, but it was a certayne kinde of play, ciuily, honest, and laudable.
¶Of Playes.
ANd bycause we are fallen into mention of playe, I thinke it good somwhat to speake therof.
Ambrose.Some of the fathers seme to abhorre from all kynde of playes.
Ambrose in his 1. booke
de officiis, chapter .23. Playes (sayth he,) and pastymes seme sweete and and pleasaunt, when as yet they are contrary to the rule of a Christian. For it is not founde in the holy Scriptures,
Chrisostome. howe they ought to be vsed.
Chrisostome vpon
Mathewe the .6. Homelye, sayeth that GOD inuented not playe, but the deuill. For the people sat to eate and drinke, and rose vp to play, in the honour of a most filthy idole. For when they had worshipped the calfe and incurred idolatrye, they seemed to haue obtayned thys rewarde of the deuill, namely to play. Peraduenture
Chrisostome alludeth to that which
Plato wrote in
Phedro, that
Theut the demon of the
Egyptians found out
Numbers, Geometry, Astrology,
Augustine letters, and dyse. But
Augustine in hys .2. booke
de Musica, sayeth that it is a parte of a wyseman to reuoke the mynde from earnest matters: and that is chiefely done by playe. Wherefore it semeth to be lawfull. But howe so great
[Page 219] an oblectation ryseth of playe, it is not heard to vnderstande.
Aristotle in hys .2.
Aristotle, booke of Rhethoriques putteth victory or hope of victorye among the causes of oblectation. But when we playe, either we obtayne the victory, or elles we are in some hope thereof. Wherefore they whiche defend playe,
Play is a cause of defectation. doo determine with themselues, that the mynde ought sometymes to bee no les refreshed, then the body: and as the body is renewed by rest or quietnes,
Why play seemeth to be lawfull. so they say the mynde is recreated by playe. By whiche meanes they thinke to proue that there muste some place bee lefte for playes: addyng yet certayne cautions. Firste, that there
1 be no filthy and vnhonest woordes vsed in playes.
Cautiōs to be added vnto honest player. It is not seldome sene that in playing both filthy and also blasphemous wordes do happen. We must also take hede, that there be not vsed to muche lyghtnes, and dissolution of grauity
2 and comelynes. For oftentymes it commeth to passe, that men do so vtterly geue themselues to playe, that afterward, they are able to do nothyng grauely. Farther, the circumstances are diligently to be marked, of the person (I say) the
3 place, and the tyme. It is certayn in deede that in the holy scriptures there is no rule or forme prescribed cōcerning playes,
The lawe of god entreateth nothynge of playes. although in thē are read many kinds of playes. In
Genesis the aungell wrastled the whole night with
Iacob. Sara saw
Isaac play with
Ismaell, which she tooke in euill parte, not vndoubtedly bycause he played, but bycause he played together with the sonne of a bondewoman.
Dauid also daunced & played before the arke of the Lord. And the maydens sang in their daunces,
Saull hath ouercome in his thousandes, &
Dauid in his .x. thousandes. And Christ complayned that the Iewes were like vnto children playing in the streetes and saying: We haue songe vnto you, &c. And although of these thynges there be no certayne rules manifestly wrytten in the holy Scriptures, yet are they set foorth in the ciuill lawes.
But before I speake of them, it shalbe good,
A distinction of playes. to distribute playes into his formes and kindes. There are some which are vtterly referred vnto chaunce, as he whiche casteth most, or casteth thys chaunce or that, carieth awaye the rewarde. There are other whereby the powers either of the body or minde are excercised.
Such playes as depend vpō chaunce & are vnderstand by the name of diseplay,
Of dyseplaye. Dyseplaye is condemned by ciuile lawes. are both by the ciuil lawes & by the fathers condemned. In the digestes
de aleatoribus the
Pretor sayth: If a diseplayer be iniuried by his fellowe, I will not geue him iudgement. But if one steale or do violence to an other, I will in deede render right, althoughe they be vnworthy. And afterward: if a mā compell an other to playe, let hym be punished, so that he be cast either into the quarreys to digge stones, or els into the cōmon prisons. By these things it appeareth, y
t by y
e ciuill lawe to playe at dyse was a thyng very odious.
Cicero in .2.
Phillip. agaynst
Anthonius: His house (sayth he) is full of dyseplayers and dronkardes. Farther, the lawes adde, if dyseplayers lay any wagers among thēselues, they are not firme. Howbeit it is permitted vnto them of the household to play among themselues, for that whiche may afterward be eaten in a feast. But in the
Code de religiosis sumptibus funerū, it is more seuerely ordeyned of play, dyse, & dyseplayers. In y
e old time souldiers were permitted to play at dise after their busines done. But y
e Emperor complaineth that at y
t tyme al men played, & in trying of chaūces, wasted all their patrimony, & lastly added blasphemy agaynst God. Wherefore he decreed, that it should not be lawfull for any man to play, nor to loke vpon hym that playeth: & he admonisheth the Bishops, diligently to loke that these things be obserued. The same
Iustinian the Emperor in his Authētiques, in the title
de sacrosanctis Episcopis, in the paragraphe
Interdicimus doth prohibite by name, that no Bishoppe, Priest, or Deacon, should either playe themselues, or looke vpon them that playe. But if they shall doo otherwyse, hee geueth commaundement to thrust then into Monasteryes for three yeares. Nowe let the Popes go and saye, it is not lawfull for Emperours to ordayne of Ecclesiasticall matters.
De excessu praelatorum, in the chapter
Inter dilectos, bycause
[Page] a certayne Chanon was found to be a dise player, & had in play geuen hys money to vsury, to receaue for .x. peeces of money .xii. he was deposed. Also
de vita & honestate clericorum, chap.
Clerici: Let them not play at dise nor tables, neither let them be present at such playes. The same thing is had in the distinctiōs .35. chap. 1. Either let them cease to play, or els let them be condemned.
Agaynste those whiche defend diseplay.But they whiche defend this kinde of playe are wont to say: What if we will so bestow our money? Are we not Lordes of our own things? We do no wrong to our neyghbour, we take not away other mens goodes. These thinges haue they continually in theyr mouth. But they ought to vnderstande, that it is the dewty of the Magistrate, to see that euery man vse hys owne thinges well. Farther we must cōsider more deepely that God gaue vnto these money, wherewith they might haue to noorishe their family, and to helpe the poore, and not to caste them to chaūce, and put them to the slippernes of Fortune. Farther it behoueth and especially Christians to represent the image of God: who gouerneth and ruleth all thynges with reason. But so to consume money, is not to be a Lord ouer his own things, but a tyranne. This also mayst thou adde hereunto, if any thing be gotten by this meanes, the same both is, and also is called, filthy gayne.
Whether thinges lost by dyseplaye may be recouered.But for as muche as it is counted filthy gayne it may iustly be demaunded, whether those thynges whiche be lost by dyseplaye, may iustly be demaunded agayne. I aunswere, that if he whiche loseth be not in his owne power, but vnder an other man, as are the children of the householde and seruauntes, the lawes do geue recouery, and that euen to .50. yeares. But if they be their owne men, recocouery is not graunted, & the cause is assigned, bycause filthines is on either party. In whiche case the cause of the possessor is the better. In the digestes. In the title
de condictione ob turpem causam in the lawe
vbi autem, when filthynes is in either party, there is no iudgement geuen. What then shalbe done with the money? They say it must be bestowed vpon the poore, so that he which hath lost, may haue hurte, and he which hath gayned, shall not haue the fruition of thyngs euill gotten. This is to be done when the possession is transferred. Of the same mynde was
Augustine in his Epistle .54.
Augustine. to
Macedonius. Where the possession (sayeth he) is transferred, let the money bee geuen vnto the poore. But where it is not transferred, as if a man take awaye any thyng by thefte, and lose it at dise, let it be restored. Wherfore we must decree, that such playes ought not to be suffred whiche are gouerned by chaunce and rashenes, so that in them, goods and money are endaungered: bycause it longeth to the publique wealth, to see that thynges be ryghtly gouerned: and God geueth goodes, to be spent to good vses. And bycause by it spryng oftentymes horrible blasphemies, and robbyng of our friendes, and couetous desire of other mens goodes is stirred vp, besides the greate losse of tyme. These thynges both the ciuill lawes and also the Ecclesiasticall do see: but at thys day they are not regarded. For the Canonicall lawes are contemned of the Clergy, and the ciuill lawes are despised of the Princes. For there is no where eyther more often or more filthily playe vsed, then among princes, and Ecclesiastical men: whiche in deede were of good iudgement, when they wrote those lawes: but they haue lyued and also do lyue most filthily.
What playes are permitted.But the other kynde of playe, whiche pertayneth to the excersyng of the powers, either of the mind or of the body, is not vtterly forbidden.
Iustinianus in the lawe before alledged, when he had taken awaye playes whiche depended of chaunce, substituted this other kynd of playes, as throwing a roūd balle into the ayre,
Aristotle. handling of the speare, running, & such like. Yea &
Aristotle in his Rhethoriques commēdeth these exercises of the body. And vndoubtedly for as much as a man hath nede of some refreshyng and pleasure to recreate him selfe w
tal, those thinges y
t are honest, are mete to be graunted vnto him. So at this day publique wealthes do sometymes set forth rewardes vnto such as cā best throw weapons
[Page 220] y
t they may haue their Citizens y
e better exercised. Howbeit it must be takē hede of, y
e the kindes of playes be not hurtful or pernicious, so that it be daungerous, least in that playe, they which exercise thē selues, or which assemble to behold, be killed, or miserably torne or lamed. And without doubt this kind of plaies is prohibited
ad legem Aquiliam, in the law
Nam ludus, and in the decretals
de torneamentis. Those thinges which of their own nature are not euil, but are euil bycause of those thinges which often tymes follow, ought to be prohibited. In the old time rewardes were set foorth vnto Syngers, Orators, Poetes, Readers, which are not vniuersally to be dissalowed, if they be done iustly or moderatly. Afterward were added stage plaies, wherof I wil not speake in this place. Daū ses also were added, of which we wyl speake in this booke in his due place. But men could not be content with these plaies: bicause also their mindes, which for sundry causes cannot exercise the powers of the body, are to be recreated wyth some pleasure: therfore they haue founde out an other kinde of play, namely the play of Chessemen, cōmonly called Chesse: neither is this kinde of play thought woorthy to be condemned.
Farther, there is a certaine other maner of playing,
Tables. which leaneth partly to chaunce, and partly to industry, as is playing at Tables, and suche lyke, where in deede they cast by chaunce, but the castes are gouerned by industry,
Plato. wherfore
Plato affirmed that the life of men, is like vnto the play at Tables. For euen as in tableplay, so also in the life of mā, if any thing go not very wel,
Terence. the same must by arte be corrected. To which sentence
Terence also in
Adelphis alludeth: and vndoubtedly these kindes of plaies seeme suche, that sometime they may be permitted, so that they bring no hurt, refresh the powers, and be ioyned with honesty, and that that time which should be spent vpon better thinges, be not bestowed vpon them.
But what shal we answer vnto
Ambrose? This vndoubtedly, that that place
De officiis yertaineth not to playes, for as muche as there he entreateth of pleasant talkes, tauntes, and skoffes, especiallye such as are ioyned with scurrility. But vpon the .118. Psalme (vpon these woordes: Turne away mine eyes that I see not vanity) he calleth stage playes vanitye,
Augustine. Lactantiu
[...]. as doth
Augustine also together with
Lactantius, Ierome and other Fathers. For they had much filthines, & wer at the beginning instituted to the honour of Idoles,
Ierome. Why stage playes bee condemned of the Fathers. and therefore they wer odious vnto the Fathers & Christians. But the reason which
Ambrose first alledged was, bicause there is nothing found in the holy scriptures how these things ought to be vsed. To that we wil answer, that they are found in the holye scriptures generallye: whither ye eate, or whither ye drinke, or whither ye doo anye thing els, doo al thinges to the glory of God. Wherfore the body and the minde are so sometimes to be refreshed with plaies, that we may afterward be prompt to grauer matters. Farther, there is nothing found peculiarly in the holy scriptures touching Bakers, Cookes, nor Shipmen, and yet neuertheles their exercises are not vtterly to be excluded.
Chrisostome said that the Deuil found out play, and alledged this:
Chrisostom
[...]. The people sat downe to eate and to drinke, & they rose vp to play. If a man looke more narowly vpon that place of this father, hee shall see that hee spake of those men which would not repent, but were woont to say: I woulde to God I might neuer weepe, but might alwaies play and laugh. To whom, he sayth, Christ preached: Blessed are they which mourne. And forasmuche as we so often sinne, and doo so grieuously offend God, how should we haue leasure to play? He also condemneth those playes whereby we are made sluggish & vnapt to good workes. We doo not in play and laughing (sayth he) imitate Christe or the Apostles: for we neuer reade that they either played or laughed. How beit he addeth a moderation, for as muche as he addeth, I doo not vniuersaly take away al laughter, but the excessiue and immoderate laughter. Lastly he turneth him selfe to stage
[Page] playes, and saith that they were inuented by the Deuill: for they containe the wicked actes and whooredomes of the Gods, whereby the consciences of godly men are greuously wounded, and wicked lustes are many waies stirred vp. And in that he saith that these thinges were inuented by the Deuil, he speaketh nothing contrary to the truth: bicause (as I haue admonished) they were instituted in the honour of false Gods. Yea and this thing he addeth also, that the Deuyll builded stages in Cities.
But nowe to conclude, me thinketh that those kindes of playes which serue to renewe strengthes in men, are not vtterly to be forbidden. Neither ought we lightly to be offended, if we se a man play at Chesse, with which play the powers of the body are nothing holpen, but onelye the industrye of the minde exercised. For if through age strength faile, so that they cannot exercise them selues by any other meanes, or that their body be but weake, why shoulde they not be permitted, moderately to delight them selues with this kinde of play? Neither also is he straightway to be condemned, which being sicke or weake recreateth himselfe with that kynde of playe, which dependeth of Fortune or chaunce, so that there in be no daunger of losse of money.
To what entēt the lawes restrayned or prohibited playes. For we must chieflye regarde to what entent the lawes forbad that. It was vndoubtedly that a man should not waste his goods prodigally, and therfore it was prouided by the law that a man should not hasard aboue a shilling: as it is had in the Code, in the place before alledged. This was the meaning of the law, that money should not be yll consumed.
But some say they delight not in play, except they play for money. But I wil demaund of them to what vse they entend to bestow that mony? Peraduenture they wil say vpon a feast. Why not rather vpon the poore? But I saye it is much better and safer not to play for any money. For although it maye bee that thou thy selfe art not touched with couetousnes, the other yet with whom thou playest, is peraduenture touched: Let the occasions vnto euyll be taken awaye, which otherwise are very manye which moue vnto euyll. And if there were nothing els to feare vs away from playes, let vs for Gods sake wayghe this, howe greate the penury of time is. The law of God requireth so manye duties, that not our whole lyfe is able to performe them: and yet shall wee bestowe time in playes? We are otherwise sufficientlye sicke with couetousnes of money, wyth ambicion to ouercome and excell other: why do we styrre vp these diseases with playes? But thou wilt say: These thinges are neuer stirred vp in me. But now thou must remember that they maye easelye be stirred vp. And we must see not onely to our selues, but that we bring not other also vnto y
e same disease. These thinges are spoken of the honest kindes of playes. If so be there be anye whyche doo play, being entised with couetousnes, let those men knowe that they rather like euil marchauntes trafficke,
Male mercari then playe. For they seeke no other thing but filthy gaine. Neither seeke they pleasure, which in honest playes is the chiefest, but they seeke their owne thinges, and that by filthye meanes. And when they which delight immoderatly in playes, doo say: There must be some pleasure in the life, whereby we maye be recreated: Their request is to be graunted, but in the meane time they must bee admonished, that there are other pleasures more honest.
Paul to the
Ephesians the .v. chap. saith: Speake vnto your selues in Psalmes,
Tertulian. Himnes, and spiritual songes, singing and making mery in your hartes. And the same thing writeth he vnto the
Colossians the third chap.
Tertulian in
Apologetico sayth that Christians vsed to assemble together to their moderate shorte suppers, and when they wer refreshed with meate, they sang deuine praises, or recited somthing out of the holye scriptures, prouoking one an other by them. And by this meanes they returned sober home.
Other honest pleasures besides playes.There are also problemes, wherwith the wits may be exercised and refreshed: which problemes if they seme to hard, there are histories, which may wyth lesser labour be learned. Why are not men hyred to reade them vnto them? There is
[Page 221] no history so sclender, which is not very much profitable for some part of mans life. There are also histories of plants, of herbes, and of stones. There are lykewise communications of godlye men one with an other, which are sweete and pleasant, wherewith mindes are refreshed, and therewithal edefied. I do not (as I haue said) vtterly take away playes: but I prefer these thinges, as much more honest and profitable. But now let vs returne vnto the play of
Samson, whych though it was honest and liberal, yet had it a deadly ende. And if this playe had such yl successe, what is to be hoped of those which are prohibited by the lawes? They which made those lawes, wer wise men in gouerning the publike welth, who seing their faith in other thinges is to be allowed, why is it not also to be allowed in thys thing?
And the young men could not interpreate. The feast indured seauen dayes, and when
Samson had put foorth his riddle the first day, they coulde doo nothing in three dayes: wherefore when wyt failed them, they turned themselues to craftines and euyll artes.
15 And when the seuenth day drew neare, they sayde vnto Samsons wife: Entise thine husband, that he may declare vs the riddle, least we burne thee and thy fathers house with fire. Hast thou called vs that he should possesse vs? Is it not so?
16 And Samsons wife wept before hym, and sayd: Surelye thou hatest me, and louest me not: for thou hast put foorth a ryddle vnto the chyldren of my people, and hast not tolde it me. And he sayd vnto her: Beholde, I haue not tolde it my father, nor my mother, and shall I tell it thee?
17 Then Samsons wyfe wepte before hym seauen dayes, whyle theyr feast lasted, and when the seuenth daye came, he tolde her, bycause she was importunate vpon hym. And shee tolde the ryddle to the chyldren of her people.
18 And the men of the City sayd vnto him the seuenth daye, before the Sunne went downe: What is sweter then hoony, and what is stronger then a Lyon? Then he sayd vnto them: if ye had not plowed with my Heifer, ye had not found out my ryddle.
19 And the spirite of the Lord came vpon hym, and he went down to Ascalon. And he smote of them .xxx. men, and taking away theyr vpper garmentes, gaue chaunge of garmentes vnto those whyche expounded the ryddle. And hys wrath was kindled, and he went vp to hys fathers house.
20 Then Samsons wyfe was geuen to hys companion, whom he had associated vnto hymselfe.
The young men come vnto
Samsons wife, desire her to intreate her husband, and by al meanes to enquire of him what his proposicion signified. They adde moreouer threatninges, and those horrible, namely that otherwise they would burne her and her fathers house. This is the nature of peruers men, when they can not ouercome by strength and industry, they flee to deceites. This maye be sene in these young men: rather then they would suffer them selues to be conquered or ouercome, they go about fraude and snares. But chiefly they go vnto hys wife, that (both bicause she was a woman, which might easelye be wonne, & bicause she was deare & welbeloued of her husband) they myght vse her labour to wrest and wring out the secrete of her husbande. They make her therefore the betrayer, and that which is most grieuous, of her own husband. This is often
[Page] times the ende of playes. The thing for which they contended, was of no great value. For euery one of them were in daunger onely of the losse of one garment and sheete a peece: & yet they say:
Hast thou called vs, that he should possesse vs? As though they should lose al that euer they had. These thinges rightlye agree with those which do play to that end, to depriue other men of their goods. They which haue lost, may after this maner complain of the winner: Thou hast with this pretence prouoked me to plai, to rob me, & not to take any pleasure by play. The woman in the meane time (as
Ambrose saith) wept, and complained vnto her husband,
Ambrose. that he loued her not, neither esteemed her.
Thou hatest me (sayth she)
for as much as thou wylt not declare vnto me thy secretes. But
Samson aunswereth wisely.
Yea, but I haue not shewed it vnto my parētes, and thinkest thou that I loue them not? What cause is there that thou shouldest complaine? There are in deede many good and faithful women, but
Samson had not yet had anye trial of his wife.
It is not expedient alwayes to cōmunicate secrete coūsels vnto wyues.
Plutarch. And seing ther are many euil and babling women, which blab out thinges of great importance, to their husbandes great dammage, therefore wise men commit not many thinges to their wiues secrete keeping: for ther are many thinges that are not expedient for them to know. And babling is a vyce in a maner proper vnto women.
Plutarche telleth of this thing an elegant hystory of
Papirius Pretextatus, which nowe is sufficient onelye to shewe. Many, though they be strong in body, and excel in strength, yet are they weake in hart.
Samson had ouercome a Lyon, but yet at the last hee coulde not ouercome the teares of hys wyfe. As long as his wife shewed her selfe sad and heauye vnto him,
Samson could not beare it. The holye ghost woulde haue these thinges set foorth in the holy scriptures, whereby we might see the nature and corrupcion of our fleshe.
The seauenth day before the sunne went downe.
The end of the daye is the sun set.
Ambrose. All they of the East did measure the ende of the day by the going downe of the sunne, which by thys place we may gather, and by many other. They expounded the ryddle after this maner:
VVhat is sweeter then hoony, what is stronger then a Lyon? Ambrose sayth that
Samson, when hee heard these thinges, strayghtwaye added: what is more vnfaythfull then a woman? This assuredlye which is added in the text, is not much vnlike:
Except ye had plowed wyth my Heyfer. To plowe is to dyg, to turne, and to searche the earth. So they searched out the mayden, that by her they might come to the counsell of her husbande. This vndoubtedlye is an easye interpretacion.
Leui ben Gerson. For that is not sufficient whych
Leui ben Gerson bringeth, that those young men committed aduoutry with the mayden, and by that abuse vnderstoode the ryddle of
Samson. For if this thing had happened,
Samson woulde not haue retayned her in matrimony.
When they had absolued the riddle, nothing remained but y
t
Samson should pay vnto them the wager. And that price would he pay vnto the Philistines, of the goods and riches of other Philistines. The miserable woman feared, that if she had not shewed vnto the young men the secrete of her husband, she should with all her famely haue bene burnt. But by thys meanes she did in very deede get vnto her selfe burning. For as wee shall heare, when
Samson had inferred grieuous euyls vnto the Philistianes, they not suffring the iniuries, assembled a power, and burnt the house of hys wyues father. So the mayden fell into the pyt which she had made.
And hys wrath was kyndled, namelye against his wyfe. But why did
Samson require secretnes of her, which he himself could not keepe? He ought to haue kept scilence, and not haue reuealed vnto her the secrete, if he woulde haue had hys secretes kept close. Farther, as touching the murther of the Philistians, yf we thynke of
Samson, as of some priuate man, hee can by no meanes be excused. For it is lawfull for no priuate manne to spoyle and kyll others, to paye hys owne debtes wythall. But bycause (as the hystorye teacheth) he was
[Page 222] stirred vp to doo this by the impulsion of the holy ghost, therfore ought he not to be accused. For it is written:
And when the spirite of the Lord came vpon hym, he went downe to Ascalon. &c. Therefore we wil not reproue
Samson, but yet we wil not draw his act into an example. But this let vs imitate, to suffer our selues to be the instrumentes of the spirite of God, & let vs with a valiaunt and bold minde follow him being our guide. For although
Samson should fyght at one time against .xxx. men, yet bicause he was driuen by the spirite of God, hee was nothing afearde.
He tooke away the spoyles. Celiphoth, that is, their vppermost & chaungeable garmentes, which he had taken away from them which he had slaine. But ther is mencion made that he payd onely
Celiphoth: neither is there any thing spoken of the linnen sheetes, which yet ought by the bargain to be payde. The Hebrues thinke that here is vsed the figure
Synechdoche, that by part is vnderstād the whole.
Dauid Kimhi saith, he would not pay the whole, bicause they came to the knowledge of the riddle by euil artes, but yet that they should not altogether complaine of his faith, he gaue them part.
There ariseth a doubt, bicause
Samson was a
Nazarite, & by his profession it was not lawful for him to drinke wine, nor to cut his heare,
How it was lawful for Sā son to handle dead Carkases being a Nazarite. nor to touche any dead corps. But he must nedes touch their bodies, whom when he had slaine he stripped out of their clothes. Ther are diuers & sundry answers brought. Some say he was a
Nazarite, but not as touching this third condicion. For the Angell onelye admonished his Parentes that he shoulde drinke no wyne, nor pole hys head: but commaunded nothing for touching of dead bodies. But other say that he did in deede kil the
Philistians, but yet he stripped of their garmēts, while they were yet breathing and on lyue. And there are some which thinke that hee caused that one or twoo of them which wer left a lyue, should strippe the other, and should go free for their labour. But these seeme mere faininges. The difficultye may be dispatched by one woord: a
Nazarite was bound by religion, not of hys owne accorde to touche dead bodies. But this man was moued by the spirite of God: neither did he these thinges of his own wyl. Wherefore the commaundement of the religion of a
Nazarite ought in this steede to geue place vnto the holy ghost. I am not ignorant how men doo easely maruaile, that the holye ghost would mingle it selfe with playes and trifles of yong men. For that can scarcely seeme to be agreable vnto the maiesty of God. Let humane reason meruayle at these thinges, as much as it list:
The prouidēce of God vseth things, though they bee neuer so lyght. yet is it nothing contrary vnto the maiestye of God, if it mingle it self with thinges neuer so light. For hereby the prouidēce of God appeareth more bright, when men vnderstande that it also conuerteth thinges most base and most light, vnto the glory of the name of God. For, for a man with apt and meete instruments, to bring any thing to passe, it is no great matter: but with thinges vnapt and deformed, to fabricate any excellent thyng, this seemeth to pertaine to a cunning woorkeman. These thinges seme in deede to be light, but what is more light then dreames? whiche yet God vseth to the glory of his name, as the history of
Pharao and
Nabuchad-Nezar doo manifestly declare. But what doo I speake of Kinges? God would by dreames exalt
Ioseph being a prisoner and poore man, vnto a kingdome. So woulde he haue the inheritaunce of
Esau turned vnto
Iacob, in a maner by a play. And by fraud the blessing was wrested by
Iacob from
Isaac, couering his handes & necke with Goates skyns. Yea and also the spirit of God mingleth it self somtimes with the plaies and verses of Poetes, when as they (how soeuer they seeme to play) do yet sometimes write true, profitable and graue thinges. And that those thinges are of God, no man ought to doubt. Let this be had for certaine, that all thynges doo obey vnto God, dreames, playes, light thinges, graue thinges, and noble. He is the ruler and gouernour of al thinges, wherefore no man ought to bee offended when hee heareth these thinges. God seemeth more and more to increase the strength of
Samson, for before being vnarmed, he fought with a Lyon: which assuredly
[Page] was a great thing. But this is much greater, to fight at one time wyth xxx. men. God would so exercise him, that he should geue ouer him selfe wholye to the counsell of the spirite.
Samsō ought not so lyghtlye to haue gon frō hys wyfe.
Samson being angrye with his wife, bicause she had vttered the riddle vnto the young men, departed from her: which his fact ought not to bee allowed. For he oughte not so lightlye to haue seperate himselfe from his wife. It was his part to correcte her, and if neede had beene, to chasten her. Neyther had thys departure good successe. For when he was gone, the father gaue his daughter vnto an other husband, namely to the fellow of
Samson, and paranimphe, whyche had ioyned himselfe a companion vnto him in the mariage. The mayden sawe she had grieuously offended her husband, wherfore she fearing his fiercenes, desireth her father to prouide her an other husband: For it is not credible (as
Ambrose saith) that these thinges were done w
tout the good wil of the maiden.
Ambrose. But diuorsement should not be made so rashly, and for so light a cause. Christe hath made one cause onely of diuorcement, namely aduoutry.
Paul addeth the difference of religion: although he wyll not haue the faithfull to depart, if the vnbeleuing party wil dwel together. Neither permitted he second mariages, bicause man and wife agree not in religion, but bicause the one wil not abide wyth the other.
Ther was here no cause of iust diuorcement. In
Samsons cause there is neither of these. There was no aduoutrye, neyther did the mayden say she would not dwell with her husband: neither did
Samson repudiate his wife, although he then departed from her. For afterwarde he returned vnto her, as we shal heare. And although he so departed, that the wyfe knewe not where he was become, yet ought she not straight way to marye an other. For the ciuill lawes, when any suche thing happeneth, doo appoynt her to tary fyue yeares, as it is had in the Digestes
De diuortiis, in the law
Vxor. And in the Authentikes
De Nuptiis, in the Paragraphe
Sed etiam. The Canon lawes in the Decretals would haue amended these thinges, and decreed that it should not bee lawfull to marye againe before some certaine woorde were broughte of the death of the first husbande or wyfe. But with what godlynes and wysdome they did that, I wyll not at this tyme declare.
It is certaine that in this place was iniustice done for the wife to mary an other, being not ignoraunt that her husbande was yet on lyue. But the Father excuseth the act, saying: I thought thou haddest hated my daughter. But why should he haue suffered hymselfe to be perswaded after this sorte? It was conuenient that he shoulde before haue knowen
Samsons mynde,
Iosephus. and taryed for a booke of deuorcement. Although I see that
Iosephus is of this opinion, that hee thinketh
Samson dyd repudiate his wyfe. But that is not very lykely, when as he afterwarde descended, to take his wife againe vnto him. Neyther should the Philistians iustly haue burned that mā with his famely.
Ambrose. Yea and
Ambrose also denyeth that there was any deuorcement. This is in a maner the fruite of those that are ioyned together in an vnequall mariage. We reade the lyke thing in the fyrst booke of
Samuel, the .xxv. chapter.
Dauid had maryed
Michol the daughter of
Saul: and when
Dauid fled, her Father gaue her vnto an other husbande, when as the first husbande had not yet repudiated her, but afterwarde
Dauid demaunded her agayne. In the meane tyme let vs that are Christians, determine thys with our selues, that it is not lawfull to dissolue matrimonies for lyghte causes.
Paule saythe: If the wooman depart, let her remayne vnmaryed, or let her be reconciled vnto her husbande.
Chrisostome. Which assuredlye hee ment not of aduoutry: for he woulde not amende the woordes of Christ, but as
Chrisostome sayth, he vnderstoode these thynges of lyghter offences, for as muche as of them some reconsiliacion may be hoped for: whych is vtterly cut of, if she be maryed to an other.
¶The .xvi. Chapter.
1
THen went Samson to Azzah, and he sawe there a harlot, and went into her.
2 And it was told to the Azzathites, Sāson is comhither. And they went about, and layde waite for him all night in the gate of the city and wer quiet al the night, saying: Abide til the morning early, and we shal kill him.
3 And Samson slept till midnight, and rose at midnight and toke the dores of the gate of the city, and the two postes, and lift them away with the barres, and put them vpon his shoulders, and caried them vp to the top of the mountaine, that is before Hebron
It is no rare or vnaccustomed thinge, that excellent men, when they haue accomplished thinges after theyr minde,
There happen sometimes greuous falles of godly men, & of churches. doe slacke good studies and honest entenprises, as though they had done with labors, & are nowe in that place y
t they can not fall. God suffreth them sometimes so to fal, that they shoulde acknowledge thē selues, & be called back to repentance. But that is not done by the merite of the sinners, but by the goodnes and mercy of god. So God suffred
Dauid to fal, so
Salomon contaminated hymselfe with a most greuous wicked crime: so
Iudas the sonne of
Iacob, being in good estimation among his bretherne, yet committed incest with
Thamar. Neyther do these things happē only vnto singuler mē, but also vnto the church, as well the new as the old. In the time of
Byleam whē y
e Israelites could not be won by any other meanes, they wer cōquered by harlots. And the church of the
Corrinthians, was at the firste so contaminated with whoredomes, that
Paule was compelled to shewe by arguments and testimonies of the word of god, that foricatiō was sin. Yet did not god straightway depart from those which I haue mencioned,
God doth not straightway after sinne take a way from men hys free gratious giftes. nor from
Samson as touching his free gracious giftes, as are strength, gifte of tongues, prophesies, and suche like: bicause they are geuen, not for theire sakes whiche possesse them, but for other.
Bileam though he was an euill man, yet had he still the gift of prophesy, yea and he prophesied most excellently of Christ. The Lord also sayth: many shall say vnto me in that day: Haue not we cast out deuils in thy name? And in thy name haue we prophesied: & it shalbe sayd vnto them, verely I say vnto you, I know you not.
Howbeit for discipline sake, free gracious giftes are also sometimes taken away: sometimes I saye, not alwayes. And
Samson did not strayghtewaye at the first time when he sinned, lose those giftes of God: yet afterwarde he loste them. But seyng these ar not alwaies taken away,
Whither the giftes which follow iustification are firme. what shal we affirm of other gifts, which of necessity follow iustification? Those vndoubtedly ar takē away in sins that ar most heinous, For he which hath committed any greuous sinne agaynst himselfe, holdeth not peace of conscience, neyther the zeale to call vpon God, nor hope towardes God. Fayth also for that time, either sleepeth and lieth still, or (as some think) is taken away, although it be afterward restored vnto the elect, and those that are predestinate, when they repent. Suche fals of excellente men are setforth,
How great the verity of the holy scriptures is How the countrey of the Philistians was deuided. that we by them should haue an example, that if at any time we fal, we should not dispayre. And hereby we vnderstand how greate the veritye of the holy scriptures is. For they dissemble not errors and vices in the greatest mē, & in those specially which they haue taken in hand to prayse.
Azza was one of the head cities of y
e
Philistians. For that coūtry was deuided into prouinces and Lordshippes: of which in euery one of them there was some one excellent and notable city. Our interpretors haue translated
Azza into
Gaza: for it is written by this letter
Ain, whiche our men turne by
g: And so the
Ammorhites they call
Gomorhites. But why went
Samson downe hither? bycause now hauing obteined so manye victories, he contemned his enemies: and peraduenture he sought occasion to inuade them. But in this citye he fell: for he had there to doe with a harlot. This woorde
Zonah signifieth in Hebrewe a harlot, of whiche thinge wee haue spoken in an other place. Some thinke that
Samson did nothing here offend, but onely turned into a woman that kept a vitling house. For by that word is also signified a woman y
t kepeth a vitling house, bycause she prepareth meate and other necessarye thinges for gestes. So some thinke that
Rahab in the booke of
Iosua, whiche receaued the spies, was not an harlot, but onely one that kept a vitling house. But I thinke that
Rahab was an harlot. For so is she called in the Epistle to the Hebrewes, which had doone her iniury now being deade,
How women that kept vitling houses are called by the Romain lawes if it called her, beinge a chaste woman, an harlotte. The Romaine lawes called such women as kepte vitlinge houses
stabulariae, as it is had in the title
de furtis stabulariorum. Ambrose sayth that
Helena the mother of
Cōstātine y
e gret was a
stabularia after this sort, & he calleth her a good
stabularia
He entred into her. This Hebrew forme of speaking signifieth carnall fellowship, namely that he had to do with her. Other think (as I haue said) that he onely lodged in her house. But y
e
Philistines whē they heard of it, did secretly enuirō the city in the night season, for they would make no noyse for waking of
Samson beyng on sleepe, for they durst not set vpon hym in the darke, for that they knew him to be most strong. They taried till it was day, neither doubted they that he could escape, being so on euery side enclosed and besieged.
Liranus thinketh,
Lyrauus. that the
Philistines drew not
Samson out of his lodging, bycause peraduēture in that region it was a law, that men should be safe in their lodgyngs. But I meruayle that
Ambrose sayth, that the
Philistines besieged the house where
Samson was,
Ambrose. when as in the Hebrew we manifestly rede that they besieged the City.
Samson came and tooke the doores, & caried them away with him. So he despised his enemies, neither was there any that durst withstand hym.
Neither yet must we thinke, y
t that was the strength of a man,
Things are to be iudged by y
e worde of God, and not by the successe. but of the spirit of God. But we must not therfore affirme that God fauored whooredome: bycause in iudging of thinges, we must not haue a regard to the successe.
Dauid also filthily cōmitted aduoutry, and at the same tyme wherin he grieuously sinned, he conquered
Rabbah, the City of the
Ammonites. Salomon had fellowship with idolatrous women, and yet all thinges in a maner went with hym as he would desire. Wherfore as touchyng actions, we must not iudge of them by ententes. Wherfore in Ecclesiastes it is rightly sayd, y
t the selfe same thinges happē vnto y
e euill, that do happen vnto the good, & therfore of thē the loue or hatred of God toward vs is not knowen. Neither by the euentes may we iudge who is godly, or who is vngodly. We must iudge by the worde of God. The things that agree with it are good: the thinges that disagree, are vngodly. But in that God doth not strayghtway take vengeance, he therefore doth it, to call vs backe to repentaunce. Wherfore it is our part to see that we heape not vnto our selues anger, in the day of anger, as
Paul sayth vnto the
Romaines.
Samson escaped the daunger,
& caried away the gates of the City vnto a montayne, that they might be a wonder, and that the
Philistines might see how great strength there was in the God of
Israel: yea & that the Iewes also might beholde so notable an acte of God. For that montayne was in the middest betwene
Gaza &
Hebron, whiche the Hebrues inhabited. By that spectacle it came to passe, that the courages of the
Philistines were daunted, but the Hebrues wer boldned. We may not (as I haue often admonished) thinke of
Samson, as of a priuate man, for he was a Magistrate appointed by God, and not by men. For if he had ben a priuate man, his actes could not be allowed: for it is wicked to violate the walles & gates of Cities. Which thing was also prohibited by the
Romaine lawes. In the digestes
de rerum diuisione in the lawe
sanctum, and in the law
sacrum, it is had that some thinges are sacred, some thinges religious, and some thinges holy. Thinges sacred, as the alters and temples of the gods. Religious, as the sepulchers of the dead, holy, as those things which are by lawes defended from the iniuryes of men, as gates & walles. In the same title also it is red.
Gates & walls of cities are by the lawes coū ted as holy. These thynges are holy, which are neither sacred nor prophane, but confirmed and defended by lawes, that they should not be violated. As if a man should do this thing or that thing, he should suffer this or that. In the same title in the law
Si quis, the violating of the walles is made death. Wherfore
Remus was put to death,
Why Remus was killed of Romulus. bycause he went ouer the walles of his brother: Which selfe same thing is decreed of prisons, as it is written in the title
de Effractoribus in the law .1. And in the title
de custodia & Exhibitione in the lawe
in cos.
Prisons ar not to be violated. Howbeit if the doore were but slenderly shut, and any manne had fled, he was more lightely punished, but yet in suche sorte, that he shoulde be counted for a condemned person, althoughe otherwyse he were innocent.
Socrates when he was in prison, & mought haue escaped, he would not,
An example of Socrates. least he
[Page] should seme to haue violated the lawes. It was obiected vnto hym: Thou art wrongfully held in prison. But he aunswered: we must not by iniury put away iniury, bycause to do iniury is alwayes euill. He also tooke an argument of an exāple. For wise men ought not to open this window vnto other: Which other would easely imitate, if they should flye out of prisō. Farther if all mā should by thēselues remedy iniuryes, & breakes prisons, what manner of publique wealth would there be at the length? Moreouer hereby we should seme to feare death more then is mete. But we must not so be afeard of death, to violate lawes and rightes. Lastly we must not doubt, but that good men fall into the handes of tyrannes by the will of God. Wherfore they ought not by an vniust way to deliuer themselues thereout. Neither ought any man to obiect vnto vs
Peter, for he fled not, but was by an angell brought foorth by the will and commaundement of God. Let vs rather see what
Paul and
Silas did in pryson: they would not flye when they might.
It is not lawfull for bounde seruauntes to flye from their masters. It is not lawfull also for bondeseruants to fly from their masters. And vndoubtedly
Paul sent home agayn
Onesimus vnto
Philemon. What if the bondeseruant feared fornication or murther at his masters hand? It was lawfull for him to flye vnto sanctuary, or to the image of the prince: there was he holpen by the lawes, and the vniust Lord was compelled to sell his bondseruāt. But a Citizen for as much as he is free,
Free men may chaunge theyr abydynges for iust causes. neither is held in prison, bycause by the lawes he may dwell where he will, for him it is lawfull to chaunge his abyding & go whether he please. But that whiche
Samson did, must not be followed, neither drawen into an example. For he (as we haue often sayde) was appoynted a Magistrate by God, and was most certayne of his vocation.
4 And afterwarde he loued a woman by the brooke Sorek, whose name was Delila.
5 And the Lordes of the Philistines came vp vnto her, and said vnto her: Deceaue him and see wherin his great strength lyeth, and by what meanes we may preuayle agaynste hym, that when we haue bound him, we may afflicte him: And we will euery one of vs geue thee a thousand one hundreth peces of Siluer.
6 And Delila sayd to Samson: tell me, I praye thee, wherein thy greate strength lyeth, and wherewith thou mightest be bounde, to doo thee hurte.
7 Samson then aunswered vnto her: If they bynd me with seuen greene roddes that were neuer dryed, then shall I bee weake, and be as an otherman.
8 And the princes of y
e Philistines brought her seuē greene roddes that were not withered, and she bound him therewith.
9 (And she had men lying in wayte with her in the chamber) then she sayd vnto hym: the Philistines be vpon thee, Samson. And he brake the roddes, as a thread of towe is broken, when it feleth fire: so his strength was not knowen.
10 After Delila said vnto Samson: See, thou hast mocked me and tolde me lyes: I praye thee nowe, tell me wherewith thou myghtest bee bounde.
11 Then he aunswered her: If they binde me with new ropes that neuer were occupyed then shal I be weake and be as another man.
12 Delila therefore tooke newe ropes and bounde hym therewith, and sayde vnto hym: The Philistines be vpon thee, Samson: (and
[Page 228] men lay in wayte in the chamber) and he brake them from hys armes, as a thread.
13 Afterward Delila sayd to Samson: Hetherto thou hast beguiled me, and tolde me lyes: tell me how thou mightest be bound. And he sayd vnto her: If thou plattedst Seuen lockes of myne hed with the threades of the woufe.
14 And she fastened it with a pinne, and sayd vnto him: The Philistines bee vpon thee, Samson. And he a woke out of his slepe, and went awaye with the pinne of the webbe and the woufe.
15 Agayne she sayd vnto him: how canst thou say, I loue thee, whē thine heart is not with me? thou hast mocked me these three tymes, and hast not tolde me wherin thy great strength lyeth.
16 And because she was importunate vpon hym with her wordes continually, and vexed him, his Soule was payned vnto the death.
17 Therefore he tolde her all his heart, and sayd vnto her: There neuer came rasor vpon myne head: for I am a Nazarite vnto God from my mothers wombe: therfore if I be shauen, my strength will go from me, and I shall be weake, and be like all other men.
18 And when Delila sawe that he had tolde her all his hearte, she sent, and called for the princes of the Philistines, Saying: Come vp once agayne: for he hath shewed me all his heart. Then the princes of the Philistines came vp vnto her, and brought the money in theyr handes.
19 And she made hym slepe vpon her knees, and she called a man, & made him to shaue of the seuen lockes of his head, and she began to vexe hym, and his strength was gone from him.
20 Then she sayd: the Philistines be vpon thee, Samson. And he a woke out of hys sleepe, and sayde: I will go out nowe as at other tymes, and shake my selfe, but he knewe not that the Lord was departed from hym.
By the outrageous loue of
Samson vnto women, we easely vnderstand, that the desire of lust is neuer satisfied, so long as we obey it.
Samson had played the whoremonger before, & yet not being content with that, he toke vnto him a harlot agayne. Wherfore no man ought to cocker his sinnes, as thoughe he myght afterwarde leaue them at will.
Seneca hath ryghtly admonished
Lucillus:
Senec
[...]. That we must not adde to lustes, but rather plucke away from them: otherwise they will grow vnto vnmeasurablenes. We see in this history as in a glasse the peruersnes of mannes nature, when God wynketh, and defereth the punishment, we are made woorse, and the more forwarde he goeth in forgeuyng, so muche the more & more do we go forwarde in sinnyng. Wherfore
Paul to the
Romaines writeth truly and profitably: doest thou not know that the goodnes of God calleth thee to repentaunce? but thou accordyng to thy hardnes and vnrepentaunt hart, heapest vnto thyselfe wrath in the day of wrath. God seemed to spare
Samson, but he was neuer a whit the better.
But what this woman was, whether she were an Hebrewe or a Philistine,
R. Leui be
[...] Geeson. it appeareth not by the History. It is onely written
that she dwelled by the riuer or brooke Sorek. R. Leui ben Gerson thinketh that she was a proselite, and y
t she had receaued the profession of the law of the Iewes. But he confirmeth not his opinion by any testimony of the scripture. Howbeit if she had ben a proselite,
[Page]
Samson had sinned much more grieuously. For he ought rather to haue dissuaded from fornication a woman being a straunger, & peraduenture not thoroughly instructed in religion, then to haue allured her to sinne. For that cause Christ rebuked the Scribes & Phariseys, saying: Wo vnto you Scribes and Phariseis, bycause you compas about sea & land, to make one proselite: & then ye make hym the child of hel, twise so much more then ye your selues. And euen the same selfe thing is also now a dayes practised, and that very often: the Papistes labor very much, to conuerte a Iewe to theyr Christian religion, and then they corrupte him, and make hym woorser then they are themselues. After whiche selfe same manner Monkes leade younge men and maydens to theyr institutions, whom afterwarde by euill artes they make moste corrupte. But these thynges haue I spoken by the waye.
But howe many of the Philistines came vnto the harlot, it is not written. Some thinke, that there were fiue, bicause there are so many pronounces in that region. Euery one of them promised to geue her xi. hundreth peces of Siluer, the whole somme therefore was .5500. peces of Siluer. So the Philistines, when they coulde not conquere
Samson by strength, assayed to wynne hym by deceate, and they allure the woman with money to betray hym. By the voluptuousnes of
Samson they take occasion, and with large promyses they styrre vp the couetousnes of the woman.
Of how greate force the entisementes of women are. But of honesty and vertue, they haue no regarde. And that the nature of stronge men is suche, that by the flatterynges of a woman it maye bee deceaued, we maye vnderstande not onely by this Hystory, but also by many other. But it shalbe sufficient to set before vs
Adam for an example: whose nature in that fyrste innocency beyng yet perfecte, was yet by a woman brought into deceate. Wherefore we must continually praye vnto God, that he woulde not suffer vs to be led into deceate, for we muste not trust to our owne strength.
The woman beyng intised by the Philistines, goeth vnto
Samson. Wherefore she is not onely an harlot, but also a betrayer. Such an ende ought they to looke for, and be most assured of, what soeuer they be, that haue fellowshyp with harlottes. There are extant examples of many, whiche partely were very euill handled of harlots, and partely betrayed by them to theyr enemyes to be slayne. For she whiche selleth her selfe, will vndoubtedly muche easelyer sell her louer. Wherefore
Salomon hath wisely admonyshed, that a harlot is no les to bee auoyded, then the mouth of hell.
And Delila sayd: Shewe me wherein thy strength lyeth. These thynges are here set foorth simply, but it is very likely, that the woman dyd thus flatter
Samson saying vnto hym, that she muche meruayled at hys so greate strength, and that she muche reioysed, that she had gotten her selfe suche a louer. And therefore she exceedyngly desyred to knowe thys, wherein hys so greate strength consisted.
Samson mocked her two or three tymes. And fyrste he sayeth:
If I bee bounde with greene roddes. That is, with boundes made of Osiers and newe twigges, whiche haue not yet bene dryed. The seconde tyme he biddeth her take
newe ropes, wherewith
Delila afterwarde bounde hym, namely when he was on sleepe. Thirdly he fayneth that
seuen lockes of his head should bee platted with the threades of the woufe, to take away his strength: He putteth a certayne nūber for an vncertayn. He would in deede haue ben constant, & hidden y
e secret from the woman, but on the other side his weakenes and softenes was so great y
t he faynted. For after he dissēbled once or twise, she was so much the more importunate with him. And thoughe she were mocked, yet she geueth not ouer, neither dispaireth she to obteine y
t which she sought for. The Hebrew interpreters thinke y
t these thinges were not done in one day, straight after an other, but at sondry tymes, y
t the woman as occasion serued might repeate the same request. Lastly it is said y
t the harlot was greuousome vnto
Samson, euen vnto the death.
[Page 229] He coulde not suffer to bee reiected of hys louer, it was lyke death vnto hym to be repulsed from hys pleasures and delyghtes. So
Samson is taken, bounde, and lead awaye.
¶Of Whooredome or Fornication.
NOw I thinke it good somewhat to speake of whooredome or fornication. For as in the olde tyme there were very many, so also at this daye there are not a fewe, whiche affirme that it is no sinne. But I will proue by Scriptures, and by most certayne reasons that it is a grieuous sinne.
They whiche extenuate thys wicked crime, doo leane vnto sundrye argumentes. Firste in the Actes of the Apostles the .15. chapter, when in those firste tymes, there arose a dissention amonge the Iewes and the Gretians, it was by common assent decreed, that the Ethnikes shoulde absteyne from bloud, from that whiche was strangled, from thynges offred vnto idoles, and from fornication. Here, say they, that whooredome or fornication is reckened with those thynges whiche of their owne nature are not sinnes. Wherefore it appeareth that of it selfe it is not sinne: for these thynges were then for a tyme decreed of the Apostles, that Christians shoulde lyue peaceably together. For there is no creature of GOD euill, as sayth
Paul to
Timothe: Farther they saye, GOD woulde not commaunde that whiche of it selfe is sinne. But he bad
Hoseas the Prophet to take vnto hymselfe an harlot, & to beget children of whooredome or fornication. Wherefore of hys owne nature it seemeth not euill. Farthermore euery sinne is agaynst charity, either agaynst that charity whiche we owe vnto God, or that whiche we owe vnto our neyghbour. But in whooredome or fornication there seemeth nothyng to be committed agaynst God: for his worshyppyng and Religion is not hurt. Neither also agaynst our neyghbour, for there is no violence offred his wife, neither is there any violent oppression. Moreouer
Augustine in hys booke
de bono coniugali writeth,
Augustine that what meate is vnto the body, that is accompaniyng together for procreation. But if a man eate or drinke a litle more then he ought, he is not accused of synne. Wherfore also if a man in accompanieng together doo a litle straye, he is not to be counted guilty of sinne. Lastly, those things which god hath prohibited as sinnes, ar so playn & manifest, that euen by y
e light of nature euery man may vnderstand y
t they are sinnes: but whooredome or fornication in mans iudgemēt is not so iudged, & many thinke y
t it is no sinne.
Mitio in y
e Comedy in
Terēce saith: Beleue me, it is no wicked acte for a yong mā to cōmit fornication. And in y
e Church of
Corint. there wāted not some which so thought also. Wherfore by these reasōs y
e filthynes of whoredom is so extenuated, y
t either it is not coūted for sinne, or els coūted amōg y
e lest sins.
We must haue a regard not to humane reasons, but vnto the word of god, not what men thinke or iudge, but what y
e holy ghost speaketh in y
e holy scriptures. And in y
e Prophets & in
Salomon, there is in euery place detestatiō of fornicatiō.
Fornication is prohibited by testimonyes of the scriptures. But in the law they say there is nothing decreed agaynst it. But for asmuch as they will reason by y
e law, I will bring testimonies also out of it, wherby it may easely be vnderstand y
e fornicatiō is prohibited. In
Leuit. in y
e booke of
Nūb. & in
Deut. y
e Iewes are prohibited to adioyne vnto thēselues straūge womē. Agayne in
Deut. y
e .23. chap. it is cōmaūded, y
t there shuld be nor harlot nor whore in
Israel. Let these places be cōpared together. It was not lawful to haue harlots, neither straūgers, neither Israelites, therfore they were al forbiddē. But some will say: How then had
Sāson fellowship with an harlot? Some of y
e Hebrues answere y
t she was not a harlot, w
t whom
Samson had fellowship, but one y
t kept a vitling house. But for asmuch as that is a weake answere, me thinketh we must otherwise aunswere vnto it. The publique wealth of the Hebrues was at that tyme corrupted. For they lyued nowe vnder the Philistines: neither is it any meruayle if they were imbrewed with any of their vices and corrupte manners.
[Page] Wherefore they had some harlottes, but not by their lawes, but by the vse and custome of the Philistines.
Testimonyes of the newe testament.But in the new Testament whooredome or fornication is apertly & manifestly prohibited. To the Hebrues it is thus written: Adoulterers & fornicators the Lord wil iudge: y
e Lord is not said to iudge & to auenge, except it be for grieuous sinnes. And to y
e
Ephesiās, not onely couetous men & idolaters, but also fornicators are excluded from y
e kyngdome of God. To the
Corinthiās also, where
Paul writeth of Excommunication, I doo not speake (sayth he) of all fornicators: but if any be called a brother, and is a fornicator, with such ye shall not so muche as eate meate. But he entreateth muche more manifestly of all this matter in the same Epistle the .6. chapter, and y
t of purpose: for many (as it is sayde) were of an euill opiniō, as touching this kynd of wickednes. First, he sayth, meate is ordeyned for the belly and the belly for meate, but God shal destroy both this and that, nowe the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord. For all meate of his own nature is pure: but for the offence of our neyghbour, we ought sometymes to absteyne. But some man myght say: Meate is necessary to lyue by. It is, sayeth
Paul, in this lyfe, but in the blessed resurrection, GOD shall destroye both the meate and the belly. Wherefore thou muste not so muche esteme them, that for theyr cause thou shouldest offende thy brother. It is not vniuersally commaunded to absteyne from all meate, but from that onely wherby thy weake brother is offended. But as touchyng fornications (sayeth he) whiche ye contemne, the reason is farre otherwyse. Your body is not geuen for fornication, but for the Lorde. And this is not to bee passed ouer, that
Paul with greate prudence sayeth not, not for procreation, but not for fornication. For the body is geuen also for procreations sake. Men are went oftentymes to excuse their faultes and to laye them vpon nature. The nature of the body (sayeth he) is to bee geuen vnto the Lord. Wherfore of it is to be taken the rule of life, and not of euil examples.
The nature of relatiues.This is the nature of relatiues, not onely of suche as in that thyng that they are, are referred vnto other, but also of those whiche are by any meanes referred vnto an other thynge, as the head vnto the body, and agayne the body to the head. For when we see the head, we straightwaye require the body, and agayne when we see the body, we require the head. Suche relatiues (as the Logitians saye) are called
secundum dici. The Lorde is the head of the body of the Churche, and it is the body of that head. Wherfore
Paul both wisely and pithely disputeth, when he sayth: The body is not made to thys end, and to pollute it selfe with lustes, but to bee correspondent vnto the head, and to bee conformable vnto it. And he addeth, GOD whiche hath raysed vp Christe, shall rayse vs vp also by his powre. The firste argument was taken from relatiues. The seconde is drawen of GOD. For if he wyll rayse vp our bodyes, as he hath raysed vp Christe, why doo we then defile them with ignominy? He goeth on and sayeth, doo ye not knowe that your bodyes are the members of Christe? Shall I then take the member of Christe, and make it the member of an harlot? Vndoubtedly a sore conclusion whiche he concludeth. Shall I take (sayeth he) the member of Christe? As thoughe he shoulde haue sayde: No without doubt, for this were to teare the body of Christe. And it is a thynge moste cruell to plucke awaye the members from a lyuely body, and to ioyne them vnto a rotten or dead body. But the strength of the reason consisteth herein. Christe can not commit fornication: wherefore if thou wilte commit fornication, thou must firste be plucked from Christe. Here is shewed that fornication is not onelye a sinne, but also a deadly and moste grieuous synne, whiche plucketh vs awaye from Christe.
Afterwarde he addeth: He whiche coupleth hymselfe vnto an harlot, is made
[Page 230] one body. For they shalbe two in one fleshe. And: He whiche is ioyned with God is one spirite. This place is most full of consolation: for as much as it declareth that we are most nigh ioyned vnto Christ, from whom we must nedes be first plucked away, before we be made the members of an harlot. He whiche cleaueth vnto an harlot is made one body: For they shalbe two in one fleshe. The Apostle seemeth at the first sight to abuse the wordes of
Genesis. For he transferreth thē to whooredome whiche are spoken of matrimony. For these wordes were spokē first of
Adam and
Eue: bycause the fleshe of
Eue was before in the flesh of
Adam, from whom God tooke a ribbe, and made therof a woman, which he agayne adioyned vnto
Adam, to be with hym one flesh. But in very deede the Apostle abuseth not this sentence, for as much as whooredome is a certayne corruption of matrimony: for one thing is common to them both, namely, the coniunction of the fleshe. For bodyes are communicated as well here as there. Wherfore
Paul had a respect vnto that whiche is common to them both, when as yet thys difference is there betwene them, that in whooredome the coniunction is agaynst the lawe of God, and therfore fornicators must be plucked a sonder, otherwise there is lefte no hope of saluation for them. But in matrimony, the coniunction is made by GOD, and therfore it is made an indissoluble knot. Wherefore seyng that the coniunction is in either all one and the selfe same,
Paul hath ryghtly applyed that sentence to whooredome: He whiche cleaueth vnto God, is one spirite. These woordes serue muche vnto this present matter. For if we be with God in spirite, we muste with earnest labor flye from those thinges whiche he hath prohibited. Wherfore aptly the Apostle hath added flye whooredome.
He sayth moreouer: Euery sinne that a mā committeth, is without the body: but he whiche committeth whooredome, sinneth agaynste hys owne body. If the argumentes whiche I haue before brought do not moue you, yet at the least haue a respecte vnto your owne body, whiche ye seeme in committyng of fornication to hate and contemne.
But it maye be demaunded howe other sinnes are without the body, but by fornication we sinne agaynst our owne body. For we doubte not, but that he whiche is very angry, noorisheth and augmenteth choler, whereby the body is not a litle hurte. Sickenes also doth very muche weaken the body: wherefore
Salomon sayeth: A sad spirite dryeth vp the bones. Dronkennes also and glotony doo hynder health, and doo in a manner vtterly destroye the body: yea and enuious persons seeme also to sinne agaynst theyr owne bodyes: For thou shalt see them dryed, withered, and in a manner kylled with leannes. Howe can it be then, that other sinnes are without the body? Some saye, that fornicators doo sinne agaynst their owne body, bycause very oftentymes by hauyng fellowshyp with harlots they are infected with the pockes, & with leprosie. But let other say what they will, I rather thinke, y
t the Apostle had a respect vnto those thynges which went before. For he had sayd, y
t the fornicator is made one body, with the harlot: & he seemeth to sinne grieuously against y
e dignity of his body,
A Similitude. which maketh it all one with y
e most vyle & filthy body of an harlot. For if a kyng or prince should mary a wife of a base and obscure stocke, it would be said that he had contaminated his kinred. I know that there are some which thinke y
t these wordes are spoken Hiperbollically, bycause there are found other sinnes also whiche do hurt the body, but this hurteth it most grieuously and most of all.
The same
Paul doth still go on and sayth: do ye not know, y
t your bodyes are y
e tēple of the holy Ghost? And assuredly he which destroyeth the tēple of God, God wil destroy him. As though he should haue sayd: ye haue not your bodies of your selues, but of god. God hath made them his temple, and the holy ghost dwelleth in them. Ye are not your owne: Wherefore ye doo not a litle violate Iustice in contaminatyng an other mannes thyng. Ye are bought with a greate pryce,
[Page] wherefore glorify God in your body. These argumentes of
Paul are both most pleasaunt, and also most strōg, which if they satisfy not some, let him loke vpon our
Samson. He was no idolatrer, no murtherer, no these, and yet is he taken, bound, his eyes put out, and is compelled to grinde in a prison, euen as if he had ben a foure footed beast.
Paul laboureth by many argumētes to proue whoredome is sinne. And no maruayle: bicause then he wrote vno the
Corinthians whiche at that tyme abounded aboue other in fornicatiōs. Wherof came the Prouerb,
Nō quiuis Corinthū y
t is It is not for euery mā to go to
Corinthus. And in vniuersal al y
e Ethnikes were in an ill opiniō touching this vice.
Eusebius. For which cause, whē y
e Church was yet springyng (as
Eusebius testifieth in his .3. booke of his hystory the .29. chap.) the
Nicolaites did openly & manifestly commit fornication, & layd y
e custome of their wicked crime vpō
Nicolaus y
e deacon:
Clemēs Alexandrinus. The history of Nicolaus the deacon. although
Clemēs Bishop of
Alexādria in
Stromatis do excuse
Nicolaus: For he sayeth, that he neither thought, nor taught any such thing. But hauing a very fayre woman to his wyfe, and therefore beyng thought to haue ben gelous ouer her, he brought her foorth before the people and said: This is my wife. And y
t ye might vnderstand y
t I am not gelous ouer her, I am cōtēt for my part that any of you take her to wife. Which thing also he mēt, as farre as the law of God would suffer. But they which were afterward called
Nicloaites, vnderstandyng his wordes peruersly, supposed y
t he thought y
e wyues among Christians ought to be cōmon. Of this Secte it is written in the
Apocalips: But this thou hast, bycause thou hast hated y
e actes of the
Nicolaites, whiche I haue hated. Wherfore it is no meruayle, though
Paul tooke so great paynes to teache that whoredome is sinne.
Fornicatiō cō trary to matrimony.This wicked crime is contrary vnto matrimony. For they whiche haunte wandryng lustes and harlots, are farre from contracting of Matrimony. Wherfore
Terence sayth: They which loue, can ill abide to haue a wife geuen thē. For whiche cause
Clemens sayth:
Clemens. whoredome leadeth from one matrimony to many, that is from one lawful coniunction, to many vnlawfull & wicked. The Epistle to the Hebrues ioyneth fornicators which aduoutrers, & testifieth that God will iudge them. And those two vices are so ioyned together, that they are comprehended in the selfe same precept, wherin it sayd: Thou shalt not commit aduoultry.
Fornication is repugnat vnto Christ & the publique wealch.This pestilence also is repugnāt both vnto Charity & to the publique wealth: vnto charity vndoubtedly, bycause the fornicators do iniury vnto their children, whiche not beyng lawfully procreated, are scarsely at any tyme brought vp honestly & vertuously. And they hurt y
e publique wealth, bycause they defraud it of good Citizēs. For
Mamzer, a bastard I say, & one borne in fornication, is prohibited to be receaued into the Church, not that he is restrayned from the holy cōmunion, or from the misteryes of saluation, but bycause it is not lawfull for him to gouerne the publique wealth, & to be numbred among Citizens. Some thinke y
t this euill may be remedyed, if a man should keepe a concubine at home. So, say they shall the yssue be certayn. It may be peraduenture certayne, but it shall not be legitimate. Seing therfore this wicked crime is both agaynst matrimony, and charity, & also the publique wealth, it cā not be denied but it is a sinne most grieuous.
A Christiā magistrate ought not to suffer harlottes. And for as much as it is so, why are fornications now a dayes openly suffred in Cityes? I speake not of the Ethnikes: I speake of Christians, and of those Christiās which wil alone seme & be called the successors of Christ. Whoredome or fornicatiō is most impudently mainteyned in their dominion, they not onely willing therunto, but also taking a commodity & tribute therof. That whiche is against y
e word of God, against matrimony, against charity, against the publique wealth, is no sinne, or els it is a notable sinne. If it be sinne, why is it not taken away & weded out?
Augustine But I know what they will bable, they bring foorth
Augustine, who in his booke
de Ordine wryteth thus: Take awaye harlottes, and all thyngs shalbe filled w
t filthy lustes. But let vs consider in what time
Augustine
[Page 231] wrote that booke. Vndoubtedly when he was yet
Catechumenus, and not sufficiently enstructed in religion. And althoughe he had not beene
Catechumenus, yet thys his saying agreeth not with the word of God, neyther with
Augustine himselfe, who in an other place affirmeth that the good which commeth of euil, as a recompensacion, is not to be admitted. Which thing also
Paule hath taught to the Romaynes: euen as they were wont to say of vs: Let vs do euil thinges, y
t therby may come good thinges, whose damnation is iust. We must neuer haue a regard to the end and euent, when we are vrged by the commaundemente of god. Somtimes men say vnto vs: Vnles thou committe sinne, this euill or that will succede. But we must aunswere, let vs do what god hath commaunded vs, he will haue a care of the successe. Neither is it meete, that one onely sentence of
Augustine should be of greater authority, then so many reasōs which we haue brought, and so many most manifest wordes of God.
God commaunded absolutely and by expresse wordes, that there shoulde be no harlot in Israell. But some go aboute to wrest this place out of our handes, in sayinge that these hebrewe woordes
Kadschah and
Kedaschim signifieth not whores or harlots, but rather the priestes of
Priapus, which were vowed or consecrated to thinges most filthy. I contrarily thinke that
Chadschah signifieth an harlot, and
Kedaschim, vnnaturall, and effeminate persons. God woulde haue neyther of these suffred among his people. But in that they obiect the holy seruices of
Priapus, it is nothing. For it was sufficientlye before decreed touchinge idolatry: and what nede it agayn to be repeated? But that we may the more manifestly vnderstand that
Kadschah signifieth a harlot, let vs reade the historye of
Iuda and
Thamar in the booke of
Genesis,
Certaine wordes ar taken both in y
e good and euill parte. and there we shall see that
Louah &
Kadschah are taken both for one and the selfe same thing. For whiche cause we must note that there are certayne wordes whiche maye be taken both in the good and euil parte: of which sort is this word
Kadschah among the Hebrewes, which signifieth both holy and also an harlot: euen as among the lattines thys word
sacrum that is holye,
Virgil. wherefore
Virgill sayth
Auri sacra fames that is the holy hunger of gold. This Hebrew word
Kadasch is to prepare, or to be prepared. Wherof is deriued that word which signifieth an harlot, bycause such women are redy and setforth vnto all men, or els bicause they are wont to go trimly docked and paynted. Wherefore
Clemens sayth,
Clemens. that the
Lacedemonians permitted harlots to weare wroughte garmentes, fine apparel, and golde, whiche thinges were not lawfull for matrones to vse.
Now let vs see what followeth in
Deut. And the hire of a whore shall not be brought into the sanctuary. Here again y
e law calleth her
Zanah, which before is called
Kadschah. But thou wilt say: If the law would not haue harlots suffred, what neded it to haue forbiddē their oblactes? What neded this law? they which say this, do seme indede to speake wittely, but yet they speake not sufficientlye. For outwarde nacions also sente giftes for ornamentes and vses of the temple. The Eunuch of the quene of
Ethiope came to
Ierusalem, to offer in the temple. The
Macedonians and
Romaines gaue yearelye oblations and sacrifices in the temple. Wherfore the law forbiddeth, that if any thing be offred by straungers, that is gotten by the gayn of a harlot, the same should not be admitted into the sanctuary. Farther, god had commaunded that there shoulde not be harlots in Israell, but he knew that they would not obserue that law. For when the
Philistians, Macedonians and
Romaines raygned ouer them, they had harlots. Yea & Christe maketh mention of harlottes and publicanes together. Wherefore god doth rightwell first forbid that ther should be no whores among the Hebrewes. And afterward he ordeineth, that if by any chaunce there were any, theyr gayn should not be admited in to the sanctuarye. Whiche thing vndoubtedly he commaunded, bicause of the vilenes and filthinesse of the gaine. In the same place he addeth: The price also of a dogge shall not be broughte into the sanctuarye, bycause that beast is filthy and vncleane.
Caligula otherwise a filthy monster, commaunded (as
Suetonius writeth) that harlotes and baudes should be openly punished.
Suetonius Hostiensis. Of this thing
Hostiensis writeth ridiculously. Harlots indede (sayth he) ar bound to pay and to offer, but the church can not nor ought not to receaue them. Yet the Glose doth much better decre in the decretals,
dist. 90. chap.
Oblationis, namely that nothing at al should be offred in the church, that is of the gain of an harlot. But priests and monkes when they feared leaste some of their profite shoulde departe, haue inuented an other reason. For althoughe, saye they, the gaine of harlotes cannot be receaued for an oblacion,
The Pope doth vniustlye get gaine of harlottes. yet nothing letteth but that it maye bee receaued for almes. But by what meanes doth the Pope receaue the money of harlots? Not vndoubtedly, as an oblation, because he cānot: not as almes, bicause he is not poore. Wherfore thē must he nedes receaue it as a prynce. The lord would not haue this kind of money in his sanctuary: but the pope will haue it in hys treasury, & hath it: & getteth a wonderfull greate gaine by it. Whose vicar then is the Pope? Gods vicar? God refused such a gayn. What, is he Christs vicar? Christ neuer departed from the will of his father. Then must it consequently follow, that he is Antichrist, when as he both teacheth and doth those thinges which are expressedlye & of purpose against the word of god and of Christ. But he wil say y
t he exacteth this mony as a prince. Let him then be prince. But I wil demaund, whither he be an euil prince or a good? For a good prince it is not lawful to depart from the lawes of God. Let him then be an euill prince, let him also be euen
Caligula.
Paraduenture he will aunswere, that in respect he is a prince, he doth according to the ciuil lawes, which do not take away harlots out of y
e dominiō of the Romaynes, yet rather they disdayne not to decree somethinge touchinge theyr price or reward. In the Digestes
de Condictione ob turpem causam, in the law
idem etsi: it is decreed, that there can be no requiring againe, if thou geue anye thing vnto an harlot. And there is a reason added: bycause although a harlot do filthily in that she is a harlot, yet she receaueth not filthily, in that she is a harlot. These wordes are darke, so that they may seme to be a riddle. Farther, in y
e digests in the title
de donacionibus, in the law
affectionis gratia, it is decreed, y
t it is lawful to geueas wel vnhonestly as honestly.
It is not lawfull to geue vnhonestly. It is lawful honestly to geue, as vnto parents, kinsefolks friends &c. Vnhonestly, as to harlots. But I would know, by what license that is lawful? Hath god geuen goodes vnto men, to cast them vpon harlots? But here they confesse there is some filthinesse: for although it be lawefull to geue, yet if thou haste promised anye thinge vnto an harlotte, thy oblygatyon byndeth thee not, neyther canne the harlotte require thy promes, as it is had in the glose, in the title
de donacionibus, in the
[...]awe
ea quae. But there is a doubt, if she receaue not filthily, why is it not lawfull without filthines to require it? They aunswere, that that followeth not: bicause many thinges are taken honestly, which are not required honestly. And to that purpose there is cited the law .1.
de variis & extraordinariis cognationibus. Wherfore the Pope will by the cyuill lawes not take a waye harlots, but receaue monye of them, which he seeth can not be suffred by the lawes of god. But here I will a little reason with him. Vndoubtedly he professeth that he is ruler ouer the ciuill lawes, and in very dede he hath altered manye of them, as thoughe he woulde amend them: when as yet he hath taken away the good, and for the most part hath set euill in theyr place. Why hath he not amended these lawes for the suffringe of harlots, when as they ar against the law of God? Vndoubtedly the true cause why he hath not taken away the lawes of harlottes, is this, bicause it should be to muche hurtefull vnto the Popes treasorye. For at Rome they measure their lawes by profite, and not by honestye.
But by what ciuill law do they receaue mony of harlots? They aunswer for
[Page 232] tribute. But why do they not rather say, for baudry? Assuredly,
What the lawes decre of baudry if we wil speake truely, Popes are not as touching this thing, otherwise then bawdes. Let them diligently marke the ciuil lawes, whereby they now go about to defende themselues, and ouer which they boast that they are rulers, and let them looke what they iudge of bawdry. In the Digestes
de ritu nuptiarum, in the law
palam it is thus written: He which hath bondewomen for gayne, and filthilye setteth them out, & is partaker of the gaine, the same committeth bawdry. Now I demaunde of these men in what condicion they count the harlottes of Rome? For citizens? Nothing lesse. They count them therefore in a manner for bondewomen, and of them they make gaine, wherefore they are in a manner baudes. As much might be sayd concerning vsury. They suffer in their dominions Iewes which ar vsurers, and they take gayne of their vsury, euery yeare a certaine part, at the leaste the twēty part. Wherfore the Pope is not onely a baud, but also an vsurer. And that which I affirme of the Pope, let prophane princes also take heede, leaste the same may be saide of them also, which excercise this kind of gaine of the Iewes. To them vndoubtedlye agreeth that sayinge of
Dauid: If thou sawest a theefe thou ranst with him, and thou didst put thy portion with adulterers.
But they say y
t these ar tributes.
What tribute is. But in y
e Code in y
e title
de vectigalibus & cō mensis, in the law
ex prestatione, and in the lawe
allegatis: Tribute is defined to be that which is payd for those things which are brought into the publike wealth from outward nacions. For they ar called in lattē
vectigalia, that is tributes, of this worde
Vehere, which signifieth to cary. And the eight parte of euery thinge was paide in the name of a tribute,
Octauarii. wherefore publicanes were called
Octauarii of
octaua parte, that is the .viii. part which they gathered. But what do harlots I praye you bring into the publike wealth? Vncleanes and filthy lustes, of which thinges the courtiers & sacrificers of the Pope do not gather the eight parte, but the whole. These thinges are called tributes and customes, which are taken of fieldes and landes, but what fields haue harlottes? What lands? None. Wherfore let thē cease to excuse a most filthy thing with an honest title. I know they wil say, if harlots were suffred free and at liberty, they would more licenciously sinne. O godly kind of correction. Can harlots be by no other meanes restrained, but so? They shoulde rather decre that they shoulde not be in the citye, that they should haue filthy and darke houses, that they should cast away al the ornamēts of theyr body, that they should not come abroade openly, and shoulde be dishonested by some markes of filthines, that thereby they might be a mocking stock vnto all men. By this meanes peraduenture they might be reuoked into the righte way. But now good God, how are they restrained?
The sumptuous
[...]es of harlots of Rome. They haue moste gorgeous houses, they openly ride in Chariots, apparaled like princes, they ride vpō their fine ambling horses, they haue with them as fellowes, men decked with chaines and disguised, yea and sometimes Cardinals, especially in the night, and a most sumptuous flock of waiting maidens. Wil they deny that these things ar true? Let graue and sincere men then, which haue at any time bene at Rome, shew whither the thinge be so or no. If they will not beleue me, I can bringe for witnesses Cardinals and Prelates of Rome.
Paulus .iii. once declared that he entended some reformation of the Church: & he committed the matter to Cardinals and Bishops, which were counted more pure thē other. And what they iudged, it is extant in the .3. Volume of counsels. And they complain y
t the power of harlots was greater at Rome, then it was any where els. But hath
Paulus .iii. amēded this? In the Sinod also of Trident y
e clergy of Rome promised some great reformacion. But they did it not, neither went they about any thing at al. Why do they not rather imitate and folow the lawes of
Iustinian? He in is Authentikes, in the title
de lenonibus, wil haue harlots
[Page] to be vtterly thrust out of the city, and that if they promised any thing vnto bauds, they should not be bound to pay and accomplish the same. Yea rather, if they haue sworn to be harlots for a time, he absolueth them of theyr oth. These things these men dissemble, and suffer and maintaine harlots. Which thing yet ought not to be meruailed at. For, forasmuch as they do so diligētly cetain and encrease spirituall fornication of myndes, that is, superstition and idolatrye, why also shoulde they not mayntaine fornication of the bodye? But seinge they toke away wiues from theyr sacrificers, it was a harde thinge, yea and impossible to want brothel houses.
Iustinianus sorowed, bicause he saw brothell houses nighe vnto the Churches of God, but now they dwell in the middest of cities, & not from the houses where holye seruices are ministred: and it nothinge greueth the Pope. But let the Lordes of those houses whiche the harlots dwell in, pleade theyr cause. But such houses pertaine for the most part vnto Bishops and churches, & they will say, we do not take part of the gain of a harlot, but as it is mete, we receaue rentes for our houses: which is not prohibited by the ciuill lawes. For in the Digestes (
de petitione haereditatis in the law
Ancillaram) it is sayd, that brothell houses are occupied in the city rents of honest men. And in y
e same title in the law
possessor, it is ordeined, that if a mā haue vnhonest gaines, he should be compelled to restore thē, least an honest interpretaciō should bring profite vnto the possessor with an vnhonest gayne.
But bicause they will maintain it by lawes, why haue they not a respect vnto the interpretacion of those lawes? That is: If this kinde of gaine bee once exacted of harlots, that ought to be restored vnto the hire: otherwise it is not law full to require them. Neyther can contrariety of lawes be auoided by any other meanes. For these lawes should not agre with those of
Iustinians, which ar had in the Authentikes
de lenonibus & scenicis mulieribus. But let them marke I pray you the thinges which are had in the title
de ritu nuptiarum, in the law
palam, and in the title
de iis qui notantur infamia, in the law
Athletas, namely that that woman is infamous, whiche hath prostituted herselfe, and he also which is partaker of the gaine. And that vniuersally al bawdes are infamous. Let vs also (which is of much more weight) haue a regard to the wordes of god which cō maundeth: Be ye holy, bicause I am holy. What do we gather by these woords? That y
t is not to be suffred among Christiās, wherby men are made infamous: wherefore take away baudes and harlots, for asmuch as these kinde of persons ar by the testimonie of the ciuil lawes noted infamous. But they wil say: Men fall very oftentimes, and sometimes cōmit those thinges wherby they are made infamous. I graunt that, yet is not this to be borne withall, wherby wil or nill they, they ar made infamous. But thoughe they had a thousand ciuil lawes on their side,
Ierome. yet ought we more to esteme the worde of God.
Ierome speakinge of thys thynge, wryteth verye well in hys Epitaphe of
Fabiola: Ciuill lawes sayth he, are not so diligentlye to be cited.
Pampinianus writeth one thing, and
Paule an other.
Tertulliane And before
Ierome, Tertulliane de anima: Brothel houses (sayth he) are execrable before God.
But if they shoulde be suffred, saye they, there is some hope of theyr conuersion. For Christ sayth: Harlots and publicanes shal go before you in the kingedome of god.
How harlots do go before the Scribes and Phareseis in the kingdome of heauen. But let them tel me, whither they can by no other meanes be reuoked into the right way, then to be borne withal? It is true indede that Christ sayd: Harlots and publicanes shall go before you in the kingdome of God. But he vnderstandeth not Harlots as long as they be harlots and ar not conuerted. For what cause then is it said that they shal go before the Phareseis & Scribes in the kingdom of God? bicause they being conuerted, do acknowledge and bewaile theyr sinnes: but the Phariseis & Scribes regarded not their wicked actes, but would seme to be moste holy. If harlots should be suffred bicause they may be conuerted, then shal ther be no sinne so greuous which ought to be punished:
[Page 233] for there is none so farre past grace, but there is some hope that he may be reuoked into the right way: and so al lawes shall sleepe.
They adde moreouer: God hath prohibited harlots,
In the tyme of Salomon there wer harlots in Israel. as it is had in
Deut. which yet were afterward suffred. For
Salamon gaue iudgement betwene twoo harlots. First I answer, that it is not certaine that they were harlots, for as muche as this woord
Zouah signifieth also her that keepeth a vitling house, and one also which getteth her liuing by sundry kinde of gaine. Farther, though they wer harlots, yet is it a friuolous and most weake argument. For wee must not reason from that which is done, to that which ought to be done. God in deede prohibited harlots, but afterward discipline quailed, and many things were cōmitted against the law. But we ought to haue a regard not to that which is done, but to that which God hath cōmaunded to he done: otherwise if we will liue according to examples, there are euil examples inough euery where. For Popes and Cardinals doo not onely suffer harlots, but also keepe them themselues, as thinges most dainty. Neither are they afearde of the Canons which decree that Priestes for whooredomes should be deposed, in the distinction. 82. chap.
Presbyter, when as yet the glose saith there: Now a daies no man is deposed for whoredome. The same is had in the second question .7. chap.
Lator: The Apostle excludeth whooremongers from the kingdome of God. But these exclude them not from the Church, neither thinke they, that they ought to be deposed. But that is no maruaile,
Aduoutries accounted of the Papistes very light crimes. for as muche as they say that the Bishop may dispense with aduoutries, and other light crimes, as it is had
Extra. de Iudiciis in the law
At Clerici, they are the woordes of
Alexander .3. wherby it appeareth, that these men count aduoutries for crimes very light. Why ought we then to depende on their examples.
Philo a Iew saith, that in the publike welth of the Iewes,
Philo. harlots could not be suffred. For al when they came to ripe age, ought of necessity eyther to be husbandes or wiues. Widowes in deede ther wer some, but yet wel growen in yeares, and of an approued incontinency. This example should we followe, namely of such an holy publik welth, & not the example of the papisticall court. When I was on a time at
Rome, I remembred a wittye saying of
Crates.
An Apothegma of Crates. He when he came to
Delphos, and sawe in the temple of
Apollo a golden ymage of
Phrynis a very notable harlot, cryed out: Beholde a token of the wantonnes of the Grecians. So I, considering there suche sumptuous harlots, and so gorgiously appareled, said: Behold a token of the wantonnes of the bishop of Romes Prelates. But let vs leaue them, and go on with the woordes of God, and the reasons brought from thence.
Basilius (in his first booke vpon the Psalmes, expounding these wordes:
Basilius. And hath not syt in the chaire of pestilence) writeth very wel. Whooredome (saythe he) stayeth not in one man, but inuadeth a whole City. For some one yong man cōmeth vnto an harlot, and taketh vnto himself a fellow, and the same felow also taketh an other fellow. Wherefore euen as fire being kindled in a City,
A similitude. if the winde blow vehemently, stayeth not in the burnyng of one house or twoo, but spreddeth far and wyde, and draweth a great destruction with it: So this euyl, being once kindled, spreddeth ouer al the partes of the City.
Ambrose.
Ambrose also wisely writeth vpon the .119. Psalme, alledging the wordes of the .vi. chap. of the Prouerbs: who can noorishe burning coales in his bosome, and not bee burnt? who saith he, can thinke that harlots can be noorished in a City, and yong men not be corrupted with whooredome?
The sentence of Augustine inuerted. And so may we aptly turne that sentence of saint
Augustine cleane contrarelye: If thou take awaye harlots, thou shalte fyll all thinges with filthy lustes. Not so, but rather contrarily: Noorishe harlots, and thou shalt fyl al thinges with filthy lustes.
They obiect againe, that the good which commeth of euil, is a recompensacion, and they wil haue brothel houses to be suffered, least violence shoulde be offered vnto honest Matrons. I haue answered before, that euil thinges are not to
[Page] be done, that good thinges should ensue. Yea, but (saye they) God himselfe hath ordained that the good which cōmeth of euil, is a recompensacion. For bicause of the hardnes of hart of the Hebrues, that they should not folow greater euils, he graunted them the booke of diuorcement. But these men ought to remēber, that we must not cal God vnto iudgemēt, neither is it lawful to require of hym a reason of his lawes.
It is not lawful alwaies to reason by the example of God. Wherfore it is no firme conclusion, God did so, therefore it is lawful for vs to doo the like. We must not looke what God hath done, but what he hath commaunded vs to doo. But as concerning diuorcement, we shal haue occasion in an other place to speake therof. God saw that hatred oftē tymes happeneth betwene man and wife, and daunger of committing murther, which thing rather then it should happen, he graunted the booke of diuorcement. But it is a false argument, God gaue the booke of diuorcement, therefore it is lawful for vs to keepe brothelhouses.
To the reasons of the aduersaries. To the fyrst.Now resteth to confute the reasons of the aduersaries. First they said, whoredome is in the actes of the Apostles nūbred among those thinges, which of their own nature are not euil, as blood, thinges strangled, and thinges dedicated vnto Idoles. For there is no creature of God euil, which is receaued with thankes geuing. Wherfore fornication is no syn, seing it is reckoned with those things. But this is a weake reason, for these thinges are not reckoned of the Apostles, that in them shoulde be like reason of fault, but bicause that all those thinges, if they shoulde haue bene vsed, would at y
e tyme haue disturbed the Churche. The Iewes by the custome of their law, abstained from blood, and that whyche was strangled: and the Ethnikes made nothing of whooredome. Wherefore, that peace should be had among them all, they decreed that they al shoulde abstayne from these thinges, wherby it followeth not, that al these thinges are like sins, but rather this we may inferre, that all these thinges were an occasion of disturbing the Churche.
To the second.Farther, they obiected that God commaundeth not sinnes, but he commaunded
Hosea the Prophet to haue fellowship with an harlot. I aunswer: Euerye synne,
What is the proper nature of synne. is in that respect synne, bicause it is against the word of God. But if God commaund any thing to be done priuately, which otherwise disagreeth with the woord written, the same vndoubtedly is not sinne, bicause vniuersally it repugneth not with the woord of God: for although it disagreeth with the word written, yet it disagreeth not with the woord priuately reuealed. It is synne to take away an other mans good. But God, when the Hebrues shoulde depart oute of Egipt, commaunded that they should borowe stuffe and syluer vessels of the Egiptians, and take them away with them, which thing they did with out sinne. No man doubteth also but that murther is synne, and yet
Abraham, if hee had sacrificed his sonne at the commaundement of God, which he was ready to doo, had not synned. So may we say of
Hoseas the prophet: If he committed whooredome at the commaundement of God, his whooredome was no synne. I knowe there are some which thinke that
Hoseas was not cōmaunded to cōmit whoredome, but to take a harlot to his wife, but that agreeth not: for it followeth, and thou shalt beget of her children of fornication. Children gotten after that maner, namely of a lawful wife, should not haue bene children of fornication.
Ierome doth better interprete these thinges Hiperbollically,
Ierome. and saith, that by this image was expressed the wickednes of the Iewes, which had forsaken god their common husband, and had committed fornication with the Idoles of the Gentiles, and had begotten vnlawfull and bastard children, as touching the woorshipping and religion of God.
To the thyrde.Farthermore, that is false which they alledge, namely that whooredome is neither against religion, nor charitye. For we haue before declared that it is otherwise, neither is it needeful here to repeate that which we haue sayd.
To the fourth.They bryng
Augustine also whiche sayth, what meate is vnto the body, that
[Page 228] is accompanieng together for procreation, but to eate or drinke a litle more thē needeth, is not a grieuous synne: therefore neither is fornication also. A similitude is not takē to agree in euery part, but serueth onely for that part for which it is taken. And vndoubtedly, he which eateth or drinketh more then he ought, doth not straightway loose the health of his body, but he which strayeth in carnal fellowship, and committeth whoredome, may easelye straightwaye beget a childe, vnto whom he doth iniury, bicause throughe his fault he is borne a Bastard. Farther, there succeedeth euyl education, and so charity is hurt. I myghte say also, euen as euyl and hurtful meate destroyeth the bodye (yea
Adam by eating of the prohibited aple corrupted his posteritye) so whooredome killeth the soule. Lastly, that which they alledged,
To the fyfte. namely that fornication is therefore no sinne, bicause it cānot be so iudged by the light of nature, that I say is nothing. For the preceptes of God are knowen to bee iust of nature, but yet of a nature vncorrupt and perfect: when as a corrupt nature doth often times allow sinnes for vertues. For with the
Lacedemonians theft was praised,
Thucydides. and as
Thucydides writeth among the auncient Grecians piracy was counted a vertue. Farthermore it followeth that the preceptes of god may by nature be knowen to be iust and honest, but yet of a nature instructed and formed by the woord of god, otherwise as
Paul testifieth: The carnal man knoweth not the thinges whiche are of god. But now let vs returne to the history.
21 Therefore the Philistines tooke him, and put out his eyes, and brought him downe to Azzah, and bound hym wyth fetters: and he did grinde in the pryson house.
22 And the heare of his head beganne to growe agayne, after that it was shauen.
23 Then the Princes of the Philistines gathered them together to offer a great sacrifice vnto Dagon their God, and to reioyce. For they sayd: Our God hath deliuered Samson our enemye into oure handes.
24 Also when the people saw him, they praised their God: for they sayd, our God hath deliuered into our handes our enemye, and destroyer of our countrey, whych hath slayne many of vs.
25 And when their hartes were mery, they said: cal Samson, that he maye make vs pastime. So they called Samson out of hys pryson house, and he was a laughing stocke vnto them, and they sette hym betwene the pyllers.
26 Then Samson sayde vnto the seruaunt that ledde hym by the hande: leade me that I may touche the pyllers that the house standeth vpon, and that I may leane to them.
27 (Now the house was full of men and women, and there were al the Princes of the Philistines: also vpō the roofe wer about three thousand men and women, that beheld whyle Samson played.)
28 Then Samson called vnto the Lord, and sayde: O God I beseche thee strengthen me at this tyme onely, that I may be at once auenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.
29 And Samson layde holde on the twoo myddle pyllers, wherevpon the house stoode, and on whiche it was borne vppe: on the one wyth hys ryght hand, and on the other with hys leaft.
30 Then sayd Samson: Let me lose my lyfe with the Philistines: and he bowed hym wyth al hys myght, and the house fell vpon the
[Page] Princes, and vpon all the people that were therein. So the deade which he slewe at hys death, were mo then they whyche hee hadde slayne in hys lyfe.
31 Then hys brethren, and all the house of hys father came downe and tooke hym, and brought hym vp, and buryed hym betwene Zorah and Esthaol, in the Sepulchre of Manoah hys father: nowe he had iudged Israel twenty yeares.
When
Samson was kept in prison, hys heare in the meane time grew to the same length that it was before it was shauen by the harlot. God at the lengthe tooke vengeaunce of the Philistines, when yet he had first begone at hys owne house. For
Samson for his synne, came into the power of hys enemyes, and hys eyes being put out, he was compelled to grinde in prison, and was vtterly made a mocking stocke. Howbeit the wicked Philistines in the meane tyme escaped not vnpunished.
The custom of God in punishing. A similitude. Thus God vseth to doo, first to punish his owne, before he afflict straungers. Phisitions also, when a man hath taken poyson, haue thys as their chiefe care, to driue away the poyson from the hart, from the lyuer, and other principal partes of the body, then they apply medicines vnto the other mē bers of the body. So also the good man of the house firste enstructeth and chastiseth his chyldren, and afterwarde he enstructeth other. Wherfore
Paul wryteth of a Bishop: If he cannot wel gouerne his owne family, how shall hee gouerne the church of God? Wherfore it is no maruayle if god chastised
Samson fyrst, & afterward grieuously afflicted the Philistines. But in that it is writtē that his heare was growen againe, we must not beleue y
t hys strength lay in hys heare, for it was a gift of god geuen him freely,
The vowe of the Nazarites being violated, was renewed. but yet God required, that for that gift he should be a
Nazarite: vnto which it belonged, to let the heare growe, and not to cut it with a rasor. But if a man had transgressed, he did not therfore straight way cease to be a
Nazarite, but ought to let his heare grow, and be clensed, and so begyn againe his institucion, which he tooke in hand. Wherefore
Samson repented that he had violated his vow, and returned to the rule of a
Nazarite, and when his heare was growen, and he restored both vnto god, and to his olde state and strength, being assured of the helpe of god, he tooke vengeaunce of hys enemyes.
In the meane time the Philistines ascribe their victory against
Samson, vnto their god
Dagon.
What Dagon was. But what this god was, it is not very wel knowen. Howbeit as farre as may be iudged by the Etimology of the woorde, it was some god of the sea. For
Dag in hebrew signifieth a fyshe. And that both the Grecians and the Latines worshipped gods of the sea,
Gods of the sea it is certayne. For they had
Neptune, Leucothea, and
Triton. Aboue the belly (as they say) it had the forme of a man, & downward it ended in the forme of a fyshe. Suche a god woorshipped the Philistines. And vndoubtedly the old Ethnikes synned grieuously therin, in that they woulde rather serue the creature (as
Paul sayth) then the creator, and chaunged the glory of the immortal God, and transferred it, not onely into the similitude fashioned like a mortal man, but also into the images of birdes, fourefooted beastes,
What maner of thinges the Gods of heretikes are. and Serpentes or creeping thinges. Neither did they onely woorship those things, which ar in nature, but also they fained vnto thē selues Monsters, which appeare no where. Such gods in a maner do heretikes woorship. For they doo set before them selues some shape and head of God, when they confesse that they heleue in God the creator of heauen & earth. But when farther they adde their own thoughtes and fansies, they make the inferiour part to ende in a fishe. Of this
Dagon there is manifest mencion made in the first booke of
Samuel. The Philistines extolled their
Dagon, bycause he had deliuered their ennemye into their handes: whiche was nothing els, then to blaspheme the name of the true
[Page 235] God. For they attributed his woorkes vnto an idole. Neither considered they that
Samson was therfore taken, bicause he had sinned against God. Wherfore our synnes are a cause, why God is blasphemed: for when by reason of them we are destitute of the helpe of God, our enemies, whiche get the victorye againste vs, doo ascribe the same, both vnto their owne strengthes, and to their supersticions.
So happened it in the conqueryng of
Constantinople,
Horrible examples of blasphemies. where the Turkes when they had gotten the city, caried about in derision the image of Christ, clothed with the apparel of the Turkes, throughout al the host, and throughout all the wayes of the City. And not many yeares ago, when the Emperour
Charles the fift lost a great nauy, and many souldiours at
Argery, I remember I hearde some soldiours say, that Christ our sauiour was now become a Mahomitan or Moore,
How holy men called vpō
[...] in tribulacions neither considered they that they them selues wer become farre woorse then the
Mahomites. So the name of God is mocked for our synnes. Wherefore holy men were wont not without a cause thus to pray, and to implore mercye, that the name of God should not be euil spoken of among the Gentiles. So delt
Moses with God, when he was angry with the people, for making the golden Calfe. The Prophets also sayd: Be mercyful vnto vs Lord for thine own sake, and for thine names sake, least the nacions say, wher is their God? Let vs in the meane time, when we heare or reade these thinges, thus thincke with our selues: Seing God hath for synne so grieuouslye afflicted
Samson, so great a man, sanctified from his mothers wombe, and appointed to deliuer Israel: what shall become of vs if we synne? So
Paul to the
Corrinthians in his first Epistle, setteth foorth vnto vs the examples of the Israelites to consider, whom God sundry wayes chastised. And to the
Romanes he sayth: If he hath not spared the natural braunches, take heede that he spare not thee. Marke the goodnes and seuerity of God: his seuerity on those which haue fallen, and his goodnes in thee, if thou abide in goodnes: otherwise thou also shalt be cut of. Wherefore by these cogitacions we may take fruite by the punishment of other.
For this vse are examples set foorth vnto the Churche,
What is the fruit of holy histories. that we in readyng them shoulde become better.
Paule sayde: what soeuer thinges are before wrytten, are written for our learning, that wee throughe pacience and consolacion of the scriptures shoulde haue hope. Wherefore when we reade that holye men were so corrected, we ought to tremble, least we also fall into the lyke anger of God. If we doo not take suche fruite by reading of the holy scriptures, we then reade them in vayne.
The Philistines geue thankes vnto
Dagon their God for the victorye. So were they delyuered vp into a reprobate sense, to geue thankes for those thinges, for whych they ought most of all to haue bene sory. For how obtayned they
Samson? By the artes of an harlot, and by most fylthye deceate. After sacrifices followeth a verye sumptuous banquet. For in those holye seruices of Idoles, was set foorth a certaine communion, that the people in that feast, shoulde reioyce together wyth a certaine common ioy.
So also in the olde Testament the Israelites in theyr peace offeringes feasted and reioyced together before the Lord. Neyther is it vnlykely, but that the Fathers also before the law, had suche holy seruices and solemnities.
To what ende the Supper of the Lorde was instituted. Christ also our Sauiour instituted a Communion and holye Supper, that wee shoulde there celebrate hys name and healthfull death. But in the Sacrifices of Idols, all thynges were ordayned for ryot and pleasure, and they seldome departed from thence wythout fylthy lustes or murther, as at thys daye doo the Papistes in consecrations of theyr Churches, after Masse they celebrate a feast, afterward they fall to dauncyng and wanton leapinges: whereby oftentymes they fall together by the eares.
The Philistines assembled together aboue three thousande men, and at the length commaunde that
Samson shoulde be brought before them, a man myserable, bounde, and blynde. When they had with so many iniuries not sufficientlye fulfylled their hatred, they woulde moreouer make hym a mocking stocke. These thinges were farre more hytter,
Iosephus. then if they had put him to death. For as
Iosephus writeth in thys place: Death is naturall, and maye after a sorte bee suffered: but for as muche as to bee made a mocking stocke, hath reproche and contumely ioyned with it, that seemeth not possible to be borne wythall. It is a thing very cruell to adde affliction vnto the afflicted. Wherefore, althoughe God seemed to haue smytten
Samson, they oughte to haue bene touched wyth some mercye towardes hym, neyther must we be molestious vnto them that are smytten by God, as thoughe we woulde imitate God. Wherefore
Amos the Prophet writeth: For three transgressions of
Edom, & for the fourth I wyl not be turned. For when the Iewes were dryuen and banished oute of theyr owne countrey, and had escaped to their borders, they handled them moste cruellye. Thys thyng, sayth God by the Prophet, hee wyll not leaue vnpunished. For althoughe the Iewes were for their desertes afflicted of God, yet it was not the duty of neighbours to heape more iniuries vpon the afflicted.
Dauid in hys hundreth and nyne Psalme curseth hym which shoulde persecute him, whom the Lord hath stricken. Set thou (sayth he) the synner ouer him, and let Sathan stande at hys right hand. When hee is iudged, let hym go oute condemned, and let hys prayers be turned into synne. Let hys dayes bee fewe, and let an other take hys charge. Bycause he remembred not to shewe mercye: but persecuted the afflicted and poore man, and the sorrowful harted to kill him. These thynges we reade,
A cruel maner towarde those which haue suffred shipwrack and contemne them, and it is horryble to see the maner in certayne regions, for if any that hath suffered shypwracke escape to the shore, theyr goods, if peraduenture they bee cast on lande, are made forfayte. What other thyng is thys, then to adde affliction to the afflicted?
Howe Samson was reconciled vnto God.
Samson beyng brought before them, declareth by the successe, howe deare he was to God. Not that the sufferaunce of the pryson had purged hys synnes, it is Christ onelye whych purgeth synnes. Not that by pacience or anye other vertue he had deserued the mercye of God: awaye wyth all consideracion of desert. But in pryson he acknowledged hys synne, hee beleued trulye in Christe, and as it becommeth a godlye man, hee repented, and that so muche the more, howe muche greater the calamitye was, wherewith he was oppressed. Wherefore being endued wyth fayth, whereby he tooke holde of the mercye of God by Christ,
Samson is proued to haue had fayth. he was reconsiled vnto God. And that he had fayth, manifestlye appeareth by that, which he prayed. How (sayth
Paul) did they cal vpon god, in whom they beleued not? And in the Epistle to the Hebrues,
Samson is numbred amōg them, which being excellent in fayth, wrought wonderful thinges.
And he sayd vnto the Ladde: leade me vnto the pyller. As thoughe he had bene wearye, hee made as though hee woulde haue leaned to the pyller.
There were there al the princes of the Philistines. They were assembled thether bycause god had appointed to take punishmēt of them al together.
In what manner Samson prayed. And
Samson prayed:
Remember me Lord. These prayers at the fyrste syght seeme not verye godly. For he praieth to haue vengeaunce graunted him of his enemies, bicause they had put out both his eyes. Vndoubtedly if he did it of a stomake or choler, we could not iustly defend his prayers. For he should haue bene no more allowed of god, then if be should expressedly haue sayd: I pray thee Lorde, prosper eyther my theft,
Augustine. or my aduoutry.
Augustine sayth that
Samson dyd these thinges, not of his own wyl, but by the impulsion & counsell of the holy ghost. Farther, (as I haue often admonished) wee muste not thynke of
Samson as of a priuate man, but as of a Magistrate, whom God hym selfe had appoynted.
And in deede as a priuate man, it was not lawful for him to reuenge his owne iniuries: but as a Magistrate, he both might & ought. If we haue in hand a priuate cause, that saying of
Paul ought to be of force: Geue place vnto anger. To me belongeth vengeaūce, & I wil render, saith the Lord. But in a publike cause the Magistrate ought by the commaundement and authority of God to auenge iniury: bicause he is gods vicar in earth: and god himselfe, although often times he take vengeaunce of synnes by himselfe, and as it is sayde withoute meanes, yet for the most part he punisheth by Magistrates. Wherfore those wordes: To me belongeth vengeaunce, and I wyl render, doo not let the seueritye of Magistrates, wherby they punish the guilty. For they are the Ministers of God: and that which they do, God himselfe doth by them.
By the same maner of speeche it is sayd vnder the person of God:
God communicateth many of hys properties vnto men. Equity is mine, iudgement is mine, and power is mine: all which thinges yet he communicateth wyth men, vpon whom hee bestoweth them. Wherefore God commaunded
Samson to reuenge the iniuries of eyther, namely of the name of God and his owne: for as muche as the Philistines had put out hys eyes. But for what cause? What, bicause he had committed whooredome? No vndoubtedlye:
For what cause the Philistines afflicted Samson. but bicause he was an Israelite, a deliuerer and reuenger of the people of God. Wherefore
Samson auengeth either iniurye, both that whiche the Philistines had done vnto hym selfe, and that which they had done vnto God. When he calleth vpon God, he prayeth hym to prosper hys vocation. And suche prayers are woont to be of most efficaye. For what other thyng dyd the Apostles and other brethren pray for (as it is wrytten in the Actes of the Apostles the fourth chapter) then that God would prosper their vocation and office? Geue vnto thy seruauntes (sayde they) not to regarde their threatninges, graunt them boldlye to speake thy woorde. Streche foorth thine hande, that they maye woorke sygnes. If a man will say, the sygnes of the Apostles were profitable and healthful, bycause they delyuered and healed the afflicted. But contrarilye the signe of
Samson tended to the slaughter of his enemies. Wherfore there is not in them both one consideration: I answer, that often times it happeneth so,
The sygnes of the Apostles did not alwaies heale. Similitudes. but yet the signes of the Ayostles also were sometimes hurtful. For
Paul made
Elimas the Cuniurer blynde, and sayd: Thou Sonne of the Deuyl, why peruertest thou the right wayes of the Lord? Beholde the hand of the Lord is ouer thee, and thou shalt be blynde, and shalt not see.
Peter also wyth hys woorde slewe
Ananias and
Saphira. Yea and
Paule delyuered manye vnto Sathan. Wherfore
Samson prayeth vnto God to make fortunate, and to helpe his ministery.
Neyther can it be properlye sayde that
Samson kylled himselfe.
Samson killed not hymselfe. He dyed in deede, but he prescribed not vnto hymself this ende, namely to dye. But sought vengeaunce of hys enemies, whych he vnderstoode woulde by this meanes ensue. The Apostles also dyd thus make reckonyng wyth themselues:
Similitudes. If as wee haue begonne we teache vnto the people the kingdome of Christ, vndoubtedly we shall bee kylled: and in that they went on wyth their purpose to teache the Gospell, it cannot be iustly sayd, that they kylled them selues.
Paule also, when hee shoulde go vnto Ierusalem, and
Agabus the Prophet tolde hym, that the Iewes woulde bynde hym at Ierusalem, what dyd hee when hee hearde these thinges? Dyd he forsake hys vocation? No verely. But rather affirmed that hee was ready both to be bounde, and to dye for Christ. So sayth
Samson: Let my soule dye wyth the Philistians. He dyd not rashely incurre death, but followeth hys vocation. Souldiours when they go on warrefare, if a man peraduenture say vnto them: ye shall be slayne wyth gunnes, or wyth the swoorde, or wyth arrowes. They wyll aunswere, if they be men of valiaunt courage: we seeke not death but victorye, or we followe the defence of our owne thynges, whereunto we are called.
But as touching
Samson, God gouerned him by his spirite. Wherefore
when he dyed, he slewe more of the Philistines then he did before while he liued. What fruite therefore had the Philistines by their deceite and treason? They bought to them selues death, and present destruction. And euen as to them that loue god al thinges woorke to good, so to the aduersaries and enemies of God, al things are turned to their destruction.
The difference betwene the death of y
e Philistines and of Samson. A moste profytable admonicion of Salomon
Samson dyeth together with the Philistines, but the ende and maner is far diuers. For they dye in their wanton behauiour, cruelty, and idolatrye, but thys
Samson in fayth, and calling vpon the true God. But as touching the matter it selfe, the residewe were to eyther of them alyke. Wherefore
Salomon admonisheth vs most wisely, that wee muste not measure the godlynes of men by outward thinges, bicause they happen alyke, both to the godlye, and to the vngodly. That
Samson dyed in the fayth, hereby it appeareth, bicause euen in the very destruction he called vpon God, and was heard, and bycause God restored vnto him hys old strength. But they which are in the fleshe, can not please God: neyther can God be rightly called vpon, vnlesse fayth shyne before. Howe shall they cal vpon hym sayth the Apostle, in whom they haue not beleued? And bycause he was heard, he prayed by the inspiracion of the spirite. For wee knowe not what we shoulde praye. Therefore the spirite doth with vnspeakeable sighinges pray for vs.
Samson had before fallen, he turneth vnto god, & he heareth hym. So let vs also, when we haue somtimes sinned, returne vnto God, & faithfully cal vpō him, & we shal be heard. For he is the same god that he was then, riche vnto al those that cal vpon him:
Ambrose. that which he did vnto him, he wil do also vnto vs.
Ambrose vpon this place writeth, that
Samson was so heard of god, that hee lost his lyfe triumphantly,
Samson is a figure of Christ. and he did not onely ouercome the Philistines, but also hymself: for he represented the image of Christ, who although while he lyued, exceedingly hurted the diuel, yet when he dyed, he vtterly triumphed ouer hym. The Philistines when they ouercame
Samson, got vnto them selues moste certayne destruction: So the Iewes, when they crucified Christ, threwe them selues into euerlasting condemnaciō. And, which is to be marueiled at, the Philistines with this so great and so sodaine destruction, were so amased, that they suffered the kinsfolkes of
Samson to come, and honorably to bury him. For when the Princes were perished, the courages of the people were daunted, neither durst they attempt any thing against the Hebrewes. This place seemeth here to requyre a disputacion, whither it be lawful for any man, for any cause, to kyll hymselfe. But bicause we shall haue a place more opportune for it, at this present I wyll omyt it, and wyl in an other place fully write thereof.
¶ The .xix. Chapter.
1
ALso in those dayes, when there was no king in Israel, a certayne Leuite dwelt as a straunger on the syde of mount Ephraim, and tooke a wyfe a Concubine, out of Bethlehem Iuda.
2 And hys Concubine playde the whoore there, & went away from him vnto her fathers house to Bethelehem Iuda, & ther continued a few dayes, namely foure monethes.
3 And her husband arose & went after her, to speake vnto her hart, and to bring her againe: he had also his seruant with him, & a couple of Asses, and she brought him in into her fathers house, & when the yong womans father saw him, he reioyced of his comming.
4 And hys father in law, the yong womans father retayned hym: and he abode wyth hym three dayes. So they dyd eate and drynke, and lodged there.
5 And when the fourth daye came, they arose earelye in the morning, and he prepared to depart: then the yong womans father said vnto hys sonne in law: comfort thyne hart wyth a morsel of bread, and then go your way.
6 So they sat downe, and dyd eate and drinke both of them together. And the yong womans father sayd vnto the man: be content, I pray thee, and tary al night, and let thyne hart be mery.
7 And when the man rose vp to departe, hys father in lawe was earnest, therefore he returned and lodged there.
8 And he arose vp early the fyft day to depart, and the young womans father sayd: Comfort thine hart, I pray thee: and they taried vntil after mydday, and they both dyd eate.
9 Afterward when the man arose to depart wyth hys Concubine and hys seruaunt, hys father in law, the yong womans father sayde vnto hym: Behold now, the day draweth toward euen. I pray you tary al nyght: Behold the sūne goeth to rest: Lodge here that thine hart may be mery, and to morrow get you earlye vpon your waye, and go to thy tent.
10 But the man woulde not tarye, but arose and departed, and came ouer agaynst Iebus, (whyche is Ierusalem) and hys twoo Asses laden, and hys Concubine, were with hym.
By reason of sundry calamities and plagues wherewith the Philistians afflicted the people of their greuous synnes, the Israelites had nowe no lawfull Magistrates: wherby came to passe that many wycked actes were cōmitted, the woorshipping of God violated, and ciuill warres arose, which must nedes happen, where synnes remayne vnpunished. And that whych mought haue bene restrayned by the punishment of one or twoo, brought the destruction of manye thousandes, both of the Israelites, and also of the
Beniamites. We shal see in this hystory (whych the holye ghost referreth to the ende of thys booke) fyrste a moste haynous wycked acte of the
Beniamites. Secondlye vengeaunce taken of that Tribe by the other Tribes, wherby the
Beniamites were in a maner cleane destroyed. And lastly we shal heare the wonderful instauracion of that Tribe.
The occasion of this warre was thus. A certaine man being a
Leuite, had a wyfe, who committed adultery, and fearing the sharpenes of her housband, fled to her Parentes. Not long tyme after, her husbande went to seeke her, fyndeth her, and is reconciled vnto her. The woman as shee returned home together wyth her husband, was with most fylthy whoredome defiled of the
Gabaonites, whereby she miserably perished, & so suffred punishment for her fyrst aduoutry. For God punisheth synnes by synnes. Neither suffered he adultry being not punished by the Magistrates, to go vnpunished.
As touching the historye, it is no marueilous or straunge thing, that the
Leuite dwelt as a straunger. For althoughe that Tribe had certaine Cities and suburbes appointed it, yet very many of the
Leuites went to the townes and villages of the other Tribes, to serue them as touching doctrine & counsels: wherof I haue a litle before somwhat spoken.
This man dwelt as a straunger on the syde of mount Ephraim. The Hebrewe woord signifieth a side, a hyp or thigh. And by translacion it signifieth a region or coast. And this is a very elegant Metaphore, when there is mencion made of a mountaine. He dwelled therfore on the side of mount
Ephraim.
He tooke a wyfe a Concubine. By this place is manifestlye gathered, that the Concubines of the Fathers were wiues. For the Iewes were not bound to the lawes of the
Romanes, when as both at this tyme they were not made, and also they pertayned not to that nacion. Whych I therefore speake bycause the
Romanes had Concubines, which were not wiues. But the Hebrewes sometimes called their wyues Concubines, bycause they were not of the same honour and dignity that their wyues were, which had authority in the house. Yea the Maister sometimes maryed his handmayden, as
Abraham maryed
Agar, Iacob Bilham and
Zilpa. Peraduenture in contracting of those matrimonies there wanted tables, or some outward ceremonies, wherwith they vsed to adorne the principal matrimonies. Neither yet was that a let, but that these were matrimonies. Of this thing I haue spoken largely before. Wherefore I will at thys tyme cease to go any farther therein.
But in that the
Leuite had a wyfe, whiche was of the tribe of
Iuda, it is not to be marueiled at: bicause vnles maydens were inheritours, they mought mary in other tribes, which thing was not permitted to those that had inheritāce, to the ende that possessions should not be confounded. Farther, forasmuche as the tribes of
Iuda and
Leui excelled the other in dignitye, they were the easelyer coopled together in matrimony. For the principality seemed wel to agree wyth the Priesthood. It is called
Bethlehem of
Iuda, to put a difference from the other
Bethlehem, as we haue before declared.
She committed aduoutry by hym. We might also say against him. For ther is great iniury done vnto the man, when the wife playeth the whoore. And this preposicion
All signifeth either. But the plainer sense is
by him. As thoughe it should haue bene said that she committed aduoutry, when she was yet together with her husband, and had not departed from him.
She fled to her father. Being so afearde of her husbande that shee durst not come in his sight, she got her to her fathers house. Adultery is committed, which is a grieuous crime, and yet is not punished by the punishment of the lawe, for that there was no Magistrate to execute iudgementes. And thoughe in all persons aduoutry is a grieuous wicked act,
The wyfe of a Minister if she be an adultres, synneth more grieuously then other. yet in the wyfe of a
Leuite or Priest it is farre more grieuous, for as muche as the holye ministerye ought to bee well spoken of. Wherefore if the daughter of a Priest had played the harlot in her Fathers house, she was not stoned as other were, but burnt with fyre, as it is expressedly wrytten in
Deuteromy. But why this adultresse was not slaine, the cause (as it is before sayde) was, for that there was no Magistrate in Israel.
[Page 249] And this adulteresse might think to herself y
t she had escaped punishmēt,
This adulterous woman escaped not the punishmente of God. as touchinge men, but she could not escape the hand of God. For god shall iudge adulterers and whoremōgers, as the Epistle to the Hebrewes teacheth, which thing he doth sometimes by magistrates: and sometimes when they cease, by himself. The woman was with her parents .4. monthes, in which space of time, her husband being either moued with mercy, or wearied with solitarines, went to seke hys wyfe, and
to speake to her harte.
Two manner of wayes of punishinge the guilty. By this Hebrewe phrase is signified that he would comfort her being in misery and afflicted, or geue her some profitable counsell, peraduenture that she should repent her of the sinne which she had cō mitted, promising her that if she would do so, he woulde receaue her into fauor agayne.
He ioined a coople of Asses. That he might haue one to cary his wife, and the other to lade with thinges necessary for his iorney. The wife as sone as she saw him,
brought him into her fathers house. By whiche acte shee declareth that shee was not vtterlye alienated from her husbande.
The father of the maiden, that is his father in lawe,
mette him and ioyfully embrased him. Whereby we gather, that the old man also wished a reconcilement betwene them.
He abode there three dayes. He abode there in verye dede fiue dayes: but thre dayes willingly, the other two dayes he was in a manner compelled by his father in law.
And they did eate and drinke. These thinges declare that they were reconciled, and that the matrimony was renewed betwene them. But when he would haue departed, the father in law sayd:
Thou shalt strengthen thy hart with a morsell of breade. And by this woorde breade he vnderstode all kinde of meate. The old man would not so sone let thē go, bicause he desired to haue fauor and loue confirmed betwene them, to thend they should not afterward be easly seperated, the one from the other: This was his purpose.
Behold the day is weakened. He vseth a Metaphore, and signifieth y
e passage of the Sunne to the west, & that there was a little of the day remaining. So also men when they come to age, ar weakned in the body. The
Leuit would tary no longer: which turned to his greate hurt.
Let vs by the way note in this place, that for him which shal make a iorney it is vnprofitable to tary long at banquetings. For commonly they ar oppressed with night, before they can come to theyr lodginges.
Now it semeth that I should entreate of adulteries, wherby I might declare the nature and greiuousnes of that sinne, and setforth the punishmentes of that crime, which ar appointed both by the ciuil laws & by the ecclesiastical, but these shalbe spoken of when wee are come vnto the history of
Dauid, who committed most filthy adultery with
Bethsaba. Now I haue determined to entreate onelye of the reconsiliation of the husband and the wife, after the committing of adultery, and I will touch the whole matter briefly.
¶Of the reconciliation of the husband & the wife after that adultery hath ben committed.
THe ciuil lawes are vtterly against the reconciliation of the husband and the wife, after the one hath committed adultery.
The ciuill lawes abhorre from reconciliation after adultery. For in the Code
ad. l. Iuliam de adulteriis in the law
Castitati nostrorum temporum it is ordeined, that if a man maried againe a wife condemned of adultery, he incurreth the crime of being a bawd. And in the same title in the law
Crimē, it is had, that he which retaineth still in matrimonye a wife that hath played the adulteresse, can not accuse her of adultry. Although afterward by a new law it was otherwise prouided for. Neither was it a light thinge to be condemned is a bawde: but it was euen as greiuous
[Page] as if a man had ben condēned of adultry. Yea and if a man retayn her that is condēned of adultry, he may him self without an accuser be condēned of adultry. And if a man marie agayn her whom y
t he hath once repudiated, he cannot accuse her of the adultry before committed. But if she again commit adultry, he may. Bycause in marieng her againe he seemeth to haue allowed her acte. And if any woman be condemned of adultry, no man can take her to wife. Wherefore y
e ciuil lawes do abhor from reconciliacion after adultry, so that it be conuict and condemned. For if it be onely his suspicion, it is lawful for the husband to retayne and accuse her whome hee suspecteth: Who if hee afterwarde see that he was ledde by a vayne supicion to accuse her, hee maye cease from that which he hath begonne, so that he first obteine a release of the Iudge.
Ierome vpon the .19. chapter of
Mathew may appeare to agree with the ciuil lawes. For he writeth: she which hath deuided one flesh into one or two, ought not to be retained, least her husbande be made subiect vnto the curse. For as it is written in the .18. chapter of the Prouerbes: He which retaineth an adultresse, is vngodly and a foole. In dede so haue the .70. interpreters turned it, but the verity of the Hebrewe hath it not. The same
Ierome saith: If there happpen any sin, it breaketh not matrimony. But if ther happen adoultery, then the wife is not lawfull. And in the .32. question the first, ar rehearsed the words of
Chrisostome. If a manne haue to doe with an adulterous wife, let him do penaunce. And the same
Chrisostome vpon the .26. chap. of
Mathew: Euen as he is vniuste whiche accuseth an innocent, so is he a foole which retayneth an adulteresse. The same thing is had in the decretals
de Adult. in the chap.
Si vir sciens: And it was decreed at the counsell of
Orleaunce. The husband which retaineth an adulteresse is partaker of the crime. And if a woman repudiated, marye an other, her laste husband being dead, she can not return vnto the first. For now she is vncleane vnto him, as it is written in the .24. of
Deut.
But now omitting these thinges, let vs see the reasons which serue for reconciliation. God himselfe which is onely good, would be the husbande of the church, and that not onely in our time, but also in the times of the fathers. But the church, especially the old church, oftentimes turned aside to idolatry, and cō mitted whoredome with the Gods of the
Gentiles, as euerye where appeareth in this booke, and also in the history of the kinges, and in the prophetes: Neuertheles yet
Ieremy called it back againe in the name of God to return to her husband. Which selfe thinge
Hoseah the prophet also did, & that with many words. And if god be redy to receaue his wife beynge an adulteresse, man ought also to returne into fauor agayne with his wife, especially if she repent, and beginne a new life. For as many as are christian men, professe the imitation of God. Ther is also an example of
Dauid, who toke agayne his wife
Michol, although her father had placed her to an other man.
Iustinian
Iustinian also in his Authentikes, when he commaundeth that an adulteresse should be beaten & be shut vp in a monastery, yet hee geueth libertye to the husbande to take her againe, if he will, within the space of two yeares, & so he most manifestly alloweth reconciliation.
Augustine
Augustine in his. 2 boke to
Pollencius is very much in this, y
t they should be reconciled. For many in his time would not receaue their wiues which had cō mitted adultery, as such, as which were now polluted & contaminated. Where fore he wrote: doest thou thinke her polluted, whom baptisme and repentaunce hath purged? Whom God hath clensed? She ought not to seme to thee polluted. And if she be now recōciled vnto the kayes of the church, & admitted into y
e kingdome of heauen, by what right canst thou put her from thee? These thinges are had also in 32. question .1. If she haue fallen, thou must know it came of humayne nature, & mercy muste be shewed her, if she arise. For we woulde the same to be done vnto vs. And extreme right, is extreme wronge. In the decretals
de adulteriis & stupris, in the chap.
Si vir sciens, it is had out of the counsel of
Orleaunce.
[Page 250] An adultresse if she repent, ought to be receaued. The glose in that place demaū deth, by what right or dewty she ought to be receiued. It answereth: Not by the lawe of necessitye, for if y
e man wil not, he cannot be compelled to receaue her, wherfore he ought by the law of honesty to take her agayne. But I woulde demaund whither it ought not also to be done by y
e dewty of piety & by the strēgth of the commaundement of God, forasmuch as
Paule to the
Philip. saith, do these things, whatsoeuer ar honest and iust? Therfore it is also don by necessity of the commaundement. But the gloser in that place intreated of the outward iudgemente, wherein no man can be compelled to receaue an adulteresse. But in the Cannon now cited it is added: Not very often. For if she fal often into adultry, she ought not to be receaued. The Glose in the same place obiecteth vnto it self christ, who whē he was demaūded, how oftē we shuld forgeue our brother whē he offendeth against vs, answered not onely seuē times, but seuenty seuē times. To this he sayth, that the words of the Cannō are to be vnderstād, that when y
e adulteresse so oftentimes falleth, the church shall not entreate for her reconciliacion, partelye bycause there shoulde be opened a wyndowe to wyckednes,
When the churche ought to entreate for those that fall. and partly bycause she might thinke that penaunce is but fayned and dessembled. There is also added an other aunswere, that that is spoken for a terrour, least men should more freely and carelesly commit sinne. Hereby is gathered that the church oughte to entreate for the reconciliation of the repentant, that they may be reconciled. Wherfore an adultresse, either sheweth signes of repentaunce, or els sheweth not. If she shew signes, the church oughte to entreate for her, that there may be a reconciliation made. But if she shewe none, the churche shall not entreate for her: otherwise it should seme to maintain sinnes.
Now must we aunswere vnto the arguments which semed to be agaynst reconciliation.
Aunsweres vnto the reasons on the contrary part. The counsell of Orleance. The cause why the law of Moses prohibited the returne of a wyfe repudiated vnto her first husbande. As touching the ciuill lawes they are to be corrected by the word of God.
Ierome and
Chrisostome do speake of such an adultresse whiche repenteth not, which selfe same thing is manifestly vnderstand by the counsel of
Orleance. For that it is there had: He whiche retaineth an adultresse, is partaker of the crime: but if she repent, let her be receaued. But why the lawe of
Moses suffred not, that a wife repudiated should not after the death of her latter husbande returne vnto her first, the cause may easely be assigned. For if he had permitted y
t, then diuorsements would easely haue bene had, in hope somtimes to recouer agayne theyr wife. God would that she that was repudiated, shoulde returne no more, to the ende that shee shoulde not easelye bee repudiated. There mighte also bee conspiracies made agaynste the latter husbande, whereby the wyfe myghte, when hee were dyspatched awaye, returne agayne vnto her firste husbande. Wherefore the lawe of God was moste iuste, whiche pertayned not vnto adultrous women, which by the commaūdement of God ought to be stoned. By these thinges now it is manifest that it is lawfull for the husband to return into fauor with his wife being an adulteresse, so that she repent: who yet ought to accuse his wife of adultry, if it be a publike crime, or if she perseuer in her wickednes, or els if she bring forth any children by adultry, least the lawful heires should be defrauded: for vnlesse she be accused, the husbande cannot depriue the son borne in adultry, but that he shall inherite. Farther, let the church entreate and work with him, that he would receaue againe the woman being repentāt. Wherfore our Leuite ought not to be reproued, bicause he receaued again into fauor his wife being an adultresse, so that she repented her of her adultery. But now will I return to the interpretation.
11 When they were nere to Iebus, the day was sore, spent and the seruant said vnto his master: come, I pray thee, and let vs turn into this city of the Iebusites, and lodge al night there.
12 And his maister aunswered him: we wil not turne into the city of straungers that are not of the children of Israel, but we will go
[Page] forth to Gibaah.
13 And he said vnto his seruant: Come, and let vs draw nere to one of these places, that we may lodge in Gibaah or in Ramah.
14 So they wente forwarde vpon their waye, and the sunne wente downe vpon them nere to Gibaah, which is in Beniamin.
15 Then they turned thither to goe in and lodge in Gibaah: and when he came, he sate him down in a strete of the city: for there was no man that tooke them into his house to lodging.
16 And behold, there came an old man from his worke out of the field at euen, and the man was of mounte Ephraim: but dwelte in Gibbaah, and the men of the place wer the children of Iemini.
17 And when he had lift vp his eyes, he saw a wayfaringe man in the streetes of the city: then this old man sayd, whether goest thou, and whence camest thou?
18 And he aunswered him, we came from Beth-lehem Iudah, vnto the side of mounte Ephraim: from thence am I: and I wente to Beth-lehem Iudah, and go now to the house of the Lorde: and no man receaueth me into his house.
19 Although we haue straw and prouender for our Asses, and also breade and wyne for me and thine handmayd, and for the boy that is wyth thy seruant: we lacke nothing.
20 And the old man said: peace be with thee: al thy penury be vpon me: onely abide not in the strete al night.
Ierusalem was therfore called
Iebus, bicause the
Iebusites in the old time inhabited it. The seruant counselled his master to take iodgynge before the Sunne should set. But he would not.
VVe will not turne in (sayth he)
neither to this city nor to that, neither to any other city of straungers which ar Gentiles. But it may seme merueilous how
Ierusalem is called straunge from the Israelites, when as in the beginning of this booke there is mencion made y
t the Hebrewes toke it & named it
Ierusalem.
How it is sayd that Ierusalē was at this time a city of straungers. They which sayd that this history is to be referred vnto the fyrst times of the Iudges, namely that it was done before
Othoniell beganne to iudge, from the death I say of
Iosua, to the gouernment of
Othoniell, seeme to be ledde by this argument. In that space of time they say these thinges happened. These mens coniecture hath in dede som shew of truth. But it is not very firm. For wee muste knowe that the Iewes often times behaued themselues ill in fallinge from the worshippinge of the true God. Wherefore he left them destitute of his ayde, wherof they being beriued, they were again ouercome of those, whome before they had ouercome, whereby it came to passe that the
Iebusites recouered agayne theyr city and dwelled in it. Wherfore those thinges which are written in the beginninge of this booke, are not agaynst those which are nowe declared. For the
Iebusites hauing recouered theyr city, inhabited it as they did before, and it was called after the old name.
The wise counsell of the seruaunt.The seruant did geue his maister wise counsell, if a man should loke vpon y
t the euent. For it is daungerous to trauayle by night especially for a man that is a straunger and vnarmed, as this
Leuite was, which had with him onely his wife and his seruant. Neyther is this any new or vnaccustomed thinge that seruantes ar somtimes wiser thē their masters, although it oftētimes happeneth, that counsel hath authority of the geuer: as we vnderstand happened here, wher counsel although it were profitable,
Aristotle. is despised, peraduēture bycause it came frō a seruāt.
Aristotle in his Politikes saith, they which excel in mind & coūsel ought
[Page 251] to beare rule and they which are strong of body must obey. But that cōmeth not alwayes to passe: yea rather it oftentymes happeneth that masters which are not of the wisest, but yet strong in body, haue seruaunts far wiser then themselues, although they be not very strong in body. Farther we must not deny,
The giftes of God are not bound vnto the estates or cōditions of men. but y
e prudence and counsels whiche are the giftes of God are not bounde vnto the conditions or estates of Lordshyp and seruitude, nor also to the temperatures of bodyes. God geueth them, to them whom he thinketh good, & that most freely, somtymes to seruauntes, and sometymes to Lordes, sometymes to poore men, and sometymes to riche men. GOD ministred vnto a man beyng a seruaunt good counsell: whiche yet the
Leuite would not fellowe to his great hurt. For if he had turned into the City of the
Iebusites, peraduenture he had not fallen into that calamity whiche followed.
These thinges are spoken concernyng the counsell of the seruaunt if we consider y
e vtility therof: but yet a thing is not to be iudged by y
e euent.
The Leuite is excused. Neither is the
Leuite in this place rashely to be accused: bycause it seemeth that he had a shewe of honesty & piety. For he thought, that if it were possible, he should not go vnto the vngodly & Idolatrers, such as wer the
Iebusites, and he had a great deale better opinion of the Hebrues, then of straungers. Yea and the seruaunt, for y
t he so earnestly desired to turne into y
e
Iebusites, may be accused either of sluggishnes, for that he being weary of the waye, would take no paynes to go any further: or els he may be accused of vnaduisednes, bycause he considered not with himselfe y
t the
Iebusites wer enemyes vnto y
e Hebrues: or els of an vngodly mind, for that he litle passed to turne vnto Idolatrers. Wherfore it seemeth that the
Leuite did rightly and wisely, if we looke vpon the ordinary way and law of piety, and not vpon the end. But all thynges happened contraryly. For in
Gibaa (as we shall heare,) his wife was by violence oppressed, and so died: and ciuile warre stirred vp, wherin many thousandes of men died.
What we ought in counsell to counte doubtful, and what certayn. Wherfore we ought alwayes to suspect our counsels as touching the ende, but yet not as touchyng iustice, not that we should feare, least god shuld cast vs away, but least for our sinnes there might happē some miserable end. Wherfore whē we haue determined to do any thing, we must with most feruent prayers pray vnto God to turne to good the counsell whiche we haue taken, and to direct our purpose. For vnles he build the house,
What is to be doone after we haue taken coū sell. they labour in vayne whiche build it. And except he prosper our enterprises, all thynges are in vayne taken in hand. And yet in the meane tyme we must vse a very great diligence. But now we rede not y
t the
Leuite called vpon God, when as yet he was in some daunger.
Iacob when he should iorney into
Mesopotamia called vpon God with a great fayth.
The counsell or purpose of the
Leuite was to turne into Cities which the Hebrues inhabited, especially either vnto
Gibaa or vnto
Rama. These Cityes were not farre from
Ierusalem. He entred into
Gibaa, where no man bad hym to hys house. That City longed to the tribe of
Beniamin. It may seeme that he would rather haue gone to
Rama, but (as it is written)
the sunne went downe vpon him nyghe vnto Gibaa, wherfore he entred into a City of men vncurteous. For whē the man being a straunger stoode in the streetes in the night tyme, no man receaued him into his house. But where as barbarous inhospitality reigneth, there also are more grieuous wicked vices wont not to be wantyng.
Why no man bad the Leuite to his house. But why no mā receaued him into his house, the cause was, for that in a great number of euil Citezins, there were very few good men, & if there were any, the same wer afrayed to receaue him into their house, least for his sake some euill should happen vnto them. For they knewe the wantōnes and the filthy lustes of those men. And so whilest the straunger was despised, the law of God was in that City had in contempt. For it commaunded, that gentlenes should be shewed vnto straungers, yea and God called himselfe the tutor and reuenger of straungers, neither could
[Page] those Citezins seeme any longer to be the people of God, seyng they had cast awaye hys lawe.
A praise of hospitality.And euen as to contemne straungers is a most grieuous vice: so is Hospitality a vertue most excellent. Wherfore in the Epistle to the Hebrues it is writtē: Forget not liberality and Hospitality. Although (not to dissemble) in Greeke it be somewhat otherwise written
[...].
What is the general worde of hospitality. But
[...] is the general word of Hospitality. Then it followeth: For with such sacrifices God is wel pleased. Out of which place the Papistes go about to defende merites, as though he whiche sheweth himselfe liberall towardes the poore, shall deserue something at Gods hand. But in the Greke is rede
[...], whiche signifieth not, shalbe wonne by deserte, but receaueth with a glad and chearefull minde: which is to be referred vnto God, and not to those whiche shew liberality vnto the poore. The sense therfore is this, that god doth reioyse in such sacrifices, & doth accept them with a glad mynde, yea and Christ himselfe also shall say in the last iudgement: I was a straunger and ye lodged me, for he that receaueth a straunger, receaueth Christ in him. So
Abraham &
Lot when they thought that they had had straungers in their house, receaued the sonne of God & aungels. The
Gabaonites being voyde of this vertue, contemned the
Leuite beyng a straunger walkyng in the streete. But there was in that City a certayne other straūger, whiche was borne in mount
Ephraim, who being moued with mercy, receaued the
Leuite into hys house. And so in
Gabaa a straunger was better then the Citezins. This man peraduenture was a husband man, and in the euenyng returned out of the field frō his rusticall worke. The
Leuite telleth him that he hath prouendre for his Asses, and also that he wanted not bread and wine, that he might the easelier and willinglier be receaued. As thoughe he should haue sayd, we shall not be burdenous vnto any man, for we haue all things that are necessary for our liuyng.
Peace be with thee: Thy pouerty be vpon me. Care not (sayth he) I wil furnishe that whiche wanteth. I nothing passe what thou hast with thee, or what thou hast not. The humanity of this man was great, whiche appeareth so muche the more excellent, bycause he dwelled among the inhumane and cruel
Gabaonites. He was borne & brought vp in an other place, where the feare of God was more regarded, then among the
Gabaonites. Yet he seemeth not herein to be praysed, for that he dwelt so longe among vngodly and wicked men.
We must flye the fellowshyp of wicked men. For we ought not to esteme any thyng so much, that for the cause therof we should haue a will to dwell among idolatrous & wicked men. Wherfore if any greuous chaunce happen in that society vnto men which are otherwise good, they can not complayne that the same happeneth vnto them vndeserued.
Lot sped yll bycause he dwelt among the
Sodomites. He saw the coūtrey fertyll and plentifull, & hauing great plēty of heardes and flockes, he would abide there. But with that he escaped not vnpunished. For once he was led away prisoner, and except
Abraham had delyuered him with an army which he had assembled, he should al his lyfe tyme haue serued in most hard bondage. Afterward when these Cityes were burnt, he scarsely escaped frō burning. Whiche benefite he may ascribe rather vnto
Abraham, then vnto himself:
How vnprofitable euill fellowship is. for if he had perished together with them, he should haue had no cause to haue cōplained of God. Euill fellowship alwayes for the most part, either hurteth or eis engendreth daunger.
The
Gabaonites beyng of the tribe of
Beniamin, are called also the children of
Iemini, bycause that famely was noble in the tribe. Wherfore this famely possessed y
e City,
D. Kimhi. although
Dauid Kimhi expoundeth the sonnes of
Iemini, for strōge and migthy men, for
Iemini in Hebrew signifieth the right hand. Wherfore the children of
Iemini (as he thinketh) are they, whiche haue lawe and ryght in the right hand, and therfore do not what is lawful, but what they can. I do not deny but that the
Gabaonites were such, but I rather allowe the first exposition as the truer and more simple. For it is manifest that it was a famely in
Beniamin,
[Page 252] of whiche came
Saul also.
Mesapua signifieth in Hebrew whatsoeuer meate is geuē vnto cattell, besides straw and chaffe, that is Tares, Otes, and Barley. The old man had compassiō of the straunger, either peraduenture bycause he was his contreyman, or els at the least for that he himselfe also dwelt there as a straunger. For common miseryes do oftentymes ioyne men together. Wherfore in
Virgil Dido sayth:
Virgil. I not beyng ignoraunt of euil, do learne to succor the miserable. After the same maner the Lord sayth in y
e law: afflict not straūgers, bycause ye were sometymes straū gers your selues in
Egypt. But the
Gabaonites had vtterly forgotten their olde estate. But y
e old mā, bicause in time past he had ben a straūger, or rather bicause he was euen then also a straūger, was moued with mercy. Yea & God doth somtymes somewhat afflict those that are his, that they should learne to haue cōpassion ouer other. For they whiche alwayes florishe in wealth and riches, are not greatly moued with the miseryes of other men. And
Paul to the Hebrues sayth, that Christ was made lyke vnto his brethren in all thynges, that he myght haue compassion of other.
The
Leuite maketh mention
that he would go vnto the house of God, that is in
Siloh where the arke of the Lord was. And
Siloh was in mount
Ephraim. He would therfore go thether, peraduenture to geue thākes vnto god, bicause bringing home his wife agayn he had luckly finished his busines. Other thinke that the yong man added these things of the arke and house of God, to the end the old mā should be the more gentle vnto him, when he should vnderstand that he was no common man, but a
Leuite, which would go vnto the holy tabernacle of God.
21 So he brought hym into his house, & gaue foddre vnto y
e Asses: Afterward they washed their feete, and did eate and drinke.
22 And as they were making their hartes merye: Behold, the men of the City, wicked men, be set the house round about, and smote at the doore, and spake to this old man the master of the house, saying: Brynge foorth the manne that came into thyne house, that we maye knowe hym.
23 And this man the master of the house went out, and sayde vnto them: Nay my brethren do not so wickedly, I praye you: seyng that this man is come into mine house, do not this vilannie.
24 Beholde, here is my daughter, a virgine, and his concubine: thē will I bryng out nowe, and humble them, and do with them what seemeth you good: but to this man do not this detestable acte.
25 But the men would not harken to hym: therfore the man tooke hys concubine and brought her out vnto them: and they knew her, and abused her all the night vntyl the mornyng: and when the day began to spryng, they let her go.
26 So the woman came in the dawning of the day, and fell downe at the dore of the mās house, where her Lord was, till the light day.
27 And her Lorde arose in the mornyng, and opened the doores of the house, and went out to go his waye, and behold, the woman his concubine was dead at the doore of the house, and her handes laye vpon the threshold.
28 And he sayde vnto her, vp and let vs go: but she aunswered not. Then he tooke her vp vpon the Asse, and the man rose vp, and went vnto his place.
29 And when he was come to his house, he tooke a knife, and layde
[Page] hand on his concubine, and deuided her in peces with her bones into twelue partes, and sent her throughout al the quarters of Israel.
30 And all that sawe it (sayd:) There was no suche thyng doone or sene since the tyme that the children of Israell came vp from the lande of Egypte vnto this daye: consider the matter, consulte, and geue sentence.
Where as it is sayde,
And he gaue his Asses foder. In Hebrew it is written
Vaiabol whiche signifieth, he mingled, for this verbe
Balal signifieth to myngle. For in those regions they vse to mingle chopped straw with barley, & so to geue them vnto their cattell.
The maner of washing of fete very muche vsed in Syria.
And washed their fete. In those places y
t are extreme hot, when men haue done their iorney, they vse to washe their feete, & to wipe away the dust, which office was sometymes shewed vnto Christ our sauiour, and he agayne executed the same vnto his Apostles.
Paul also required this of good widowes, namely to washe the feete of the Saintes.
Bring out the man that we may know him. By these words is described a thing most filthy & an horrible act. There was neuer heard of the like boldnes & filthy lust as was this of the
Gabaonites: therfore they are called
the children of Belial, that is, without an yoke, bycause they had shaken of good manners, the lawe of God and of nature, neither would they abyde to beare any yoke. Hereby also appeareth theyr exceding cruelty, for they did not onely despise a straunger, but also would reprochefully haue doone him great iniury.
But y
e good old man the host of y
e
Leuite, had not onely receaued him into hys house, but also afterward defended him with y
e daunger & iniury of his house. He goeth forth vnto thē, exhorteth thē not to cōmit any such thing. First bicause the thing was filthy & horrible: farther, bicause y
e mā had entred into his house, & he coūted it his part, by right of hospitality to defēd him frō al iniury. Lastli, whē he perceaued y
t their lust was importunate & vnbrideled, he offred vnto thē his own daughter & the wife of y
e
Leuite, rather thē they should do him so great a reproche. Howbeit they as contēners both of god & mē nothing care for these things.
Of the fayth of Hospitality. The right of hospitality was of no force with thē, which the old mā obiected vnto thē. Vndoubtedly faith is to be kept with an enemy, and much more with a guest or strāger. Wherfore in the digestes
de nautis & cauponis in y
e law .1. there is a double actiō allowed against the host, if any thing be takē away out of y
e lodging frō the guest, how much more if there be violence done against his body? Among the elders y
e religiō of straūgers was great, bycause it semed a thing acceptable vnto god to defēd & saue harmeles y
e straūger.
Iupiter Hospitalis. Wherfore
Iupiter, as he was called
Stator &
Pheretrius, so also was he named
Hospitalis, as it were a keper and defēder of straungers.
Busyris a cruell host. But
Busiris like a cruell & bloudy Tyrant slewe his guestes. But his cruelty escaped not vnpunished, for
Hercules slew him with his club.
Euery manne ought to bee sale in his own house.The
Gabaonites w
tout al yoke rāged abrode in the night tyme, beset the house, threaten to breake it opē, & to stay them y
t are in it, when as otherwise euery mā ought to be safe in his owne house. Which thing was also decreed afterward by the
Romane lawes, as it is had in the title
de in ius vocando, in the digestes in the lawe
plerique: No man ought to haue hys house inuaded. For the priuate house of euery man seemeth to be a certayne holy sanctuary to his possessor. But with the
Gabaonites there was nothyng safe or holy: so much had lacke of a gouernor brought to passe.
The vngodly are sometymes called brethrē.The olde man when he dissuaded them from their wicked crime, called them brethren, to see if by pleasant and gentle speech he could haue asswaged thē. For if he should haue dealt more sharpely, he should more vehemently haue kyndled them. And yet in callyng them brethren he lyed not, for as they came of the tribe of
Beniamin, and he discended of
Ephraim, they were begotten all of one father,
[Page 253] namely of
Iacob. Lot also in the like cause called the
Sodomites brethren. It was vndoubtedly wysedome in moste daungerous corrections, to vse moste gentle wordes. Yea and
Augustine when he wrote to the
Madaurenses,
Augustine. whiche otherwise were Idolatrers, called them brethren. Wherfore it is to be lamented and meruayled at, that the Ministers of the Churches of the
Lutherians doo so abhorre from our men, that they will not in any case call them brethren, as though they denyed the sonne of GOD, and preached not his Gospell. But our Churches nothing regarde their importunity, but of Christian charity counte them for brethren, whether they will or no: and althoughe they differ from them in the matter of the Sacrament, yet haue they not broken the bande of brotherly charity towardes them. But whether of vs doo behaue our selues more sincerely and faythfully in the fielde of the Lord: Christ in the last day, & also in tyme hereafter shall declare.
But here commeth a question whether this olde man did well, in offryng his daughter and the wife of the
Leuite vnto the
Gabaonites, to the ende they should not violate his guest. To this all men aunswere not after one manner. Some say that he considered the greatenes and horriblenes of the wicked crime, and preferred the lesser euill before the greater, and would not breake his fayth geuē vnto his guest. And by these reasons they thinke to excuse hym. And after the same manner they iudge of
Lot.
Chrisostome. And amonge other
Chrisostome excedyngly prayseth
Lot in that thyng:
Ambrose. whiche selfe thyng doth
Ambrose also in hys booke of
Abraham the
Patriarche, bycause he lesse estemed the contumely of hys house, then so great a wicked acte. But
Augustine in his questions vpon
Genesis,
Augustine. considereth these things, both more diligently & also more depely, and denyeth that to recompēse one faulte by an other, is not in any case to be suffred.
Compensation of sinnes is not to be admitted. By his sentēce it was not lawfull for hym to permitte hys daughter to the lust of the
Sodomites, to the ende they should not sinne more grieuously. Neither is it lawfull for vs to committe the lyghter crime, to auoyde a more grieuous. For the Apostle hath apertly taught: That euyll thynges are not to be doone, that good should ensue. Wherfore when the matter commeth to sinne, althoughe it seeme light, yet we must vtterly abstayne from it. And if it should seeme that some greuouser sinne would followe, if we should refuse to sinne, that care is to be committed vnto GOD, but we vnder that pretence ought not to committe any sinne. This was
Augustines opinion, whiche I excedingly well allowe. And not to goo from our Hystory whiche we haue in hande, althoughe this olde man ought fayth vnto hys guest, yet ought he fayth and defence also vnto his daughter, and vnto the wife of the
Leuite. Neither was it lawfull for him to performe more fayth vnto hys guest, then the woorde of GOD would suffer. Wherfore he could not iustly humble vnto them his daughter, or the wife of his guest. For the father hath not the daughter so in hys power, that he maye put her foorth to other men to be abused. Neither ought the daughter to obey in any thyng that is sinne, thoughe the father wil and commaunde her.
But they say: The lesser euill is to be preferred before the greater.
How the lesser euill is to bee preferred before the greater. I knowe that men are wont so to say. But it must ryghtly be vnderstand, namely that it taketh place in outwarde afflictions and griefes of the body, and of the lyfe. Bycause in such discommodityes, as often as we must take deliberation what we ought to preferre, the lesser hurt is to be preferred before the greater: bycause it hath the nature and reason of goodnes. But in sinne there is no consideration of goodnes. And vndoubtedly what soeuer is synne, the same muste strayghtwaye be reiected, let followe what will. But
Augustine, excuseth after a sorte
Lot and thys olde manne, bycause they fell with a heauy and troubled mynde. It oftentymes happeneth vnto wyse men, with a troubled mynde to doo those thynges, whiche afterwarde when they come to themselues, they allowe not.
[Page] But this excuse doth not vtterly absolue these menne from sinne, althoughe it somewhat release them. But if a manne will say,
Paul preferred the lesser sinne before the greater, when he sayde, he woulde be accursed of Christ for hys brethrē, rather then they should persiste in that blyndnes and stubbernnes, wherein they were holden. He whiche obiecteth this vnto vs, must knowe that he doth not rightly vnderstand that place of
Paul. For the Apostle desired to redeme the saluation of the Iewes with his daunger, not vndoubtedly with sinne, but with hys losse or hurte, namely to be accursed of Christe, not certaynely to be made an
Apostata, or to cease to beleue in Christ, but onely not to haue the fruition of the eternall and blessed lyfe.
Augustine.
Augustine also hath many thynges agaynst thys compensation of sinnes. And amonge other thinges: What (sayeth he) if a man require, either of a mayden fornication, or of a maryed woman adultery, and threateneth to kill hymselfe, vnles he obteyne hys request, ought the pure and chaste women to fulfill his desire? No vndoubtedly. Neither thoughe he afterwarde slay hymselfe, shall the chast women be counted guilty of his death. They ought in deede to be sory for hym, to deplore his acte, but not to thinke they haue done euill, bycause they graunted hym not vnlawfull thynges. The same
Augustine vpon the .146.
Augustine. Psalme writeth: If a man deny dewe beneuolence vnto his wife bycause he would lyue chastly, and the wyfe in the meane tyme fall into adultery, he sinneth, neither can his entent be allowed. For sinne is not to be admitted in the wyfe, for the exercising of continency. God (sayeth he) doth not recompense suche a hurte with suche a gayne. Wherfore the sentence of
Leo the first,
Leo in the dist .46. chapter.
Non suo) is to be allowed, wherein he sayth, that it is vncomely that any should bestow theyr faultes vpon other mens commodities.
Augustine in hys booke
De mendacio to
Consentius sayeth: For the health of our neyghbours,
Augustine. we must doo whatsoeuer may be doone. And if it come to that point, that we can not helpe them without sinne, there remayneth nothyng els for vs to doo. And he addeth that no manne must be brought into heauen by a lye. The same
Augustine in an other place sayeth: If poore menne see a cruell and bitter riche manne, and woulde steale any thynge from hym, eyther to helpe themselues, or other poore menne, they doo not diminishe sinne, but encrease it.
Gregory And
Gregory Byshoppe of Rome in hys Epistle to
Siagrius: To committe the lesse sinne, to the end to auoyde the greater, is to offer Sacrifices vnto GOD of a wicked acte,
To Chrisostome and Ambrose. as it is written in the .21. of the
Prouerbes. But in that
Chrisostome and
Ambrose doo for thys cause prayse
Lot, they are thus to bee vnderstande, namely that they allowed hys charity and fayth towardes straungers, and had a respecte vnto the horriblenes of the sinne whiche the Citezins were ready to committe, not that they allowed their abandonyng of theyr women. And thus muche as touchyng thys matter.
How much the horrible synne of the Sodomites is to be detested.
Augustine.But in that the olde manne calleth it
a villany and a detestable thyng, whiche they went about to committe, he sayeth most truely. For seede was geuen vnto manne for procreations sake. But these pestiferous menne abuse the gifte geuen them of GOD, they resiste hys law, and agaynste nature chaunge menne, in that after a sorte they turne the male into the female.
Augustine to
Pollentius: Adultery (sayeth he) is more grieuous then whooredome, and incest more heynous then adultery, but that whiche is done agaynste nature, is of all most wicked and detestable. And he addeth: In thynges whiche GOD hath graunted, it is more tollerable immoderatly to transgresse, then lyghtly to sinne in those thynges whiche by no meanes are graunted. And in hys .3. booke of Confessions he sayeth, that the fellowship of humane kynde is violated with GOD, bycause nature whiche we haue of GOD, is polluted. This was the crye of the
Sodomites and the
Gomorhites which ascended into heauē, and the grieuousnes
[Page 254] of their wickednes is moste manifest by their distruction. For they were distroyed with fire and brimestone from heauen, punishementes vndoubtedly agreable vnto so greate a heynous crime: by the fire was noted their burnyng filthy luste, and by brymestone theyr stynkyng and vnpure wicked crime.
Chrisostome.
Chrisostome writeth: Bycause they followed not fertility, but barennes, therfore God made that so ill, baren, and infertyle whiche before was most fertile. But he demaundeth:
Why god doth in the
[...]e da
[...]es deferre the punishement of Sodomites. Why are not they whiche are in the same faulte in these dayes punished also after the same manner? He aunswereth, whome that punishement moueth not, for them abydeth the vnquencheable fyre. And they are not so punished in this lyfe, bycause suche menne for the moste parte are conuersaunt amonge good menne: and GOD promised
Abraham, that he was ready to forgeue
Sodome, if there mought haue bene founde there but onely tenne good menne. Wherefore for as muche as Cityes at this daye are not altogether so corrupte, as
Sodome was then, therefore GOD dealeth more remissedly with them. It also oftentymes happeneth, that althoughe these men are moste wicked, yet they had good predecessors. And GOD (as he hath testified) tarieth, and differreth the punishement vnto the thyrde and fourth generation. Farther, we muste marke that thys vice wheresoeuer it rangeth, it is not alone. With it are ioyned cruelty, inhumanity, pryde, robbery, and oppressing of the poore. And when it shall come to this point, that menne cruelly withdrawe their dewtyes from their neyghbours, GOD doth then on the other side withdrawe hys helpe and grace. Wherefore they beyng left vnto themselues, that is, vnto their owne corrupte and viciate strengthes, doo degenerate into beastes.
The Sodomitical sinne is to bee punished with death. The lawe of GOD in
Exodus and
Deuteronomy made thys sinne death. And
Paul to the
Romanes sheweth that thys is the punishement of Idolatrers. And in an other place he numbreth abusers of nature with them, whom he excludeth from the kyngdome of GOD. Amonge the olde Grecians thys wicked crime was punished with death, and that by the lawe of
Laius,
Bessarion. Tertulian. whereof
Bessarion maketh mention agaynste
Trapezuntius. Tertullian de Monogamia writeth that among the
Romanes there was a lawe called
Lex Scantinia,
Lex Scātinia. whiche was of the same shapenes. For he would signify that the Byshoppe of
Vthinensis was contaminated with thys kynde of wickednes: He feared not (sayeth he) the lawe called
Lex Scantinia. In the
Code ad l. Iuliam de Adulteriis & stupris in the lawe
Cum vir nubit. Constantius Augustus, cōmaundeth the lawes to arise, and the lawes to be armed with the auengyng sworde, that such as are infamed by this crime, should be subiect to most cruell punishementes.
Iustinian also in his Authentikes in the title
vt no Luxurientur contra naturam, maketh thys crime death, and addeth that for such a detestable crime, Cityes are ouerthrowen, and plagued with pestilēces, hunger, and earthquakes. He mought also haue added ciuile warres, whiche (as this Hystory testifyeth) doo fellowe, and those moste cruell.
Extra de excessibus prelatorum in the chapter
Clerici, it is ordeyned, that they whiche are taken in thys crime, shoulde be put out of theyr place and dignity. And the lay men also should be excommunicated.
But it is to be knowen that euen GOD bendeth hymselfe to vengeaunce,
☜ and sendeth fury and madnes vpon suche persons, where the Magistrate neglecteth his dewty, and suffreth wicked menne to go vnpunished. Therefore in
Genesis it is written that the aungelles smote the
Sodomites with blyndnes, so that they could not finde the house.
We muste also note that the
Gabaonites came in a manner all of them vpon a heape vnto the doore, that it myght appeare that they all conspired into thys so detestable a crime.
But there ariseth a doubt, whether sinne may by any meanes be excused for
[Page] this cause,
Sinne is not excused therefore bycause it is publique. bycause it was common, and almost all men were infected with it? No vndoubtedly, yea rather it was so muche the more wicked and heynous, as it was committed of many, and that without punishement. For they dyd not onely conceaue and committe wickednes, but also publishe and set it forth openly, and without shame ranne together to accomplishe it. Wherefore it is rightly written, that the sinnes of the
Sodomites cried and ascēded vp into heauen.
Esay also writeth: They haue published abrode their sinne like
Sodoma. And where we see that done, we must thinke that it is a certayne token, that that publique wealth shall in shorte tyme perishe. For menne when they are touched with some shamefastnes, althoughe they sinne, yet remayneth there some hope of amendement and repentaunce. But when in a manner they openly professe wicked actes, and write bokes of them, and wil haue theyr wicked crimes to be publique, there is nothyng elles to be looked for, but the vengeaunce of God. With thys wicked vyce the Prelates and Papisticall Sacrificers in these dayes are chiefely infected, and also the Antechristes of Rome, vnto whom matrimony is very odious.
Let vs also consider the goodnes of God, whiche stirreth vp this olde man, to admonishe, and reproue them, and to bryng them agayne into the ryght waye. They were menne polluted and contaminated and vtterly vnwoorthy of so great a benefite. But there are neuer men so euill, but that GOD doth by some meanes admonishe them of their synnes. The olde man dyd his dewty: but they contemne and deride him.
He brought foorth hys concubine. Who? Not the olde manne, but the
Leuite, who deliuered his wife, for feare least he should hymselfe haue fallen into their power. But why did not the olde manne delyuer his daughter also? Paraduenture, bycause those Citezins cared not for her beawty, who yet counted the wife of the
Leuite to be very fayre and beautifull. They so afflicted her all the nyght, that in the mornyng she dyed. Theyr wicked crime turned at the length into murther. In this place the hande and vengeaunce of GOD sheweth forth it selfe. This woman hauyng before committed adultery, and not for it iustly punished,
The adulteresse as she sinned so is she punished. at the length dyeth euen in adultery, and suffreth the lawe of the lyke. But whether she repented at last or no, there is nothyng written of that matter. We onely see the outwarde thynges, it is GOD whiche searcheth the heartes. But if she dyd repent, and that with fayth, then escaped she eternall punishementes. Yet GOD will haue discipline established in publique wealthes, and the malefactors punished, who if they repent, then are they fatherly chastisynges, and not punishementes. Neither is it lawfull for the Magistrate to neglecte his office, althoughe they repent: for if they doo cease to punishe, God (as it is before sayd) will by hymselfe reuenge. Wherfore that whiche is written to the Hebrues: Whoremongers and adulterers GOD will iudge, may be vnderstand two manner of wayes, bycause God sometymes punisheth by himselfe, and sometymes by the Magistrate.
The Leuite layd his concubine beyng dead vpon the Asse, went home and deuided her body into twelue partes, whereof he sent into euery tribe a parte. But it may be demaūded,
Howe the Leuite distributed the pieces. how he sent twelue parts into euery tribe, when as they wer 13. number. Some thinke it was, bycause he sent nothing vnto the tribe of
Leui, for that y
e
Leuites dwelled dispersedly among y
e other tribes. Other suppose that he would send nothing vnto the tribe of
Beniamin, bycause he thought that they would be no equall reuengers, for as muche as the
Gabaonites pertayned vnto them. But this sentence seemeth not probable, bycause it was the sinne onely of one City, & therefore it pertayned not vnto the whole tribe: vnles peraduenture we will say, that he supposed that the
Beniamites were of such mindes, that they
[Page 255] woulde not know and take vengeance of the offences of theyr owne bretherne. Neither was he deceaued in his opiniō. For so happened it in very dede. Other say that he sent two partes to the tribe of
Manasses, bycause the
Manassites dwelled part beyond
Iordane, and part on this side: therfore they say that in this hys distribution were omitted two tribes,
Beniamin and
Leui, for the causes before alledged. The entent of the
Leuite was,
What was the entent of the Leuite. that no tribe should excuse themselues by ignorance.
He was compelled so to do, bicause ther was then no Magistrate in Israel, neyther any certayn place of iudgement where he might plead his cause. Wherfore he stirreth vp al y
e people to take away euil amōg thē. And it semeth that he more profited by this meanes, then he shoulde haue done if he had vsed letters or spech. For those things do very much moue, which are set forth before y
e eies. And yet in so doing he sought not reuengemēt, either by a wicked or by an vnlawful meanes, forasmuch as he did not tumultuously call souldiers together, neyther raised vp sedicions, or inuaded the city, which did him the iniurye. He broughte the cause before them, to whom it pertained to knowe it: He complained not to
Ammorhites or
Iebusites, but to his owne people. Wherfore he ordreth his accusation well and lawfully: neyther by accusing doth he violate the law,
By accusinge the law is not violated, but holpen. yea rather he is an help vnto it, as on the cōtrary side, they which hold their peace and vtter not wicked acts, ar against the lawes. For euē as of our selues we ought not to wish any mans death, so must we not suffer the lawes to be openly and vilanously violated with out punishmēt.
This ciuil war is not to be imputed vnto the Leuite. Wherefore let the bishops in the old time looke howe godly they did, when they made intercession vnto magistrates for wicked men, and for such as wer appointed to dy. If thou wilt say ther straight way followed most ciuil warre, whiche thing seemeth may be imputed vnto the
Leuite. But it is not so, it ought rather to be ascribed vnto the
Beniamits, which would not punyshe so greate a wicked cryme.
In this history
Iosephus somewhat varieth from the holy scriptures.
Iosephus. Firste he denieth that this woman was an adultresse, and that she therefore departed from her husband. She was (sayth he) very beawtifull, and when her husbande loued her excedingly, and complained that she loued not him agayn, she as one not able to abide his brawlinges, fled vnto her parents. But the holy scriptures do manifestly teache, y
t she had played the harlot. In which sentence al the interpreters agree together. Farther he denieth that the
Gabaonites thoughte this, namely to abuse the
Leuit, he sayth that they being allured by the beawty of the wife, desired onely to haue to do with her. But y
t also is plainly against the holy scriptures, wherin it is by expresse words written:
Bring forth the man, that we may know him. Farther he denieth that the
Leuit deliuered his wife vnto them, but the
Gabaonites (saith he) toke her by violence. At the last also he addeth this (which I thinke also is very likely) that the
Leuite when he sent the peces of the body, did sende messengers also to declare what was done: otherwise he shoulde not much haue profited, if he had sent but the peeces onely.
These euils did therefore happen, bicause there was no magistrate or prince to iudge the Israelites.
In the papistical church ther is no magistrat The same thinge also happeneth when there is a magistrat or prince, which doth not his office. And bicause the ecclesiastical men haue at this day shaken of the yoke of the politicall Magistrate, there is therefore no magistrate amonge them. Whereby the Christian publike welth suffreth great discommodities.
¶Of a Magistrate.
THis place admonisheth me to entreat of a magistrate, whome I iudge may thus be described, namely to be a person elected by the institution of God, to kepe the lawes as touching outward discipline, in punishing trāsgressors with punishment of the body, and to noorish and defend the good. There are vndoubtedly
[Page] many persons elected by the institution of God which are not Magistrates as the ministers of churches, whiche yet are keepers of the worde of God, & of his law, but not as touching outwarde discipline onely. Bycause it is the office of ministers, by the word of God to pearce euē to the inward mociōs of minds: for the holyghost adioyneth his power both to the right preachinges of his word & also to the sacraments which are distributed in the church. But the magistrat onely exerciseth outward discipline & punishment vpon transgressors. The minister bindeth the guilty & vnpenitent in the name of god, and in his name excludeth them from the kingdome of heauen, as long as they so remain. The magistrate punisheth withoutward punishmentes, & when nede requireth vseth the sword. Ether of them nourisheth the godly, but after a diuerse manner: the magistrate encreaseth them with riches, honors and dignities: the minister comforteth them with the promises of god, and with the Sacramentes. Wherefore the magistrate is instituted,
The end of a magistrate. to the end that the lawes should be most diligētly kept, the guilty punished & the good holpen & noorished. And vndoubtedly the law is a dumme magistrate, & againe the magistrate is a liuing and speaking law, and so also is the minister of god (as
Paule sayth) to theyr prayse which do well: and contrarily he beareth the sword against the wicked, as gods reuenger & iudge, neyther tende these thinges to any other end, then to the health of men.
But the forme of magistrates is not one onely but manye, as
Monarchia, Aristocratia,
Many formes of magistrates.
& Policia: or
Tirannis, Oligarchia, &
Democratia. The discriptiōs and natures of which forms
Plato, Aristotle, and other Philosophers haue elegantly taught. Of all those formes the best is to be desired, and all men to whome it pertayneth ought to prouide, that a good or tollerable estate degenerate not into an euill one. But if it happen that Tirans or wicked princes obteine the gouernment of thinges,
An example of the Iewes. that is to be suffred asmuch as is by the word of god lawfull. The Iewes were by violence oppressed of the
Babilonians, whome yet god admonished that they should obey, & to pray for the king, although he were a tiran, & possessed the kingdome of the Hebrewes most wrongfully.
Cesar also held
Iewry by tiranny, and yet Christ sayd: Geue that whiche is
Cesars vnto
Cesars, & the thinges y
t are of god vnto god. The Apostles also haue taught that we must obey princes & pray for thē.
Nero was a most vnpure beast, whō yet the Apostle in his Epistle to y
e
Romains declared y
t he ought to be obeyed, not onely for fear, but also for cōscience sake.
Phocas possessed y
e empire of Rome by euil arts, most cruelly slew
Mauricius his prince, & also his children, whom yet y
e
Romaines acknowledged as theyr Emperor, &
Gregory the .i. red vnto y
e people his cōmaundements & writings. If y
u wilt demaūd, what form of a publike wealth y
t Iewes had, it may easly be known by those things which we haue in an other place spokē. They had at y
e beginning this forme
Aristocratia: for god allowed y
e counsell of
Iethro, which was y
t ther should be chosē out wise mē & strong & such as fered god, which should gouerne the publike welth, as it is writtē in
Exodus &
Deut. Yea & god himself did so w
t his sprite inspire these .70. men, whō he had cōmaunded to be chosē as helpers of
Moses, y
t they also prophesied. So were the Israelite gouerned, although afterward they were gouerned by y
e power of a king.
Princes ar called Pasto
[...].But this is not to be omitted, y
e princes in y
e holy scriptures ar not only called Deacōs or ministers of god, but also pastors, of whō
Ezechiel cōplaineth for many causes for y
t they cruellye & peruerslye fed the people of God.
Homere also calleth
Agamemnon the feder of y
e people. For they ought not to beare rule as thieues or hired mē, to flese & to oppresse, but to kepe, norishe & fede like pastors. They are also called fathers,
Magistrates are called fathers. wherfore the Senators among y
e
Romaines were called
Patres conscripti, y
t is appointed fathers, nether was ther a greter or more aunciēt honor in y
e publike welth thē to be called
pater patrie, y
t is the father of y
e country. Yea also a magistrate is contayned in y
e law of God vnder this cōmaū dement: Honor thy father & thy mother. Wherfore princes owe vnto their subiectes a fatherly loue. And they ought alwaies to remēber, that they are not rulers
[Page 256] ouer beastes but ouer men, & that thēselues also are men, who yet ought to be far better & more excellēt thē those whom they gouern, otherwise they ar not apt to gouern thē. For we make not a shepe a head ouer shepe, but the chief wether & then the shepeheard, And euē as a shepeheard excelleth y
e sheepe, so ought they to whome the office of a magistrate is committed, to excell the people. But now must we consider by whome Magistrates are ordeined. That sometimes is done by the cōsent of y
e Senate, somtimes by y
e voices of y
e people,
By whome magistrates are ordeined. God is first ordeiner of magistrates. or by y
e will of the souldiers, or els by successiō of inheritāce. But these ar but instrumēts. But y
e proper cause of Magistrates is god him self: which may be by many reasōs proued. First there is by god a certain light kindled in y
e harts of mē, whereby they vnderstand y
t they can not liue together without a guide, & there hēce spronge y
e office of a magistrate. The law of god also commaundeth to obey Magistrates. And before the law geuen by
Moses (as it is written in
Gen.) god ordeined y
t he which shedeth mans blood his blood, also should be shed, not vndoubtedly rashly & by euery mā (for that were very absurd) wherefore we may gather by those wordes, that a magistrate was not obscurely instituted by god, whiche shoulde punish manquellers.
Paule also writeth, that all powers whatsoeuer they be ar ordeined of god. And Christ aunswered vnto
Pilate: Thou shouldest haue no power against me, except it had beene geuen thee frō aboue. By these testimonies and reasons it followeth that god is the true & proper cause of Magistrates.
But here some cauell, & saye that if all magistrates are of God, then must all things be rightly gouerned: but in gouerning publike welthes many things as we se, are done viciously & peruersly. Vndoubtedly vnder
Nero, Domician, Commodus, Caracalla, &
Heliogabalus good lawes were contēned, good men killed, & discipline of y
e city was vtterly corrupted. But if Magistrates were of god, such thinges coulde neuer haue happened. This reason neither can nor oughte any thing to moue vs: bicause the office is to be seperated from the person:
The office is to be seperated from the persō. & vndoubtedly it is possible, that he which hath the office may be a wicked & noghty mā, when as yet neuerthelesse the power is good & very profitable. For there is nothing so good, but that men by theyr malice may vse it ill. Therfore it is no meruaile if there haue bene kings & Emperors, which sometimes haue abused y
t power geuen thē, which yet they were not so able to corrupt, but that mē receiued by it many good things & cōodities, as I haue before shewed. By the testimony of
Daniell it is most manifest that Magistrates ar of God. For he (saith he) geueth & transferreth kingdōs as it pleaseth him. Farther we se that y
e Monarche hath somtimes bene in y
e East, somtimes in y
e South, afterwarde in the Weast, & somtimes in y
e North: & also that there hath sometimes bene good princes, and somtimes euill: sometimes haue reigned noble men, & sometimes obscure men. And we vnderstād that it oftentimes happeneth that riches or power profite not to get or kepe a kingdome: and to thinke that these things are done by chaunce without the prouidence of God, it is most absurd.
Some Astronomer will peraduenture say that these chaunges or mutaciōs are imported by y
e starres: but
Daniell the minister of y
e truth, saith that it is God which chaūgeth times. For euē as he hath in y
e year appointed courses of times,
The chaunges of the wicked ar not to be ascribed vnto the starres. so hath he as it pleaseth him somtimes ordeined & somtimes takē away princes. He did cast down
Saul, & he also promoted
Dauid. And he foretold that he woulde so do: least it should seme to haue happened rashely or by chaunse. Yea and kingdomes & publike wealthes may be called certayne worke houses or shops of the wil of god. For that is done in them, which god himself hath decreed to be done, although princes oftētimes vnderstād it not. God called y
e
Medes and y
e
Assiriās to afflict y
e Israelits, & them (when it semed good vnto him) he repulsed & toke a waye. He raysed vp the
Persians agaynste the
Chaldeans, and the
Grecians agaynste the
Persians, and lastlye the
Romaines againste all other nations. Who deuided the kingdome of the Hebrewes into
Iuda and
Israell? Vndoubtedly God.
Ahias the
Silonite did foretell that it shoulde so come to passe, and sayde
[Page] that the word was come forth from the Lorde, that it shoulde so be. Who ouerthrew
Achab? Who caused
Iehu to be annointed, but onely God? But there ar certayne Tirannes which destroy publike welthes.
What draweth Tirannes to Pub. welthes. I graunt that. But our wicked actes deserue it. For there are oftentimes so greiuous wicked actes and so many, that they cannot be corrected by the ordinary magistrate, and by a gentle and quiet gouernance of thinges, and therfore god doth then prouide tirannes to afflict the people, and yet for the most part he tempreth and lenyfieth his punishment in raysinge vp good and godly princes.
God sendeth good Princes after tirannes. After the fall of
Nero he set vp
Vespacian: after
Domician, he sent
Neruan and
Troian: after
Commodus, Pertinax and
Seuerus: after
Heliogabalus, Alexander. But they which say: The wicked actes of Tirannes are not of God, yet do they range and spreade abroade in kingdomes and Empires, therfore Empires and kingdomes ar not of god: they (I saye) make a false
Silogismus a secundum quid ad simpliciter that is, from that which appeareth to that which is indede, neither doth this rightly follow: Certayne thinges in a magistrate are not of God: therfore the magistrate is not of God. Or tather they reason
[...] from accidences for vices and wicked acts chance to publike powers, but are not knit vnto them
(per se) that is of thēselues, or by theyr nature.
The godly may vse Ethnike magistrates.But some man will doubt: If the Magistrate be an Ethnike & also a tiran, whither it be lawfull for a godly man to vse his helpe and ayde? What els?
Paul appealeth vnto
Cesar a most wicked tiran. But it may seme that he did against his own preceptes. For in his firste Epistle to the
Corrin. he reprehended those Christians whiche pleaded causes at the iudgemente places of the
Ethnikes. He iustlye reproued the
Corinthians, bycause there were Christians amonge them, which might in the church haue decided theyr causes. Neyther was it conueniēt that Christians should contend with christians at the iudgemente places of the vngodly. But
Paul whē he appealed vnto
Cesar, had not to do w
t christians, but with y
e Iewes, & president of Rome. Wherfore forasmuch as he had not a faithfull magistrate, neither could it otherwise be done, & his life also was soughte, he did not il in imploringe the fayth and ayd of the cōmon magistrate, although he were an
Ethnike. For euē as we vse the Sun & Mone, so also is it lawfull to vse the publike and ordinary magistrate, what manner of man so euer he be.
The church vsed an Ethnike Magistrate.The Christian church did the same thing, whē there were yet no Christiā Emperors. For
Paulus Samosatenus was condēned as an heretike, & being a bishop he was displaced. But bicause he would not render vp the house which longed to y
e bishop, there was request made vnto
Aurelianus y
e Emperor, & ayd obteined at his hands to cōpel him to deliuer his house vnto y
e new bishop. Who can say y
t the church herein sinned, bicause it vsed y
e publike magistrate, though he were an infidel? But let vs returne thither frō whence we digressed, and constantly beleue that the magistrate is of god, althoughe oftentimes (our sins deseruing the same) many things vnder him ar done wickedly & vniustly. Howbeit
Hoseah the Prophet semeth yet to be against vs whē he saith: they haue raigned, but not by me.
How it is sayd that tirannes raign not by god. But we must know that
Hoseah entreated of tirans, which nether regarded laws, neither norished y
e good, nor toke away y
e euil frō among y
e people, & therfore they raigned not by god, but by theyr own lust: they regarded theyr own affections & not the law of god. Farther they inuaded kingdomes, being stirred vp by theyr own wicked desires, & moued by their own ambiciō, not as they which felt y
e calling of god vnto the kingdome, neither toke they vpon them the power w
t a wil to obey god, but to satisfy theyr own ambiciō. This was not to reign by god. But y
t they were not exalted to the kingdom by y
e wil of god, it is contrary in a manner to y
e whole scripture. For god calleth
Nebucad-Nezar his seruāt, bycause he would vse his ministery to afflict y
e
Israelites, whē as yet it might haue bene said y
t he reigned not by god, forasmuch as he foght against y
e Iewes by his own lust & couetous desire of his mind, & not of a zeale to fulfil the will of god.
[Page 257] Wherfore the sentence of
Hosea the prophet is nothing against vs, but that we may beleue that the Magistrate is of God, and that we ought to obey him.
Paule saith: Let euerye soule be subiect vnto the higher powers. The same thing is written to
Titus. And in the first Epistle of
Peter, the second chap. And
Paule to
Timothe addeth, that we should pray for them.
But the Papistes, and they which wil be called Ecclesiastical men,
Ministers of the churche are not exemted frō the ordinarye power.
Chrisostome. wyll not heare these thinges. For they cry that they are exempted from publike and ordinary powers, when as yet the Apostle vsed no exception when hee sayde: Let euerye soule be subiect vnto the higher powers. And: He whiche resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. Yea and
Chrisostome also vpon that place saith, that the Apostles, Prophetes, Euangelistes, and Moonkes, are comprehē ded vnder that lawe. And
Chrisostome wrote these thinges of Ecclesiastical persons, when as yet he was Bishop of
Constantinople, and there were then also Christian Emperours.
But it is a sporte to beare the argumentes,
What the false ecclesiastical mē trifle of twoo swoordes. whiche these false Ecclesiasticall men vse. In
Etrauag. de Maioritate et Obedientia, chap.
Vnam sanctam, Bonifacius the .viii. (whom they say entred in as a Foxe, raigned like a Lion, and dyed like a Dog) saith that there are two swordes in the Church. And least he should seeme to speake it rashly, he citeth these woordes out of the .xxii. chap. of
Luke: whē I sent you without bag or scrip, did ye at any time want any thing? They said vnto him: No. Christ added: But now I saye vnto you, let euerye man take his scrippe and wallet, and he which hath none, let him sell his coate and bye a swoord. They said vnto him: Behold here are two swoordes. Christ answered, it is sufficient.
Bonifacius saith: Two swoordes are sufficient for the Churche, namely the spiritual sword and the temporal. Wherefore they whiche say that
Peter had not an outward swoord, do seeme not to vnderstand the woordes of Christ, wherein he sayd: Put vp thy swoord into the sheath. Thy swoorde (sayth he) and not an other mans. For he had a swoord of his owne, although he were bidden to put it vp.
But there must needes be some order kept and obserued in these swoordes. For what powers soeuer there be, they are ordained of God. For there shoulde be a great confusion, if for that being two swordes in the Church, the one should not be gouerned by the other. Wherfore the temporal sword ought to be gouerned by the spiritual. And to make this argument more plaine: The church (saith he) hath two swoordes, but it vseth them not after one and the selfe same manner. For it exerciseth the spiritual swoord, but the temporal sword ought to be drawen, onely at the becke and suffrance of the Church. This is so obscure, that it may in a maner seme to be a riddle. Howe be it this is his meaning,
The Pope maketh subiect vnto him selfe the swoorde of the Emperour. that the sworde of the Emperour ought to be drawen onely at the wyll and pleasure of the Pope, that when he commaundeth, he must strike, and by sufferance, that is he must go forward in striking, so long as he listeth and wil suffer it. Wherfore these thinges must be in order: and the order is that the temporal swoord be reduced vnto God by the spiritual. For (as that
Dionisius saith,
Dionysius. who is thought to be an
Areopagite, although he be farre an other) all inferiour thinges are referred vnto the chiefest thing, but yet by a meane. Wherfore, saith he, the temporal sworde must be drawen at the becke of the Pope, that by that meanes it may be referred vnto God. So we see is now brought to passe. For so often onelye as the most holy willeth that warre be made against the
Lutherians, he wil that the Emperour straightway should obey. And if any Prince wil not with much submission obey him, straightway are sent Legates hither and thether, that al other kinges and princes should apply them selues vnto his becke, and make war and vexe him, which wil not obey him.
The Pope preferreth himselfe before al kings and princes.
Bonifacius addeth moreouer that he himselfe is aboue al kinges and princes. For principallity is to be esteemed according to the dignity of the things which
[Page] by it are exercised. We (saith he) exercise spiritual thinges, and they temporall, wherfore their swoorde is inferiour to ours, and they themselues also vnto vs. He addeth also an other reason, they pay vnto vs tenthes, but tenthes ar paid by the inferior vnto the superior. Wherfore seing kings & princes pai tenthes, they do testify y
t their lands & reuenues pertaine vnto the church, & that they ar subiect vnto it. Moreouer, he which blesseth, is greater then he which is blessed. But Bishops consecrate and anoynt kinges. The Glose addeth: That of kinges onely the right shoulder is anointed, but the heades of Bishops are anointed. And vpon Kinges is poured oyle, but vpon Bishops
Chrisma. Wherefore wee must needes confesse that Kinges are inferiour to Bishops. Farther, kinges receaue the crowne and scepter of Bishops. For who saith hee, anoynted
Saul, and who anointed.
Dauid, but onely
Samuel? who anoynted
Iehu, but a Prophet sent by
Helizeus? The matter also which is intreated of by bishops, is greater thē that, about which kinges are occupied. For Christ said vnto
Peter: whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth, shalbe bound in heauen. This power is greater then al humane power. And God saith vnto
Ieremy: I wil set thee ouer nacions and kingdomes, to roote out and destroy, to scatter and to plant. Therefore we are greater then al the power of kinges, and are exempted from their right. Wherefore prophane and lay powers of Emperours and Kinges must be iudged by the Ecclesiastical men,
The Pope wil not bee iudged or gouerned of any. & ought by vs to be appointed, and may by vs be ouerthrowen. For to whom it pertaineth to builde, to the same it belongeth to destroy. Therfore the spiritual Magistrate ought to iudge of the ciuill Magistrate. But if the spiritual offende in any thing, of whom ought he to be iudged? The inferiour, saith he, ought to be iudged of the superiour. But the Pope, which is the highest of al, of whom shal he be iudged? Of no man saith he, but onely of God, bycause the spiritual is iudged of no man, but he iudgeth al thinges.
Oh how finely and trymly ordaineth he his tirannye? He calleth hym selfe onely spiritual. The Gloser, although he were otherwise grose inough, yet hee could not be so much a blocke, but that he sawe that these thinges were spoken very absurdly. How, saith he, is the Pope spiritual, if he be vnpure and wycked? He expoundeth himselfe by this distinction:
Two maner of spiritualties of the Canonists. There is one maner of spiritualtye saith he, of the person, and an other of the state. Wherfore if there be anye spiritual person, he may reproue al men by a brotherly admonicion: but he ought to be reprehended of no man. Bicause for that he is spirituall, hee committeth nothing filthely. But sometimes some person which is not spiritual in life and maners, ought yet to be called spiritual, bicause of his degree. As are many bishops and Popes: wherfore we must cal the bishop of
Rome whatsoeuer he be, spiritual and most holy. But what thing els is this, then to teache vs to lye, if they wil haue a filthy varlet called most holye?
Bonifacius at the last concludeth, that all Emperours and Kinges must be subiect vnto his power onely. And he addeth a reason: Vnles we wil together with the
Maniches appoint twoo begynninges: which thing we ought not to do, for
Moses sayd not, in the beginninges, but in the beginning God created heauen & earth.
The Pope pronoūseth that he of necessitye of saluacion ought to be obeyed.
Of the two maner of powers, the ciuil and ecclesiastical. Wherfore, saith he, we define, determine, and pronounce, that all men oughte of necessitye of saluacion, to obey the Pope, as the chiefest power. And so he excellētly I promise you concludeth that al Ecclesiastical men are exempt from the ciuil Magistrate.
Before I come to confute this their most shameles boasting, I thinke it expedient briefly to speake of the two maner of powers: of the Ecclesiasticall power I say, and ciuill. In that it is sayd that the Ecclesiastical power is preferred before al ciuil functions, it is somwhat that they say, if it be rightlye and aptlye vnderstand. All ecclesiasticall power cleaueth vnto the woorde of God, so that without it is none: but the woord of the Lorde is a rule common, whereby all thinges ought both to be directed and be tempered.
Ambrose instructed Theodosius. For it teacheth in what maner the outward sword and publike wealth ought to be gouerned. And generally also it sheweth how althinges ought to be done of al men. So
Ambrose (whō
[Page 258]
Theodosius the Emperor raged to cruelly, and without al consideracion against the
Thessalonians) perswaded him, that in al punishmentes of death, ther should be .xxx. daies space after the sentence geuen, least the Magistrate should do those things in a rage and fury, wherof although he afterward repented him, yet they could not be amended. So many Bishops, oftentimes in things most waighty, shewed foorth their authority, and many times either put away cruell warres, or els pacified them, & out of the word of God preached among them. Wherfore the Ecclesiastical power after this maner comprehendeth althinges, bicause out of the woord of God it findeth how to geue counsell in all thinges. For there is nothing in the whole world, wherunto the woord of God extendeth not it selfe. Wherfore they are farre deceaued, which vse to cry:
The preaching of the woord of God hath al mē & al states subiect vnto it. what hath a Preacher to do with the publike wealth, what hath he to doo with warres? what with Poticaries? what with Cookes? But let them tel me, when the Minister of the woorde perceiueth the law of God to be violated in these thinges, why should he not reprehende them by the woord of God? Why should he not admonish them? Why should he not exhort them to cease from synne?
The Minister of the Churche worketh by the woord, and not by the swoord. How far cyuill power extēdeth Nndoubtedlye it is his dutye to correct synners, not in dede with the swoord, or punishing by the pursse, not by emprisonment, not by banishment, but after his owne manner, that is by the might and power of the woord of God.
Againe, the political power is extended to al those thinges which pertayne to political power. But after what maner? Shal ciuil power require good mociōs of the minde, and inward repentance? It cannot cause these thinges: yet it must wish these thinges, and vse those meanes wherby they may be had. For he ought to haue a care, that Bishops, Pastors and Teachers in the Churche doo teache purely, reprehende fatherly, and by the woord of God administer the sacramēts. This thing in dede the Magistrate doth not by himselfe, but hee ought to haue a regarde, that they may be in a redynes, which should do them wel. Wherefore either power extendeth most amply, and comprehendeth al thinges, but not after one and the selfe same maner. And the rule of either of them is to bee taken out of the woord of God, which is plaine to be in the Church.
Againe, there are two subiections: One is political and ciuil,
Two kinds of subiection. whereunto all men are subiect, who if they offend in any thing against the lawes, let them at the iust Magistrates hand looke for imprysonment, punishment by the pursse, banishment, death, and outward paines. But if they doo wel, let them looke for honours, rewardes, dignities, and prayse. And after this maner the ciuil power is not subiect vnto the ministery of the woorde, bicause by it it can not by these kindes of punishmentes be afflicted and constrained. The other subiection is spiritual, that is of faith, and of obedience. For strayghtway, as sone as men heare of their duty out of the woord of God, and that either this thing or that is to bee done, or this or that thing to be auoyded, they geue place, beleue, and obey. Bycause they perceaue, that that which is spoken, is the woorde of God. And these are the endes of eyther power.
A sentence of Valentiniā the Emperour. And so is to be vnderstand that saying of
Valentinian the Emperour, out of the booke called
Historia Tripartita, which thing is had also in the distinction .63. chap.
Valentinianus: Chuse (saith he) suche a bishop, vnto whom we which gouerne the Empire, may sincerely submyt our heades, and vse his admonicions as medicines. &c. By which wordes is vnderstand that it longeth vnto the Ecclesiastical power,
An error of the same Valentinian. to admonish out of the woorde of God for saluacion. Although the same Emperour afterward erred. For when he had appointed
Ambrose Pretor of the City of
Millane, the people did chuse him byshop. Which thing when the Emperor knew,
A bishop ought not to haue a care onely ouer soules, or onely ouer bodyes. he gaue thankes vnto God therfore after this maner: I had made hym ruler ouer the bodyes of men, but thou wouldest haue him ruler ouer the soules. &c.
Valentinian did not rightlye put a distinction betwene offices. For why? Ought bishops to haue a care onely ouer soules, and not also ouer bodies? What if they geue them selues to glotonye or
[Page] dronkennes, or liue licenciouslye touching outwarde thinges, shall they not reproue these thinges? Vndoubtedly they must reproue them. Neither must princes haue a care onely ouer the bodies of men, and neglect their soules. For wee do not imagine that a prince is a neateherd or a swineherd, to whom is committed onely the care of the belly, flesh and skinne of his subiectes: yea he must prouide that they may liue vertuously and godlily. But what if Christian Princes when they are by the woorde of God admonished of publike and most grieuous synnes, wil not heare, neither amende that which they haue noughtely committed. What I say shal the bishop do herein?
Ambrose excommunicated
Theodosius the Emperor, when he exercised so grieuous tiranny against the
Thessalonians. Innocentius also excommunicated
Arcadius, when he had exiled
Iohn Chrisostome, who admonished him freely and trulye, as it is had in the dist. 96. chap.
Duo sunt, & in the dist. 18. in the chap.
Quoniam quidam. And they are the wordes of the syxt Synode, where it is decreed that ther should euery yeare be had two Sinodes. And if princes would hinder them, let them be excommunicated.
Eusebius.But what do I make mencion of these latter thinges? Let vs reade
Eusebius in his .vi. booke, and .xxxiiii. chap. where he saith that
Philip the Emperor, who liued in the tyme of
Origene, was the first Christian prince, and when he would haue bene present together with the faithful on Easter euen, and haue communicated with them in prayers, the bishop, bicause he was a wicked and noughty liuer, reiected him among them that wer put to penance, that he should make open confession before the Churche, and acknowledge his synne, otherwyse hee could by no meanes be admitted vnto the Communion. This did the byshop at that tyme against the Emperour & chiefe Monarche of the whole world. Wherfore the ciuil power ought to be subiect vnto the woorde of God which is preached by the Ministers. But againe the Ecclesiasticall power is subiect vnto the ciuil, when the Ministers behaue themselues yll, either in thinges humane or Ecclesiastical. For these powers are after a sorte conuertible and sundry wayes are occupied about the selfe same thinges, and mutually helpe one an other, euē as
Aristotle Theodectes calleth Rhethorike and Logike interchangeable artes,
Aristotle. bicause either of them are occupied in the selfe same thinges after a sundry maner. The Ecclesiastical power is subiect vnto the Magistrate: not by a spiritual subiection, but by a politike. For as touching the Sacramentes and sermons, it is not subiect vnto it, bicause the Magistrate cannot bende the woord of God or the Sacramentes, which the ministery vseth, neither can he compel the pastors and Teachers of the Church to teach otherwise, or in any other sorte to administer the Sacramentes, then is prescribed by the woorde of God. Howbeit ministers in that they are men and Citizens, are without all doubte subiect vnto the Magistrate, and also their lands, riches, and possessions. So Christ payd tribute, so also did the Apostles, and the whole primatiue Churche, when there were yet most holye men. Their manners also are subiect vnto the censures and iudgementes of the Magistrates.
Farthermore, we must adde that Ministers are subiect vnto the Magistrate, not onely as touching those thinges which I haue rehearsed, but also (as I before signified) cōcerning their function. Bicause if they teache not right, neither administer the Sacramentes orderly, it is the office of the Magistrate to compel them to an order, and to see that they teache not vnpurelye, and that they myngle not fables,
Princes may put Ministers oute of their place, if their be haue thē selues yll. or that they abuse not the Sacramentes, or delyuer them otherwise then the Lorde hath commaunded. Also if they liue noughtelye and wickedly, let them put them out of the holy ministerye. This did
Salomon, who deiected
Abiathar, and substituted
Sadok in his roume, as it is written in the fyrst boke of Kinges, the second chap. And in the new Testament,
Iustinian displaced
Siluerius &
Vigilius, which thing I doubt not but other princes did sometimes. But how iustly, I wil not presently declare: this one thing I wil say, that that
[Page 259] thing was lawful for them in the causes now alledged. But some man wil say, that I speake now of the fact, and not of the right. Yea but I speake also of the right. For the king ought to haue with him the law of God written, bicause he is ordained a keeper, not onely of the first table, but also of the latter.
It longeth not to the Minister of the Churche to put downe Princes. Wherfore he which offendeth in any of them both, falleth into his power. But althoughe a king may remoue an vnprofitable and hurtful bishop, yet can not a bishop on the other syde put downe a king, if he offend.
Iohn in dede reproued
Herode, but he displaced him not of his kingdome.
Ambrose and
Innocent excommunicated Emperours: but they went no farther. Yea and Christ called
Herode a woolfe, but he tooke not away from hym his kingdom, and he payed tribute vnto
Tiberius, a most wicked Tiranne, neither was he at any time author to any man to shake of his yoke. Wherefore let Popes take heede by what right as they lust them selues, they put Kinges and Emperors out of their place. This thing did neither anye of the Prophetes, nor the Apostles, nor Christ.
The Popes boast that they haue great power: but if it be any that they haue, it consisteth wholy in the woord of God. Let them teache, preach, and admonish, if they wil exercise their power: otherwise the ciuil and temporal power, whom they so much crake of, is farre from the ecclesiastical Ministers. In summe, euen as there is found no king nor Emperour so great, which is not subiect vnto the power of the woord of God, which is preached by the Ministers: so on the other syde is there no bishop, which when he hath offended, ought not to be reproued by the ciuil Magistrate. What difference so euer there bee, the same (as I haue sayde) is wholye as touching the manner of reprouing. The Ministers of the Churche doo that by the woorde, and Princes by outward punishmentes. But our false ecclesiastical men wilbe princes and raigne. But Christ woulde be no king. And when he was sought for, to that ende to be made a king, he vtterly refused it: yea he openlye professed that his kingdome was not of this worlde. He said also vnto the Apostles: Princes of the nacions do beare rule ouer them, but ye shal not do so.
Peter also (whose successors they affirme them selues to be) admonisheth Ministers, not to exercise dominion ouer the Clergy. But these men wyll haue prysons, soldiours and swoordes, and styrre vp warres, as they lust them selues.
Perduenture they wil obiect vnto vs the
Assamonites,
Of the Assamonites or Machabites. out of the olde Testament, whom it is certayne that they were both Kynges and Priestes, and confounded both the powers. That historye in deede is wrytten in the bookes of the
Machabites, but we must see whyther they dyd it rightly, or wyckedly and ambiciously. Vndoubtedly I thinke they did it not orderly: for God by his word had many tymes adiudged the kyngdome vnto the Tribe of
Iudah, euen to the tyme of
Messias. And contrarily he commaunded the
Leuites, that they shoulde possesse no landes, and muche lesse to occupye a kyngdome among theyr brethren. But if a man had rather saye, that they did thys thyng by a certayne secrete reuelacion and hydden iudgement of GOD, hee shall not amende theyr cause. For that whithe is so done, ought not to bee drawen into an example. But I thynke rather that they offended in so doyng. They dyd well vndoubtedlye, when they delyuered theyr Countrey from tyrranny: but that thing being finished, they ought not to haue taken vpon them the kyngdome. Neyther dyd GOD obscurely declare that that theyr act displeased hym. For (as wee gather out of
Iosephus) that house afterward neuer wanted Tragedies.
How the Apostles somtimes vsed outwarde punishmentes. They farther obiecte vnto vs, that
Peter slewe
Ananias and
Saphira, and that
Paule strake
Elimas the Sorcerer wyth blindnes. That is true in deede: but they dyd these thinges by the woorde of God, not by violence, not by the swoord, neither by the labour of a hangman. Let these men doo the same thynges by the woord, and wee wyll regarde them. Why doo they not harken vnto
Paule to
Timothe:
[Page] Let no man going on warfare for God, wrap hymselfe in cares of this lyfe. If they wil go on warfare for God, why doo they in such sorte hynder themselues with worldly busines? Haue they so much leasure from their own affaires, that they can haue a care ouer other mens thinges? Let them answer plainly: would they at this day abide, that any king should attempt to teache the Gospel, or administer the Sacramentes? They would not suffer it. Neyther did God hymselfe also suffer it:
The offices of both the powers must not be confounded. but he strake
Ozeas with Leprosy, when he would haue burnt insence vnto God. Why therfore doo they inuade other mens borders? These functions ought to be seperated, bicause either of them requireth a whole man a part by hym selfe: yea rather scarce hath beene founde anye one man at anye tyme, which coulde ryghtlye execute eyther of them, so hard a thyng is the execution of them both. Howbeit, both of them doo helpe one an other: for the politike Prince geueth iudgement, and the Ecclesiasticall doth not in deede geue iudgement, but he teacheth how iudgement ought to bee geuen. Haue no respect (sayth he) of persons in iudgement: afflict not the poore and straunger: receaue no bribes. &c. So on the other syde the political Magistrate preacheth not, neither administreth the Sacramentes. But vnlesse these thinges bee ryghtlye ordered, he ought to punish the Ministers.
Wherin either power differeth and agreeth.And to be briefe, there are two thinges to be considered of vs in thys collacion. In the Ciuyll Magistrate is to be considered both the power, and also the man which beareth and exerciseth the power. He in respect that he is a Christian man, is vndoubtedly subiect vnto the woorde of God, and in respect that hee beareth power, and gouerneth, he ought also to be subiect vnto the same woord of God. For out of it ought he to seeke rules to gouerne and to administer. In the Minister of the Churche also is to be considered both the ministerye it selfe, and also the person which executeth it. As touching the person, the minister is subiect vnto the Ciuill power: for he is both a Citizen, and payeth tribute as other men doo, and is vnder the correction of manners. But as concernyng the ministerye, he is also somewaye subiect vnto the Magistrate: For if he eyther teache or administer the Sacramentes agaynst the woorde of God, he must bee reprehended by the Ciuil Magistrate. And yet must hee not seeke for rules and reasons of hys function at the same Magistrates hand, but out of the woorde of God. By thys distinction we may easelye vnderstande the differences and agrement of eyther power.
To the argumentes of Boniface.Now resteth to come to that
Thraso Bonifacius to confute hys argumentes. Fyrst, he gathered out of that whych the Apostles answered: Beholde here are two swoordes, and Christ added: It is sufficient, that the Churche hath twoo powers,
How the churche maye haue twssiwoordes. and both of them committed vnto hym. To that I aunswer, that it is possible, that sometymes there may be two swoordes in the Churche: but there were not so alwayes in it, neyther peraduenture shall bee alwayes so. What outward swoord had the Church in the tyme of Christ, and of the Apostles and Martyrs?
The Churche hath nowe almost al artes. But yet now (they wyll say) it hath. I graunt that, bycause kynges and Emperours are Christians, whych in the olde tyme were Ethnikes. The Churche hath also husbandrye, trade of marchaundise, the arte of Carpenters, and other suche lyke. For they whyche exercise these thynges, are members of the Church. But that cōmeth to passe (as the Schoolemen speake)
per accidens, that is by chaunce. For there might be a Churche, thoughe those thynges were not. So nowe, bycause there are Princes in the Churche, it is sayde to haue an outward swoorde. But bycause Princes are in our tyme a part of the Churche, it doth not therfore follow that the sword of Princes is the sword of ministers: euen as although there be in the Church husbandry and trade of merchaundise, and also the arte of Carpenters, it cānot therby be gathered that ministers are husband men, merchauntes, and Carpenters.
Now I come to the place of the Euangelist. The Apostles sayde, they wanted nothing, when they were sent without wallet and scryp, vnto whom Christ sayd: Let euery one take vnto him his scrip and wallet, and he which hath none, let him sell his coate, and bye a swoord. What woulde Christe signifye by these woordes? Nothing els vndoubtedly, but to shewe that the state and condicion of tymes hereafter should be far otherwise then they wer before. Hitherto (sayth he) whylest I was wyth you, ye felt no griefe, neyther wanted you any thyng. But now harder tymes are at hand: now shall ye haue neede of coates, scryps, and swoordes. By these woordes hee declareth that hee shoulde depart from them, and that hee woulde sende them into the whole worlde to preache and teache the Gospell, in which ministery they should meete with so manye aduersities, that they should thinke themselues to haue neede of swoordes. It is a figuratiue kinde of speeche, whereby is vnderstande one thing by an other, as is that in
Genesis, when the Lorde sayde, that hee repented that he had made man. For God is not in very deede touched with repentance, but he doth that, which men repenting vse to doo, that is, he chaungeth that which hee hath done. And vndoubtedly then he by the flood destroyed humane kinde which hee had created. So now he hath not instructed his Disciples, to fight with yron, but onelye by a certaine paraphrasis describeth the condicion of the tyme to come. And euen as a gowne oftentimes signifieth tranquility and peace: so in this place a sword sheweth troublesome and vnquiet times.
After this maner
Chrisostome interpreteth these woordes,
Chrisostome. expounding this place of
Paule: Salute
Prisca and
Aquila. The Lorde (sayth he) hath not broken the lawe, which before he had made, saying: And hee which striketh thee on the one cheeke, turne vnto him the other. Blesse those that curse you, pray for them that persecute you. How then doth he commaunde his Disciples to bye themselues swoordes? He ment no such thing, saith
Chrisostome: For it is a figuratiue kinde of speeche, whereby he signified that he should be taken away from them, and that they should be afflicted with many calamities. These woordes are not so to be taken as they appeare at the first syght. In an other place Christe sayth also: That which ye haue heard in the eare, preache on the house toppes. And yet wee neuer reade, that the Apostles stoode on the house toppes, when they preached vnto the people. Neither assuredly was it decent to haue left the strete and temple, and to haue spokē from the house top. The sense was, that those thinges which they had hearde priuatelye, they shoulde speake openlye and manifestlye. The Lord also sayd: Destroye this temple, and in three dayes I wyll restore it: which is also spoken figuratiuely. For he commaunded not to ouerthrowe the temple of
Salomon (as the Euangelist himselfe interpreteth) but vnderstoode that which he spake, of the temple of hys owne body: wherein (as
Paule sayth) corporally dwelled all diuinity.
But to returne to the matter, that
Luke so ment
Chrisostome proueth by these thinges which follow: That in the sonne of man shoulde be fulfylled that which was spoken of him: And he was counted with the vngodly. But the Apostles vnderstoode not Christ: for they thought that hee had spoken simplye, and (as the woordes sounded) spoken of an outward sword. And so did
Boniface vtterly interpreate it. And in that Christ addeth: It is inough, he vnderstoode that two swordes are sufficient in the Church, so that ther ought to be nowe neyther more nor fewer. But
Chrisostome vnderstandeth it farre otherwise. For when Christ perceiued y
t the Apostles vnderstode him not, by that answer he declared that he would omit the thing. And in dede so is a scholemaster wont to say vnto a child which yet vnderstandeth not that which is taught him: It is inough. Otherwise vndoubtedly two swords wer not sufficient against al the aduersaries of Christe. There shoulde moreouer haue needed coates of male and shieldes. Wherfore
Chrisostome concludeth that y
e speche was figuratiue & parabolical.
[Page] Farthermore,
In the times of the Apostles y
e church had not two swoordes. if
Bonifacius exposition bee receaued, wee muste thincke that the Church in the time of the Apostles ought to haue had two swords, which is most farre from the truth.
But let vs come to that which Christ said vnto
Peter: Put vp thy swoord into thy sheath. Thy sword (saith
Boniface) not an other mans sword. But what gathereth he by those wordes? Although
Peter haue his sword, yet if he be cōmaunded to put it vp, how can he haue it drawen? or to what end hath he a swoord, if he maye not vse it? But
Boniface wil peraduenture aunswer: I haue in deede a sword, but I vse it not, but by an other mans hande. Or I vse not myne owne swoord, but the sword of the Emperor, & other princes. For they ought to draw the sword at the becke and sufferance of the Church. I would gladly demaund, whither Christ, whē he bad
Peter to put vp his sword, ment this, that he should in dede vse it as he listed and would himselfe,
Euery man is sayd to doo that himselfe whych he doth by an other man. but yet by the labour of an other man? Assuredly that which a man doth by an other, he seemeth to do it himselfe. If a man by mony or giftes get one to kil his enemy, although he do it not with his own hand, yet neuertheles he should be an homicide: otherwise euen Princes doth not with their own hand kil the guilty, but commaunde the hangmen to punish them. Ther is in this answer of
Bonifacius a deceite of equiuocation. For we demaund whither an ecclesiastical Minister may beare the office of a ciuil Magistrate, and vse a ciuil sword: and they remit vs vnto the sword of Peter, a man otherwise priuate.
Bernardus.Howbeit
Bernardus in his .4. booke
de Consider. ad Eugenium, semeth to interprete the two swordes. I graunt that
Bernard hath certaine thinges lyke vnto this, but yet not vtterly the same. But we must remember, in what tyme
Bernardus lyued. He liued at that time, wherein all thinges were corrupted in the Church, and if a man reade those his bokes
de Consideratione, he shal se that he grieuously complaineth of the corruption of his time.
Eugenius was by the
Romanes excluded the City, and peraduenture he meditated by violence to restore himselfe. Wherefore
Bernard exhorted them to preache the Gospell, to deale aganst the
Romanes with the woorde and with Sermons, rather then wyth the sword.
Eugenius said: what wilt thou haue? That I should feede Serpentes and Dragons and Beastes? Yea rather assayle them saith
Bernard with the woord, & not with iron. And in an other place he saith: If thou wilt haue both swordes, thou shalt leese both. Neither is it to be thought that
Eugenius would by himself haue fought, but peraduenture he assayed to moue warre by other, from whiche purpose
Bernard disswaded him. And thus much of him.
But in that
Bonifacius addeth, that those swords of the church ought to be in order (namely that the one should be subiect vnto y
e other, & that he proueth by thys saying of
Paule: Those powers that are, are ordeined of God) is manifestly declared how this man wresteth the scriptures. For this word
ordinatae, that is ordered, is in Greeke written
[...]: which is nothing els, then instituted or appointed. But be it so, as
Bonifacius hath expounded it, what manner of order shal this be at the length? Vndoubtedly, it shoulde be that the Minister shoulde teache, and the ciuil power shoulde heare and beleue. But this is nothing vnto the Pope which teacheth nothing.
The lowest thinges saith
Dionisius are by meanes reduced vnto the hyghest. Wherfore
Bonifacius concludeth that the outward sword ought to be referred vnto God by the spiritual. Vndoubtedly I wil easely graunt that the swoord of the spirit, that is the word of God, is the meane wherby the other sword, namely the outwarde, ought to be tempered and directed vnto God. But why doth not the Pope retaine this meane?
The Pope vseth not the swoorde of the woord. Why vseth he not the word? Why teacheth he not? why preacheth he not? Nndoubtedly princes that stray, are not by him reuoked into the right way, yea rather contrarywise the Pope and bishops of the Church are somtimes rebuked and iustly reproued of princes.
Aaron assuredly, being high priest,
It longeth to princes sometimes to admonish and correct Ecclesiastycall men. fel greuously in making the golden calfe and obeing the foolishnes of the people.
Moses accused him greiuously, whome it is certayne that he was a ciuil magistrate. For toward the end of
Deut. he is called a king. And when the priestes abused the mony which was offred for the mending of the couerings of the temple, who remedied that, but onely
Ioas the king? I will not speake of
Dauid and
Salomon, and others which deuided the lottes of the priest, & orders of the
Leuites. And I will not at this time proue these things by any more examples. For they are manifest inough of them selues. Wherefore I graunte that the ciuill power maye be corrected of the ministers by preaching of the word. But the Pope vseth not this kind of gouernment, but rather an incredible tirrannye.
They boaste moreouer that they themselues are greater in dignitye, for that they excercise spirituall & heauenly thinges, where as princes are occupied onely about earthly and ciuill thinges. Be it so: for we deny not but that ministers are occupied about thinges greater and more deuine then magistrates are. But doth the Pope alone minister them? Yea rather he neuer doth it at al. Wherfore if the dignity of the ministery depend of those things, then will it follow that many bishops and priestes do in dignity far excell the Pope, which neuer preacheth, & most rarely, and to very few, administreth the Sacraments.
Let vs come to tenthes,
Of tenthes. by y
e paiment wherof
Bonifacius laboreth to proue y
t al princes ar subiect vnto him. This argumēt semeth to haue some shew, bicause at the first sight it agreeth with the .7. chap. of the Epistle to the Hebrewes, wher
Paul proueth the dignitie of christ to be greater thē y
e dignity of the priesthode of the
Leuits. For thus he gathereth:
Abraham payd tenthes vnto
Melchisedech, at which time
Leui was not yet, but was at y
e time in the loins of
Abrahā, & so paid tēthes in him. And he which payeth tenths to an other, by the self same thing professeth himself to be inferior vnto him. Christ was priest accordinge to y
e order of
Melchisedech. Wherfore the Apostle concludeth y
t the priesthode of y
e
Leuits was much inferior vnto the priesthode of Christ. I haue opened the spring frō whence
Bonifacius deriued his argumēt. The place is very dark, and nedeth explicatiō, and moreouer
Bonifacius doth not aptly apply it to his purpose. First we ought to vnderstand that tenthes in the old time pertayned vnto ceremonies, & that aswel in
Melchisedech as in the
Leuites.
Both the priesthode of Leui & also of Melchisedech signified Christ. For in either priesthode they were referred vnto Christ. And either priesthode was in very dede a figure of Christ: for euen as the Leuiticall prieste entred once euery yeare into the
Sancta Sanctorum, and that neuer without blood: So Christ by his blood entred once into the tabernacle, that is into heauen, and agayne
Melchisedeche for that he had neyther father nor mother, resembled Christ, which in respect that he was God, had no mother, and in respect that he was a man, wanted a father.
But what signified the tenthes in either priesthode?
Christe was more playnelye signified by the priesthode of Melchisedech, then by the Leuiticall priesthode. Vndoubtedly they signified nothing els, then that the elders ought to referre al theyr things vnto christ. By that ceremony the people worshipped euen Christ. And if a man wil conferre
Melchisedech and the priesthode of
Leui together, although both of them seme to shadow Christ, yet shall he se that he is more expressedly & manyfestly signified by
Melchisedech, as the Epistle to the Hebrewes testifieth.
Bonifacius sayth: we receiue tenthes of all the lay men. Ye do take them indede, but now that Christ is come, the paying of tenthes is no more a ceremony, as it was before the comming of Christ, when by tēthes men worshipped Christ, which was to come in the flesh, and confessed that they ought vnto him both thēselues, and al that they had. After which self same manner they payd the first fruites of al their thinges.
Tēthes at this day ar no more ceremonies but rather rewards and stipendes. But our men do in these dayes receiue tenthes. But by what law? Not vndoubtedly by the ceremoniall law, but by the morall lawe. Forasmuche as it is mete that the Mynister shoulde bee nooryshed of the people. For the laborer is woorthye of hys rewarde: and hee whyche serueth the Gospel, it is meete
[Page] that he liue of it. Wherfore whither stipéds be payd vnto ministers out of lands or out of houses, either in ready mony or in tenths, it skilleth not, so that they be not maintained filthily, but honestly. Indede these rewardes in some places doo retayn the olde name of tenthes. But in many places they ar not called tenthes, but stipendes or wages. And assuredly they are in very deede rather rewards, whiche are dew vnto the labours of the ministers, then tenthes.
Stipendes are paid both to superiors and also to inferiors.And as touching this foresayd argument, we must vnderstand that such rewardes and stipendes, are thinges indifferent: bicause they are sometimes payd vnto inferiors, and sometimes to superiors. For tributes which are geuen vnto kinges and princes, are theyr stipendes which we geue vnto them, partly to norish and susteine them, and partly to confesse that we are subiecte vnto them, and lastly y
e they may haue wherwithal to defēd the publike welth and vs. And somtimes inferiors also do receaue stipendes. For princes pay them vnto souldiers, and yet cannot we therefore saye that the souldiours are greater then Kynges and Prynces. And notwythstandynge I woulde not haue anye thynke, that I speake these thinges, to dimynyshe the dygnitye of the Ecclesiasticall ministerye, but that men myghte vnderstande that theyr argumentes are very trifling.
The church which payeth the stipēd vnto the minister is greater then he Why in the church kinges are consecrated Power is geuē vnto princes of god, and not of bishops. Neither doubt I to affirme, that the church it self whiche payeth the stipend vnto the minister, is greater then the minister. Wherfore if we speake of tenthes, as they are at this day geuen vnto ministers, they are no cause that they should be greater then those that pay them. But in that kinges and Emperors are consecrated and annointed of byshops, and in that they receiue the crowne and sword of them, it nothinge helpeth their cause. For if we speake of the ciuill power, that is not geuen of the bishop, but of God. But this thing is ther done, that after the king or Emperor is chosen of god, in such manner as is agreable, prayers should be made for him in the assembly of the church, that god may confirm and strengthen his hart, that he may encrease piety in him, and instil in him a feare of his name, prosper his counsels, and so make fortunate his actions, that they may proue profitable vnto the church, and vnto the publike welth. And the bishop whilest these thinges are in doing, is the mouth of the church, & goeth before it, in expressing the prayer. And this function was deriued of an olde ceremony and custome of the Iewes. And y
e the king receaueth not his power of the bishop, but of God, euen their owne decrees also do testifye. In the
dist. 96. chap.
Si Imperatur, Gelasius saith, that the Emperor hath the priueleges of his power at gods hand. Why then doth
Bonifacius arrogātly claim it vnto himself? namely that which longeth to God onely. For as
Paule sayth: All power is of god. In the Code
de Iure veteri enucleando in the lawe firste,
Iustiniane.
Iustinian declareth that his power was geuen him of the deuine maiesty. And the Glose (
in Extrauag. de maioritate & obediencia in the chapter
vnam sanctam toward the end, saith, that power is geuen vnto kings of God onely, and that therfore they do indede receiue the crowne of the byshop, and the sword from the aulter.
But let vs more narowly examine
Bonifacius argumēt: I (sayth he) do geue power vnto Emperors. Therfore I am greater then Emperors. Let this most blessed
Thraso aunswere me, who consecrated him when hee was chosen Pope? Vndoubtedly the bishop
Hostiensis. Let vs conclude therfore that the bishop
Hostiensis is greater then the Pope. And if that follow not, thē is the argument also of
Bonifacius of no force, bicause (as I haue now shewed) it cleaueth vnto a broken foundation. For they are not bishops which geue power vnto kinges. Farther,
All emperors were not consecrated of the Pope. wer there not many Emperors whiche were neuer consecrated of bishops, and yet were neuertheles for al that Emperors? Neither were the old Grecian Emperors so annointed. Wherfore that is a new inuētiō. But what if I proue that the head bishop was somtimes consecrated of the ciuill magistrat? Vndoubtedly
Moses cōsecrated
Aaron, whē as yet (as it is sayd)
Moses was a ciuil prince. Wherfore
Bonifacius laboreth in vayne about his consecration, bicause he canne
[Page 262] gather nothing thereby.
He boasted moreouer of the kayes.
Wherin the kayes of the church consyst. We (sayth he) haue the power of binding and losing. But the power of the kayes consisteth herein, that ye should preach the word of god truly. For he which beleueth the gospel, is losed: & he which beleueth not, is bound. But when ye neither preach, nor teach, neither can ye binde, nor lose. And farther this subiection which we haue graunted is spiritual, namely of fayth and of obedience: and not ciuill, and with dominion.
Afterward was
Ieremy obiected, vnto whom the Lord sayde: I haue appointed thee ouer nacions and kingdoms, &c. First here I demaund what kings
Ieremy deiected, or whom he abrogated of theyr Empire, and what new kinges he instituted? They can shew of none. What therefore signify these woordes: I set thee ouer nacions and kingedomes? Vndoubtedly nothing els, then that by the sprite of prophecy & word of god he should foretell what kingdomes god would ouerthrow for sinnes, and what new ones he would institute. Why doe not the Popes so excercise theyr power? Let them sette before kinges and princes of the earth the threatninges of god,
Prophetes are not the efficiēt causes of the ouerthrow of kingdomes. Ministers and prophetes are an occasion, but not a iust cause of ruines. and let them be in this manner ouer nacions and kingdomes. Could
Ieremy be called the cause of the ouerthrowe of kingdomes? He was not properly the efficient cause, but onely a certayn occasion. For when he had admonished the king of
Iudah, and he beleued him not, the prophet by his preachinge was some occasion that he shoulde be condemned and ouerthrowne. So
Paule sayth: To some we are the sauor of life to life, and to other the sauor of death to death: When as yet the Apostle properlye killed no man, but his preaching after a sorte broughte death vnto those whiche would not beleue. It is god therefore that seperateth, ouerthroweth, scattereth & planteth. Neither disdaineth he sometimes to call vs hys fellowe workers.
Bonifacius goeth on, the lay power ought to be iudged of the Ecclesiasticall, but by what kind of iudgement? Vndoubtedly by this, that in the churche he set forth the anger of God against sinners, & that they be admonished and corrected by the holy scriptures. But y
e bishops may expel kings and put them out of their kingdome, wher is y
e permitted? Frō whence haue they that? what writings wil they bring for it?
The Pope ought to be iudged of the church. But that is most intollerable y
t the Pope sayth that he can be iudged of no man. And yet
Iohn .23. was in the counsel of
Constance put downe, and not onely by god, but also by men. So these men plant and replant Canons, and the same they allow and disalow, as often as they think good. Yea and Emperors haue sometimes thrust out and put down Popes, as it is before said.
Paul to the
Gal. sayth: If an Aungell from heauen preach any other gospel, let him be accursed. If the Pope (which may come to passe, and hath alredy long since come to passe) obtrude wicked opinions, who shall pronounce him accursed?
It is the dewty of the magistrate to execut the sentence of the church agaynst the pope Shall he be vtterly iudged of no man? The church vndoubtedly shal geue sentence vpon him: and the magistrate (for that he is the chiefest part of the church) shal not onely iudge together with it, but also shall execute the sentence. Farther it longeth vnto the magistrate to prouide that the riches of the churche be not geuen vnto y
e enemies of godlines. Wherefore if bishoppes become enemies of the churche, a faythfull magistrate ought not to suffer the goods of the church to be consumed by them. The Canonists haue this oftentimes in theyr mouth: That for the office sake is geuen the benefice. When therfore they do not their office, ought the magistrate to suffer them to enioy their benefices?
But let vs heare howe
Bonifacius proueth that he can be iudged of no man. Bycause he that is spiritual (sayth he) iudgeth all thinges, but he himselfe is iudged of no man. A godly and wel applied argument I promise you. But let vs se what kind of iudgement
Paul writeth of in that place. He speaketh not vndoubtedly of the common kind of iudgement, whereby men are either put to death or put oute of theyr roome. He entreateth there onelye of the vnderstandinge of thinges deuine, and which auaile vnto saluation. These thinges I say properlye
[Page] belong vnto the iudgement of the spiritual man: but concerning common iudgementes, and knowledge of ciuill causes,
Paule neuer thoughte of them in that place. Which is easely perceaued by his wordes, we haue not receiued (saith he) the sprite of this world: but a sprite, which is of God. If thou wilt demaund for what vse y
e sprite is geuen vs: He answereth, that we should know those things y
t are geuen vs of God. And bycause y
e sprite of this worlde cannot geue iudgemente of thinges deuine, it is added: The carnall man vnderstandeth not those things which ar of y
e sprite of god. The spiritual man iudgeth al things. What? Doth he iudge also ciuill and common causes? No vndoubtedlye: but he iudgeth those thinges whiche pertayne vnto the saluation of men: he himselfe is iudged of no man. Without doubt both
Peter and
Paul were iudged by the ciuil power, wherunto
Paul appealed to be iudged there, and yet were they both spirituall.
Peter & Paule were iudged by the ciuil power.But that place is thus to be vnderstanded. He y
t is spirituall, in that he is such a one, cannot in thinges deuine and such as pertaine vnto saluation, bee rightely iudged of any mā, which is not endewed w
t the same sprite that he is. The wicked and worldly ones count him oftentimes for a sedicious, vnpure, & infamous fellow: but only God and his sprite looketh vpon the hartes.
Note.Lastly
Bonifacius concludeth, that there is one onely chiefe power which longeth vnto the pope, least we should seme with the
Maniches to make many beginninges.
We put this one onely beginninge, and not many. And he addeth: That god in the beginning, and not in the beginnings, created the world. We also abhorre from the
Maniches, and do put one onely beginning, and pronounce one onely fountayne and ofspring of all powers, namely, god and his word, without which can be no power, either ciuil or Ecclesiasticall. For the foundation of either of them dependeth of the word of god, & so we make but one beginning & not two. Farther, if
Bonifacius wil vrge these words of
Genesis: In the beginning god created. &c. there oughte to be in the world but one onely king. For when
Paul sayde: One Lord, one faith, one baptisme, he added not one Pope.
A Schisme of thre Popes.At the length our
Thraso commeth so farre, that hee excludeth them from the hope of saluation, which acknowledge not the Pope for the chief prince & head of the church. But when ther were two or three Popes al at one time (which thing both happened, and also endured the space of .60. yeares full) it muste needes be that those were at that time
Maniches, and did put two beginnings, which were of
Bonifacius opinion. Moreouer, what thinke they of the
Gretians, of the
Persiās, and Christians which dwell in the East part, for as much as they acknowledge not the Pope, who yet neuerthelesse reade the scriptures, beleue in our Lord Iesus Christ, and both are, & also ar called christians? Al them
Bonifacius excludeth from the hope of saluation. This is the ambicion and vnspeakeable tirannye of the Popes.
When we obiecte vnto the papistes these wordes of
Paule: let euery soule be subiect vnto the superior powers, they aunswere: that euery soul ought to be subiect vnto the superior power, but yet to theyrs, not to other mens power, otherwise the frenchmen ought to be subiect vnto the Spaniardes, the Spaniardes to the
Germaines, which thing, for that it is absurd, it is concluded, that euery man ought to obey his own Magistrat. But now the clergy acknowledge the bishops for theyr power, and ought to be subiect vnto thē: and the bishops acknowledge the Archbishoppes and Primates, and they lastly acknowledge the Pope. After this manner say they, we obey the power, and satisfye
Paule. What haue we to do with kings or ciuil magistrats? But this is nothing els, then most filthily to abuse the wordes of
Paule.
The Papistes do rēt into two partes both the kingdomes and the people. Doo they not see that they deuide the publike wealth into two bodies, which oughte to be one body onely? For when they deuide the kyngdome of the Clergye, from the kingedome of the laitye, they make in one kyngedome twoo peoples, and doo sette ouer eyther people a Magystrate.
[Page 259] And thereby commeth to passe, that the Clergy whiche are Frenchemen, seeme not to be Frenchemen: and the Germanes seeme not to be Germanes. And this maketh not coniunction, but diuision.
Farther, of what power I praye you speaketh
Paul? Not vndoubtedly of Byshops or Archebishops, but of that power whiche beareth the swoorde. He doth not without a cause (sayth he) beare the swoorde. He speaketh of that power to whom tribute is payd. For for this cause (sayth he) ye pay tribute. But Bishops neither beare swoorde, nor exacte tributes of the people. Wherfore
Paul speaketh not of them. And thoughe Germany Byshops beare the swoorde, and do gather tributes and customes, they doo not that in respect that they are Byshops, but in respect that by accidens they haue the ciuile power adioyned vnto thē: how rightly, let them see to it. But it is manifest that
Paul spake of the Ciuile power, vnto whiche he commaunded that euery soule should obey. Neither is the interpretation of
Origene probable, wherin he affirmeth, that
Paul sayd: Euery soule,
Origene. and not euery spirite. Bycause (sayth he) the spirituall man is moued with no affections, neither possesseth he any thyng in the world. Wherfore he is not subiect at all vnto the outward power. Wherfore
Paul commaundeth euery soule, that is, euery carnall man to obey the ciuile power. But what? Was not Christ spirituall? who was more spirituall? And yet he acknowledged the superior power, and payd tribute. What say you to the Apostles, were not they spirituall? And yet they neuer exempted thēselues from the ciuile power: yea rather they obeyed and taught others to obey them.
But let vs heare what our
Bonifacianes aunswere farther. They say that they haue not this power ordinarily, and by the right of their fruition, but graunted them by priuiledges and giftes of princes. And why say they is it not lawful for vs to enioye the priuiledges and liberality of princes? But we ought here to haue a regard, not what princes haue doone, but what they ought to haue done. God without all doubt hath made subiect euery soule vnto the hygher power. It was neuer lawfull for any prince to breake that law.
Whether it wer lawful for princes to exempt Ecclesiastical men from their subiectiō. Nor humane reason seeth not better then the prouidence of God, what should become of the affaires of humane kynd. And the euent it selfe also sufficiently hath declared how much that remission of princes hath profited. For after that Bishops and false Ecclesiastical men got themselues once frō the subiection of the ciuile power, they straight way became farre worse then they were before, and made the people which were committed to theyr charge, nothyng the better. Wherfore let them cease to say that Emperours and kynges haue geuen them these thynges, let them rather heare y
e word of god, wherin they are cōmaūded to obey princes. But they haue not onely withdrawen thēselues from obedience towarde princes, but also haue claymed vnto thēselues an immunite or fraunches.
What immunity is.
What tribute is.
What custome is.
Vlpiane. And an immunity is a liberty from doyng of homages, & bearyng of ciuile burthens. And among burthens are numbred tributes, & customes. Tributes are those which are payd of landes and possessions. Customes are those whiche are payd of marchandises, & of those thinges whiche are either caried out or brought in. These thynges
Vlpiane calleth y
e sinewes of the publique wealth, as without which it cā not either consist, or be gouerned. By what ryght therfore and reason haue these men withdrawē themselues from the publique commodity? With what face do they boast of such liberality of princes, whiche neither Christ, neither the Apostles, nor the Prophetes vsed? And althoughe they haue this thing as they say,
Ministers of the Church ar exempted from personall burthēs and from such as are filthy.
Vlpianus. by the gift of kings and Emperors, yet must they take heede, that it be not hurtfull vnto the Citezins, and least whilest they are lifted vp, other be aboue measure burdened. And yet ar they not by priuiledges and lawes of princes exempted from all burthēs. In deede they are franchised from personall burthens: & that not without great reason, whiche euen the Ethnike princes sawe also. In the digestes
de Vacatione & excusatione munerum, in the law
Praetor: Vlpianus saith: If a man haue
[Page] gotten a benefice, neither can hurt of conscience be absent from it, he is acquited. And
Constantine the Emperor, in the
Code de Episcopis & Clericis in the law .1. and .2.
What personal burthens are. Filthy burthens. exempteth them from personall and filthy burthens. Personall burthens are those whiche are accomplished by the industry of the mynde and labour of the body. Filthy burthens are those, as to burne lyme, to digge sand, to kepe the cundite, to heate the bath, and such other of like sorte. From these burthens they are woorthily exempted, bycause the ministery by such filthy excercises should come in contempt. And they are made free from personal burthens, bycause whē they should geue theyr mindes to holy thyngs, they ought not to be withdrawē to other thynges. Wherfore princes haue ryghtly graunted these thynges vnto Ecclesiasticall men, that they should not be absent from the study of religion, and that they should not be contemned of the common people.
But what if a man clayme hymselfe to be a Minister onely by hys apparell or garmentes, and doth nothyng in the Churche, is this freedome also graunted vnto hym?
Iustiniane. No vndoubtedly. Yea
Iustiniane in the
Code de Episcopis & Clericis in the lawe
generaliter sancimus, sayth that he meaneth onely of those, whiche diligently geue themselues to holy thynges, and not of vagaboundes and idle persons, which bragge onely in the name of the Ministery. Moreouer Ministers are not loosed from ordinary charges, althoughe they are exempted from extraordinary charges.
Ordinary charges. Extraordinary charges. Ordinary charges are those, whiche are imposed alwayes by the commaundement of the lawes. Extraordinary charges, whiche are exacted onely for some present necessity, and afterward doo cease. Wherfore if Ecclesiastical men haue manors & landes, as other Citezins haue, for them they ought to pay.
Why they are acquited from extraordinary charges. For the Church when it taketh landes, taketh them w
t their burthens. But they are free from extraordinary tributes, bycause in the olde tyme Ecclesiastical men were poore, & besides necessary foode and apparell had nothyng remanyng, or if peraduenture there remayned any thyng, all the same, whatsoeuer it were, was bestowed vpon the poore. But nowe it is cleane contrary: for both they abounde in riches, and they bestow very litle vpon the poore. And yet if any great necessity happened,
They are not exempted from all extraordinary charges. they were compelled to pay also extraordinary charges. As if there were any highe wayes to bee mended, and any bridges to be made, any shippes to be edified, for to transporte an hoste, as it appeareth in the
Code, by the lawes of the Emperour. Neyther vndoubtedly doth brotherly charity suffer, that when other are burdened, they shoulde lye styll aboundyng in wealth and riches. Neyther is it to bee suffred, that they shoulde lyue at ease, and other in payne.
Yet the Pope in his Decretalles (
de Immunitate Ecclesiae in the chapter.
Non minus, where the woordes of the Counsell holden at
Lateranum are cited. And in the chapter
aduersus Consules) will haue the Ecclesiasticall men vtterly exempted. And
Bonifacius the .8. in hys .6.
de Immunitate Ecclesiarum, in the chapter
Clericis laicos, permitteth them not to pay any thyng. Yea and he excommucateth the prince, which taketh tribute of a Minister of the Churche, and also the Minister hymself which payeth it. This law as to cruel,
Benedictus the .11. after a sort mitigateth, in
Extrauag. de Immunitate Eccles. in the chap.
Quod olim, yet he permitteth not y
e prince to do any thyng without askyng counsel of y
e Byshop of Rome. For he in deede doth not excōmunicate those princes which do receaue tribute of Ecclesiasticall men, but onely those that exacte it of them. For he permitteth not, that princes should exacte any thyng by their owne right, whiche thing yet sometymes he permitteth, namely in an extreme necessity, as in daunger of religion and lyfe, so that firste there be had the consent of the Byshop and clergy, and afterwarde also the agreement of the Pope. So longe therefore hath he decreed that they must tary. So these men do exempt themselues frō the obedience and tributes of princes and kyngs, which (as I haue before sayd out of
Vlpiane)
[Page 264] are the establishementes and sinewes of the publique wealth.
A sayinge of Diocletian. When I thinke vpon these thinges, I call to remembraunce a profitable saying of
Diocletian: of whō when a Philosopher desired an immunite: This request (sayd he) disagreeth with thy profession. Thou professest (sayd he) that thou wilt ouercome thy affections, but thou shewest that thou art ouercome of auarice. So these men professe themselues to be spirituall. But in a spirituall mā is nothing more required thē charity, whiche counselleth vs not to lyue franchised and securely, when other are oppressed with cares and burthēs.
Thomas Aquinas bringeth a place of
Genesis to shewe that Priestes are exempted from tributes,
Thomas Aquinas. not in deede by the law of GOD, but by a lawe made by princes, and yet neuertheles agreing with the law of nature. For
Pharao kyng of
Egypt prouided, that the Priests should not paye the fift parte of their fruites for tribute, when as yet so muche was exacted of all the other
Egyptians. Wherfore he concludeth that Priestes are exempted. This place is diligently to be considred. First let vs note, that the Priests of the Egyptians had theyr dayly lyuing out of the threasory of the kyng. They had meate and drinke and money geuen them to lyue by. Afterward it came to passe, that when the hunger waxed great, all the Egyptians solde their landes vnto the kyng, therwith to buy corne to driue away the hunger. But whē that famine was past, the kyng rendred the landes vnto the olde possessors, but yet vpon this condition, that euery yeare they should paye him the fift parte, but of the landes of the Priestes there was no fift part payd. And no meruayle: bycause they sold not their landes vnto the king when they were kept of the common cost. Yet it is to bee thought that they payd so muche tribute of their landes as they were wont to pay before the famine. Neither vndoubtedly can any other thyng be gathered out of that place, but that Priestes ought to be noorished of the common cost: but in that they payed not the fift part, that happened for an other cause, as we haue nowe declared.
They bring forth also the .8. chapter of
Esdras, where
Artaxerxes prouided that when he had layd a tribute vpon the Iewes, there should be nothing leuied of the
Leuites in the name of a tribute. But this is not to be meruayled at, seyng y
e
Leuites had no landes to pay tribute of. For vnto them pertayned onely oblations, first fruites, and tenthes. For whiche cause they were released of tributes. Also
Iulius Cesar de bello Gallico sayth,
The Druites payd no tributes.
Plini. that the
Druites whiche were Priestes in
Gallia payd no tributes. But
Plini in his .16. booke and .44. chapter, writeth that the
Druites had no landes. And yet are not these thinges spoken to this end, that I should thinke that it is not lawfull for the Magistrate to deale somewhat more gently with them, and somewhat to beare with thē:
It is honest that the
[...]agistrate deale somwhat more gently with Ministers. Bycause they must alwayes apply themselues to holy thinges, and study for nothyng els. Wherby it cōmeth to passe, that they can not increase their substaunce, yea rather very oftentymes they suffer great losse, neither haue they their stipendes, but duryng theyr lyfe. This thyng onely I dissalowe, that they clayme vnto thēselues immunity, both real and personall, they vtterly refuse both ordinary and extraordinary charges, and that by tyranny or against the worde of God, and for that the Pope will not suffer princes to exacte tributes of Byshops and Ecclesiasticall men, when they will themselues: and bycause they will not geue them, if they be required. The word of God hath otherwise commaunded, when it sayth, let euery soule be subiect vnto the higher power. And therfore (sayeth he) ye pay tributes. None is excepted: neither would Christ himselfe be exempted.
Chrisostome.
Chrisostome vpon that place of
Paul: It may (sayth he) seeme greuous vnto Christians, for that they beyng the children of God and appoynted for the kyngdome of heauen, are subiect vnto princes of this world. But he aunswereth: Whilest we are in this lyfe, our dignity is hidden. For it appeareth not what we shalbe. Wherfore whilest we lyue here, let it not be grieuous vnto vs to rise vp to the Magistrate, to geue them the way, and to honour them. These thynges are full of comelynes and are decently
[Page] done of the saintes. Nowe that we are regenerate by the worde and the spirite, it might seeme that we neede no Magistrate. Wherefore the Iewes, bycause they were the people of God, tooke it very grieuously that sometyme the
Babilonians raigned ouer them, sometymes the
Persians, sometymes the
Grecians, sometymes the
Romanes,
Anabaptistes & Libertines. and other nations whiche knewe not God. The
Anabaptistes also and
Libertines cry that it is a thyng vnworthy for a Christian to suffer a Magistrate ouer hym. The Clergy of the Pope also haue shaked of this yoke from themselues. But the Apostles which foresawe that this thing would come to passe, did very often inculcate, that the Ciuile power should be obeyed, whiche precept is two wayes transgressed: one way is, when men say they will not obey the Magistrate,
Sinne committed two maner of wayes agaynst the Magistrate. and sediciously make warre agaynst hym. The other way is, whē they circumuent hym by subtility and guile, that he can not execute his office. For there are in courtes, whiche flatter in the eares of princes, disprayse & prayse whom they lust, complayne of the good, as euill, and commend the euil, as good. So according as they wil, some ar preferred to prouinces, and other some ar displaced.
A sentence of Diocletian. Wherfore
Diocletian sayde: A good, wise, & wary Emperor is oftētymes solde of his subiectes. The prince is at home in his palace, they that are familiar with him accuse & defende before him whom they will. Yea and among the
Romanes y
e fathers which were called
Conscripti, y
t is appoynted, were sometymes called
Circumscripti, that is deceaued or abused. The course of Iustice is by many deceates hindred. Neither skilleth it much whether it be done by violēce or by guile, bycause both wayes the publique wealth is hurte, and the institution of God contemned.
Neither is this to be passed ouer in this place (whiche hath also ben often spoken of) that the Magistrate is not to be obeyed, if he commaūd any thing against the worde of God. For when he so doth, he is no Magistrate. Bycause (as
Paul sayth) he is the Minister of God to good. Wherfore if he commaund thinges contrary vnto the worde of God, he is not in that parte his Minister. But thou wilt say: Sometymes greuous, molestous, and harde thinges are cōmaunded: whiche yet are not agaynst the worde of God. What is to be done in those cases? We must obey: for we are commaunded to obeye our Lordes, thoughe they be hard, so that they commaunde nothyng agaynst the worde of GOD: whiche thing if they do, we must aunswere them with this sentence of
Peter, whiche sayth: we must rather obey God then men.
Nabucad-Nezar would haue had his Image worshipped, the faythfull Hebrues aunswered: Thy image O kyng we will not worship.
Antiochus cōmaunded the Hebrew woman to eate swines fleshe: but she chused to dye with together her seuē childrē, rather then to cōmit any thing agaynst the lawe of God. Also the
Martin, as well in the old tyme as also in our tyme, suffred most extreme punishmentes, and most cruell deathes, for that they would not sinne agaynst the law of God.
Eusebius. An example of Constātius an Emperor.
Eusebius Casariensis writeth that
Constantius the father of
Constantine fayned vpon a tyme, that he would put out all the Christians whiche would abyde in theyr religion, from their honours and offices. But they whiche were in very dede godly, of theyr own free will gaue ouer their dignity, and chused rather to geue place vnto dignityes, then to depart frō Christ. But this turned to good vnto thē, for the Emperour embraced thē: and those which had denyed Christ for to keepe their dignityes, he vtterly remoued from hymself, saying: that they also would not be faythful vnto him, whiche had broken thier fayth vnto God.
Constantius afterwarde the sonne of
Constantine,
Constantius the second an Arrian. beyng an
Arrian, went aboute to drawe the faithfull Byshops into hys heresy: but they chused rather to be banished,
Iulianus Apostata. then to follow that wicked purpose of the Emperour. Afterward
Iulianus Apostata opened the temples of Idoles, and labored to dryue the Christians to the Ethnike religion & worshipping, but such as wer in deede godly had greater
[Page 265] loue and regarde to Religion of Christ then to their lyfe.
Achilles. Yea and
Achilles in
Homere sayth: I will obey the princes, but yet when they commaund things honest and iust.
And these thynges pertayne not onely to subiectes, but also to inferior Magistrates. For what,
Of inferior powers. if the superior prince commaunde the inferior Magistrates, to receaue the Masse in their Cityes? Vndoubtedly they ought not obey. If a manne will saye: It is the superior power, therefore it muste bee obeyed: I will aunswere: In thynges ciuile and humane let them obeye as muche as they ought, but nothyng agaynste GOD. We muste alwayes runne vnto that principle:
Euery thyng is suche a thyng by reason of an other, wherefore that other shall more bee suche. Therefore if we obeye the Magistrate for goddes sake, muche more is GOD hymselfe to be obeyed. Wherefore the inferior Magistrates ought not in suche thynges to haue a regarde what the superior power commaundeth, but what God hymselfe hath commaunded.
But there are some whiche saye:
Whether the consent of the Churche is to be taryed for in reformyng of religion.
A Similitude. that before we departe from the obedience of the Magistrates as touchyng Religion, we must tary for the consent of the Churche. They whiche say these thynges, must marke that Christ neuer so commaunded: Euery manne for hymselfe is wholy bounde vnto the lawe of GOD, whether other consent or dissent. If the good man of a house haue many seruauntes, whome he commaundeth to doo hys woorke in the countrey, but some of them, when their master is absent wil be idle,
Paul taryed not for consent. ought the rest therfore to be idle, bycause some consent not to theyr common busines? Did
Paul when he was called to preache Christ, tary for the consent of his other brethren. No vndoubtedly: but as he writteth vnto the
Galathians, when it pleased GOD to reuele vnto me hys sonne, that I should preache hym amonge the Gentiles, I dyd not strayghtwaye aske counsell of fleshe and bloude, neyther went I vnto the Apostles whiche were before me, but I went into
Arabia. Wherefore he taried not for the consent of other, but straightwaye obeyed his vocation. So also ought we to doo: after that GOD hath opened vnto vs his truth,
Whē we must tary for consēt. we muste not tary. We muste in deede tary for the consent if the thynge bee doubtfull and darke. But our cause is manifest and without all obscurenes, whiche if we will omitte tyll consent be had, the thyng it selfe is lost,
An acte of Tiberius. and good occasions taken awaye.
Tiberius woulde haue brought Christe into the number of the goddes, but he thought to haue the consent of the
Senate: but the
Senate woulde not: and by that meanes it came to passe, that whylest the consent was taryed for, Christ coulde not bee numbred amonge the goddes, wher as
Tiberius was able to haue brought it to passe by himself. But I pray you let them tel vs: For whose cōsent they will tary? For the Byshops cōsent? But they (no doubt) wil neuer consent: for they are sworne enemyes vnto the truth.
But let vs returne vnto the inferior Magistrate, of whom we spake before. We must remember what God hath commaunded chyldren concernyng theyr parentes: Honour thy father and thy mother. By whiche woordes vndoubtedlye is also commaunded honour and obeysaunce towarde superior powers. For they haue the place of parentes towarde the inferior Magistrates. But let vs see what Christe hath pronounced as touchyng thys matter. He whiche loueth father (sayeth he) or mother more then me, is not woorthy of me. The same thyng without doubte muste we thynke of the Magistrate whiche is the father of the countrey. We muste obeye hym, but yet not aboue the Lord. Yea if he commaunde any thyng agaynst hym, he is both to be hated, and also to be denyed. Neither is it lawfull for any manne to professe hymselfe to be a Christian, whiche will not departe from the superior Magistrate in these thynges, whiche are agaynste the woorde of GOD. Thys were to haue a wyll to serue two Lordes, and to halte in two partes. If GOD be God, let vs follow hym: and that not by halues, but wholy.
But it is to be feared (saye they) least whylest we are agaynste the superior power, we engender daunger to the publique wealth. To this will I answere contraryly to that which
Demades in the old tyme answered vnto the
Athenienses.
An answere of Demades.
Cassander the
Macedonian, whiche succeded
Alexander the greate, entreated with the
Athenienses, to woorshippe
Alexander for a GOD. They stayed at it, but
Cassander, vnles they woulde consent, seemed that he would inuade them with battaile. Wherefore
Demades spake thus vnto the people: That it was to be feared, least whilest they retayned heauen, they lost not earth. So doo I aunswere these menne, but chaungyng the woordes: That it is to be feared, least whilest they to muche regarde and defende an earthely publique wealth, they lose heauen. For althoughe the superior power doo fume and threaten, we must stande valiantly to a good cause. For we muste woorshippe GOD holyly and godly, thoughe all Magistrates and the whole worlde were agaynste vs. And therefore if that superior power commaunde any thyng agaynst the lawe of God, it is not to be obeyed.
An example of Naboth.So dyd
Naboth behaue hymself, he would not graunt vnto
Achab hys vyneyarde whiche was his inheritaunce. Neither had he in that thing a respect vnto any thing elles, then that the lawe of GOD should remayne vnbroken, wherin it was commaunded that y
e tribes and famelyes of the Israelites as touchyng possessions should remayne distincte and separated. Wherefore by it, it was not lawfull for
Naboth to alienate hys inheritaunce for euer. Yet a manne beyng farre endetted mought haue solde his inheritaunce, till the yeare of Iubily. But after that yeare it returned vnto the olde possessor agayne. GOD woulde by thys meanes, that the inheritaunces of the Israelites shoulde not be confounded. Wherefore
Naboth woulde not sell hys auncient inheritaunce, that the lawe of GOD shoulde not be broken, whome Magistrates also ought to follow, and not to geue place in theyr Cityes and dominions vnto moste vnpure Masses and Papisticall Idolatrye. The Iewes, when they were oppressed vnder the
Mocedonians,
The constancy of the Iewes agaynste the Macedonians & Romanes. chused to suffer any thynge, rather then that the Image of
Iupiter Olimpicus shoulde abyde in the Temple of GOD. And when the
Romanes bare rule ouer them, howe greate sedition and tumult stirred they vp, rather then they would suffer the Siluer Eagle, or the Image of
Caligula to be set vp in the holy place. Yea &
Valentinian y
e Emperor beyng an
Arrian (as both
Eusebius writeth and also
Ambrose in hys Epistles) would haue had the Church of
Millan delyuered vnto him, there with hys heretikes to haue celebrated prayers and holy seruices.
Ambrose. But
Ambrose woulde not geue place, but rather abode daye and nyght in the Temple together with the people, that the Emperour should not fynd it empty and so possesse it. If the Hebrues would not haue the Temple of GOD polluted with Idoles, and
Ambrose suffred not the Churche to be contaminated by heretikes, why doo faythfull Magistrates permitte theyr Temples to Idolatrers, and vnpure worshippynges of Papistes?
They saye that these thynges pertayne not vnto them, and that these Temples are not in theyr power. What then? If murther shoulde be committed in those Temples, or any shoulde there conspire agaynste the publique wealth, woulde they leaue murtherers and conspirators vnpunished there? And would they say y
t these wycked crimes pertayne nothyng vnto them? Would they willingly & wittingly suffer these thyngs? I thinke not, if they were wise, & if they would keepe and defend the publique wealth. If a man should obiect vnto them, this Temple is not yours, neither maketh it any matter vnto you what is here done: yea but they would then aunswere, for as muche as it is in our City, in that it sufficiently pertayneth vnto vs. But wicked actes, farre more grieuous then murthers and conspiracyes, are there committed, Idolatry I say, sacrilege,
[Page 266] and blasphemye. And shall a Magistrate whiche will be called a Christian, thynke that these thynges pertayne nothyng vnto hym? But, say they, the superior power hath commaunded these thynges to be done. To this I haue already largely aunswered. Nowe thys thynge wyll I adde, if the same power shoulde go aboute to destroye the Citye, or to take awaye or diminishe the priuiledges, they woulde neuer suffer that, they woulde rather runne to weapons: but these thynges whiche are farre more grieuous and cruell, are openly and manifestly done and suffred. And whiche is muche moste grieuous of all, those thynges are there suffred, where many yeares the Gospell of Christe hath bene receaued.
Nowe resteth (bycause oftentymes the Magistrate excuseth hymselfe, saying y
e Ecclesiastical causes pertayne not vnto him) to declare y
t to be vntrue. Although it be sufficiently declared by those things which I haue already spoken, yet for y
e more easie vnderstandyng I thinke it good to adde those thynges. First I say y
t y
e Magistrate is the keper of the law of God, which conteyneth not onely the latter table, but also the first. Wherfore y
e Magistrate is a keper as well of the one, as of the other. I adde that also whiche
Augustine sayth,
Augustine. that not onely priuate men, but also kynges ought to serue the Lorde. For in the Psalme it is written: In gatheryng together peoples into one, and kynges to serue the Lorde. And in an other place. And nowe O kynges vnderstand, be wise ye that iudge the earth. Serue the Lord in feare, &c. A priuate man (sayth
Augustine) serueth the Lorde if he confesse hys name, and lyue vprightly.
Howe kynges ought peculiarly to serue the Lorde. But this is not sufficient for a kyng and Magistrate. For he by his authority and power ought so to serue the Lorde, that he must punishe those that are agaynst hym: whiche thyng vnles he doo, he seemeth to assent vnto blasphemers and heretikes. For the king, when he seeth these menne, and suffreth them, is as much in faulte, as if he shoulde ioyne hymselfe with them, and mainteyne theyr wicked actes.
Nebuchad-Nezar as soone as euer he knewe GOD, made a decree that whosoeuer spake blasphemy agaynst the GOD of
Daniel, shoulde dye. The lyke decree made
Darius afterwarde. Wherfore our Magistrates also ought vtterly to take awaye all Idolatryes, blasphemyes, and superstitions, assone as euer they find them out.
The Ethnike princes neuer thought that the care ouer Religion pertayned not vnto their power. Why was
Socrates condemned at
Athens?
The Ethnike princes had a regard vnto religion. I do not now demaunde how holyly or iustly: (for as all men in a manner beleue,
Anitus and
Melitus lyed agaynst hym) this I speake, for that he was for no other cause condemned, but onely for religion, as thoughe he taught newe gods, and led away the youth from the olde, and receaued worshyppyng of the gods: and he was by a prophane Magistrate condēned.
Socrates was for religiō sake condemned of a prophane Magistrate. Wherfore the
Athenienses thought that the obseruance and care of religion pertayned vnto their Magistrate. The law of God commaunded that the blasphemer should be put to death, not I thinke by euery priuate mā, or by the Priestes, but by the Magistrates. The Ethnike Emperors also in those first tymes did for no other cause rage agaynst the Christians, but bycause they thought that matters of religion pertayned vnto their iudgement seat. And assuredly as touching this opinion, they wer not deceaued: for none (as
Chrisostome sayth) either Apostle or Prophet reproued the people,
Chrisostome. either Iewes or Ethnikes, bycause they had a care ouer Religion, but they were deceaued in the knowledge of Religion: bycause they defended theyr owne religion as true, and condemned the Christian religion, as vngodly and blasphemous.
Constantine and
Theodosius are praysed, and very many other holy princes, bycause they tooke awaye Idoles, and either closed vp, or elles ouerthrew theyr Temples. But they dyd not these thynges, but for that they thought that the charge of Religion pertayned vnto them: otherwise they should haue bene busy fellowes, and should haue put theyr sicle into an other mannes haruest. The
Donatistes tooke thys in very ill parte, and grieuously complayned
[Page] thereof in
Augustines tyme, bycause the Catholique Byshoppes required ayde of the Ciuile Magistrate agaynst them.
Augustine. But
Augustine confuteth them with the selfe same argumentes, whiche I haue a litle before rehearsed, and addeth this moreouer: Why did ye accuse
Cecilianus Bishop of
Carthage before
Constā tine, if it be wicked for the Emperor to determine concerning Religion.
Farther, there is gathered by those thynges whiche the same father wrote agaynst
Petilianus, and agaynst
Parmenianus, and also in many other his Epistles, howe that the
Donatistes accused
Cecilianus (as it is sayde) before
Constantine the Emperour, who first sent the cause to
Melchiades Bishop of Rome. And when by hym they were ouercome, they appealed agayne vnto the Emperor, neyther reiected he their appealation from him, but committed the matter vnto the Bishop of
Orleance: by whom they were agayne condemned. Neither rested they so,
Constātine decideth a matter of religion. but again appealed vnto y
e Emperor, who heard thē, decided their cause, condemned them, and by hys sentence absolued
Cecilianus. Where are they now which so often and so impudētly cry, that there is no appealyng from the Pope, and that the causes of Religion pertayne not vnto the ciuile Magistrate?
To whom in the olde tyme pertayned the ryght of callyng generall counsels? Pertayned it not vnto the Emperors?
Counsels were called by Emperors. As for the counsell of
Nice, the counsell of
Constātinople, of
Ephesus, and of
Chalcedonia, Emperors called them.
Leo. 1. of y
t name, prayed the Emperor to cal a counsell in
Italy, bycause he suspected the Gretians of the error of
Eutiches: & yet could he not obteyne it, and the Byshops were called together to
Chalcedonia, where at the Emperor also was present, as was
Constantine at the counsell of
Nice. Neither doo I thinke y
t they were there present, to sitte idle and to do nothing, but rather to put forth vnto the Bishops what they should doo, and to vrge them to define rightly.
Theodoretus telleth, that
Constantine admonished the fathers to determine all thinges by the scriptures of the Euangelistes, Apostles, Prophetes, and Canonicall scriptures.
Iustinian also in the
Code,
Iustinian. Augustine. wrote many Ecclesiasticall lawes of Byshoppes and Priestes, and other such lyke. Yea and
Augustine hath taught, that the Magistrate ought after the same manner to punish Idolatrers & heretikes, as he punisheth adulterers, for as much as they cōmitte whoredome against God in mynd: which is much more heynous then to committe whoredome in body. And looke by what lawe murtherers are put to death, by the same also Idolatrers and heretikes ought to be punished, for that by them are killed not the bodies, but the soules: although the common people be stirred vp onely agaynst homicides, bycause they see the bloud of the bodyes killed, but see not the death of the soules. Vndoubtedly it is profitable for the Magistrate to take vpon hym this care, and by his authority to compell menne to come to holy sermons, and to heare the worde of God: for by that meanes it commeth to passe, that by often hearyng those thyngs, begyn to please, whiche before displeased. As Hystoryes teach, that God hath oftentymes with most noble victoryes illustrate godly prynces,
God hath prospered princes whiche had a care vnto Religion. which haue had a care vnto these thinges.
Farther, it can not be denied, but that it is the dewty of the Magistrates to defend those Cities and publique wealthes ouer whiche they are gouerners, and to prouide that no hurt happen vnto them: wherfore for asmuch as Idolatry is y
e cause of captiuity, pestilence, famine, & ouerthrowing of publique wealthes, shal it not pertaine vnto the Magistrate to represse it, and to kepe the true sound religion? Lastly
Paul teacheth fathers to instruct their children in discipline, & in the feare of God: but a good Magistrate is a father of the countrey, wherfore by the rule of the Apostle he ought to prouide that subiectes be instructed as common children. But kynges and princes, whiche say that these thynges pertayne not vnto thē, do in the meane tyme let, geue, and sell Bishoprikes, Abbacies and benefices, to whō they thinke good, neither thinke they that to be none of their office:
[Page 267] onely religion they thinke they haue nothyng to doo with, and they neglect to prouide that they, whom they exalte to most ample dignityes, should execute theyr office rightly. Wherfore this thyng onely remayneth for them, euen that GOD hymselfe at the length will looke vpon these thynges, and with most grieuous punishement take vengeaunce of their negligence. These thynges haue I spokē the more at large by occasion of our Hystory, which maketh mention twise or thrise that euilles happened in
Israel, bycause they had not a kyng or lawfull Magistrate.
¶The .xx. Chapter.
1
THen all the children of Israell went out, and the congregation was gathered together as one man, from Dan euen to Beerseba, and from the lande of Gilead, vnto the Lord in Mizpa.
2 And the corners of all the people, and all the tribes of Israell, assembled in the Churche of the people of God, foure hundreth thousand footemen that drew sword.
3 And the children of Beniamin heard y
t the childrē of Israell wer gone vp vnto Mizpa. Then the children of Israell sayde: Howe is this wickednes committed?
4 And the man the Leuite, the womans husband that was slayne, aunswered and sayde: I came vnto Gibea whiche is in Beniamin, with my concubine to lodge.
5 And the men of Gibea arose agaynst me, and beset the house roūd aboute vpon me by nyght, thynking to haue slayne mee. And haue forced my concubine that she is dead.
6 Then I tooke my concubine, and cut her in pieces, and sent her thorough out all the countrey of the inheritance of Israel. For they haue committed abhomination and vilany in Israel.
7 Beholde all ye children of Israell, geue your aduise and Counsell herein.
The congregation of the Israelites was assembled together to iudge of the crime. This Hebrew word
Edah signifieth a Church or an assembly,
The end of assemblyes or meatynges together. beyng deriued of this verbe
Adah, whiche is to testify: bycause that it is the vse and ende of such assemblyes, that the godly should faythfully testify before God of those thynges whiche are put forth to be consulted of.
From Dan euen vnto Beerseba.
Dan & Beerseba. In this kinde of
Paraphrasis is comprehended the whole people of
Israel. For these ar the endes of that kyngdome: &
Dan is the ende towarde the North, wherby y
e Iewes are neyghbours vnto the
Zidonians, and
Beerseba toward the South.
Euen vnto Gilead. That land is beyond
Iordane,
The borders of the region of the Hebrues. where the two tribes
Ruben and
Gad together, with halfe the tribe of
Manasses dwelled. Thys was the third end toward the East. And ouer agaynst that toward the West lay the sea called
mare Mediterraneum. Within these termes and lymites was conteyned the region of the Hebrues, whiche they possessed in the land of
Chanaan.
They came into Mizpa vnto the LORDE.
Where Mizpa was.
Mizpa was a place moste apte to haue assemblyes in, it was not farre frome
Ierusalem in the Tribe of
Iudah. In the fyrste booke of the
Machabites the thyrde Chapiter,
[Page] it is thus written: When the people by reason of y
e tyranny of the
Macedonians fled out of
Ierusalem, they assembled together in
Mizpa vnto
Iudas Machabeus. And it is added that y
t place was a house of prayer of aūcient tyme, & laye situate ouer agaynst the City of
Ierusalem. And in this booke we haue before heard, how that when
Iiphtah should be ordeyned Iudge ouer the people, the people assembled together in
Mizpa. In
Samuels tyme also y
e people assembled together twise vnto that place: once when they should leade an army agaynst the
Philistines, & an other tyme when
Saul should be created kyng. Farther, when all the Citye was ouerthrowen by
Nebuchad-Nezar, all the people fled to
Godolia in
Mizpa. Moreouer besides the oportunity of the place, was added a notable benefite of God: bycause, as we rede in the .10. chapter of
Iosuah, there assembled thether agaynst the people of
Israel a very great nūber of kynges, for there were not fiue or sixe, but very many kinges which were neyghbours, entending vtterly to destroye the name of the Iewes. Yet God commaunded them to be of a good & valiaunt courage, bycause he would geue vnto his people the victory ouer them all. And when that thyng happened, contrary to all mans hope, the Hebrues for a monument of so great a benefite, built in that place an alter vnto God. Wherfore it is probable (as the
Rabbines affirme) that in
Mizpa began to bee a house of prayer. For the people went not to the tabernacle or to
Ierusalem, so often as they had occasion to pray,
Euery Citye had Synagoges. but had in Cityes and Villages certayne Synagoges, wherein they prayed together vnto GOD. But to doo Sacrifices it was not after that manner lawfull but onely at the tabernacle of
Moses, or at
Ierusalem, after
Salomon had builte the Temple: althoughe hyghe places were sometymes vsed. Wherfore the people assembled thether as well for the opportunity of the place, as also by reason of the auncient Religion: neither thought they it lawefull to begyn any thyng without prayers. Whiche institution, for that the Papistes woulde somewhat resemble, they firste prouide to haue a Masse of the holy Ghost, songe before they make any leagues, or rather conspiracyes agaynste Christe.
It is sayde
that they assembled together vnto the Lorde, to praye together vnto the Lorde.
D. Kimhi. Although
Dauid Kimhi thinketh that this was added: bycause wheresoeuer is a multitude of the godly, there is GOD also present. And to confirme that sentence, he bringeth a place put of the Psalme: GOD stoode in the Synagoge of Goddes. For Iudges whiche in thys place are called Goddes, when they geue iudgement, ought not to thinke that they haue theyr owne cause in hande, but Goddes cause, as
Iosaphat the godly kynge shewed them. I doo not dissallowe this sentence: for it is both godly, and also it maketh menne to vnderstande, that when assemblyes are godly had, then doo menne assemble vnto GOD: whiche thyng if menne in these dayes woulde consider, greate menne woulde handle publique causes with more feare of GOD. Howbeit thys is for certayne that the Israelites assembled not in
Silo, as some thinke.
And the corners of all the people assembled. The Hebrewe woorde is
Penoth, whiche properly signifyeth corners: but in this place it is taken for Capitaines, heades ouer ten, Cēturious, Tribunes, and gouernors of warlike affayres. For they after a sort are corners, strengthes and stayes of an army. Wherfore the villages of the
Holuetians in the
Italian toungue are called
Cantones. Wherfore the Hebrues come and assemble in
Mizpa, not rashly, but in their orders. They had not in deede a kyng, or myghty Magistrates, or
Senadrim, as it is thought, for they wer sore decayed and weakened by the
Philistines. Yet they retayned among themselues some order and discipline.
Fower hundreth thousande footemen. When they went out of
Epypte, they were 666000.
The nomber of the Israelites diminishe. men. It seemeth that the number was nowe diminished. And no meruayle, bycause they had ben afflicted with many & greuous calamities. Also
[Page 268] the tribe of
Beniamin was away, which peraduenture had thirty thousande soldiours. For that tribe was both ample and also mighty.
And the chyldren of Beniamin heard. The
Beniamites would not be present, they onely heard what should be done.
Dauid Kimhi
Kimhi admonisheth that these woordes are put in by a parenthesis: for there is no cause shewed why they woulde not be among them.
And the children of Israel sayd: Tel how this wycked act was committed. Kimhi thinketh that these things are to be red in y
e vocatiue case, as though it should haue bene sayd: O ye children of Israel, declare the whole matter in order as it was done: in the meane time it seemeth that the
Beniamites are noted, bycause they would not come vnto the assembly, neyther take awaye euill from among them. The people assembled together to vnderstand the cause, that for as much as ther was no Magistrate, the people might publikely geue iudgement of so haynous a wycked crime.
The Leuite answered. This is in deede a short accusacion,
It is prooued that Concubines wer wiues but yet it comprehendeth al. In the meane time, this is to be noted, that this Leuite is called the husband of the womā that was slaine, which yet is called his Concubine. Wher by is proued the sentence which we haue before affirmed, namelye that lawfull wyues also are called Concubines.
They entended to kyl me. He speaketh modestly and shamefastly, and declareth the wycked act of the
Gabaonites. Leui ben Gerson saith, that he so spake, bicause he was ready to dye, rather then then he would suffer so great a villany.
Behold al ye chyldren of Israel. When hee had finished his tale, he byddeth them to take counsell, what was to be done in this matter. Then followeth the deliberation.
8 Then al the people arose as one man, saying: There shall not a man of vs go to his tent, neyther shal any turne into hys house.
9 But now thys is the thyng whych we wil doo to Gibea, against it by lot.
10 And we wyl take ten men of the hundreth throughe out all the tribes of Israel, and an hundreth of the thousand, and a thousande of ten thousand, to bryng vittayle vnto the people, that they maye doo (when they come to Gibea of Beniamin) according vnto all the villany, that it hath done in Israel.
11 So all the men of Israel were gathered agaynst the City, knit together as one man.
12 And the tribes of Israel sent men throughe all the Tribe of the chyldren of Beniamin, saying: What wyckednesse is thys that is committed among you?
13 Now therefore delyuer vs those wycked men which are in Gibea, that we may slay them, and take away euyll from Israel. But the chyldren of Beniamin woulde not obey the voyce of theyr brethren the chyldren of Israel.
They al euen to one determined, that so great a villany should be auenged, if the
Beniamites would not punish the guilty, as it was meete they should. The summe is: They wil not suffer the wicked act to escape vnpunished. But howe these thinges mought be rightly and orderly done and ordered, was first to bee considered. For there was a great number of men, namelye .4. hundreth thousand. Wherfore out of that number they chused some to bring vittayles: & other some to assayle the enemies. But before all thinges, they sent a message vnto the
Beniamites, that if they woulde deliuer the wicked men, they woulde cease
[Page] from warre. But some man wil say, was it sufficient to deliberate to fight, and onely to heare the accusacion of the Leuite? Vndoubtedlye it seemeth that hee ought to haue proued that fact,
What wytnesses the Leuite mought haue. both by reasons, and also by witnesses. But it is probable, y
t he had his seruant to witnes, which was present when those things were done, and peraduenture that old man, to whom he had turned in. For it is to be thought that he was departed from the
Gabaonites, for as much as he could not abide their wickednes. But howsoeuer the matter was, the people before they go to hand strokes, decreed to send messengers vnto the
Beniamites, that by them they might excuse their fact, and defende them selues. And by that meanes the other part, namely the guilty, was heard.
In the meane time they chuse those by lots which shoulde be appointed to certayne offices. This was the peoples doing: and therfore it was done by choyse, that they might know, who should cary vitailes vnto the campe, & who shoulde fight.
To cast lots ar most apt for the popular state. And to cast lot seemeth to be the most meetest way for the state of the people: for the people loueth equality of lawes, and equability, which seemeth then to be chiefest, when choise is permitted vnto lots. Wherfore wher as the people gouern, Magistrates are oftentimes chosen by lots. So is it also in hostes, y
t whē soldiours wil, they doo many thinges betwene themselues by lots. This therefore was the maner therof, that the tenth man of the whole people shoulde bee had, so that one of ten should by lot be taken, ten of a hundreth, one hundreth of a thousand, and a thousand also of ten thousand. This seemeth to be a very profitable and commodious way. For now oftentimes in hostes a man shal se more rascals and vitlers, then soldiours. But by this meanes or decree, one tended vp on nine soldiours, and ten vpon ninetye. And their charge was to prouide vyttailes, bicause they knew not how long that expedicion shoulde endure. So in
Titus Liuius Quintius Cincinnatus,
Titus Liuius. being created Dictator in a perilous time of the publik wealth, and hauing a iorney to make by night, straightway cōmaū ded, that the youth should gather together stakes and make readye weapons: but the old men and such as were not apt for warre, shoulde dresse vittailes for the rest, as much as should serue them for fyue daies. Here we see that the Dictator had his choise of them al. But among the Israelits ther was no Dictator: wherfore the matter was put to lots. In the booke of
Iosua also in the first chapter, it is written that
Iosua commaunded the tribunes to gather an armye, and that al of them should haue meate ready drest to their handes, when they should passe ouer
Iordane. For they wer ignorant what should happen vnto them.
As it were one man. They were agreed together, and also of one mynde: and nothing is more profitable prosperously to make warre, then the concorde of soldiours.
Warre whē it is not proclaymed, seemeth theft.
The tribes of Israel sent messengers. The Israelites do appoint nothing rashly or headlong. This reason was most iust, that before they made any inuasion by warre, they should proclaime warre. For where that is not done, it may seme to bee rather theft, then warre. Farther, they woulde that if anye had beene innocent amonge them, they shoulde not haue wrapped them selues together with those wicked men.
Delyuer vnto vs (say they)
those which haue committed so great wickednes. That al the people may punish them, if ye will not. And they bring foorth the law of God:
That euil may be taken away from among the people. By euil is vnderstand sinne and wickednes: that semeth to be taken away, when it is punished.
How euyl is taken away. But if it remayne vnpunished, then remaineth that God wil take vengeaunce therof. Other do thus expound it: That we maye take away euil, that is, that we may turne away from Israel the calamities, whyche for that sinne seemed to hang ouer it. So Iesus in the Gospel healed al diseases and griefes in the people: when as yet he came not for diseases sake, but for sins. But diseases are inflicted bicause of synnes. Therfore seing he tooke awaye the cause, namely synne, he tooke away also the effectes of synne.
They sent messengers,
[Page 269] not onely to one famely of the tribe of
Beniamin, but to all.
Schebat in Hebrue is a tribe, but here it is taken for a famely. And in very dede tribes wer nothing els then famelies, comming of the Patriarches, namely the children of
Iacob. But the tribe of
Beniamin had ten famelies,
Beniamin had ten fa
[...]elies.
R. Selomoh. who toke their names of their first Parentes. And those ten famelies were so notable and aboundant, that
R. Selomoh saith, that
Rachel after a sort brought forth twelue tribes, that is, ther came out of
Beniamin ten famelies, which myght bee likened vnto ten tribes: Farther, of
Ioseph were borne
Ephraim and
Manasses. Wherfore the Tribe of
Beniamin was very populous and mighty. Whereby also it came to passe that they trusted to much in their own strength, and thought that they were able to resist al Israell. Wherfore they would neither deliuer the guiltye, nor yet punish them. For they thought it ignominious vnto them, if they should haue don either of them. They would not geue place to sound counsels, wherefore they could not deny, but that warre was iustlye made against them, which by honest meanes they might haue auoided. But the rest of the people are to bee praysed, bicause they with so great moderacion tooke in hande so great a matter. Fyrst,
A comparyson betwene y
e people and the Bē iamites. they would know the cause, then sende messengers, to require that the guiltye might be put to death: lastly they would assay althinges, rather then they would make war against their brethren. On the contrarye syde, the
Beniamites doo al thinges peruerslye, they take no counsel, they neither deny nor excuse their act, they wyll not deliuer the guilty, but prepare them selues to defende. And so for the wickednes of a fewe, they contaminate them selues all. And as
Paul sayth to the
Romanes, they do not onelye euyll them selues, but also consent to them that doo euyl. Neither could they excuse themselues by ignoraunce of the law, which they had so often heard. They acknowledge that the wycked act was most grieuous, which yet they allow in defending the guilty.
14 But the children of Beniamin gathered them selues together out of the Cities into Gibea, to go out and fyght agaynst the chyldren of Israel.
15 And the children of Beniamin were numbred at that tyme .26. thousand men that drew swoorde, besides the inhabiters of Gibea, whych were numbred .vi. hundreth chosen men.
16 Of al this people there were .7. hundreth chosen men, that were shut in their ryght hande: all these coulde slyng stones at an heare breadth, and not fayle.
17 Also the men of Israel beside Beniamin, were numbred .400. thousand men that drew sword. Al these wer men of warre.
18 And they arose vp, and went vp to Bethel, and asked of God, & the children of Israel sayd: which of vs shal go vp firste to fyght agaynst the chyldren of Beniamin? And the Lord sayde: Iuda shall be fyrst.
19 Then the chyldren of Israell rose vp earelye, and camped agaynst Gibea.
20 The men of Israel I say went out to battaile agaynst Beniamin, and the men of Israel put them selues in aray, to fight against them besyde Gibea.
21 And the chyldren of Beniamin came oute of Gibea, and slewe downe to the ground of the Israelites that day .xxii. thousand mē.
22 And the people the men of Israel plucked vp their hartes, and set their battayle agayne in aray, in the place where they put them in a ray the fyrst day.
[Page]23 And the children of Israel went vp, and asked the Lord saying: Shal I go agayne to battayle agaynste the chyldren of Beniamin my brethren? And the Lord sayd: Go vp against them.
24 Then the chyldren of Israel came neare the chyldren of Beniamin the second day.
25 And the second day Beniamin came forth to meete them out of Gibea, and slew downe to the grounde of the chyldren of Israel agayne .xviii. thousand men. Al they could handle the swoord.
The
Beniamites assembled together to
Gibea, bicause they saw al the brunt of the battail bent thitherwarde. They tooke out the choyce of their soldiours, wherein were not comprehended the inhabiters of
Gibea, which were in number sixe hundreth men of warre, and men picked out. And it is added for a thyng wonderful, that there were of the
Beniamites seuen hundreth, which had an impediment in their right handes, but vsed slynges, & leuened so nye, y
t they missed not euen an heare bredth.
What hande is said to be closed It is saide
that they had their handes closed, bycause the sinews wer bound, neither could the spirites haue their mouings frely. For which cause they were vnapt to draw swordes. The latin translacion hath
ambi dexteros, bicause they could vse both handes, as though either hand were the right hand.
Leafthanded. And they which excuse this translacion, do say that they so vsed the leaft hand, as if they had had no right hand. I thinke rather that they were leaft handed. But in that it is added that they leueled so rightly, that they missed not a heare bredth,
Hyperbole. I thinke it be spoken by this figure
Hiperbole, wherby their cunning and industry might the more be commended.
In the Hebrue it is read that the
Beniamites had .xxvi. thousande soldiours. But in the latin interpretaciō are put onely .xxv. thousād, for this cause as I suppose, bicause in that last conflict wherein the
Beniamites were ouerthrowen, we reade onely of .xxv. thousand that were slaine. Wherfore if a man compare the first number with the latter, there are a thousand ouer, whom other thinke that when their host was discomfited, and thinges past all hope, they turned backe & fled into
Europe.
D. Kimhi. But
Kimhi thinketh more rightlye, that they were myssing, when the
Beniamites got the vpper hand in those twoo first conflictes. For it is not credible that they so ouercame, that they lost none of their soldiours. Wherfore if thou adde them vnto the .xxv. thousand, which fel in the third battail, then is the whole number of .xxvi. thousande explete. These thinges I knowe are of smal waight: which yet I thought good to note, bicause the
Rabbines haue written many thinges of them, and the translacions do differ.
When the soldiours were chosen out, and al thinges set in an order, the Israelites send to
Bethel, and aske counsel of God. The Arke of the Lorde was at that time in
Siloh,
Bethel is not alwaies the proper name of a place. and from thence wer geuen answers. And
Bethel in this place is not the name of a City, but is takē for the house of God, and signifieth a place where the Arke of the couenant remained. Farther,
Siloh was not farre from
Gibea, wherfore it was no hard matter for the Israelites to send thether to aske counsel of God. They asked the Lord,
which tribe should haue the fyrst place in the battayle, for some one tribe must nedes be the first. Answer was made, that this should be geuen vnto the tribe of
Iuda. That was of al the tribes most populous and noble, vnto which afterward came the kingdome. They enquired not who should be the captaine of the warre, but which tribe shoulde begyn the battaile first against the enemies.
Why thei doubted not of the victory.
Wherin the Israelits synned.They nothing doubt of the victory: neither demaund they any thing concerning it. They saw that their quarrell was iust. They sawe also that they were more in number and multitude, and that it would be easy to ouercome so fewe: wherefore they pray not vnto God to geue them the victory, which was a grieuous
[Page 270] synne, as
R. Leui ben Gerson affirmeth. Wherefore God being offended, suffred them twise to fal before their enemies, and that wonderfullye. For God hateth nothing more then pride, and to much trust in our owne strengthes. He wil also haue men knowe, that victory is both to be required,
D. Kimhi. and also to be hoped for at his handes onelye. But
Kimhi sayth, that other thinke that this so great misfortune of warre happened, bicause of the idolatry of
Micha the Israelite. As though God should in this maner haue delt with them: Ye will auenge the iniury done vnto a man, being a Leuite, but ye neglect and wyncke at the contumely which I suffer at the
Danites handes, who publikely worship Idoles. Either of these sentences is very likelye, althoughe neither of them is gathered out of the text. Howbeit this we may affirme, that there were some certain causes, wherby God was excedinglye prouoked of the Israelites. But what those causes were, though we know not, it is no meruayle. For the counsels of God are hidden and obscure. Order at the length required this, that the Israelites should first auenge the contumely of God himself, and afterward of the Leuite. But this is sufficiently declared in the text,
What thynges the Israelites had omitted, that they at those twoo first tymes came not vnto God earnestly inough. They came in deede: but they neither fasted, nor killed sacrifices, nor made any praiers, as far as the holy history declareth. But at the last, hauing already two ouerthrowes, all of them with a lowly and humble minde come vnto God, al pray together and fast. These thinges seme sufficiently to declare, that they were not before in the house of the Lord in suche maner as they ought to haue beene. For if they had had true fayth, they would haue before also proclaimed both cōmon prayers, and also fasting. Mourning, fasting, and praiers are the effectes of faith and true repentaunce. These thinges for that they had not, it is probable that therfore they receaued so great losse at the first and second conflict. This thing also might bee a cause, for that they made warre to much securely and contemptuously, as they which dyd put their confidence in the number and strength of their own men. Wherefore they contemned the enemy,
The contempt of enemies hurteth very much then the which nothing is more vnprofitable to those y
t shal fight. For contempt of the enemies engendreth negligence in the hostes.
26 Then al the children of Israel ascended, and all the people, and they came into the house of God, and wept, and abode there before the Lorde. They fasted also that day vnto the euening, and offered burnt offringes, and peace offeringes before the Lord.
27 And the chyldren of Israel asked the Lorde (for there was the Arke of the Lord in those dayes.
28 And Pinhas the sonne of Eleazar, the sonne of Aaron stoode before it in those dayes) saying: Shal I yet go any more to battayle against the children of Beniamin my brethren, or shal I cease? The Lord answered: Go vp, for to morow I wil deliuer them into your hand.
29 And Israel set men to lye in wayte round about Gibea.
30 And the children of Israel went vp against the children of Beniamin the thyrd day, and put them selues in aray against Gibea, as at other tymes.
31 Then the children of Beniamin comming out to meete the people, were drawen from their City, and they beganne to smite and to kyl of the people as at other times, euen by the wayes (whereof one goeth vp to the house of God, and the other to Gibea) in the fielde, vpon a thirty men of Israel.
32 And the chyldren of Beniamin sayd: They are fallen before vs
[Page] as at the first. But the children of Israel said: Let vs flie, and pluck them away from the city, euen to the high wayes.
33 And when al the men of Israel rose vp oute of their place, and put them selues in aray in Baal-Thamar: in the meane while, the men of Israel that lay in wayte, came forth of their place, euen out of the medowes of Gibea.
34 And they came ouer agaynst Gibea, ten thousande chosen men of all Israel, and the battayle was sore: for they knewe not that the euyll was neare them.
35 And the Lord smote Beniamin before Israel, and the chyldren of Israel destroyed of the Beniamites the same day .xxv. thousand and one hundreth men. All they coulde handle the swoord.
36 So the children of Beniamin saw that they wer smitten down, for the children of Israel gaue place vnto the Beniamites, bycause they trusted to the men that lay in wayte, whych they had layde besydes Gibea.
37 And they that lay in wayte hasted, and brake forth toward Gibea, and the embushment drew themselues along, and smote al the City wyth the edge of the swoord.
38 Also the men of Israel had appointed a certayne tyme with the embushmentes, that with great speede they shoulde make a great flame and smoke ryse out of the City.
39 And the men of Israel retired in the battayle, and Beniamin began to smyte and kyll the men of Israell, about .xxx. persons, for they sayd: Surely they are striken downe before vs, as in the fyrste battayle.
40 But when the flame began to aryse out of the City, as a pyller of smoke, the Beniamites looked backe, and beholde, the flame of the City began to ascend vp to heauen.
41 Then the men of Israel turned againe, and the children of Beniamin were astoyned, for they saw their destruction at hand.
42 Therefore they fled before the men of Israel vnto the waye of the wyldernes, but the battayle ouertooke them, also they whyche came out of the Cities, slewe them among them.
43 Thus they compassed the Beniamites about, and chased them at ease, and ouerran them, euē ouer against Gibea on the East side.
44 And there fel of Beniamin .xviii. thousand men, which were all men of warre.
45 And they turned and fled vnto the wyldernes, vnto the rocke Rimmon, and the Israelites glayned of them by the way .v. thousand men, and pursued after them vnto Gidehon, & slew two thousand men of them.
46 So that al that were slayne that day of the Beniamites were 25 thousand men that drew sword, which were all men of warre.
47 But .vi. hundreth men turned and fled to the wyldernes, vnto the rocke of Rimmon, and abode in the rocke Rimmō .4. monethes.
48 Then the men of Israel returned vnto the chyldren of Beniamin, and smote them with the edge of the swoord, from the men of
[Page 271] the City vnto the beastes, and al that came to hand, also they set on fyre all the Cities that they could come by.
After that the children of Israel had had the ouerthrowe, they went vp vnto the house of God, and wept there. And assuredly somewhat they dyd that belonged vnto piety, but yet not so muche as they ought: for they fasted not, neyther offered they Sacrifices, whiche are tokens of a full fayth and conuersion.
Why God had thē ascend whē they shoulde be ouerthrowen. How beit the Lorde byddeth them to ascende, bycause he woulde not feare them away from the battaile, which they had in a iust cause taken in hande. He dyd not strayghtway geue the victory, but styll permitted them to be afflicted of their enemyes, whereby they might vnderstande their faultes, and more earnestly desyre pardon. There perished againe .xviii. thousand of them, after which slaughter it is sayde that they came all of them humbly vnto God. There they wept, not counterfetlye or lightlye, but bytterly and earnestlye, and that all the whole daye.
They fasted, they offered burnt offerynges and peace offeringes. Burnt offeringes were they which were all whole burnt, but of peace offeringes a certaine part was offered, an other part was geuen vnto the Priest, and an other part returned vnto him whych offered it, to eate it with his frendes in the sight of the Lorde. The Hebrues being now oppressed with troubles, doo not onelye pray vnto God, and bewayle their synnes, but also fast, and after fastyng institute a cōmunion among themselues. In that it is said that the Arke of the Lord was there, we must vnderstande that of
Siloh: for there it continually abode. It is said that the priest stoode before the Lorde: and that is nothing els, then that he exercised the holy ministery.
They asked: Shal we ascende, or shal we cease?
This is a more ful interrogacion then the first were. This is a more ful interrogaciō then the first wer: for at the first time they onely demaunded, which tribe should first assaile the enemies. At the second time, whither God wold that they should ascend against their enemies. But now they demaund whither they shal go vp, or whither they shal cease? As though they vtterly referred the matter vnto the wil of God. God answereth them more gently & faith:
Go vp, to morow I wil deliuer them into thine hand. The thinges that are now done and set foorth, serue to our cōmodity. We ought to attempt nothing, whereof we are not before certain, whither it be iust or vniust. For the true knowledge wherof, we must seke for the answer of God out of the holy scriptures. The Israelites wold not wrap the innocents with the gilty, & therfore they sent messengers at the beginning, which thing at this day is not obserued in making of wars. Our Capitains and Emperors do althinges without respect, & do no les rage against children, olde men, maydens, and widowes, then against those which haue chieflye offended. The
Beniamites are worthely to be condemned, bicause they defended an vniust cause, & thought that it would be ignominious vnto thē, if they should deliuer any of theirs to be punished, which thing we see happeneth very often tymes in these dayes. For maisters defend their seruantes, they care not by what right or wrong. For if their seruant, although he be gilty, be cast into prison, they think that therby cōmeth a great ignominy vnto thēselues, their famely, and to their court. But they ought to haue iustice before their eyes, & not to haue a regard to any thing els, then that the lawes should be kept. The
Beniamites did put their confidence in their own strength, & the Israelites in their great number, and also in the iustnes of their cause. But both of them sinned, for confidence is not to be put either in the strength of soldiours, or in the number, or in the iustnesse of the cause, but onely in the mercy of God.
Although the cause be good, yet doth not the thing alwaies succeede prosperously. The
Beniamites in a most wicked cause got the victory the fyrst time, the second tyme, yea and the thirde tyme, yet at the last they suffered punishment, and were ouerthrowen and slayne. For God, howsoeuer he do for a time winke
[Page] at the wicked actes of men, yet he suffereth them not alwayes to escape vnpunished. For the vngodly, as the holy prophetes admonishe vs, floorishe for a short time: but if thou a litle while passe by and returne, he shall be no where. That the Israelites wer so often ouercome,
Why god wold haue the Israelites ouercome. it was the worke & counsel of God, not bicause he would help the wicked men, but to allure his to true & iust repentace.
We may also hereby learne, that in all matters that wee take in hande, three thinges are chiefly to be required: first that the cause be iust which we will defend.
Three thinges required in euerye thing that we take in hād. Farther, that we put not the abilitye of performing the same in our owne strength, but in God: lastly, that we put to our endeuor & diligence. Otherwyse to despise the meanes, wherby we may attain to our purpose, is nothing els thē to tēpt God. It is not inough to say: I haue a good cause, I will cōmit y
e residue vnto god. We must also stretch out our strengthes, & ad to our diligence: Wherfore we may not put our affiance in any cause, although it be neuer so iust.
Some man wil say: what difference then is there betwene a iust cause, and an vniust?
There is great difference betwene, to haue a good cause, & to haue an euil. Much vndoubtedly. For in an vniust cause thou canst not cal vpon God, or trust that he wil be an helper vnto thee. For an vniust cause is vnder y
e curse of God, and to cal vpon God to helpe, it is euen like as if I should desire help of a man, to fight against my selfe. But if the cause be good, euery man maye put his confidence in God, & cal vpon him, but yet not in such maner to put hope in the equity of the cause, but that thou mayest hope, that God for his mercies sake wyll bee an ayde vnto thee.
The successe maketh not the cause eyther good or euyll. If the successe bee euill, the cause is not therefore straightwaye good.
Nebuchad-Nezar destroyed Iewrye, and ledde awaye the nacions that were adioyning captiues into
Babilon, and yet was not his cause therefore good. Gods cause in deede was iuste: for hee woulde by that meanes take vengeaunce of a rebellious people. But
Nebuchad-Nezar thought nothing els but to exercise his tyrāny.
Ioseph, bicause he would auoide adoultery, was cast into prison, and yet was not his cause therefore euer a whyt the woorse.
Dauid was eiected of
Absolon, and yet was not
Absolons cause therefore anye whyt the better. In our time Princes that are Protestantes haue had yl succes in war, and yet is therfore not the cause of the Gospel to be thought the worse. The
Beniamites now got the victorye more then once or twise, in a cause moste wicked. The holy Martirs in our times are most miserably slayne of Tyrannes, and that with most cruel kinde of torments, and yet we nothing doubt but that their cause is most excellent. England had of late, as touching the word of God and truth, a Church most rightly instituted, which was afterwarde miserablye disiected and seperated: neither followed it therby that the cause of religion was euil. But now thankes be geuen vnto God which hath restored it.
From the cause to the effects is a firme argument, wher the effect followeth of necessitye the cause.There may in deede be drawen an argument of the euentes, but not of necessity, yea scarse probable. For the passage from the effectes to the cause, is not firme, vnlesse the effectes and causes be necessary. Wherefore this argument is of no force: The Israelites haue a good cause, therfore they shall not fall in battayle: for it may be, that God wil illustrate hys glory, yea euen with the slaughter of them. And this argument also is no stronger then that: The
Beniamites ouercame, wherefore they had the better cause. These things I haue spoken the more at large, to the end we should not wauer in mynde, or doubt of the goodnes of our cause, if peraduenture the thinges go not prosperously wyth vs.
The godli whē they haue receaued the ouerthrow, flee vnto God.
The vngodlye gaue not thāks vnto God for the victory.Farther, in this place is to bee noted the nature of godlye men: when they haue receaued the ouerthrow, they flee vnto God. But the vngodly, euen when they get the victorye, doo not geue thankes vnto God, as now we rede not that the
Beniamites gaue thankes vnto God for their good successes, we haue heard of none of their prayers, nor of any confidence they put in God: yea rather there arose so great security and insolencye of some of their successes, that they brake out of the Citye, and pursued the enemies, farther then was meete or conuenient.
[Page 272] But at the last they receaued the iust fruite of their pride. Contrarilye the Israelites being afflicted with miseries, got themselues vnto God. Vnto whō god answered, y
t he would the next day deliuer the
Beniamites into their hands.
In the two first interrogacions, the Israelites seemed to doubt nothing of the victory: bicause they had yet a confidence in their own strengthes and number, but after the second ouerthrowe, they shewed in verye deede a lowlye and humble mynde.
Shal we go vp (say they)
or shal we cease? As though they shoulde haue said: O Lord
Iehouah, al the victory lieth in thine hand, therfore we wholy cōmit our selues to thy mercy: shew thou vnto vs, what we ought to do. If thou commaunde vs, we are ready to leaue of from our enterprise.
Leui ben Gerson. Dauid Kimhi This is a perfect interrogacion, after the opinion of
Leui ben Gerson. Kimhi hath noted manye thinges in this place, not a litle profitable for the vnderstanding of other scriptures, concerning interrogacions and oracles. This saith he, was the maner of asking of God. He which would enquire concerning anye publike affaire,
The maner of asking of God. or otherwise of anye waighty matter, came vnto the priest, and he putting on an Ephod, stoode before the Arke of the Lord. In the Ephod, or in the brest plate wer twelue precious stones, wherin were written the names of the twelue tribes, and ther were also set the names of
Abraham, Isaac, and
Iacob, & in those stones were al the letters of the Alphabete. The asker ought to turne his face vnto the priest, and to aske, not in deede so apertely that his voice should be hearde, neyther yet so softly, that he should onely thinke in minde the thinges whych he desired, but in such sorte, as we reade that
Hanna prayed in the firste booke of
Samuel, wher it is sayd that she moued her lips onely, neither spake she any thing that could be heard. Then was the oracle in this maner geuen vnto the Priest. By the power of the holy ghost certaine letters appeared aboue the other in the brest plate, and that either in place or in brightnes, wherin the Priest red the oracle and wil of God. And these thinges are those
Vrim and
Thūmim, which the Priest bare in his brest plate. This is
Kimhies opinion. Vnto whom, what faith is to be geuen, I cānot tel. For it might be, that the spirit of god did w
tout letters geue oracles by the voice of the high Priest, whose hart he inspired w
t prophecy.
This
Pinhas which is written
to haue stand now before the Lord,
Pinhas. is not called by his proper name onely, but also by the names of his father and grandfather, are added with al, that is, the names of
Eleazar and
Aaron: which is don so much the more diligently, bicause no man otherwise would beleue that he could haue lyued so long. Therfore the Readers woulde haue thought that thys had bene some other, rather then the sonne of
Eleazar. For if thou wilt count the yeares,
Pinhas lyued long. thou shalt finde that ther wer no les then .300. yeres passed, from the time of that noble act of
Pinhas, vnto this age wherof we now speake. Wherfore it mought seme incredible that it should be the same man. Howbeit for as much as the holy scriptures do testify this thing, we ought so to beleue. Neither vndoubtedlye is it any maruaile, though God prolonged his life so long. For when he had slaine the harlot of
Midian, and the Prince of the Tribe of
Simeon, euen in that their wicked act, God iudged that he had employed his labour excellently well, & that he had done a most notable act. Therfore my couenant (said he) shalbe with h
[...] life and peace. By which wordes was promised vnto him long life & honorable, which he should execute in his priesthood.
Of what tribe Elias was. Ther are some which produce his life farther, and say that he was
Elias. But that hath no grounde of the holye scriptures. Yea rather some thinke that
Elias came of the tribe of
Beniamin, and not of the tribe of
Leui, wherof
Pinhas came.
¶Of Merites.
VVHere as it is said that the Israelites went vp, wept, fasted, & did sacrifice,
Against merits we must not think that by those actions they satisfied the anger of god: for we haue no merites, for as muche as we cannot perfectly obey the law of God.
[Page] Farther, if there were any merites of ours, they should consist of such woorkes which we ar not of duty bound to do vnto God: otherwise if we owe vnto God whatsoeuer we do, what thing can our merite then be? But both we our selues and al ours, doinges I say, sayinges, thoughtes, and counsels are due vnto god. Wherfore our merites do vtterly perish. Moreouer those workes whereby wee should merite, ought to be of our selues: which cannot be affirmed, for as muche as it is god which worketh in vs both to wil & to perform, & that not as we wil, but according to his good wil.
Augustine. Wherfore
Augustine was accustomed very wel to say, y
t God which crowneth his giftes in vs. And in his .100. Epistle
ad Sixtū Presbiterum, Paul (saith he) when he had sayd: The rewarde of synne is death, dyd not straightway adde contrarily: The rewarde of righteousnes is euerlasting lyfe. But Grace sayth he, is eternal life, for that is not rendred to our merites, but is geuen freely. He might in deede haue wrytten after the same manner if he woulde. For the holye Scripture sometimes so speaketh. But for that he was a defender of grace, hee woulde not geue occasion vnto his enemyes to impugne it. Farther, our woorkes, how holye so euer they appeare, are neuerthelesse vnpure and imperfect. Wherefore they are woorthye rather of punishment, then that they should deserue any good. And wythout doubt they should be punished, were not the redempcion and iustification whyche wee haue by Christ our Lorde.
There ought also to be some anallogy or proporcion betwene merites and rewardes, whereof there is none betwene our workes and eternall lyfe. For as
Paul saith: The sufferinges of this time, are not woorthy of the glory to come, which shalbe reuealed in vs. This is to be added, that in the holye scriptures is no where found the name of merite. Some in deede are wont to bring the .xvi. chap. of
Ecclesiasticus, and there they say it is written: All mercy shal make place vnto euery one, according to the merites of his workes. But they which obiect this thing, let him looke vpon the Greeke text, wherin it is thus written:
[...], which is in latine:
Deus omni misericordiae faciet locum, & quis
(que) iuxta opera sua inueniet. Which in englyshe signifieth: God wil make place vnto al mercy, and euery man shall finde according vnto hys woorkes. But in these woordes there is no mencion made of merite, onely this is wrytten, that whose woorkes are good, they shall be in good case, but yet their woorkes are not sayde to bee merites or causes of rewarde. I wyll not speake howe that booke is not in the Canon: bycause
Paule and the Gospels vse the same forme of speaking. But of that whyche is wrytten vnto the Hebrewes, by suche Sacrifices God is well pleased, I haue before spoken: nowe wyth one woorde onely will I briefly touche the thing. This woorde of deseruing is not founde in the Greeke. In Greeke is read
[...], by whyche woorde is onely signified, that the good woorkes of the faythfull are gratefull and acceptable vnto God.
Of the woorde reward.But as touching this woorde rewarde, which some, bicause they do not well vnderstand it, do take for merite, we must deuide it two maner of wayes. For that is sometymes called a rewarde, whiche is geuen freelye, but yet is promysed, by adding of some worke, wherby men should be styrred vp to doo well. So eternal life may be called a reward, not y
t we deserue the same by our woorkes, but bicause by a certain order appointed of God, it followeth our good workes. But somtimes a reward is that which is due vnto good dedes,
Whither eternal lyfe may be called a reward & is rendred vnto them of duty. After this maner eternal life cannot be called the reward of our workes. Wherfore
Paul to the
Romanes saith:
Abraham beleued God, & it was imputed vnto him for righteousnes. But vnto him which woorketh reward, is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. Wherefore eternal lyfe, for as muche as it is not of ryght dewe, cannot be a reward, if the woorde be taken in that signification. But when they thus reason: there is a reward geuen,
[Page 273]
ergo there is a merite. The argument is not firme,
A genere ad species. bicause in affirming we may not discend from the general woorde to the
species. Neyther doth he rightly conclude whych sayth: It is a liuing creature,
ergo it is a man. This generall word reward hath two
species: therfore this argument is not firme, if we saye: It is a reward,
Ergo it is plaine that it must be geuen of dewty.
This saying also of
Ieremy is to be added: Cursed be euery one that putteth his hope in man, and calleth flesh his strength. But all our thinges, whatsoeuer they be, are not without flesh. Wherfore it is not lawful for vs to put confidence in them.
Ierome. And
Ierome writing vpon that place hath very well brought in manye thinges, whereby may be vnderstanded that in our workes there is no regard of merite. Yea and the Papists also themselues, which ar the patrones of merites, are sometimes compelled to confesse that our merites are nothing at all. For on the 2. Sonday in the Aduēt, thus they pray: Be pacefied O god with the prayers of our humility, and wher helpe of merites do want, succor vs with the aydes of of thy mercy. The fathers, whē in theyr writings they oftentimes inculcate this word of meriting, do by it signify nothinge els, then to get, to obteine, and to atteine to. And as manye of them as haue written purelye, the same haue detested the consideration of merites, whereof the papistes so much bost. Wherfore the Israelites were not heard thoroughe the merite of their teares or prayers, but bycause by fayth in Christ to come they obteyned forgeuenes of sins, and so by his merite onely they returned into fauor againe with god.
They offred sacrifice.
What profite the sacrifices of the law had. Although I haue before largely spoken of the sacrifices in the olde time, yet I thinke it good here also briefly to touch what profite was of them in the old law. When men are vexed with calamityes, they beginne to think vpon theyr sin, they loke vpon the law: wher whē they behold the wrath of god kindled for sinne, they are in hart deiected: in which perturbatiō there remaineth no remedy, but to get them vnto Christ, which is the summe and end of all sacrifices. Him did the fathers, which wer godly, embrase by faith: but in the sacrifices, as often as the sacrifice was slaine, so often the death of Christe was after a sorte set before the eyes of those that stoode by, by whose death the synnes of the world should be taken away.
The sacramēts of the olders & ours at al one, but differ in outward Simboles & signes. Wherfore they had after this manner a communion amonge themselues in Christ, which by sundry notes and signes dayly signified to the people in the old time, wherhēce they by fayth receaued vnto their saluacion both his death and the fruite therof as we do. Wherfore
Paule sayth trulye vnto the
Corrinthians: All did eate of one, and the self same spirituall meate, and all dronke of one, and the selfe same spirituall drinke. And they dronke of the spirituall rocke following them. And that rocke was Christ. Wherefore the elders had theyr misteries and sacraments, whereby they also embrased Christ. And vndoubtedly as touching the thing, they had the same that we haue, the difference was onely in the Simboles.
But
Augustine noteth in thē certaine other differences,
Augustine. Differences betwene the Sacramentes of the elders and ours. which here to rehearse shal not be vnprofitable. Firste they hadde manye sacramentes, and wee but few: the Simboles of our sacraments are water, bread, and wine: they had oxen calues, shepe, gotes, doues, turtle doues, bread, wine, oyle & such other like. Farther, the condicion of our sacramentes is diuerse from the equality of theirs: for theyrs were more greuous, but oures are by Christe made both easier and also lighter. Moreouer those simboles that were geuen vnto them, were conteined in one country onely, but ours ar common to the whole world. Farther in them Christ was setforth, as he which should come: but to vs, as he which is now alredye come. But as touchinge saluation there is no difference. For the same saluation and the same Christ was offred vnto them, which is settefoorth vnto vs.
[Page] This is also to be added, that our Sacraments are more manifest and excellent, for asmuch as they haue more manyfest woordes of Christ and his redemption, which make fayth more ful. And therfore the sprite is now had more aboundātly, then it was in that time, if we speake of the cōmon state of men. For I speake not of persons singularely, neither do I thinke that
Abraham had lesse faith and sprite then christian men now haue. But now let vs returne vnto the history.
The hebrewes when they were afflicted, fled vnto God by Christ, who was set before them in their sacrifices, and was there apprehended by fayth. Therehence was all the vtility of their sacrifices, to the offring or receiuinge wherof it was not lawfull to come rashly, otherwise they should haue beene to their hurt, and should haue kindled the wrath of God against them, which thinge
Paul hath very well admonished vs of saying: He whiche eateth or drinketh vnworthely, eateth and drinketh vnto himself damnation.
What the purifications of the Elders signified. Wherefore in the law there were many purifications, sprinkelings, and washinges, before they came vnto the holy seruices. And these men now repent, and throwe themselues downe vnto the ground wepinge before the Lorde: for they were touched with the bitternes and greuousnes of their sinnes.
When god had heard the prayers of the Israelites, and had promised to deliuer the
Beniamites into theyr handes, he ministred also vnto them secrete and sound counsels, namely that they shoulde in a conuenient place lay an embushmēt, and making as though they would flee, draw away their enemies from the cities, that afterwarde they mighte oppresse them, both before and behinde. They had among them contrary counsels.
The counsels of the B
[...]niamits and of the Israelites are diuerse.
The like poletike deuise in the boke of Iosuah. The
Beniamites sayd: They flee, let vs follow them and oppresse them as they are fleing. The Israelites contrarily said: Let vs geue place vnto the
Beniamites, hat they may follow vs more insolently and securely. For we will stoppe them of their returne into the city. We reade of the like pollicy of warre in the booke of
Iosua, when the city of
Hais was assalted. It is now writtē that god himself smote them. For it is said,
And god made Beniamin to fall before the Israelits, least the victory should seme to be attributed, either vnto the strengthes of the Israelites, or to theyr pollitique deuyse. The whole sūme of those which were slayn, were .25. thousand. The order of this history might seme somewhat trobulesome, which yet if it be apart cōsidered perticulerly, shalbe the better vnderstanded. For at the first conf ict were slaine of the
Beniamites 18000. then when they fled into the desert .5000. lastly when they fled to
Gibea .2000. all whyche summes added together, doo make the full nomber of .25000.
The city ascended vp to heauen. Here is the figure
Hiperbole, whereby is signified either that the smoke of the citye ascended vp into heauen, or that els all the riches thereof which were now on fire and turned into smoke, ascended vp into heauen. The
Beniamites being in extreme daunger, loke backe vnto the city, as though there they should haue found succor and ayde. They recule, but they fall into the handes of the Embushments, and are slaine. From thence they get themselues and flee vnto the woods, but in the flight they are miserably killed. A few whych escaped in those ouerthrowes, got them to the rock
Rimmon, as in to a high castel and wel fensed, both by nature and situation. And ther a few wer saued, as is afterwarde declared. Whereby we gather that no mighte or power can help vs, when god wil strike. Whatsoeuer can be deuised or inuented of vs, it nothing profiteth agaynst the Lord.
In the hebrew tongue a place of fence is called a rocke.
So great and so populous a tribe, as soone as euer god would, perished in a manner wholy. Ther remained only .600. men, whiche got themselues into the castle of
Rimmō. It is called
a rock, bycause in the holy scritures places of fence are so called, for that they are in a manner situate vpon stony rockes and high
[Page 274] places. But why the .600. men were left on lyue, there is shewed a cause,
Why the .600. men wer saued namely least any one whole tribe should want in Israell. God would not for theyr deserts, but for his names sake haue a certayn few remaining, that the pub. wealth of the Israelites should be preserued. And those same he left not whole, but in a manner mained: for they had no wiues, neyther were there anye wemen lefte of that whole tribe, for them to marry: therfore they wer compelled to desire wiues of y
e other tribes. Wherfore the tribe of
Beniamin,
The tribe of Beniamin that remained, consisted also of other tribes. Whither it was lawful for the Israelites to kill the children. although otherwise it remained but smal, yet howsoeuer it was, halfe the part therof cōsisted of other tribes. For the Israelites had slayne al their wyues and children and cattayle. This seuerity of the Israelites was great, or rather it may seme to be cruelty, and also against the law of God, wherin it was forbidden, that the childrē should be slaine for the sinnes of the parents. But it is very likely (which thing the Hebrewe interpreters also affirme) that the Israelites when they fasted and prayed before the lord, vowed
Cherim, that is the vow of a curse, wherby it was not lawefull to reserue any thing, which thing they vsed to do in battaile of peril, and in great daunger. Yea and in
Deut. the .13. chapter: God commaunded, that if any citye of the Israelites fell vnto idolatry, all the tribes shoulde go vp and ioyne theyr powers together and conquer it, so that they shoulde with sword and fire destroye all thinges that they found in it. But the
Beniamites defended a manifest wicked act, which differred not much from idolatry, and it is possible that the city of
Gibeah was idolatrous. Wherfore nothing ought to be reserued in it. In the boke of
Iosuah it is written, that when
Acham had hidden for himself a certayn small thing of the curse of
Iericho, the whole host was afflicted for that cause, which deceate being afterward found out, not onely he himselfe was killed, but also hys sonnes and daughters, with his oxen, his asses, his shepe, and his tente also and all his stuffe. Which thing yet we must not thinke that it was done by the prescript of the law, but by a certaine singulare counsell of God.
Ciuill warres more cruel thē outward wars But whither Israell exceded measure in this auengement or no, wee shal afterward see. We may learne also by this history, what sharpenesse there is in ciulll wars: for they haue farre more cruell endes, then outwarde warres.
¶Of fasting.
NOw that we are come to the end of the chapter: For asmuche as it is sayde that the Israelites fasted and afflicted themselues before the Lord, I haue occasion geuen me, somewhat to speake of fasting. And to beginne from the Etimoligy of the word, this Hebrew woorde
Tsum signifieth to afflict.
Aben Ezra Wherefore
Aben Ezra sayth, that whersoeuer in the holy scripture is founde affliction of the soule, there is vnderstand fasting. There is a nother word namely
Tsama verye ny vnto this word, and it signifieth to thirst: for they which fast much, ar wont to thyrst, bicause the humors of the body ar with hunger and fasting dried vp. The
Grecians cal it
[...], of this particle primatiue
[...], &
[...], which is to be strong and firme, bicause by fasting the strength of the body is diminished. But bicause this particle
[...] is rather extensiue, it semeth to signify very firm and very strong, bycause a man that is fasting, is verye firme and constante, so that he had rather suffer grief, then to go from his purpose. Also the
Grecians cal fasting by an other word
[...], bicause they which faste, doo beriue themselues of foode. For
[...] signifieth both corne and meate.
But before I define what fasting is, I think it good first to vse a distinction.
A distinction of fastes. Natural fast For forasmuche as there are sundry kindes of fastings, they serue not all to our purpose. For there is a certaine fast that is naturall, whyche pertayneth eyther to the recouering or to the defending of the health of the body. Wherfore
Hipocrates
[Page] sayth, that they which are of a full and perfect age, or also are old, can verye well abide to fast: in which place old men are to be vnderstande as touching the first part and beginning of age. For they which are very old can no better abide fasting,
Ciuill fast. then young men or childrē. There is an other fast which is ciuil, & is thē taken in hand, whē men are so bent to their things, that by no meanes they will intermitte the affaires which they haue begonne. So
Saule when he pursued the
Philistians, and had the victorye nowe in his handes, commaunded that no man should taste of any meat before euening. So also certain Hebrewes vowed that they would neither eate any thinge or drinke,
A fast familiar vnto christiās. before they had killed
Saul, as it is written in the actes of the Apostles. This manner also of fasting pertaineth not to this present matter. There is an other kinde of fasting, which ought to be familiar vnto all Christans, namely to take meate soberly and temperatly: which thing they shal do, if they neither eate to often in one day, nor whē they do eate, doo gorge themselues with to muche meate, or seeke for delicates and fine banquetes.
The commodities of christiā sobriety.This manner of liuing is very muche profitable to diminishe lustes, neyther suffreth it the minde to bee troubled with affections. It maketh the minde more chearfull and redy both to prayers, and also to the actions of the life. Wherfore Christ sayd: let not your hartes be oppressed with surfeting or dronkēnes.
Peter also hath writtē: Be ye sober, for your enemy y
e deuil goeth about like a roaring lion, seking whom he may deuour.
Paul also wrote of himselfe: I chasten my body, and bring it into bondage, least I preaching to other, should be made a reprobate. Farther there is an other commodity of this fast, that thereby expenses are spared, not to lay them vp couetously, but that that which is ouerplus vnto vs, we may geue vnto the poore.
There is an other fast which is aboue mans strength, and is sometimes geuē of god meruelously vnto some of the saints,
Miraculous faste. to commend theyr doctrin.
Moses in the mountayn fasted .40. dayes, for God would by a notable example shew, that that law which he setforth, came from himself, and was not inuented of men. Nether went
Moses therfore vnto the mountayne to fast, but to receiue the lawe of GOD, and to talk with him.
Elias also receued bread and water of the Aungel, and in the strength of that meate walked .40. daies, euen vnto the mount of god
Horeb, that hee by this miracle shoulde bee declared to bee the true reuenger of the lawe. By this kynde of fastynge our Sauioure commended the preachynge of the Gospell, that it should not seeme to bee a thynge vulgare, but shoulde be proued a thyng begonne by God. But these wer miracles, neyther pertayne they anye thinge vnto vs, but onelye that wee shoulde haue them in admiracion, and by suche examples bee stirred vppe with reuerence to receaue the word of God.
A fast cōpelled.There is also an other fast, which lieth not in our power. As when we beinge destitute of meate, haue not wherof to eat. Here is nede of pacience, and we must pray vnto god, that he would strengthen and encourage vs. So the saints when they wandred about, and preached the Gospel, wer compelled somtimes to hunger. And the disciples when they followed the Lorde, were driuen by hunger to plucke the eares of corne, and to rubbe oute the corne.
Elias also desired meate of the widow, and wayted at the brooke for such meate as the Rauen should bringe him. This kind of fasting men do not take vpon them of their own free wil, but it is layd vpon them by God.
Religious fast.But omitting all those, as which nothing pertayne vnto our disputation, let
[Page 275] vs come to our fast which we may cal religious. And this fast is an abstinēce,
Definition. not onely from meate and drinke, but also from all other thynges whiche may delite and noorishe the body, contrary to the accustomed manner, as much as strength will suffer, and it is done of a repentant mynd and of a true fayth, by prayers to desire the clemency of God, for miseryes, eyther already oppressing vs, or very nighe at hand. The forme of this definition is abstinence,
An expositiō of the causes of true fasting. and that aboue the accustomed manner, whiche yet excedeth not strengthes of the body. The matter is not onely meate and drinke, but also all thynges whiche may reioyse the body. The efficient cause is fayth and repentance for sinnes committed agaynst God. The end is, by prayers to craue the mercy of God, and to turne away or to diminishe calamityes. Therfore they whiche fast,
Exercises of those that faste truely. ought to geue themselues to prayers, almes, visitynges of the sicke, and to the holy supper.
When we feruently pray vnto the Lord, and do from the heart truly repent vs of the sinnes which we haue cōmitted, & for their causes are earnestly afflicted, we can not easely thinke vpon meate, drinke, & fine delicates. For whō such a griefe grieuously vrgeth, it is more pleasant to thē to absteyne, thē is any other delectation. So
Dauid in his .35. Psalme sayth of his enemyes: When they were sicke, I laughed not, but put on sacke clothe, and afflicted my soule with fasting, and earnestly prayed for them. They whiche deiect and humble themselues (bycause they in a manner dispaire of their things) are wont to contemne and loth meate and drinke, and other delightes and pleasures. Hereby we may vnderstād,
Why fastyngs please God.
Ierome. how it commeth to passe, that our fastes doo please God, not assuredly that the emptines of the belly pleaseth God. So
Ierome derideth certayne, which fasting to hardly, were made to all purposes all their lyfe long vnprofitable. This pleaseth God, that we deiect the mynde, that we returne vnto him with prayers, and casting away other pleasures, do put all our delectation in him onely.
But the fastes wherof we now intreate,
Fastes publike and priuate. are sometymes publique and sometymes priuate. Priuate fastes we take in hand, when we are afflicted with proper and domesticall miseries: for there is none whiche is not vexed sometymes either in himselfe, or in his famely. Or if it happē that peraduenture he be not greued with any calamity of his owne or any of hys:
We must faste sometymes for other mennes sakes. yet sometymes he must mourne for other. For if we be the members of one & the self same body, we must thinke y
t the discōmodityes of our brethrē pertayn vnto vs our selues. So
Dauid prayed for them which afterward became his enemies, & which reioysed in his euils. So
Iobs frindes, whē they saw hym vexed w
t most grieuous plagues, lay seuē dayes full, in dust and ashes, before they spake any thyng vnto him: so much wer those men moued with his misery. Wherfore before they commoned with hym, they would by fasting and prayers desire God to asswage his so great misery. So
Dauid when
Abner was slayne, did not onely mourne at his buriall, but also sware that he would y
t day taste of no meate before the sunne were set. The same thing did he when he was reproued of
Nathan the Prophete, and when he had receaued tydinges of the death of the childe. Vndoubtedlye all the whole tyme that he was sicke, he neuer toke meate.
Nehemias in the .1. chap. whē he heard of the afflictions of the Hebrewes whiche remayned in
Ierusalem, afflicted himselfe with fasting, and prayed vnto the Lord.
Daniel also when he had red those things which
Ieremy wrote of y
e captiuity of .70. yeares, cōfessed both his owne sinnes, and the sinnes of the people, wept also and fasted. Wherfore priuate fasting ought to be taken in hand, not onely for our selues, but also for others.
But publique fasting is two maner of wayes commaunded:
How publique fastes are denounced. Either of God himself by the law, or of y
e Magistrate, or of the Bishop, or els of a Prophet. And this is to sanctify a fast, which sometymes is red in the holy scriptures. Of thys kind there are many examples,
What it is to sanctify a fast. & especially that fast which the Israelites in this place imposed vpon themselues. In the .1. booke of
Samuel, when the
Philistines
[Page] grieuously afflicted the Iewes, the whole people at the exhortation of
Samuel assembled in
Mizpa, wept, fasted, and threw away their Idoles.
Dauid also with all his, fasted, when he heard of the ouerthrowe of the people and death of
Saul. The men also of
Iabes Gilead toke the carkayses of
Saul and
Ionathas, and wept, and also fasted. That also was a publique fast whiche
Iosaphat commaunded in the .2. boke of
Paralip. the .20. chap.
Esther the queene beyng in extreme daunger, commaunded by
Mardocheus a publique fast to be denounced. The Israelites in their captiuity (as it is written in the .7. chap. of
Zachary) had a fast both in the .5 moneth, & the .7. moneth, bycause in the .5. moneth the spoyling of the City & desolation of the tēple happened, and in the .7. moneth
Godolias was slayne: wherby so many miseryes afterward ensewed. That was also a publique fast whiche
Iezabel proclaymed, a woman otherwise wicked and an Hipocrite. Her acte declareth that it was the manner, that when any great wicked crime was committed, the whole Churche should fast, as it were desiryng helpe agaynst the common punishement. This fast sometymes also the Prophetes required. As
Iohel when he sayd: Sanctifie ye a fast.
Esdras also in his, 8. chap. proclaimed a fast. Wherfore fastes were by certayne godly considerations publikely denounced.
Why an yearely fast was instituted among the Hebrues.God himself also commaunded a publique fast. For he commaunded that euery yeare the feast
Chephurim, that is the feast of expiations, should be celebrated the .10. day of September with a publique fast. For the people committed many sinnes thorough out the whole yeare, neither did they diligently obserue the ceremonyes. Wherfore once in a yeare the tabernacle was purified, and a publique fast was obserued. These thinges in the old Testament, signified as it wer by a certaine shadow that the sinnes of mē should be by Christ abolished, of whō when we take hold by a true and lyuely faith,
The day of fast was a festiuall day. we are losed from sinnes, and therof followeth the mortification of sinnes and carnall delightes & pleasures. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that that one daye of fast was a festiuall day. For it was not lawful in the publique fast, either to worke, or for a man to geue hym selfe to his own busines, not that on feastiual dayes we ought vtterly to be idle, but that in those dayes we should do good deedes, whereby we may rest in God, and we are commaunded onely to absteyne from our owne woorkes. But to beleue, to pray, to acknowledge sinnes, to bewaile them with an earnest repētāce, are the woorkes of God, and therfore are not forbidden on festiuall dayes, but rather commaunded.
The Ethnikes acknowledged a Religious fast.These thynges haue not onely the Hebrues learned out of the lawes of God, but also the Ethnikes by the instincte of nature. For when
Ionas preached vnto the
Niniuites that their City should within .40. dayes be ouerthrowen, they dispayred not of the mercy of God, but got themselues to repentaunce, and euery one of them, euen from the kyng vnto the lowest Citezin, with their beastes also and cattell, fasted. And when they vehemētly and with a feruent zeale cried vnto the Lorde,
Augustine. Porphyrius. they were heard.
Augustine de ciuitate dei, writeth that
Porphyrius taught, that abstinence from flesh and grosse meates, doth purify the myndes of men, wherby they are made the more prompt to thinges deuine, and to familiarity with good spirites.
Plutarche.
Plutarche also in his litle booke
de Iside & Osiride sayth, that the Priestes of
Heliopolis vtterly absteyned from all meates, whiche might noorishe and augment the wantones of the fleshe, and that they neuer brought wyne into the temple of their God. For they counted it a vilany to drinke wyne in the day tyme in the sight of their God: other men sayd he, vsed wyne, but not much, and they had many purifications without wyne. The same
Plutarche de cohibenda Iracundia sheweth,
Holy
[...] that among the
Athenienses wer certayne holy sacrifices, which were done onely with water without wyne. And this is notable, which is written in the same booke,
Empedocles. Titus Liuius. that
Empedocles was wont to say, that a mā ought most of all to fast from malice.
Titus Liuius maketh mention, that when at Rome there happened many portentuous thyngs, which seemed to foreshewe
[Page 276] some great euill, the
decemuiri were sent to looke into the bookes of the
Sibilles, and that there was aunswere made, that they should institute a publique fast in the honor of
Ceres, whiche fast should also be repeated agayne euery .5. yeare. And that by that meanes the anger of the gods should be pacified. Wherfore the Ethnikes beyng smiten with the feare of the euils, whiche hoonge ouer their heades, fled vnto the oracles, fasted, and prayed the gods to turne away their anger. But Christians, not onely seyng so many & so great euils, but also hearyng them told from all parts of the world: yet turne they not vnto GOD by prayer, neither are they any thyng moued in mynde.
But peraduenture some man will say, that Fastes,
Fastes are commended in the new Testamēt bycause they are partly Iewishe, and partly Ethnike, seeme to be farre from our Religion. But that it is not so, may easely be proued by the new Testament. In the Actes of the Apostles the .13. chap. the Church, beyng admonished by an oracle that
Paul and
Barnabas should be chosen to visite the Cityes and Townes where the Gospell had ben preached, first decreed a fast: then they layd their handes vpon them. And in the .14. chap. when they after they had accomplished their matters thorough
Iconium, Listria, and
Antioche, returned home, they instituted a fast, and created ministers and Priestes in euery City.
Augustine in his Epistle to
Cassulanus sayth:
Augustine. When
Peter should at Rome haue talke with
Simon the sorcerer vpon the Son day, the Churche of Rome vpon the Sabaoth day denounced a faste, whiche custome was alwayes afterward retayned.
Ierome.
Ierome in his prologue vpon
Mathew sayth, that
Iohn beyng desired of the Churches to write the Gospell agaynst
Ebion and
Cerinthus, who denyed the deuine nature of Christ, aunswered that he woulde so doo, if the whole Churche woulde before indicte a publique faste. Whiche thyng
Eusebius also in his Ecclesiasticall Hystory testifieth.
Eusebius.
Paul also in the .1. to the
Corinthians the .7. chapter, admonisheth those that are ioyned together in matrimony, not to separate themselues a sonder, but for a tyme, to geue themselues to fastyng and prayers. In whiche place I thynke he vnderstādeth publique prayers, and also a publique fast. For fellowshyp with the wife nothyng letteth, but that they may be vsed priuately, but whether he vnderstood publique fastes or priuate, it skilleth not much.
Farther, Christ being asked of his Apostles, why they could not heale y
e dōme and cast out the deuil. He answered: Bycause of your incredulity. And he added: This kynd of deuils is cast out onely by fasting and prayer. That place is somewhat darke, and therfore it shall not be vnprofitable briefly to expounde it. Is it to be thought, that by the merite of fastyng and prayers (as they vse to speake) deuils are cast out by vertue of the worke wrought? Not so. What thē signified the woordes of Christ? First he said: Bycause of your incredulity: for if ye had fayth, euen so muche as a grayne of mustard, and should say vnto this mountayne: Take vp thy self, & cast thy self into the sea, it should obey you. And together with a fayth, is necessary a vehement and feruent prayer, and also fastyng, bycause a fixed and earnest prayer which draweth the mind, not onely frō meate and drinke, but also from all other humane cogitacions and pleasures. Wherefore Christ by the effectes describeth the cause, namely, fayth by prayers and fasting, and he speaketh of those deuils, to whom god gaue more liberty, as though he should haue sayd: ye must not lyue easely or idely, if ye will cast out this kynd of deuils. Ye must haue a sure and strong fayth whiche thyng he expressed by the effectes, by prayers I say and fastes.
By these reasons and testimonyes may fastes also be commended in the new Testament. But in them are faultes to be taken heede of,
What vices in fasting ar to be taken heede of. whiche very often are many, and those greuous. First bycause in the Papacy are obserued fastes vpon certayne appoynted dayes, without consideration of persons or occasions,
Faste brought in without measure. as an yearely ceremony, whiche at this day is vtterly of no strength, & is as if it were Iewishe. Moreouer euery man hath added & heaped vp of his owne, whatsoeuer
[Page] pleased him, and not that, which calamity of tymes or feruent prayers required. For one man brought in
Septuagesima, an other
Sexagesima, an other
Quinquagesima, another
Quadragesima which is Lent, an other
Rogatiō dayes, an other
Imber dayes, an other y
e euēs of y
e Apostles, an other Friday, an other Saterday, & an other brought in fastyng on y
e Wēsday. But of so many fastes, what vtility hath there at the length followed?
Many contentions and questions concernyng fastyngs. A great many questions & contentions. For a man will scarse beleue, howe many questions the elders haue had concernyng fast.
Augustine ad Cassulanum writeth that therfore we must fast on the Wensday, bycause Christ was sold that day: and on the Friday, bycause on that day he was crucified. But of the Sabaoth day he much doubted. For they of
Millane & of the East parte, affirmed that on y
e day we should not fast, bycause Christ that day was at reast in the sepulchre: contraryly the
Romanes and
Affricans, and certayne other, bycause Christ was deiected euen vnto y
e ignominy of the sepulchre: therfore contended that the Sabaoth should be fasted.
Monica the mother of Augustine.The mother of
Augustine, when she came out of
Affrike to
Millane, and sawe that the men there fasted not on the Sabaoth day, began to meruayle at the vnaccustomed manner. Wherfore
Augustine which was not yet baptised, came to
Ambrose, & asked in his mothers behalfe what was best to be done? Do sayth
Ambrose that which I do.
An aunswere of Ambrose. By which words
Augustine thought y
t he should not fast, bycause
Ambrose fasted not. But what he ment, he himselfe more manifestly expressed. I (sayth he) when I come to Rome do fast, bycause the Sabaoth day is there fasted: but when I returne to
Millane, bicause here it is not fasted, I fast not.
De consecratione dist. 3. chap.
De esu carnium, it is decreed that Friday and Wensday should be fasted, y
e Sabaoth day is left free. And in the same distinct. y
e chap.
Sabbato vero,
Innocentius.
Innocētius hath added: That y
e Sabaoth also must be fasted. But he bringeth a farre other cause, then that which before we spake of. For for bycause (saith he) the Apostles both vpon the Friday, and also vpon the Sabaoth day were in great mourning and sorow, therfore we must fast. In the same dist. chap.
Ieiunium: Melchiades decreed, that we must not fast on the Sonday, nor on the Thursday: and he geueth a reason, bycause the fastes of Christians ought to be on contrary dayes, to the fastes both of heretikes and of Ethnikes.
Epiphanius.
Epiphanius bringeth a reason why the Wensday is to be fasted, namely bycause Christ was that day taken vp to heauen: for it is written, that when the bridgrome is taken from thē, then they shall fast, and this he affirmeth to be the tradition of y
e Apostles, when as yet at this day we beleue y
t the
Ascension happened on the Thursday:
We must geue
[...]le credite to traditions. wherfore let the Papistes take heede, howe muche credite they will haue to be geuen vnto their traditions. For there are many of them, whiche euen they themselues can not deny, but that they are ridiculous and vayne. I know in deede there are traditions founde whiche are necessaryly gathered out of the holy scriptures, and for that cause they ought not to be abrogated. But other traditions whiche are indifferent, are not to be augmented in number, least the Churche should be oppressed, neither to be thought so necessary, that they can not be abolished. And we must beware that in them be not put the worshipping of GOD. But as for those whiche are agaynst the woorde of god, are by no meanes to be admitted. In the dist. 76. chapter .1. are added
Imber dayes, or the Fastes foure tymes in the yeare. Which why they are so diuided, scarsely can any man perceaue. They cite
Ierome vpon
Zachary, who maketh mention of the fourth moneth, fift, seuenth, and tenth. And they seeme to be moued with a wicked zeale to distribute these fastes into foure partes of the yeare. And those fastes whiche the Iewes receaued euery yeare for y
e calamityes which they had suffred,
Why y
e fast of Imber dayes were inuented the same our men haue made yearely. But other haue inuented an other cause, namely bycause in those foure tymes of the yeare: Byshops are wont to promote clarkes vnto the ministery and orders. Wherfore they say that the people ought then most of all to faste and praye, that GOD would graunt
[Page 277] them good Pastors.
Fasting and prayers should be had in the ordering of Ministers. But I would demaund of the Byshops why they institute Ministers onely at those .iiii. tymes of y
e yere. Vndoubtedly, they cā render no certayn & iust reason therof.
Augustine. Aerius an heretike.
Augustine in his boke
de Haeresibus, sayth y
e
Aerius contemned oblatiōs for the dead, & also such fast as were appointed, bycause Christiās were not vnder y
e law but vnder grace: but he would y
e euery mā should fast at his owne pleasure whē he himselfe would. In dede I allow not
Aerius in y
t he was an
Arriā, but as touchīg sacrifices & oblations for y
e dead, he iudged rightly & godly. And also concerning appointed fastes, I see no cause why he ought to be reproued, vnles peraduēture he thought this, y
t fastes could not be denoūced of the Magistrate & of y
e Church, as y
e difficulty of times required. The reason also which he vseth, y
e Christiās are not vnder y
e law, but vnder grace, is weake: for we are not so deliuered frō the law, y
t we are absolued frō all order.
Iouinian an heretike.
Augustine also writeth y
t
Iouiniā contemned abstinences & fastes as things vaine, & vnprofitable: where in if he spake of bare fastes onely, & such as wer appointed at certayne dayes & certayne tymes of y
e yeare, he iudged not ill. For vnles they be adioyned with faith & repentāce, & also with vehement prayers, they nothing at all profite. In
Esay y
e .58. chap. y
e people cōplayned: We haue fasted, & thou hast not looked vpon vs: which wordes shew, that fastes with out circumstances requisite, are not acceptable vnto God: but if they be ioyned with their additions, they are not vnprofitable.
By y
e decrees of
Liberius, who liued in y
e tyme of
Cōstātius, may be knowē,
Liberius. how y
t whē y
e ayre was vntēperate, or y
t there was any famine, or pestilēce, or warre, then they assēbled together to denoūce a fast, wherby to mitigate y
e anger of god.
Augustine.
Augustine whē he saw his city besieged of y
e
Vandales, gaue himself vnto fastyng & prayers, & in that siege died, as
Possidonius testifieth. And generally whē we attēpt any great waighty matter, as whē we denoūce war, or creat Magistrats, or ordeine Ministers of y
e Church, we haue nede most of al of feruēt prayers, for the feruētnes wherof fasting very much auayleth. Christ when he should begyn his preaching, went into y
e wildernes & fasted. A widow when her husband is dead, is left in a perillous state. Therfore prayers & fastes are very conuenient for her.
Anna the daughter of
Phanuel led her life in y
e temple, where she gaue herself to prayer & fasting.
Paul to
Tim. sayth: A widowe which is truly a widowe, putteth her cōfidence in the Lord, & day & night applieth herselfe to prayers & fastes.
Cornelius, when he was not yet sufficiently instructed of Christe, and was heauy and pensiue in mynde, in the ninth houre was fastyng, and in prayers, to whom the Aungell (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) appeared.
But it may be demāded, when fastes are denoūced of princes & of the Church,
Whether fastes denounced ought to be obeyed. whether men are bound to obey them or no? Vndoubtedly they are bound by the law of fayth, & by obediēce. For when fastes are set forth y
t are agreable vnto the word of God, how can he which beleueth in god detract thē? Assuredly he cā not. Howbeit this is to be vnderstād of those which are of y
e state & conditiō y
t they be able to fast. For if a mā be hindred either by age, or disease, or labours, in y
e case this ought to be of force which y
e scriptures say: I wil haue mercy & not sacrifice. But they which are not hindred, ought to obey.
Consilium Gā grense. In y
e counsell of
Gāgrensis chap. 30. it is ordeyned, y
t if a mā obey not y
e fastes which ar cōmāded him of y
e Church, howsoeuer he boast of perfectiō, without bodely necessity, & proudly contemneth the decrees of the Church, let him be accursed.
The Canones of the Apostles In the Canones of y
e Apostles (although they be
Apocripha & conteyne certayne strāge things, neither is it sufficiently agreed vpō the nōber of them) in y
e Canon I say .68. it is cōmanded, y
t the Clergy, which fast not, hauing no bodely necessity, shuld be deposed. Let infātes in no case be cōpelled & driuē to fast: for y
t should hurt their health. Yet
Ioel sayth: Sanctify a fast, gather together old men & sucking children. And the
Niniuites at the preaching of
Ionas, cōpelled beasts & infātes to fast. These wer extraordinary
[Page] thinges, neither are they for that end set forth, that we should imitate them.
Augustine.As for priuate fastes most men will haue them to be free. Wherfore
Augustine ad Cassulanum: We know (sayth he) that we must fast when we are commaunded, but on what dayes we should fast, and what dayes we should not, we know not, bycause that is no where prescribed in the newe Testament, therfore fastes are to be left free: And in his 2. booke
de Sermone domini in monte (expoundyng these woordes:
Howe fastes maye be called free or not fre. Iudge not and ye shall not be iudged) he writeth, that men may two maner of wayes iudge rashly. Either if they drawe that into the euill parte whiche mought haue bene done ryghtly: or if when it is manifest that a facte is playnely euill, they thinke that he which hath done it, can not repent. And of the first kynd he bringeth an exāple, as if a mā, bycause he is sicke in the stomake, or is troubled with any other infirmity of y
e body, would not fast. An other whiche knoweth not this, will suspect him to be a gloton, & to much delicate. For here that which is free, & which may well be done, is drawen into y
e worse part. This in deede is
Augustines opinion, which yet we ought prudently & soundly to vnderstand. For if a priuate man, when he is in misery or daunger, doth see that fasting & prayers may helpe him, he except he fast doth vndoubtedly sinne. But for as much as fasting after this sort & maner now declared may profit, we must vndoubtedly fast. It is free in deede, bycause by y
e outward law he can not be condē ned which fasteth not. But when our fast may aduance the glory of god, it is no more fre, for asmuch as we ar cōmanded to loue God withall our hart, w
t all our soule, & w
tal our strength. For there are many things which of their own nature are free & indifferent. But when it commeth to choise, & we see they may eyther illustrate or obscure the glory of God, then are they not free nor indifferent, bycause all our strengthes and facultyes are to be applyed vnto the glory of God.
In true fastīg we must faste the whole day.Farther there is an abuse of fastes as touching the space of tyme: for as much as the Papistes, if they some litle while defer their dinner, and then whatsoeuer they eate, so that they eate no fleshe, they thinke it sufficient. But the elders remayned fasting al the whole day euen to euening, al which time they were occupied in the worde of God, in prayers, and holy occupations. In
Leuit. the .23. God sayth,
The Iewes fasted from euenyng to euenyng. when ye fast, rest from all worke, and afflicte your soules: for it is a Sabaoth. And no man doubteth but that the Sabaoth endureth from euening to euening. So
Saul when he had put the
Philistines to flight, proclaymed a fast vntill night. And
Dauid in the death of
Abner sware y
t he would taste of no meate till night.
Tertulian. Augustine.
Tertullian cōtra Psychicos sayth, y
t the Churche produced their fastes euen to euenyng.
Augustine de moribus Ecclesiae contra Manicheos: Let accustoned fastes saith he, of the Church be continued euen vntil night: for al the whole day were celebrated holy assemblyes, were also had publique prayers, but at euenyng they were dismissed,
In the Lent. & did eate meate. But it is a sporte, to see how y
e Papistes illude this aūcient custome: they say their euen songes before noone, & then they go to dyner, at night they institute a drinking, & so boast y
t they fast very wel.
Thomas Aquinas,
Consilium Calcedonense. Whiche was the ix. houre.
Thomas in secunda secundae sayth, that in his time fastes were produced euen vnto the ninth houre. And he bringeth the counsell of
Chalcedonia, where it is decreed y
t he which eateth before the ninth houre, should not be counted to haue fasted. Here by the way we must declare which was the ninth houre. The vi. houre was at none, in which tyme we rede y
e Christ our sauiour was crucified. Wherfore the ninth houre must needes be the third houre from noone. The elders dyd so deuide the tyme,
The distribution of the houres among the elders. that alwayes from the Sunne set to the Sunne rysing they counted 12. houres, and agayne as many from the rysing of the Sunne to the goynge downe thereof. Agayne they deuided eyther tyme into foure spaces, and those they called watches: And euery one of those spaces contayned three houres. Wherefore the thirde houre from the rysing of the Sunne is with vs eyther the eyght or nynth houre, as the tyme of the yeare requireth: For these houres are vnequall. The sixte houre is noone, and the nynth
[Page 277] is the thirde at after noone, and the .xii. at the sunne set. But
Thomas obiecteth vnto hymselfe, that whiche we say, namely, that the elders fasted the whole day. It is ridiculous to heare what he aunswereth. Bycause we (sayth he) are in the state of the day, and the elders were in the state of the nyght: therefore we must finishe our fastes in the day tyme, when as they ended them in the night tyme. And he bryngeth this saying of
Paul: The nyght is past, & the day hath drawen nyghe. Whiche sentence how much it serueth to this present thyng, all menne see and vnderstande.
An other abuse is, the choyse of meates,
Of the choyse of meates. wherein nowe in a manner consisteth the whole religion of fastes. The elders vsed it not: for when they had fasted vntill euen, at supper they dyd indifferently eate whatsoeuer was set before them. But now our mē do more seuerely absteyne from flesh, egges, and milke, then they in the olde tyme absteyned from vncleane beastes.
Paul reproueth this superstition, and calleth it a doctrine of deuils. But they say, that
Paul reproueth those onely, whiche auoyded some meates, as euill creatures, and beleued that those euill creatures came from an euill God: but we (say they) do teache no such thyng: we onely forbid mē some kind of meate for one day, or a few dayes, which afterward we set at liberty.
Montanus an heretike.
Tertulian. What choise of meate is to bee followed. As though
Montanus could not after this manner haue excused himself, against whom these places are cited of the fathers.
Tertullian accuseth
Marcio as an heretike, bicause he did put some holines in fish. Wherfore there is no choise of meate to be suffred, but so much as shall seeme to serue to temperance, whiche thing if the Papistes would so diligently haue takē heede of, they should rather haue absteyned frō wine, then frō flesh. For
Salomō saith, wine is a thing of excesse. And
Paul: Absteyne (saith he) from wine, wherin is excesse. They should also haue absteyned from fishe, & especially the delicater kinde of fishes. For there are of them whiche do no lesse delight the taste,
Fishes coūted amōg delicates and no lesse stirre vp to lustes, then doth fleshe. And vndoubtedly among the elders, as well the Grecians as the
Romanes, fishes were counted among the chiefest delicates.
Moreouer
Socrates in his Ecclesiastical History teacheth,
Socrates the Hystoriagrapher. Sōdry kindes of fastes. that the elders fasted far otherwise: for in the Lent some fasted two dayes, some foure dayes, some .x. some xv. some xx. & other some the whole xl. dayes. And when they fasted, some absteyned frō all kynd of flesh & fishe, and did eate onely all maner of pulses. Other absteyned frō flesh of foure footed, & lyued onely on foules & fishes. For al thīgs were at that tyme left free in the Churche. For when they had fasted vntill euen, at supper they dyd eate moderately whatsoeuer came to hande: althoughe afterward the thing began by litle & litle to decline to superstitiō.
Ierome.
Ierome to
Nepotianus sayth, that there were in his tyme whiche absteyned not onely from all kynd of meate, but also from bread. They vsed certayne thinne broths, made with spices, neither did they drinke them out of a cuppe, but supped them out of a shell.
Augustine de moribus Ecclesiae & Manichaeorum,
Augustine. A cōparisō betwene a Christian and a Manichite. bringeth in a
Manichite an elect (for so theyr called they Ministers) who in dede did ease no flesh, but in the meantyme vsed most delicate & fine meates, and most sweate sawses: wyne also they might not touche, but drinkes which wer made of fruites, which much resēbled wine, & farre passed it in pleasātnes & tast, of these I say they dranke aboundantly. On the other part he setteth a true Christian man, who remayned fastyng vntill euenyng and then had to supper a messe of herbes potage sodde with a pece of larde, and a smal portion of salte flesh, and hardened in the smoke, and dranke thre or iiii. draughtes of wyne:
Augustine demaūdeth, whether of these semeth to haue fasted best & more truly: and he gaue iudgement on the Catholikes syde.
The
Mōtanistes so delighted in this choise of meates y
e they inuēted for thēselues
[...] which wer meates to dry vp nature, & such other like.
[...] of the Montanistes.
Tertullian.
Ierome. For (as
Tertulliā affirmeth) they did eate only bred, salt, & al maner of pulse, & their drīke was water. This kind of fast they vsed ii. wekes before Easter.
Ierome also addeth y
t they
[Page] wer wont to fast three Lentes, & for that cause that they fasted so seuerely, they were called
[...] that is Pure.
Eusebius. Mōtanus the first that wrote lawes of fastīg
Eusebius in his .5. booke and .18. chap. writeth that one
Appollonius reproued
Montanus, bycause he was the first that wrote lawes of fastyng, as though the Churche before hym was free. He by lawes and prescriptes prescribed what dayes men should fast, and what meates they should absteyne from. Suche an author haue the Papistes of their prescribed fastes and choyse of meates.
Agaynste the choyse of meates. This superstition agreeth not with the woorde of God. Christ sayth: That whiche entreth into the mouth, defileth not the man. And whatsoeuer is set before you, that eate, demaūdyng nothyng. And to
Titus: All things are cleane, vnto the cleane, but vnto the vncleane, nothyng is cleane. To the
Colossians: Let no man iudge you in meate and drinke. To the
Romanes: The kingdome of God is not meate and drinke. To the
Corinthians also, are many thynges written to confirme this sentence, where he entreateth of meates dedicated vnto Idoles. So the Scriptures make mencion of no choyse of meates for Religiōs sake: yet I deny not but that meates are to be chosen, either for the auoyding of excesse or sicknes, or elles for the kepyng vnder of the wantones of the flesh.
A certain choise of meates is to be admitted. Of the institution of Lent. But that Christians should absteyne from fleshe, from egges, and from milke for religions sake, is no where prescribed in the Scriptures.
There is an other abuse bycause they impose such fastes which the strengthes of men are not able and abyde. For they will haue the people fast .40. dayes. Which thyng, if it should be required accordyng to the prescript rule of GOD, and of the olde Churche, namely that the fast should be continued vntill euen, no man in a manner were able to performe that. And that institution some referre vnto
Thelesphorus the Pope, other some to a tyme a litle before hym. And vndoubtedly therein is nothyng elles, then a certayne mere wicked zeale and noughty imitation of Christ. For he fasted .40. dayes: therfore superstitious then thought it good that Christians should fast so many dayes euery yeare, when as yet Christ fasted after this maner,
Christe required not of hys Apostles the fast of Lent. but once in his lyfe tyme: neither required he at any time any such acte of his Apostles. But these men decree it to be sinne, and that a grieuous sinne, whē such a fast is violated. They ought to haue regarded that Christ all y
e tyme did eate nothyng, & in that he could so long endure, y
e same to haue pretayned to a miracle, and to the power of God: The holy scriptures no where commaunde,
Chrisostome. that in that thyng we should imitate Christe.
Chrisostome in hys .47. Homely vpon
Mathewe: The Lorde (sayth he) hath not commaunded thee to faste fourty dayes, althoughe he mought haue commaunded it. What then commaunded he? Learne (sayth he) of me, for I am meeke and humble in heart. But the manner of these men is peruerse. For they will imitate Christe in that which they ar not commaunded: but that which they are cōmaunded, they will not followe. Our sauior when he sent foorth his disciples: Go (sayth he) to all nations, teachyng to obserue those thynges, not whatsoeuer thynges I haue done, but whatsoeuer thynges I haue commaunded you. And it is a wonder to see howe superstitiously and subtelly they haue decreed of these thynges in the Counsell of
Martine de Consecratione,
Confiliū Martini. in the dist. 3.
Non licet, and in the Canones of the Counsell of
Laodicenum in the chapter
Non oportet, it is commaunded, that in the Lent fastyng on the Thursday should not be broken. And in the Counsell of
Agathensis it is commaunded,
Consiliū Agathense. that in the Lent fasting on the Saterday also should not be broken: bycause on the Thursday & Saterday many fasted not. Yea & on the Sondayes also in the Lent, wherin they fasted not, they would that there should be retayned a choise of meates. And
de Consec. in the dist. 4.
A reason out of Gregorye for the obseruynge of Lent.
Gregoryes reason confuted. chap.
Deni
(que) sacerdotes it is ordeyned, that y
e Priestes should begyn theyr fast from
Quinquagesima. And in the same place .5. distinct: chap.
Quadragesima. Gregorius hath inuented a reason wherby to proue that Lent is to be fasted. We must sayth he, geue y
e tenth part of the whole yeare vnto God. And the .x. part of y
e yeare cōsisteth of .40. dayes. Wherfore we must fast so many dayes. A goodly
[Page 279] reason I promise you. Why doth thys
Gregory forget that the Leuiticall priesthoode and ceremonies thereof haue now ceased? Wherfore it is not lawfull to bind christian men to tenthes and Iewishe ceremonies. And if for that cause the time of Lent be to be cōsecrated to a fast, bicause it is the tenth part of the whole yeare, why did not the Iewes in y
e old time so fast? Why did not the Prophets reproue them, bicause they deceaued god of such a kind of tenth?
But why Lent was inuented, as much as I can gather I wil declare.
Why the fathers instituted Lent. The fathers when they saw men liue very carelesly and negligently, thoughte it good y
t they should be cōpelled after a sort to renew godlines in some part of the year, & somewhat to bridle the fearcenes of the flesh. And for this thing they thought that the .40. dayes before Easter were most mete, that men should so long haue theyr minds both occupied in repentance, & also in remembring the benefites of God. This inuention, although at the first sight it might seme trimme,
The institutiō of Lent is against Christiā liberty. yet it agreeth not with Christian liberty. For we must think vpon the benefites of god and of our greate ingratitude, and other our moste grieuous sinnes, not onelye 40. daies, but also continually. Farther by this meanes they opened a most wide window to liue securely and reacheleslye. For if they once had performed fullye those .40. dayes, they thoughte that all the whole yeare after they mighte geue themselues wholy to al kind of pleasures and lustes. For they referred the time of repentance to these .40. dayes. And although the elders had a lent,
Eusebius. Ireneus yet (as
Eusebius sayth in his .5. booke and .24. chapter) it was left free vnto all men. For
Ireneus after this manner entreated with
Victor bishop of Rome, whē he would haue excommunicated the East church, because in the obseruinge of Easter it agreed not with the church of Rome. What (sayd he) can we not liue at concord, although they vse theyr owne rites as we vse ours? For some fast in the Lente two dayes, some .4. dayes, some ten dayes, some .15. some .20, and other some .40. dayes, and yet is concord neuertheles kept in the Church.
Ther is an other abuse,
Fasting is an excercise & not a holines. namely bicause som put holines in fasting as though a worshipping of god consisted in it, where as in very dede fasting is onely an excercise, which of it selfe hath no holines. They are fooles, which in fasting thinke that for that cause they haue god bound vnto them:
Ierome. wherfore we must not rashly geue credite vnto
Ierome when he sayth, that fasting is not a vertue, but the foundation of al vertues. For onely Christ and faith in him is the foundation of all vertues. If he had sayd, that fasting is a helpe of certayn vertues, he mought haue bene borne with al.
And vndoubtedly herein the elders oftentymes erre,
A fall of the riders. for that they prayse & extol fasting aboue measure. If so much should be attributed vnto fasting, we must of necessity confesse that
Iohn Baptist liued more holily then Christ. For he fasted more then Christ did. For Christ did eate and drinke as temperate and modest men vse to do: But it is sayde that
Iohn did neither eat nor drinke. Yea and
Paule to
Timothy writeth, that the exercise of the body hath small vtilitye, but piety is profitable to all thinges. If thou wilte demaunde what piety is:
What piety is. I wyll aunsweare, that it is a true worshippinge of God, a soundnes of doctrine, and a pure life, which thinges follow hope and faith. In these thinges assuredly is very great profite, and the excercise of the body hath indede some profit, but not so great. But we must note that
Paule speaketh not of fasting and excercise of the body, which is Hipocriticall and wanteth fayth, but of the true and christian fasting and excercise of the body. For those things which want fayth and procede of hipocrisy, are sinnes, neither do they any thing profite. Wherfore
Esay sayth:
Fasting is not a part of satisfaction. Is this the fast which I haue chosen? But these our men go farther, and besides that in fastynge they put holynes, they make it also a parte of satisfaction.
[Page] Forasmuch as y
e Scholemē in the .4.
They extende fastes euen to purgatory.
Gracian. boke of sētences do appoint satisfactiō to consiste of prayers, almes, & fasting. What abrogateth the death of Christ, if this do not? They say also that by fasts, soules are deliuered out of purgatory. And least any should think that I fayn these things, let him rede
Gratian in the .13. quest .2. chapter
anima, where he putteth the wordes of
Gregory, who sayth: Soules are deliuered from purgatory, either by the prayers or fastinge of theyr kinsfolkes.
There is also an other more greuous abuse, for that some affirme that by fastes they can satisfye the churche, althoughe they ceasse not from sinne. Thys kynde of faste God himselfe reproueth by expresse woordes in
Esaye: What care I (saith he) for your fastes? Ye fast contentions and strifes. Is thys the faste which my soul hath chosē?
Liberius y
e Pope decreed, y
t al the lent we must abstein from pleadinges in the lawe.
Liberius. This is not verye wiselye decreed, for the publike wealth cannot consiste if it be so longe or euer matters be heard, or iudgemente geuen. If fasting should for a weighty cause be denounced for a day or two, ther mought for that space of time be commaunded intermission of iudgement. But that lawes shoulde cease, so longe as
Liberius will haue them, it is againste the Publike wealth. Farther the same
Liberius saith, that the vse of matrimony polluteth the fast of Lent, wherefore they would haue men all that time to abstain from theyr wiues. But
Paule exhorteth man and wife more soundly, namely to departe for a time, and that by theyr mutual consent, and to return to the same, least they should be tempted of Sathan.
An abuse of shrouetide.There is also an other abuse, in that euery where before Lent all that time, which they call Srouetide, men do most vntemperately geue themselues to glotonye, excesse, dronkennes, and filthye lustes, and that vnder this pretence, that they may the easelier fast, as though it were lawful to do euill, that good may ensew. Neither is this a new kind of vice. For
Basill in his homely of fastyng, and
Chrisostome vpon
Gen. do in many places greuouslye complaine of that thing.
Basile. Chrisostome. Some fast for delicatenes. For when they know that they shal not suppe, at dinner they lade theyr filthy sinke with many and heauy burdēs, so that they make themselues vtterly vnprofitable for the whole day. Other on the contrary part, do vtterly wast themselues with fasting,
It is not lawefull for a man to consume him selfe with to much fastinge. yea and in a māner kil themselues, as
Basilius and
Nazianzenus did: who being men excellently wel learned, yet by abstinences and fastinges were made vtterly vnprofitable vnto the Church. They wer compelled to kepe theyr bed sometimes halfe a yeare, and somtimes a whole yeare. Lastly, there ar some, which for that they fast, haue a wōderful delight in themselues, & ar proud, & also dispise other mē, as that Pharesy which said: I am not as other men, I fast twise in the weeke &c. I could reckē a great many more of these abuses: but for this time me thinketh these ar sufficient. This one thing onely wil I adde, that in fasting we see two extremities. The Papists in a maner retaine theyr superstitious fastes, but we vtterly neglect those fastes that ar lawfull and good. Wherefore it seemeth that on eyther side the thing is to be amended. And thus farre concerning these thinges.
¶The .xxi. Chapter.
1
ANd the men of Israel sware in Mizpa saying: Ther shal not a man of vs geue his doughter to any of Beniamin to wyfe.
2 And y
e people came into y
e house of god, & abode there til euen before god, & lifted vp theyr voice & wept sore.
3 And they sayd: O Lorde God of Israel, why is this chaunced in Israel, that there should be this day one tribe lacking in Israell?
4 And on the morowe the people rose vp, and made there an altar,
[Page 280] and offred burnt offringes and peace offringes.
5 And the children of Israell sayde: Who are they amonge all the tribes of Israel, that came not with the congregatiō vnto the lord? For they had made a great othe concerning them that came not vp to the lord in Mizpah, saying, that they should surely dye.
6 And the children of Israell had pity on theyr brother Beniamin, and sayd: There is one tribe cut of from Israell this day.
7 What shall wee doo vnto the remnant of them, for to get them wiues, for asmuch as we haue sworne by the Lord, that we will not geue them of our daughters to wiues?
8 They sayd, I say: What ar they of the tribes of Israel, that came not vp to Mizpah vnto the lord? And behold there came none of the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead vnto the congregation.
9 For the people was numbred, and beholde there was not one of the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead there.
10 And the congregation sent thither .12. thousande men of the strō gest of thē, & commaunded thē sayinge: Go and smite the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead with the edge of the sword both women & childrē.
11 And this is that ye shall do, vtterly destroy all the males and all the women that haue lien by men.
12 And they found among the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead .400. mayden virgins, that had knowen no man be lying with any male. And they brought them to the host in Siloh, which was in the land of Chanaan.
13 And the whole congregatiō sent & spake vnto the childrē of Beniamin, that were in the rocke Rimmon, & called peaceably vnto thē.
The Israelites, as farre as may be gathered by this history, had bound themselues with a double othe. First, y
t no man should geue his doughter to wyfe to the
Beniamites: which was nothing els, but that they were minded vtterlye to destroy the tribe of
Beniamin. Farther, they sware that if any of the Israelites had not put to his help agaynst the
Beniamites, he should be slain. Here are very many things worthy to be noted. First, we must consider that the Isralites wer to seuere against the
Beniamits. For they did not onely slay the men, but also the wiues and maydens: wherefore there were no women left on liue for those .600 menne whiche were remaininge, to engender yssue of. But afterwarde when the same Israelites more diligentlye considered their acte, they iudged it not wel done, that a whole tribe should be cleane destroyed. Of which they nothing thought when they were in their great iury and rage. Wherfore they now accuse theyr cruelty, and detest theyr rigorousnes which they had vsed.
But that they bound themselues with an othe, y
t they woulde not geue their doughters in matrimony to the
Beniamites, it is not in this history mencioned: but yet it is most likely y
t it thē happened, whē they were in
Mizpah, & the
Beniamites would not deliuer the guilty. Wherfore the
Beniamites wer oppressed w
t great miseries. For ether they must take to wiues foren & straūge wemē, which thing was prohibited thē by the law, or els they must perpetually lead a sole life without wiues, and so that tribe should vtterly perish.
The Israelites were to cruel agaynst the Bē iamites. The Israelites in y
t they mourn, do suffer punishments for theyr cruelty. For it should haue ben inough for them to haue punished the men. What nede was there to slay women & maidens which had nothing offēded? Vnles peraduenture they had vowed the vow
Cherem. But such a vow it was not lawfull for them to vow, but by the authority
[Page] and commaundement of God, whych appeareth not to haue beene doone in this historye. In reuenginge we muste keepe a meane: for all are not to be slaine which come into the power of them that ouercome. It is sufficient to punish the guilty.
God punisheth moderatly. God slew in Egipt
Pharao, also the firste begotten, and many other, yet destroyed he not the whole nation. And when he destroyed
Sodom, he saued both
Lot and also his famelye, and deliuered from misery the citye
Zoar, whither
Lot went. And in the flood when he drowned the worlde with water, yet he woulde saue on lyue
Noah with his famely. But it semeth that these men determined, vtterly to destroy al the
Beniamites: whiche theyr counsel God allowed not, who when the Iewes were afflicted of the
Chaldeians, and they raged more cruellye against them then was mete, both threatned to punish them, and also did indede punish them most grieuously.
The variety of mans nature.Now the Israelits repent them of their cruelty: but it is to late. They should haue thought of this thing before. But this is the nature of man, these that florish they are angry with, and enuy them, & when the same men are ouerthrown & deiected,
Architas Tarentius. Athenodorus they pity thē. The sword is not rashly to be moued, neither should punishmentes be executed with an angry mind.
Architas the
Tarentine hath a very wise saying vnto his seruant: If I were not angry I would punish thee.
Athenodorus a Philosopher very wel learned when he had gotten leaue of
Augustus to depart home, & being desyred to leaue some notable precept with him, aūswered very wisely: Before thou geue place to anger & execute auengment, first say ouer with thy selfe in order all the letters of the Greke Alphabete, namely that in that space and detracting of time the violence of the mind may asswage.
The othe of the Israelites being vniust, did not bind them to obserue it.
It was not lawfull for daughters to marry without the consent of theyr parents.
Farther we must note that this othe of the Israelites of not geuinge wiues vnto the
Beniamites, was neyther godly nor lawefull. Wherefore they were not bound to obserue it. Howbeit we vnderstand by this history, y
t this was of force among the people of god, that the daughters should not mary without the consent of theyr parentes. For if it had bene lawfull for thē to haue maried against theyr parentes will, a man might haue saide: Althoughe ye will not geue your daughters vnto them, they of their owne accord may contract matrimony with them. This thing is so agreable vnto nature, that the Romaine lawes also forbid that matrimony should be firme, except it be contracted by the consent of the parents, as we haue before declared. But that thing which neither God, nor nature, nor good lawes can suffer, the same doth the Papisticall superstition easely admitte.
The Israelites come to
Siloh for two causes, partly to aske counsell of God concerning the
Beniamites, and partly to geue thanks vnto God for the victory. Therfore they burne sacrifices and burnt offringes. And they wept for the misery of the
Beniamites, euen vntil euen. Wherfore it appeareth that they fasted the whole day, otherwise they could not haue wept before the lord vntill euen.
Why the Israelites erected an altare.
Dauid Kimhi
And they erected an alter. But to what ende? There was an altare there before. Some aunswere that there was an altare there indeede, but it was so old, that it was halfe decayed, and therfore it neded to be repayred. But
Kimhi saith that it was a custome, that when all the people shoulde publikely aske counsell of God, there should of new an altare be erected. But this he affirmeth without the authority of the word of God. I rather thinke, when so great a multitude of people assembled together, ther was so great a number of sacrifices, that the old altare was not sufficient to do holy seruices vpon. Wherfore that the seruice of of god should be with more expedition finished, there was erected an other altar. Which thinge also we rede
Salomon did, when he dedicated the temple whiche he had built.
When they had wept, bicause of the othe wherby they had bound themselues not to mary theyr daughters vnto the
Beniamites, they thought vpon the other othe, whereby they had vowed themselues to slay all those whiche woulde not
[Page 281] put to their helpe to the common warre. Neither is their any mencion made before of this latter othe. For many thinges are ouerpassed in the historye, which are afterwarde spoken of, althoughe not in their place. And whilest they are in hand with these thinges, with one and the selfe same labour they both prepare wiues for the
Beniamites, and also saued their othe. For they which wer absent from the warre, were not bounde by the othe. Wherfore they might mary their daughters vnto the
Beniamites.
But as touching the first othe for not geuing wiues to the tribe of
Beniamin, it was not lawful. Wherfore it might haue bene broken without any violating of religion: for the cutting of of that tribe, was against the word of god. For his wil was that it should be preserued among the people of Israel. For God by
Iacob the Patriarche gaue manye and excellent blessynges vnto the
Beniamites, which blessinges also
Moses in
Deut. repeated. But although such an othe was not ratefied, yet the Israelites do wisely in that they labour, both to prouide for the
Beniamites, and also not to be counted rashly to violate their othe.
An example of Iosuah. So
Iosua sware that he would saue the
Gabaonites, when as yet god had cōmaunded that al the
Chananites should be slayn. For he found a meanes that they should serue in the tabernacle, and so by that meanes bee after a sorte punished wyth cyuill death. Although he durst not do that, but by the commaundement of god. And he would that the people by his example, should learn not easely to violate an oth.
For example sake euen vain othes ar not easely to be violated. What men the Iabenites wer As touching the
Iabanites, in that they are called
Galaadites, it manifestly appeareth that they pertained vnto the tribe of
Manasses, and dwelled beyond
Iordan. They bicause they were not present at this warre, are iudge of al the Israelites as enemies, who being destroyed, their maidens which remained on lyue, were brought to
Siloh, into the land of
Chanaan. And it is rightly added in the lande of
Chanaan, bycause
Iabes Gilead was not there, but in halfe the Tribe of
Manasses, beyonde
Iordane.
This warre against the
Iabenites was iustly and worthely taken in hande,
The Iabenits are worthely inuaded. bycause they obeyed not the publike cōmaundement. The Israelites had bound them selues by an othe, that whosoeuer withdrew himselfe from this war, the same should be put to death. Therfore they counted the
Iabenites as enemyes, least other men by their example should contemne publike decrees. The
Beniamites had committed a grieuous wicked crime: but these men in that they refused the common warre, and weakened the authority of the publike wealth, seme also to fauor their crime.
The punishment of Metius Suffecius. It is not the parte of good Citizens in warre taken in hand by common counsel, to withdraw themselues by priuate counsell.
Metius Suffecius captaine of
Albany, when he forsoke
Tullus Hostilius, fighting against the
Fidenates, by the commaundement of
Tullus was bound to two cartes, and so drawē in peces.
Solon depriued him of al honour & dignity,
Solon. A decre of Pō peius. which in the time of sedicion adioyned himselfe to neyther party. And
Pompeius (as
Plutarche affirmeth) when he fled from
Cesar, proclaymed that he woulde count all them to be enemies which abode at
Rome, and helped not the common cause. And after this maner are the
Iabenites prescribed and counted for enemies. And no otherwise are they to be counted, which in this our tyme, when there is controuersye concerning religion, doo dissemble althinges, when as in the meane tyme they wyl neither stand on the Papistes syde, nor on ours.
It is not lawful for vs in religion to be neuters. They (say they) wyll stand in the myddest betwene both, which is nothing els, then that they wyll be wyth the aduersaries or enemies. For they halte on either side, and therfore it may be said that after a sort they fauor them. Farther the cause of religion is farre greater and greuouser then the cause of the publike wealth. In the Churche no man can excuse himselfe that hee is a straunger: for no man which professeth himself to be a Christian, can be a straunger from religion: wherfore warre is iustly proclaymed against the
Iabenites.
Althoughe I thinke that in this matter also the Isralites wer to cruel. For it
[Page] semeth that it should haue bene sufficient to haue slaine the men that were apt vnto warre,
To much crueltye against the Iabenites. which had committed the crime of rebellion. But to kil womē, old men, and children, it was to much cruelty. Neither could they say that they had vowed vnto the Lord the vow
Cherem, forasmuch as they had saued the mayden virgins. And vndoubtedly so great cruelty turned them to euyl: for if they had delt more gently with the
Iabenites, they had had more women for the
Beniamites. Neither coulde they haue geuen counsell to haue vsed force to get them selues wiues. But it is good to vnderstand how the Israelites founde oute that the
Iabenites were absent.
The battaile being finished, they al assembled to
Siloh, and numbred the people, among whom when they founde none of the
Iabenites, they easelye vnderstoode that they were absent from the warre. So great was their piety and religion at that time, that when they had obtained the victory, al of them assembled together to geue thankes vnto God. But that thing is contemned now a daies: for how many are there, which when they haue gotten the victory, wil acknowledge the benefite of God, and geue him thankes. Preachers do out of the Pulpit admonish the people to pray publikely for sicke folkes, of which we either se, or heare of none in a maner, which when they are restored to health, do publikelye geue thankes vnto God, for that they haue by the prayers of the Churche escaped free.
They proclaymed peace vnto them which were in Rimmon. That is, gaue them safeconduct to returne home againe in safety.
14 And Beniamin returned at that tyme, and they gaue them wiues, whom they had made on lyue of the women of Iabes Gilead, which yet were not sufficient for them.
15 And the people had compassion on Beniamin, bicause the Lord had made a gappe in the tribes of Israel.
16 And then the Elders of the congregacion sayd: what shall wee do for wiues for the rest? For the womē of Beniamin are destroied.
17 And they sayd: There must be an inheritance for them that bee escaped of Beniamin, that a tribe be not destroyed out of Israel.
18 For we cannot geue them of our daughters to wyues. For the chyldren of Israel had sworne saying: Cursed be he that geueth a wyfe to Beniamin.
19 Then they sayd: Behold, there is a feast of a Lorde yearelye in Siloh, in the place which is on the North syde of the house of God, and on the East syde of the way that goeth from the house of God, vnto Sechem, and is South from Libanon.
20 And they commaunded the chyldren of Beniamin, saying: Go and lye in wayte in the vyneyardes.
21 And take hede: For behold, if the doughters of Siloh come out to daunce in a row, then come ye out of the vyneyardes, and catche vnto you euery man hys wyfe, of the daughters of Siloh, and get you into the land of Beniamin.
22 And if their fathers or brethren come vnto vs to complayne, we wyll say vnto them: Haue pity on vs for them, bicause we reserued not to eche man hys wyfe in tyme of war. And bicause ye haue not geuen vnto them, so that ye haue at this tyme offended.
23 And the children of Beniamin did euen so, and tooke them wiues of the dauncers, according to their number, whom they cought,
[Page 282] and went their wayes and returned euery man to hys inheritance. And repairyng their cities they dwelt in them.
24 And the children of Israel departed thence at that time, euerye man to hys trybe, and to his famelye. And went out from thence euerye man to hys inheritaunce.
25 In those dayes there was no kyng in Israel, but euery man did that which seemed ryght in hys owne eyes.
They are sayd
to haue made on lyue those maydens, whom they had not slain: for forasmuch as they had thē in their power, it semed y
t they might iustly haue slayne them. But they would preserue them on lyue:
Whereby they vnderstode that God wold saue the tribe of Bē iamin. for that they sawe it was not the wyl of God, that al the
Beniamites should vtterly be destroyed, and here by they vnderstoode the wil of God, bicause he had caused sixe hundreth of them to escape. Wherfore they gaue them safeconduct, and the maydens of the
Iabenites to be their wiues.
God made a breache in Israel. That which they did themselues, they ascribe vnto God.
A breache they cal the cutting of of one tribe. Here is expressedlye set foorth the inconstancy of mans minde. In that fury and hot anger they woulde haue destroyed al, and they desyred of God to graunt them a ful victory: & when they haue obtained it, and finished the matter, they mourne & afflict themselues. If they had moderatly vsed the victory, this thing had not happened vnto them. After the same maner they synned against the
Iabenites: for if they had not slaine al the women ther, they had had wiues inough for the
Beniamites. Now hauing slayne all, they found onely .400. mayden virgins: which not being sufficient, they are compelled to seeke other by rapte or stelth.
And the Elders sayd. So were the Senators or Senadrim called, or els the Tribunes and Centurions, which were rulers ouer the warlike affaires.
Let their inheritance be safe. Iosua had appointed vnto euery tribe his inheritance. Wherfore the Israelites could not clayme vnto them selues the landes of the
Beniamites.
Cursed be he which geueth his daughter.
What mooued the Israelites to sweare. Hereby appeareth the forme of the othe: it was an othe of execration. This act of the Israelites had some shewe of equity. For godlye men ought not to contract matrimonies with the vngodlye. And it is most manifest that the
Beniamites were vngodly, when as they would neither deliuer nor punish the guilty. Besides that, they considered that the
Beniamites wer now not much vnlike vnto the
Chananites, for as much as they had cōmitted wicked acts, like vnto their syns. But God had forbidden the Israelits to mary with the
Chananites. Wherefore they coūted it a wycked thing to geue their daughters in matrimonye to them. Howbeit they oughte not so to haue done. For what if they had repented,
The oth of the Israelits was not fyrme. might they not then haue contracted matrimonies with them? That othe was rashly and without iudgement made, neither ought it by any meanes to haue bene kept. Neither, as it is most lykelye, was it obserued of their posterity.
A solemnity in Siloh from yeare to yeare. It was a yearely solemnity, whervnto they vsed publikely to assemble: but for asmuche as the Iewes had manye suche feastes, it is vncertain, what maner of solemnity this was,
Dauid Kimhi of which mencion is now made. Yet I maruaile that
Kimhi sayth, that this feast seemeth to haue bene
Kippurim, whē as it is written y
t thei had a famous dauncing, which wer absurde to be added in a publike fast.
The Chaldey paraphrast. The Chaldey Paraphrast seemeth to haue a respect vnto the feast of the Calēdes or new Moones, in which feast wer thankes geuen vnto God for the gouerning of the world, and course of thinges, as vpon the Sabaoth day for the creation of thinges. But I confesse that I am ignorant what maner of feast this was. How be it I am of that opinion, that I thinke it was the solemnity of the tabernacles.
There is a feast day of God in Siloh. This description sheweth not that it was the solemnity of the place, but rather of the people of Israel, which assembled vnto the feast: and forasmuch as one City coulde not hold al the Israelites, they assembled vnto al the partes adioyning vnto the City, & to those in especial which are here described. And the Elders do appoynt these places by name, y
t they might there hide them commodiously, and leade away the maydens as they were dauncing. As though they should haue sayde: Vnto those places they wyll come, out of the hidden places you may breake foorth, and steale them away. Hereby wee maye perceaue,
It was synne to daunce at the solemnity. It is synne to abuse the feast dayes. that the virgins in holye assemblies gaue themselues to playes and daunces, which was to abuse the feast day. It had bene better for them to haue occupied them selues about grauer matters. For the feast daies were to this end instituted, that the people shoulde assemble together to heare the woord of God, to be present at the sacrifices, where they shoulde both cal vpon God, and communicate together the Sacramentes instituted of God. Wherfore it is no maruail if these maidens were so stollen away.
Wher as it is written:
And when their Abothem, that is their fathers,
shall come, & againe
Achihem, that is their brethren, this letter
Men is put for
Nun, that is
M. for
N. namely the masculine gender for the feminine. Which forme of speaking is often vsed in the holy scriptures.
Haue compassion on vs for them. The sense of this short and briefe prayer is this: We wil say that we wer sorowful and pensiue, and that we could no other way seeke and prouide wiues for the
Beniamites. And whatsoeuer is done, we wil affirme to haue bene done by our counsel, and that we were the authors therof. And so we wil desire them, for our sakes to pardon you. Other do easelier expound it: Gratefy vs, and geue vs your maidens, if you thinke them vnworthy to haue them. We thought that there had bene maidens inough of the
Iabenites: but that happened otherwise. Wherefore we were constrained to prouide for them by some other meanes. And if they wil say that they are bounde by an othe, and that they cannot geue them: vnto that we wil answer, that their othe is satisfied, bicause they themselues haue not geuē their daughters, but ye haue stollen them. Here we perceaue that a publike othe is lenefied and mitigated by the interpretacion of the Elders. And vndoubtedlye that is their office whyche gouerne a publike wealth.
Ye (say they)
haue not geuen them of your owne free wyl, wherfore ye are free from the othe. Therefore the
Beniamites are prouided for by rapte or stelth.
The rapt of the Sabines. In the
Romane historye also it is saide that the virgines of
Sabine were rapte or stollen, but yet somewhat after an other sorte. For ther the virgins whych were rapt, were straungers, neyther had
Romulus any ryght ouer them: but these maidens were Israelites, and were subiect vnto the authority of the people.
In that these men interprete and lenefy the othe, it hath some shewe of equity. For it might seeme that the fathers violated not their othe, bicause they of their own accorde gaue not their daughters vnto the
Beniamites, but they tooke them away by violence. But if a man more diligently examine the thing, he shal finde either of those excuses false,
The oth is not wel interpreted bicause the
Beniamites dyd not of their owne priuate counsel steale the maydens, but by the perswasion of the Elders. And on the other syde it seemeth that the Israelites gaue their daughters of their owne accord, & fraudulently brake their oth. For the fathers sware y
t they woulde not geue their daughters to the
Beniamites. Howe had they them then? Of the Elders. But they are the fathers of the countrey: wherefore this was no vpright and simple dealing:
They eschewing one wicked example fall into an other. neyther dyd guile breake their oth, but rather bound it. The Israelites pretended the religion of an othe: which yet they craftelye violated, & cōsented to rapte or stealth, which wicked act is no more remisse then periurye. They wyll not geue an example of periury, and they graunt to rapte. Farther they violate an other principal pointe of the law of God. For in the last chap. of
[Page 283]
Numbers it is cōmaunded, that if a mayden be an inheritour, she should not mary into an other tribe, to the ende that inheritances should not be confounded. What therefore if some of these that were stollen, were inheritours? Vndoubtedlye they had against the law of God maryed out of their tribe.
If a man wyll say, they did thys wyth a good minde, and (as they vse to saye) for a godly intent, that the whole tribe of Beniamin should not vtterlye perishe: Answer may be made, it is not sufficient that a thing be done with a good minde: bicause also we must see that the thyng whych is done, be good, be iust, be right, and agreable vnto the woord of God. Farther, God forbyddeth that matrimonies shoulde be ratefied wythout the consent of the Parentes. But here the maydens are rapte, and maryed not onely wythout the knowledge of the Parentes, but also agaynste their wyls, agaynst good lawes, and authority of the woord of God. Farther, the Magistrate promiseth to pacefy the Parentes, and to reconcile them vnto them, if they chaunce to be angry: and so they fall from one wycked act into an other, neither asked they counsel of God in thys thyng. They take counsel of themselues, as though in a thyng of such perplexity and obicurenesse they coulde not erre. And that we shoulde not maruayle that these thyngs so happened, this verse is agayn repeated:
There was no king in Israel.
Now resteth to speake apart of Rapte and of Daunces. But as touchyng an othe, I wyll touche onely so muche, as I thynke sufficient to this history.
¶Of Rapte.
THys woorde Rapte in Hebrue is called
Cheteph, the Grecians saye
[...], the Latines
Rapere, whych is to take away by violence, not al maner of wayes, but as it were by a certayne fury and great violence.
What differēce is betwen theft and rapte Wherefore Rapte differeth from theft: bycause theft may be commited secretely, & wythout violence. Wherfore in the digestes
de Iureiurando, in the law
duobus reis it is had: Though a man sweare that he hath not rapte any thing away, yet is he not straight way quit of theft. For although that which is done be not rapte, yet it may be theft. So the ciuil law seperateth theft from rapte. But to what thynges rapte pertayneth,
Of what rapte is here intreated. it is had in the Digestes
De condictione triticearia in the law
.1. Thinges immouable as houses, landes and Farmes, are inuaded, but thynges moueable, as thynges not hauing lyfe, beastes and men are rapted. But we here entreate of the rapte of thyngs moueable, & yet not of althings, but of humane bodies, whych are by violence taken away for lustes sake.
There is an other kinde of rapte, but not proper:
Augustine. which Augustine toucheth in his
19 sermon
de verbis Apostoli, & it is had in the decrees.
14. quest
.5. chap.
Si quid inuenisti, wher he sayth that thynges which are found must be restored. Which thing if thou do not, thou hast rapte them, forasmuch as thou hast done what y
u couldest, so that if thou haddest founde more, thou wouldest haue rapte more. &c.
The Gloser. There the Gloser very well declareth, what is to be done wyth thinges that are found. Eyther (sayth he) the same thynges are counted for thynges cast awaye, as if anye owner hath cast awaye anye thyng, the same thyng if a man retayne when he hath founde it, he committeth not theft. But if that thyng whych is found be not wyllingly cast away,
What is to bee done wyth thinges found. neyther thought to haue bene wyllingly lost by the owners (as when a ryng is found, or a pursse, or any suche thyng, whych is not wont to be cast asyde) the same thing if thou retaine, it is theft, vnles thou keepe it by thee with a wil and mynde to restore it again. Wherfore thou must publykelye testefye that thou hast founde those thynges, whereby the owner may come to hys owne agayne, as it is decreed in the Digestes
de furtis, in the lawe
Falsus, in the Paragraphe
Qui alienum. But if thou keepe it by thee, wyth the mynde not to restore it, it is thefte. Whych thing Augustine in the place nowe alledged reproueth.
The same thyng is decreed in the Code
de thesauro, in the law
Nemo. And in the institucions
de Rerum diuisione, where it is ordayned, that if a man fynde treasure in his house or grounde, it shall be hys that fyndeth it. But if he finde it in an other mans soyle, either he hath gotten it by chaunce, or els he sought for it, if he haue gottē it by chaunce, let it be deuided betwene the fynder and the owner: but if he sought for it, the whole muste redounde to the owner. If the place were holye, and the treasure be founde by chaunce, the fynder shall haue it.
It is added, that if a man sought treasure in his own ground,
Against magi
[...] and artes forbidden. & vsed therunto magike & artes forbiddē, the thing foūd ought to be forfaited to the cōmon treasury. For he which by euil meanes hath sought a thing, semeth vnworthy to be possessor therof.
[Page] But to returne to Augustine, that which I before said, I affirm that it is not properly rapte,
Origene. if a man hold backe a thing that he hath founde. Which thing Origene plainly declareth in his
.4. Homely vpon Leuiticus: Some saith he, wyll not restore that which they haue found. For they say that God hath geuen it them. But whatsoeuer they say it is a crime like vnto rapte. He saith not that it is rapt, but a certain thing like vnto it. Although we haue out of the ciuil law made a difference betwene theft and rapte, yet may rapte be called theft, but yet so that there be added violence. In the digestes
de furtis, in the law
Si vendidero, it is thus writtē: A rapter euery way cōmitteth theft, and is an open theefe. But omitting these thinges let vs returne to that kinde of rapte wherof we now intreate.
Some said, that to rapte is nothing els then violentlye to leade awaye a mayden from the house of her father, to the ende after he hath defiled her, to marye her to hys wife. But this definicion is not ful nor absolute, although it be vsurped of the Canonistes, in the
.36. question
.1. chap.
Lex illa, Paragraphe
Cum ergo. For in this our history the maydens were rapted, and yet not led away from their fathers house, but out of the field or vineyardes. Neyther is that true which is added, namely to mary her, or to haue her to his wife, when he hath defiled her. For the rapter may either haue a wyl to haue her for his Concubine, or to abuse her for his pleasure, although he take her not to wyfe. Farther, this foresaid definicion mencioneth onely of maydens, whē as yet neuertheles both maried women and wydowes, also free mayd seruants, and bondmayd seruants, & also yong children may somtime bee rapted. Wherefore that crime extendeth farther then that definicion containeth. Onely harlots seeme to be exempted. For they are not said properly to be rapted, although they be led away by violence. And vndoutedly it is then no action of rapt, but onely of iniuries. But such persons are vnderstand to be rapted from the custody eyther of the parent, or of their Tutor, or Guarden, or Patrone, or Lord, to the ende to haue vnlawfull accompanieng together, whyther matrimony do follow or no.
Of the punishmentes of rapters.Now must we declare what punishments are ordeined for rapters. In the Code
de raptu virginum et viduarum in the law
Vinca, Iustinianus intreateth at large of that matter, & maketh the rapte of the persons, which I haue before rehersed, death, so that also the companions, and they which haue holpen the rapter, are comprehended in the same punishment. Neither was that thought to be sufficient, but ther were inuented other punishments more grieuous then death. For it is decreed that not onelye the Iudges & Magistrates shal put him to death, but also if the rapter be takē in the wicked act doing by the parents, brethren, kinsfolkes, tutor, gouerner, lord, patrone, or finally by him in whose power she is that is rapted, they may kyl him, & that without any punishment. It is also ordayned, that they which are present with the rapter, & defend him in his filthye act, maye also be slaine wythout any punishment to hym or them that killeth them.
Rapte is sometimes cōmitted against a mans own spouse.He addeth moreouer, that rapte is somtime cōmitted against a mans owne proper spouse, as if one by violence take away her, whō he hath not yet maryed. And if a man take away an other mans wife, he doth not onely cōmit adultery, but also rapt. If the rapter be not slaine in the very wicked act doing, he ought afterward to be put to death by the Iudges or Magistrates, & that in such sort, that though he appeale vnto a superior magistrate, he shal not be heard. And that thing saith Iustinian was ordained by the law called
Lex Constantinia.
Power to appeale is taken away frō rapters. Vndoubtedly it is grieuous not to be heard if thou appeale: which thing is here decreed. So great a matter dyd the ciuill lawes make of rapte
In freemaid seruants, & bondmaid seruants the punishment is ended with death: but if a frewoman be rapted, the goods of the rapter, & those which be present w
t him,
[...]o turne to her vse that is rapted. Neither is it any thing worth for the rapter to geue away his goods, or to bequeath them away by wil, but they fal into the hands of her that is rapted, & that not onely for a time, but also for euer, so that she may either sell them, or alienate them, or geue them for a dowry. One thing onely is excepted, vnles she that is rapted doo marye the rapter, the goods of the rapter are geuen her on that condicion that she should not mary hym. And the reason of the law is added, bycause in our publike wealth we suffer not, that a man shoulde marye a wyfe after the maner of an enemy. For Citizens are wont to mary their wyues, and not to rapt them. But what was done with them, which although they wer not present at the rapt, yet were a counsel therof, or being wytting thereof, vttered it not, or afterward receaued
[Page 284] the rapter into their house? Iustinian decreed, that they in deede shoulde not loose their goods, but onelye be put to death. But if a bondman, or bondwoman were taken either in cōmitting or ayding this crime, they were commaunded to be burnt wyth fyre.
But what if a mayden wil by her own consent be rapte? None of the punishment for al that (saith
Iustinian) ought to be diminished, it is vtterlye al one, whither the woman wil, or wil not. And the reason is added, bicause if the rapter woulde abstayne from the rapte, it is not very likely that any woman wil offer her selfe of her owne accorde to be rapted. Wherfore it semeth probable, that she was won by flattery & deceites. Yea, & the Parents of the maiden, if they consent to the rapte, are cōmaūded to be banished. These things
Iustinian decreeth in the Code, who yet afterward in the Authentikes (where is entreated of womē rapted, which mary the rapters) was cōpelled to make y
e law new, bicause ther wer which canelled, that if she that was rapted did consent vnto matrimony, she might posses the goods of the rapter. For so they interpreted the first law: y
t the goods of the rapter ought to come vnto her that was rapted, if she maried him, or if he in his wil made her his heire: But we (saith
Iustinian) ment no such thing: for our lawes do not appoint rewardes for a wicked crime. Farther, neither can he make any wil, for asmuch as he is now condemned to dye, neither do our lawes suffer any such matrimony to be of force. And if it be no matrimony, how thē cā she posses y
e goods of the rapter in the name of a dowry? wherfore he decreed that such matrimonies should not be ratefied. What then shal become of the goods of the rapter? If the maiden (saith he) haue parentes, which haue not therunto consented, those goods shall come vnto them. But if they haue consented as it is alredy said, they were banished without anye propritye of goods or landes, which kinde of punishment was much more grieuous then playn exile. But if the mayden had no Parentes, or had those which consented, the goods of the rapter were confiscate to the cōmon treasory. By these thinges appeareth that in those tymes rapte was counted a detestable crime.
Wherunto this thing also I wil adde, if any daughter had maried against the wyll of her parents, or otherwise behaued her self wantonly & vnchastly, it was lawfull for the parents to disinherite her, as it is had in the Code,
De Inofficioso Testamento, in the law
si fileam. This one thing is excepted. If the father knew that the iust time of matrimony was past, & he would not place his daughter, then hath he nothing to saye against hys doughter, if she mary without his knowledge, or against his wil: yea rather he is compelled to geue her a dowry, as it is had in the Code in the same place, in the law
Si post viginti quinque annos. Wherby it appeareth that
.25. yeares was the time of farthest prolō gacion of matrimonye. The same thing is had in the Digestes,
De ritu nuptiarum,
What if a woman rapt a mā in the law
qui liberos, Other lawyers determine the same thing, if a woman rapte a man: although they say that happeneth rarely.
Now is to be added the opinion of the Canonists,
The opinion of the Canonists & what they bring out of the scriptures. In the
.36. q.
1. Gracian bringeth that definicion of rapte, whiche we haue before confuted. But this thing he addeth: That in rapte is iniury done somtimes to the maiden, & not to the parants: & somtimes to the parents, & not to the mayden: & somtimes to both of them. For if the maiden wil be rapt of her own free will, there is no iniurye done vnto her, but vnto her parents. But if the parents geue the man power to rapte the daughter, bicause she wil not consent to mary him, then is no iniury done vnto thē, but vnto the daughter. But to both of them is iniury done, when the mayden is led away from her parents, against her wil, & aginst their wil,
Consilium An reliauense. & in the same place he bryngeth the counsel of Orleance, in the chap.
de raptoribus, where also he confesseth that rapte was wont to be punished with death. But it is added, that if the rapter come vnto the Church, the punishment of death is escaped. What shal there then be done? If the mayden (sayth he) consented vnto the rapter, first she shall be taken from him, & be restored to her parents, but yet being excused, that is, a caution receaued, that she be not slayne or disinherited. But if she consented not, she is by her selfe sufficientlye purged: but the rapter shal be compelled to publike penaunce, as it is had in the
.36. q.
2. chap.
Raptores. But what if he wil not do penance? He shalbe excōmunicated,
Cōcilium Chal cedonense & Cabilonense. according to the counsel of Chalcedonia & Cabilonum. But if he do penance, he shall be punished by the pursse. And herein they say y
t they follow the word of God, which is written in Deut.
22. chap. If a man defile a mayden, he shal geue vnto her parents
.50. sycles, and shal take her to wife. And so he condemneth the rapter to pay a certain sum of mony vnto the parent of the mayden. The which sum if he wil not pay, or haue not wherwithal to pay, he is driuen to serue the father of the maiden for certaine yeres, which the Gloser contracteth to fyue, vpon this condicion, that in the meane time he may redeme himselfe if he wyll.
It is also added: If they consent together, the matrimony is firme, so that the father agree therunto. And that these matrimonies may be firm betwene the rapter & her that is rapted, it also appereth by the decretals
de Raptoribus et incendiariis,
Conciliū Mel dense. in the chap.
cum causa, & in the chap. following. Which thing without dout is against the ciuill lawes, & the Canōs that are of the better sort. But the coūsel of Meldenū hath far otherwise decreed.
[Page] For first it hath ordained, that the rapter, & she that is rapted should do publike penāce: afterward it permitteth matrimony, but yet not betwene themselues, but wyth other. And it is added, that if the husband or wife of either of them die, he which hath cōmitted the rapte, or consented vnto the Rapter, cannot contract new matrimony, except the bishop release him. Farther it is ordained, that by no meanes any such matrimony shuld be firme, no though the Parentes consent therunto. Yea, and the same Gracian confesseth,
Consilium Aquisgrauense. that the same thing was decreed in the Counsel which was had at
Aquisgranum. Yet afterward, both he himselfe otherwise defineth, & also the decretals of the Popes. What then make they of those Counsels? They answer, that those Counsels ment this, that it should not be lawful to contract matrimony in that case, vnles open penance be fyrste done, and the consent of the Parentes had.
Ierome.And to proue that sentence. Gracian (in the .36. q. 2. chap.
Tria) citeth Ierome, who semeth to acknowledge three lawful kindes of matrimony. One, when a mayden is geuen in matrimony to a husband by her Parentes or Tutors. An other, if a mayden bee oppressed of a man, & her father afterward consent to geue her him in matrimony. The third is, if the father cōsent not to such mariages, but geue her vnto an other mā. These three matrimonies he saith are lawful in the holy scriptures. But in the .27. q. 2. chap.
Additur, is by the testimonye of Ierome an other kynde of lawfull matrimonye added, namely when a widow, which is not vnder the power of the Parentes, marieth in the Lord. Hereby Gracian gathereth that Ierome acknowledgeth matrimonye betwene the Rapter & her that is rapted. But I perceaue that in the .22. chap. of Exodus, is nothing intreated of rapte, onelye mencion is made of fornication, and not of rapte. For it is said: If he shal by flatteries allure her to lye with him, then hath he libertye geuen him, that he may take her to his wife, hauing the consent of the Parentes. But if a man had rapted a mayden or man chylde, then he was iudged by the lawe called
Lex Plagii, which is written in Deutronomy, & testifieth that he shoulde be punished with death, whosoeuer stealeth a womā or mā in Israel. Wherfore ther is nothing writtē in the holy scripture (as far as I se) as touching y
e establishing & racefieng of such a matrimony
But here some man wil obiect, that Iacob & his sonnes consented, that Sechem one of the sonnes of Demor,
Of the rapte of Dina. should haue in matrimony Dina Iacobs daughter, whō Sechem had rapted, so that his subiectes would suffer thēselues to be circumcised. I graūt this: but it was done before the law of Moses was geuen. Neither do we rede that the Patriarches had anye woorde of God concerning this thing. Neither can it be denyed that before the law was published, very many thinges wer cōmitted against it. Iacob, of whō we now intreate, had the same time .2. sisters in matrimony. Amrā had to wyse his Aunt, of whom he had Moses, Aaron, & Maria, which matrimonies, after the law was geuen, wer not lawful. Wherfore the example now brought, proueth nothing.
But if hope of matrimony should be geuen vnto Rapeters, there shoulde be opened a wide window for furious yong men to vse raptes. For they wyll make no doubt to rapte, if they may hope to mary her whom they haue rapted. But all occasions of euyll are to be taken out of the publike wealth and the Church. Farther, forasmuche as Parentes are highly to be honored, if matrimonies should against their wils he contracted betwene the Rapter and her that is rapted, they should suffer great cōtumely. This thing also semeth to be added, that Lucius the Pope writeth to the bishop of Burgenū (as it is had
Extra de Raproribus et Incendiariis, in the chap.
Cum causa) that he decreeth, that if a mayden saye, that before she was rapted, there were woordes passed betwene them of mariage, it cānot be called properly rapte. What shal then be done? May she agaynst her Parents wil mary the Rapter? Innocentius the .3. in the chap. following, decreeth: If a maiden be rapted against her wil, and afterward consent to mary the Rapter, that mariage is also firme, yea although it be agaynst the wil of her Parentes. And he addeth that this is done in the honor of matrimony, when as in deede it apertlye pertayneth to the reproche therof, if a man do more deepely weigh the whole matter. In the 27. q. 2. chap.
Raptor, it is had: If a mayden that is rapted, bee betrothed vnto an other, by the woords of the future tence, she must be restored vnto him, so that he wil receaueher. But if he wil not, it is free for the maiden which was rapted to mary an other. But if she were betrothed by the woords of the present tence, and that she can proue that she was rapted against her wil, the spouse if he wil not receaue her, ought to be compelled.
The schoolemens opinion.
Thomas Aquinas.The schole Deuines write not much disagreing vnto this. Thomas Aquinas in .2. 2. toucheth this question, whē he writeth that capte springeth of a vehement lust, wherby the Rapter is so troubled, that he neglecteth al daungers. And he wyll haue her that is rapted, to be rendred vnto her Spouse, if she haue any: and if she haue none, vnto her Parentes, or if she be wythout Parentes, to them in whose power shee was. And then if they wil agree, she may mary the Rapter: but so, that first be made restitucion, bicause in al theft and rapte restitucion is chiefly required: yet saith he, rapte before restitucion be made, letteth matrimonye to bee contracted, that is, that they synne, if they contract matrimony: but if it be cōtracted, it breaketh not the contract. But to the Canōs which
[Page 285] determine against it, be answereth, y
t they were made in detestacion of y
e crime. But the Pope afterwarde considered the matter better. But this was not the parte of a holye man to woorship the Pope for God, and so to flatter him lyke a bondsclaue. And to the ende he might seeme to speake rightlye, he bryngeth the woordes of
Ierome, which are in
Gracian concerning the three kindes of matrimonye. But how that place serueth to this present matter, I haue before shewed. Lastlye, hee obiecteth vnto himselfe the Counsell of
Meldenum. But that place he sayth, is to be vnderstand: If a man shall rapte her which was maryed vnto an other. As thoughe that were obscure or doubtfull. Wee neede no Canons to vnderstand this. A certaine Deuine not of the woorste sorte, stronglye setteth himselfe against Thomas concerning thys thing, and where Thomas saith, that rapte letteth not the matrimony already contracted, he aunswereth, that many decrees make against that sentence. Farther hee bringeth a reason, namely that he which is cōmunicate can not receiue the sacramentes. And then he addeth that the Rapter is excōmunicated: wherfore vnles he do open penāce and reconcile hymselfe vnto the Church, he cannot contract matrimony.
But
Caietanus there laboureth vtterly to defende hys Thomas,
Caitanus. and denyeth that he which is excommunicate, cannot receaue the Sacramentes. Howbeit this he confesseth, that he which is excommunicate, synneth if hee receaue the Sacramentes. And he addeth: If an excommunicate be admitted to confyrmacion or to holy orders, it cannot be denyed but that hee hath receaued the Sacramentes, neither is it lawful for him to repeate them againe, if he afterward doo penaunce. Farthermore, he sayth that the Mayster of the Sentenses in the .iiii. where he reckoneth the impedimentes, whych take awaye matrimonye contracted, numbreth not rapte at all. Farther, he teacheth that the Rapter, and shee that is rapted, are not by the act it self excōmunicated, but to be excōmunicated. But bicause he seeth it is in the Canons of the counsel of
Chalcedon &
Cabilon: Let the Rapter and her that is rapted be accursed, he answereth that the Glose enterpreteth that saying to be of the same force, as if it had bene sayd: Let them be accursed. Moreouer he answereth to the other twoo thynges concerning restitucion and penaunce, & he sayth, that she that is rapted, ought not to be restored, but it is sufficient, if he satisfy the father by some meanes, although she bee not rendred vnto him into his hand: euen as in theft it is not alwayes necessary that thinges taken away shoulde be restored, but sometymes it is sufficient, that the iniury be recompenced by a price or bonde. But concerning penaunce he sayth: The Rapter, if he contract without it, doth synne in dede, but yet after he hath contracted, the matrimonye is firme. Lastlye, he saith that the Canons, which decree to the contrary, are either abrogated, or els doo speake of spouses. After this maner Thomas,
Caietanus, the Deuines, Ecclesiastical men, & Canonistes triflle among them selues, & play the Parasites with the Pope their God.
Now wil I declare, what the holy scriptures determine of rapte,
The sentence of the holye scriptures. and what they iudge thereof. The first place is out of the booke of
Genesis the .6. chapter, where it is wrytten: The sonnes of God seing the daughters of men that they were fayre, tooke them to wiues, such as they lusted them selues. I know there are brought sundry interpretacions of this place. Some expounde the sonnes of God to be angels, which being kindled by the beuty of faire women, had fellowship with them. This exposicion cannot agree: for forasmuch as angels haue no bodies, they cannot burne in such lustes. Others by the sonnes of God vnderstand those which came of
Seth, and were brought vp in the true worshipping of God, who being ouercome with beuty & fayrnes, contracted matrimonies with the daughters of
Cain, that is, with Idolatrers and Infidels. Whereby nothing nowe remayned sounde and perfecte, and therefore God sending a flood,
The Chaldey interpreter. destroyed the whole worlde. The Chaldey Interpretour sayth, that the Sonnes of God were myghtye men, and Magistrates, who when they hadde taken to wyues the daughters of vyle men, all thynges were fylled wyth vyces.
Here I see was committed rapt, which thing the Chaldey Paraphrast hath signified, which paraphrast among the Hebrues is of an incredible authority. And assuredlye
Moses saith not that they desired those wiues of their Parentes, but onely tooke them whom they lyked best. By that place may easely be noted the course, and as it were the degree of mans peruersnes. For first they sawe, and then they desiced, and at the last they rapted. Neither were they wonne by their vertues, but onely by the beauty of the body. Wherfore God punished that sinne by a flood. And although there were many other synnes in men, yet this one is expressed with a great emphasis.
Moreouer in the
.34. chap. of the same booke,
Sechem the sonne of
Hemor dyd rapte
Dina the daughter of
Iacob. But what ende that rapte had, it is not nedeful now to declare.
Curiosity was the cause that Dina was raptes. But the cause why
Dina was rapted, was her curiositye: the mayden would go foorth, and vnderstand the maners of other women. Curiosity did then hurt her, & also wil alwayes hurt women. For if it were hurtful vnto the famely of
Iacob, being so great a Patriarche, for a mayden to wander a broade, howe muche more daungerous is it for other famelies, which are not so holy nor acceptable vnto god? But the nature of women is much infected with this vyce. And therefore
Paul to
Titus, admonisheth women to loue their husbandes, to bring vp their children, and to be byders at home. And to
Timothe, when he entreateth of wanton and yong widowes: they wander abroade (sayth be) and runne from house to house, and at the last go after Sathan. Yea, & these virgins, of whom we nowe entreate, when they wandred thorough the vyneyardes, and gaue themselues idely vnto dauncinges, were taken vp by the
Beniamites. Some man wil say, that the brethren of
Dina oppressed the
Hemorhites by guile. It is true in deede, but when they were reproued of their Father, they sayde: Ought they to haue done
Niblah, that is, a foolishe and wycked thing in Israel? And that
Dina was rapte not wyllingly, but against her wyl, hereby appeareth, bycause it is written that
Sichem, after he had oppressed her, spake vnto her hart, which signifieth nothing els, then that he woulde by flatterye haue comforted her.
The Beniamites did not properlye commyt rapte. Vniuckiendes of raptes.But it maye seeme marueilous, that these
Beniamites were not punished for their rapte: but we must consider that they dyd not properlye commit rapte, bycause they led away the maydens, not onely by their owne counsell, but also by the wyl of the Elders. Otherwise true and proper rapte hath alwayes had an vnlucky ende.
Io Argus was led awaye of the
Phenicians, Europa of the men of
Creta, Medea of
Iason, Helena of
Paris, all whych raptes styrred vp discordes and warres, and also the ouerthrowinges of publike wealthes and kingdomes.
Also the women of
Saba, being of curiositye desirous to bee present at open spectacles,
Titus Liuius. Augustine. were rapted by the
Romanes. Whereof followed suche warres, that both nacions were almost destroyed, as
Titus Liuius and
Augustine De ciuitate dei wryte. Wherefore forasmuch as God wil not haue such wicked actes vnpunished, it is meete that from hence foorth we auoyde suche matrimonies. I am not of that sentence, to deny y
t those matrimonies which hitherto haue ben contracted after that maner, are matrimonies. For it is not my mynde to bring in a confusion of thinges. But these two things I affirme, first that in contracting there is sinne, especially if it be done against the wil of the Parentes. Farther, that those lawes, wherby suche matrimonies are permitted, are to be corrected, that hereafter it be not lawful to doo the like. For we see that the order whyche God hath set, is peruerted, when Parentes are neglected, by whose counsels matrimonies should be contracted. And by this meanes yong mē at encouraged to raptes, whē as they hope y
t they may mary the wiues whō they shal rapte. Farther, that which I speake, is agreable with y
e lawes of God, with the law of nature, & with the ciuil lawes. Wherfore let the Canonistes & Schoolemen take hede how they iudge the contrary. Now resteth somwhat to speake of daunces.
¶Of Daunses.
CHorea that is a daunse, is formed (as
Plato sayth) of this worde
[...], whiche signifieth ioye, bycause it is a certayn testification of ioy.
Seruius. And
Seruius (when he interpreteth this verse of
Vergil, Omnis quam chorus & socii comitantur ouantes, that is, whō all the daunse and fellowes followed with mirth) saith that
chorus is the singyng and daunsing of such as be of like age.
But whēce daūces had their beginning, there at sōdry opiniōs.
Of the offryng of Daunses. Some thinke that men when they beheld the sondry motiōs of the wādring and fixed starres, sound out daunsing, wherby y
e variety of motions might be represented. Other thinke that daunses came rather of religion, bycause among the old Ethnikes, there were in a maner no holy seruices wherein was not leapyng or daunsing. For they led their daunses from the leaft part of the alter to the right, wherby to resemble the motion of the heauen from the East vnto the West, afterward they returned frō the right to the leaft, to expresse the course of the wādryng starres. Whiche thyng peraduenture
Vergil signified when he sayd:
Virgil.
Instaurant
(que) choros, mixti
(que) altarla circum, that is, and they beyng mixed together renewed theyr daunses compassing about the alters.
Yea & the Priestes of
Mars whiche were daunsers,
Salii the priestes of Mars. were had in great honour among the
Romanes. And there are some also which referre the beginning of daū sing to
Hiero a tyran of
Sicilia. For he (they say) to establish his tyranny, forbad the people to speake one to an other.
The deuise of Hiero. Wherfore men in
Sicilia began to expresse their meaninges and thoughtes by beckes and gestures of the body, and y
e thing turned afterwarde into an vse and custome. But whatsoeuer this thyng was, daunsinges in the olde tyme were not agaynst Religion: althoughe afterwarde they were applied to publique mirth.
There was also an other kind of daunsing, wherby young mē wer exercised to warlike affaires. For they wer cōmaunded to make gestures & to leape, hauyng vpon thē their armor, y
e afterward they might be the more prompt to fight, whē neede for the publique wealth should require.
Saltatio Pyrrhica. This kind of daunsing was called
saltacio Pyrrhica, & bycause it was exercised in armor, it was called
[...]. Of this daūsing is mētion in y
e ciuile lawes, namely in y
e digestes
de paenis, in y
e law
ad dānū. And sometymes yong men whē they had offēded, wer not straightway put to death, but were condēned either to hunte vpon a stage, or els to daunse in armor. And they wer called
Pirrhicarii. Also there was an other kind of daūsing,
Wanton daunsyng. which was instituted onely for pleasure & wantōnes sake, & that was called of y
e Grecians
[...] &
[...]. But of those daūses which by gestures of y
e body, expressed the senses of y
e minde, writeth
Lucianus in hys booke
[...],
Lucianus. Athenaeus. & so doth
Atheneus. In which kynd at the length it came to y
e point, y
t when at Rome
Demetrius Cynicus derided the daunse called
Mimica saltacio, callyng it a thyng vaine & nothing worth, a noble daūcer, which thē was had in honor at Rome, desired him, y
t he would once onely beholde hym daunsing, & afterward to iudge & speake his fansy whatsoeuer he would. He came vnto y
e stage, the daunser called
saltator Mimicus begā by gestures to resēble y
e cōmon fable of
Mars, takē in adultery with
Venus. In which thing he so expressed the sunne whiche declared the fact, &
Vulcanus knittyng his nets, &
Venus ouercome with shame, &
Mars humbly destring pardon,
A saying of Demetrius Cynicus. y
t
Demetrius being astonished cried out:
[...]. That is, I heare O mā the things y
t thou doest, I do not onely see thē, for by these thy handes y
u seemeth to me to speake. About y
e same tyme by chaūce came to Rome y
e king of
Pontus, & whē he had sene this daūser played his gestures on y
e stage, being afterward biddē of
Nero, to aske what thīg he most desired to haue geuē him, he desired to haue y
e
Mimus. Nero meruailed, forasmuch as he mought haue asked other thinges of much greater price, & asked him the cause of y
t his request. He answered, bycause
[Page] I haue sōdry nacions subiect vnto me, which without an interpreter, I cannot vnderstand, and oftentimes it happeneth that the interpreters do not faithfully inough tell vnto them what I say, nor againe what they say vnto me. But this fellow with his gestures will expresse al thinges most faythfully.
Plato.
Plato in his .3.
de legibus maketh two kinds of daunsings, one
[...], which before we haue called
Pirrhicum. The other
[...], which he calleth
[...], I omitte to speake of the filthy kynde of daunsinge, bycause it is apertly condemned by the lawes. The Pirrhicall daunsing, and that whiche is done by gestures maye haue place to some vses of the publike wealth, but they pertayne not to our purpose. Wherfore in this place we must speake of
[...], how fat it is lawful,
Daunsing by it selfe and of his owne nature is not vicious. forasmuch as it is excercised for mirth sake. Assuredly I thinke that this kinde of daunsing is not of his owne nature vicious or prohibited, bicause nimblenes and agility of the body is the gift of God, and if there be added any arte, namely that the body be moued in order, aptly in nomber, and with comelines, I do not se why it ought to be reproued, so that it be doone in time, moderately and without offence. For euen as it is lawfull to sing, and we may vse singing to geue thankes vnto god, and to celebrate his prayses, so also by a moderate daunsing we may testify the ioy and mitth of the minde. For
Dauid publikely daunsed before the arke of the Lord, & the maidens with daunses & songes celebrated his victory against
Goliah. Maria also the sister of
Moses, whē
Pharao was ouerthrowen & slayne, led daunses with other women, and soong a song of victory. Wherfore seing holy men and chast women haue vsed daunses, we can not say y
t of theyr own nature they are vicious.
Daunsinges vsed at thys day ar vicious. But as it is vsed in these dayes that men should daunse mingled together with womē, ought not to be suffred, bycause these thinges are norishmentes and prouokers of wantonnes and lusts.
Maria the sister of
Moses daunsed not with younge men, but apart by her self among women. Neither daunsed
Dauid with women, and maidens which celebrated his victory daunsed among themselues, and not with men.
Moreouer they which loue God withall their heart, & withall their stengthes, ought not onely to obserue his commaundementes, but also to cut of all occasions whereby the obseruing of them might be letted.
Reasōs against daunses of our tymes.But our daunces are most euident occassions of trāsgressions of the lawes of god. They are snares & offences, not onely vnto the daūsers, but also to y
e beholders: for they stirre vp & inflame the hartes of men, whiche are otherwise euill ynough euen from their beginning: & that thing which is to be repressed & kepte vnder with great study & industry, the same is stirred vp by the wanton entisementes of daūses. Vndoubtedly, if a mā wil consider himself, either by experiēce or by reason, he shal finde that in such spectacles y
e lustes of y
e mynd are not a litle kyndled & inflamed, & he shall perceaue y
e men returne home from those daunses les good then they were, & women also les chast then they were. Farther, perils are rather to be auoyded, then to be noorished. For (as
Salomon sayth) he which loueth daunger, shall fall therin.
But some wil obiect, that whereas daunses be so against maners, & do kindle lust, the same commeth rashly & by chaunce: but euery thing is to be iudged not of these thinges, whiche happen by chaunce, but of these thinges which are in it of it selfe & by nature. There are some so chast & vncorrupt, that they can behold these spectacles with a perfect & chast mind.
Difference of accidences. I graunt, y
t that may sometimes happen, but I adde that all accidences are not of one & selfe same kynde. For there ar some which happen very rarely, other some are called
[...], y
t is which by their nature may as well be present vnto any thing, as absent. And there are some which are called
[...] that is, such as are wont to happen oftentymes & for the most part. These last accidēces ought in euery thing to be considered and most diligently weighed: neither must we take heede, what may be done, but what is wont to be done.
Aristippus.
Aristippus daūsed in purple, & beyng reproued, he made
[Page 287] an excuse, that he was made neuer a whit the worse by that daūsing, but might in y
e softenes kepe stil his Philosophical minde. But such voyces are not to be heard: bicause as
Demosthenes saith, & it is cited of y
e lawyers,
Demosthenes. we must not cōsider what some certayne man doth at a tyme, but what is wont to be done for the most part. Graūt that there be some one mā so chast y
t he is nothing moued with such entisementes, how in the meane tyme is the people & multitude prouided for? Shall we for the perfectnes and integrity of one or two, suffer all the rest to be in daunger?
But so (a mā will say) take away sermons also & sacramentes, for many heare the word of God, sometymes to their condēnation, & many eate & drincke the holy misteryes vnto their own iudgemēt.
A certayne profitable distinction of thinges Here we must know that certayn things are profitable to the saluation of mē, & are cōmaūded by y
e word of god, which things ought by no meanes to be taken away. And certayn things are indifferent, which if we se they tend to destructiō, they are not to be suffred. We haue the law of god for hearyng of Sermons, and receauing the Sacramentes: but for daunsyng there is no cōmaūdement geuen. Wherfore these things ar not to be cōpared together. But by daūses & leapinges some say y
t very many honest matrimonyes ar brought to pas. It may be so sometymes, but I was neuer of y
e opiniō y
t I would haue matrimonyes contracted by these artes, wherin a regard is had onely to the agility & beauty of y
e body. There are other meanes much more honest: let vs vse them and leaue these as litle chast & shamefast. Let vs remēber, y
t although honest matrimonyes ar sometymes brought to pas by daūsings, yet much more oftē ar adulteries & fornications wont to follow of those spectacles.
What daūses are honest. We ought to follow the exāples of godly fathers, who now & then vsed daunses, but yet such as were moderate & chast, so that the men daūsed by thēselues, & the womē a part by thēselues: by such kynde of daunses, they shewed forth the gladnes of their myndes, they sang prayses vnto God, and gaue hym thankes for some notable benefyte whiche they had receaued. But we rede not in the holy Scriptures of mingled daunses of men and women together. But our men say: Who can daunse after that sorte? In saying so, they vtter themselues, what they seeke for in daunsing.
Moreouer let vs marke y
e effects of daūsing. It is writtē in
Mathew,
The effectes of wicked daū ses. y
t the daughter of
Herodias daunsed at a banquet which the king made: & the kyng tooke pleasure in her, whom he could not openly without shame behold. For she was a manifest testimony of his vnlawfull matrimony & of hys adultery. For
Herode had maried the mother of that mayden being his brothers wife. Of that daunsing it came to passe, y
t
Iohns head was cut of. Many are angry with vs, bycause we crye agaynst daūsings, as agaynst things which are of their own nature euill & prohibited: we on the other side say, that things are not alwayes to be weighed by theyr owne nature, but by the disposition & abuse of our fleshe: we can not deny but that wyne of his owne nature is good, whiche yet is not geuen vnto one that is in an agew, not that the wine is euill, but bycause it agreeth not with a body that is in that maner affected. In
Exodus, when the people had made themselues a calfe to worship, they sat down, did eate, dranke, and rose vp to play. In which place it seemeth that to playe was nothing els then to daunse.
But least I should seme this to speake and to iudge alone, I wil adde certayne testimonies of the fathers.
Augustine against
Petilianus the 6. chap. The byshops (saith he) were alwaies wont to restrain idle & wantō daūsings: but now a dayes there are some bishops which are presēt at daunses, & do daunse together with women, so farre are they of to restraine this vice. The same
Augustine vpon the .32.
Augustine Psalme (when he expoundeth these wordes, on the Psalter of ten stringes, I will sing vnto thee) maketh those ten stringes the ten commaundementes, & when he had spoken somwhat of one of them, at the last he cōmeth to the Sabaoth, where of it is writeten: Remember that thou sanctify the Sabaoth daye. I say not (sayth he) to liue delicately, as the Iewes were wont. For it is better to digge all the whole day, them to daunse on the Sabaoth day.
Chrisostome in his .56. Homely vpon
Genesis,
Chrisostome. when he entreateth of the mariages of
Iacob: Ye haue heard sayth he, of mariages, but not of daunses, whiche he
[Page] there calleth deuelish: and he hath many things in the same place on our side. And among other he writeth: The bridedome & the bride are corrupted by daunsing, & the whole famely is defiled. Agayne in the .48. Homely: Thou seest (sayth he) mariages, but y
u seest not daūses. For at y
e tyme they wer not so lasciuious as they be now a dayes. And he hath many mo thinges on the .14. chap. of
Mathew, where he spake vnto the people of the daūsing of the daughter of
Herodias, & amōgest other thinges he saith: At this day Christiās do deliuer to destructiō not half their kingdome, not an other mans heade, but euen their owne soule. And he addeth that where as is wanton daunsing, there the deuill daunseth together with them.
Cōsilium Lao dicenum.In the counsel of
Laodicenum it is written: It is not mete for Christian men to daunse at their mariages. Let them dyne & suppe grauelye & moderately, geuyng thankes vnto God for the benefite of mariages. In the same coūsell also it is had: Let not the Clergy come vnto spectacles either on y
e stage, or at weddinges. They may in deede be present at mariages: but after there come in
[...], that is, singers & players on instruments, which serue for daunsinges, let thē rise & go theyr wayes, least by theyr presence they should seeme to allow that wantonnes. In the counsel of
Ilerdenum,
Consilium Iler dense. which was had vnder
Symmachus, &
Hormisda Popes, and
Theodoricus the kyng, the same thing is decreed, namely y
e Christiās should not daunse at mariages. But in the counsel of
Altisiodorenum, which was vnder the Pope
Deus dedit,
Consilium Al
[...]isiodorense. this seemeth to be contracted vnto the Clergy. For there it is prohibited, that any of the Clergy should at a feast either syng or daunse, as thoughe it were in a sorte lawfull for other.
Schoolemen.Of y
e same opinion are certayne schoole deuines in the .3. boke of sentences, dis. 37. who refer these prohibitions onely vnto the holy dayes.
Ricardus de media villa saith that to daunse on the holy daies is a sinne most grieuous, as though on other dayes it may be permitted. But the opinion of the fathers, & sound counsels is far more seuere then the opinion of these men, who perniciously release those thinges which should be contracted: for as much as they haue y
e peril of soules ioyned with them: & not onely perill but all falles that are most greuously to be lamēted. Howbeit it seemeth that these mē borowed this their sentence (wherein they prohibite daunsing on the holy dayes) out of the ciuile lawes. For in the Code, in the title
de feriis in the lawe
dies festos: We release in deede idlenes on the feast dayes, but we will not haue men geue themselues to voluptuousnes. Wherefore it shall not be lawfull on the feast dayes to vse daunsinges, whether they be for lust sake, or whether they be done for pleasure.
But let vs see what the Ethnikes opinion was as touching this thing.
Emilius Probus in the life of
Epaminonda sayth:
Aemilius Probus. Salust. That to sing & to daunse was not very honorable among the Romanes, when the Greciās had it in great estimaciō.
Salust in
Cantilinario writeth, y
t
Sempronia a certayne lasciuious & vnchast woman was taught to sing & daunse more elegātly then became an honest matrone. And there he calleth those two thinges the instruments of lechery.
Cicero.
Cicero in his .3. booke of offices writeth, y
t an honest & good man wil not daūse in y
e market place, although he might by y
e meanes come to great possessions. And in his oratiō which he made after his returne into y
e Senate, he calleth
Aulus Gabinius his enemy in reproche
saltator calamistratus y
t is, the fine daunser: It was obiected to
Lucius Murena for a fault, bycause he had daunsed in
Asia. The same thing also was obiected vnto the king
Deiotarus. Cicero answereth for
Murena: No man daunseth beyng sobre, vnles peraduenture he be mad, neyther in the wildernes neyther yet at a moderate and honest banquet. The same
Cicero in
Phillipicas vpbraydeth vnto
Anthony among other his vyces, daunsyng.
The diuersitye of temperature of the men of the East and of the men of the West.But it appeareth that the nature and disposition of the men of the East & of the West was not al one and the self same. They are cheareful of mynde, & nimble in body, and for that cause delight in daunsinges. For to omitte other examples,
Dauid the kyng daunsed publikely. And they which come now vnto vs out of
Siria, do affirm
[...] that the Christians, which liue in those regions, do vpon the Resurrection day & also vpon other famous feast dayes, come into the temple with harpes and
[Page 288] violes, & sing Psalmes among thēselues, & daunse together. For their spirites ar more nimble & chearefull, & ours more heauy. Howbeit they say y
t they daunse soberly and modestly, the men a part by themselues, & the women also by thēselues.
Now should remayn,
Certain thīgs as touching an othe. to speake somwhat of an othe: but bicause to entreate therof would be lōg, therfore I thinke it good to defer it til an other tyme. This thing onely wil I say for the expoūding of this place, y
t those othes which ar agaynst the word of god & charity, ar of no strēgth: neither do they bynd y
e men y
t sweate. They sinned in swearyng rashly, but they sinned more grieuously in performing it, for asmuch as they had made an euill othe. Yet are these elders of
Israell to be praised, who althoughe they saw y
t their othe was not firme, yet they would not seme opē ly & cōtēptuously to violate it, least by their exāple they should open vnto the rude people a window vnto periuries, which thing also it semeth y
t
Iosua did vnto y
e
Gabaonites. For although in very dede they performed not their othe, yet they would by a certayne shew seeme to performe it, and to haue it in estimation. That which remayneth to be spoken of this thyng
[...], I will deferre vnto the interpretation of the Hystory of
Samuel.
And now I thinke good to adde this,
The Israelites erred in y
t they asked no
[...] counsel of god. y
t it is no meruail that y
e Israelites sware a foolish othe, and excercised their sharpenes towardes their brethren more cruelly then was mete: and also admitted & gaue counsell to that rapt such as it was, for asmuch as they neither asked counsel of god, nor of y
e highe priest, nor of the Prophet concerning these thinges. God in deede had promised thē the victory, yet had he not geuen thē this commandemēt cleane to destroy the tribe of
Beniamin, & to kil al their women, also to slay all the women of the
Iabenites, they had no cōmaū dement out of the word of god.
The negligēce of the Priestes is to bee meruayled at. But the negligence of y
e highe Priest & Priestes is most of all to be meruayled at, which did not of their owne accord offer thēselues, although the elders asked not counsell of them. But
Pinhas (as I suppose) was at this tyme sore worne in age, & the other Priestes raking all things vnto thē, they cared not how, very coldly regarded thinges pertayning vnto God, for asmuch as there was no king in
Israel nor stoute Magistrate, whiche should haue kept y
e Hebrues in the duty of the lawe. Wherfore the people not being holpen by the holy ministery so much as nede required, committed many thinges thorough folishnes & fury, & gathered such fruites of their workes as the hystory rehearseth. For they should not haue ben so outragious to haue slayne al y
e maydens of the
Beniamites, for asmuch as the law had prohibited, that children should be slayne for the sinnes of their parētes. Neither ought the Israelites to haue bound thēselues by an othe, not to mary theyr daughters by any meanes to y
e
Beniamites. It was also to cruelly done to destroy all the women of the
Iabenites which were not virgins. Neither ought they to haue committed that kynd of rapt to saue theyr othe vpright, which was but a vayne othe and of no force.
Neither is this to be passed ouer, that the virgine maydens,
The punishement of the abuse of religiō. by that rapt wer punished for the contempt of religion. For as I haue before said, they abused the rest of y
e holy day. Vndoubtedly the Israelites were not cōmaunded to assemble before at certayn tymes of the yeare in the holy congregation of the Lord, to the end they should apply themselues to daunses and playes. The sonne of God when he was twelue yeares of age, came vnto the temple,
An example of Christe beyng yet a childe. & there (as it behoued) applied himself to y
e busines of his father: which thing if y
e maidens of
Sylo had done, they had not ben rapted. Wherfore it is the part of virgins when they came to holy assemblies, religiously to geue themselues to things deuine, and to abide nyghe vnto their parētes, & not to runne about daunsing in the fieldes, townes, streetes & vineyardes. For as often as they are out of the sight of their parentes & kepers,
The parentes of the maidens y
t were rapted did sinne. they are ready for raptors, and for the impotent fury of young men. This also is to be considered that the parentes of the maydens that were rapted, were iustly punished, bycause they negligently kept their daughters on the feast day. For God geueth children vnto the parentes to kepe as a pledge, and that not carelesly but warely.
And ye shall by violence take vnto you euery man his wife.
An argument against hauing mo wiues thē one called Polygamia, The elders doo not geue Counsell vnto the rest of the
Beniamites to take mo wiues then one, but they wil euery man to take his own wife. And a litle after it is added:
They tooke vnto
[Page] them wiues according to their number. Vndoubtedly if plurality of wiues should haue at any tyme ben admitted for the procreation of children, here it seemed most of all to haue bene nedefull, for asmuch as the tribe of
Beniamin was in a maner destroyed, & needed a speedy instauration or renewyng. But the elders althoughe they carefully studyed for the restitution of the
Beniamites, yet they thought it not mete to flye vnto the remedy of
Polugamia: whiche is an argument, that in theyr iudgement that was not allowed.
Euery man departed from thence vnto his owne inheritaunce. Being (as it is to be thought moued in their myndes with sundry and dyuers affections. They partly reioysed for the victory whiche they had obteyned: partly they pitied the
Beniamites, and were sory they had made so vncircumspect an othe: and had raged with to cruell and vnaduised a zeale. They lamented also theyr brethren and fellowe souldiers, whom they had in that expedition lost by two ouerthrowes. Wherfore let the greuous & horrible punishment of the
Beniamites be a warnyng vnto vs to auoyde and eschew vnhonest and filthy lustes, as pernitious pestilences, as wel of the soule as of the body, and also of al good thynges.
The fruite of the readyng of this hystory.But for asmuch as we are by the fauour of God come to the end of this booke, it is our part, as it were in a table to set before our eyes this foresayd hystory, to beholde in it the gouernement, whereby God defended and gouerned his Church and publique wealth, he doth in deede punishe sinnes greuously, but after his fatherly correction he doth with an vnmeasurable goodnes restore the hurtes and losses, wherin men oftentymes incurre by theyr owne error & faulte. In all these things we may see an Image of our tymes. For we are infected with the same infirmityes that our fathers were: neither doth the deuill and his mēbers with lesse diligence at this day vexe the congregatiō of the godly, then he did in the old time.
Wherfore let vs praye vnto God our most louyng father thoroughe his sonne Iesus Christ, that euen as from the begynning he hath holpen and noorished hys Churche in most great daungers, so also he would now keepe and defende it, when it is almoste ouerwhelmed with euils and calamityes. Let vs desyre him also, that euen as he from tyme to tyme stirred vp Iudges and deliuerers vnto the Hebrues, by whom he restored both liberty and health: and as in our tyme he hath geuen Heroicall and most excellent men, namely
Luther, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Phillip Melanchton and suche like setters forth of the doctrine of the Gospel, so he would vouchsafe to go forwarde, and in conuenient tymes stirre vp certayn lyghtes, by whiche he may illustrate the mindes of hys elect, and kindle their heartes to keepe & amplifie the Church of Christ, that at the lēgth he may haue it raygning with him in heauen, without spot or wrinkle. Amen.
¶The ende of the Commentary vpon the Booke of the Iudges.
¶ The commentarie of Master Peter Martyr vpon the Booke of Iudges.
THere be some whiche deuide the holy scriptures into foure parts, Of the diuision of the holy Scriptures. and ascribe some bokes as wel of the old testament as of the new, to lawes, some to histories, some to prophecies, and other some agayne to wisdome. But it is not meete so to deuyde the bookes of the holye scripture one from an other, bicause that in the bokes of Exodus, Leuiticus, Numeri, and D [...]uteromie, in which they appoint lawes to be conteined, are founde almoste as many histories as lawes. Besides that in the bokes which they assigne to prophetes, lawes of liuing vprightlye are oftentimes written and clearely expounded. Neither can we properly separate the bokes of Salomon & other of y e kynd (which they wil haue proper to wisdome) from lawes and prophecies. For there are in them sentences here and there written, which seruing for the instruction of life, haue also w tout controuersy the nature of lawes. Furthermore for y e that in thē are very many secretes opened vnto the church by the inspiration of the spirite of god, they poure vndoubtedly into the attentife hearers, oracles of thinges to come. It may easily he graunted, that all these things which they make mentiō of, are founde in the holy bookes: I meane the precepts of liuing, notable hystories, prophecies of thinges to come, and also moste wise sentences and sayinges: but in such sort, that in maner in euery booke they are set forth vnto vs dispersedly, neither yet would I that these holy bookes should be deuided one from an other by these endes and limittes.
I would rather thinke as the learned sorte doe also iudge, that whatsoeuer thinges are conteyned in the holy Scriptures should be referred vnto two principall heades, the lawe I meane and the gospell. There be two principal pointes whereunto al the whole scriptures are referred. For euery where are declared vnto vs either the precepts of god of vpright liuing, or whē we are reproued to haue strayed frō thē by reasō of weakenes or els of malice, y e gospel is layd forth before vs, wherin by Christ that thing wherein we haue offended is pardoned, and the strength and power of the holy ghost promised vs, to reforme vs againe to the image of god, whiche we had loste. These two thinges maye we beholde in all the bookes of Moyses, in the histories, Prophetes, and bookes appointed to wisdome, and that not onely in the olde Testamente, but also in the newe, and they are not separated one from an other by bookes and leaues, but by that maner which is now declared. What thinges are entreated of in thys boke of Iudges. And this is sufficient as touching the generall matter of the holy scriptures. But nowe we must peculiarly speake of this booke, that we may vnderstand what things they be which are entreated of in the same. And to the ende we may the more plainly vnderstande this, it is nedefull to call to memory those thinges which were spoken of in the former bookes.
In Genesis is set forth the creation of the worlde, then howe of Abraham, Isaac, Iacob and his twelue childrē was engendred the people of god and how [Page] they wer brought into Egipt to driue away their famine.
Exodus teacheth the greate encrease, and incredible multiplication of the Israelites, the maner also and forme wherby they were of god by Moyses deliuered from bondage and set at liberty, and how they wer excellētly adorned with lawes, iudgementes and ceremonies, whiche thinges are also comprehended in the bookes of Leuiticus. What is cōtayned in y e bookes which go before the iudges. The booke of Numbers conteineth very many passages of the Hebrewes, and diuerse placings and orderings of their tents in the desert places, & also certain vsages of those rules which were prescribed before of god in the lawes. And lastly of al in Deuteronomy. When Moyses should depart out of this life, he like a most faithfull minister of god, & moste learned preacher, repeteth vnto the people almost the whole lawe. After whose death Iosua captain of the Hebrewes led the people beyond Iordane, and possessed some parte of the promised land of Chanaan, and deuided it as god had commaūded to his whole natiō by tribes. Whē he was dead god gouerned the Hebrewes by certain excellent mē which were called Iudges, of which Iudges this booke which we haue taken in hand to enterpreate hath his name and title.
Why thys is called the booke of the iudges.But for the better vnderstanding of the title therof we muste know that this word Shaphat in the Iewes tongue signifieth somtime to execute the law, and to iudge the causes betwene thē which are at controuersie, which office yet is not proper to those Iudges, of whiche we nowe entreate. For there were Leuites appointed which sate and gaue iudgement at the gates of euery citye, and aboue all iudgementes sate Senadrim which were an assembly of 70. elders.
Senadrim.Furthermore y e word signifieth to reuenge & to set at libertie, which these excellent mē performed, whose noble acts ar declared in this volume. They by their authoritie, through their might and counsell, deliuered the Israelites when they were oppressed of straungers, and kept them in the obseruing of the law & true worshipping of God. And that their office may the better be perceiued, we wyll briefly expound the face and estate of that publike weale. God himselfe was the true and proper king of that nation, Of the common wealth & estate of the Iewes. for he onely had the principal power there, but not as he had ouer other nations, but so, that he by his becke, oracle, and certain commaundement, gouerned the estate of the Israelites, which he promised to do in the .18. chap. of Exodus. Wheras he said that that people should be hys chiefe kingdome. But bycause he would also vse the ministery of men, he prouyded al thyngs necessary for the Hebrewes, fyrst by Moyses and then by Iosua as long as they liued. They exercised the office of princes or captaines, which men being dead god would haue the best and most excellent men to haue the rule ouer thē (for such men were picked out to be of the senate, whose excellent conditions are set forth as well in Exodus as in Deuteronomy: for the lawes of God would not suffer euery one to be called to that office. That is whē y e best men are gouernours ouer the cōmō weale) If thou shalt therfore consider these men then shalt thou see the forme of that gouernment which is called Aristocratia. But bicause that it was not lawfull to attempt great matters without the peoples consent, we may therfore iustly thinke that it was also a common wealth which endured to the tyme of Saule and Dauid the first kings. That estate therfore in respect of god was a kingdome, but in respect of the Senate & those chiefe men it was Aristocratia. Bicause in electing of thē they had no regard to their riches but to their vertue and godlines, & for y t the weightiest matters wer referred to the people, therfore we may say it was a cōmon welth. Wherfore it manifestly appeareth y t the administratiō of matters of the Israelits was very well tēpered of three kinds of gouernments. What was the cause of the raysing vp of Iudges. And bicause, wheras many gouerne the common wealth, it is nedefull when daungerous tymes doe happen, for the better successe and expedition of thinges to be done, one muste be [Page 2] appointed which may haue both y e chief rule & also y e chief authoritie: for y e which cause y e Romanes created often tymes both Empe [...]ors & also Dictators. So god whē y e Israelites wer most greuously oppressed of their enemies, iudged it mete to deliuer them and bring thē to libertie, he euermore stirred vp some one man by his spirit, whom he endued with noble vertues, strēgth of body, warlike arte and other gifts mete for that purpose which shuld be brought to passe, by whose industry & good successe the people might be deliuered from tyrantes.
Betwene forrayne nations and the Israelits in this similitude, The difference betwen the iudges & princes of the heathen. thys difference is to be marked. Emperors and Dictators were appointed and chosen of men. But the iudges of the Hebrues wer not declared by the voyces of mē, The iudges were neither properly lords nor kinges. but by y e ordinance & inspiratiō of god. They could not be properly called capitaynes or kinges or els lordes, Posteritie or succession was here of no force, neither was there a regard to one perticular tribe or family, neither was there required the election of mā or the cōmon assent of y e people. In humane publique weales these vse to take place, but God in thys hys publique weale preferred whom he pleased to be iudge in y e gouernmēt of things. Besides that, they which are chosen by the cōmō voyce of mē must first be endued w t excellent strēgth & vertues, but god made those whō he decreed to be Iudges & setters at libertie of y e Israelites, notable and most excellent vppon the sodayne, though they were neuer so much rude and vnmete of nature. And that this is true, witnesseth the 2. chapter of this boke where it is thus written, God raised them vp Iudges, which deliuered them out of the handes of their oppressours. &c. And therunto is added when the Lord had raised them vp a iudge, he was with the iudge, and deliuered Israell al the dayes of his lyfe. Moreouer these men in time of theyr authoritye were not in dede Lords ouer the Israelites, but onely wrought with authoritye, admonition, counsell and exercising warlyke trauayles. This is made playne by that that Gedeon as it is written in the .8. chap: when he had gotten the victorye ouer the Madianites, when it was offred hym to be king ouer Israell he refused it. For the people sayd vnto hym: Reygne thou ouer vs and thy sonne. By the which wordes they dyd not geue the kingdome onely vnto him, but also to hys posteritye. But he would none of it, yea he answered them thus. I wil not reign ouer you, God shal reygne ouer you. And it is written in y e fyrst boke of Samuel that God sayd vnto the Prophet, They haue not cast thee away but me, The papists do impudentlye claime vnto thē selues the title of spirituall honour. that I should not reygne ouer them. It appeareth therefore manifestly y t these Iudges were neyther kynges nor yet Lordes of the Israelites. I would to god that this kynde of authoritye were diligently marked in the popysh Church, where wicked men do so impudently vsurpe vnto themselues spirituall promotion, seing that Christ hymselfe as he is the true priest, so also is he oure only priest, for he only pacifyeth the father towardes vs and they whiche are gouernoures of the Church here on earth are to be counted only as hys ministers. Wherfore they can not clayme vnto themselues that title, but they muste cast away Christ and do hym iniurye.
Neyther is thys to bee passed ouer, that the Iudges whiche were ordayned of god dyd alwayes deliuer Israell from the miserye wherwith they were oppressed: but the kinges, into whom y e common wealth did afterwards as it were degenerate, did not alwaies deliuer the people out of bondage, which was cōmitted vnto them, The estate of the Hebrues was better vnder the Iudges than vnder the kings. yea they oftentimes destroyed them and compelled them at the length to slauery. Wherfore it is to be iudged y t the estate of the Hebrues was farre better vnder the iudges than vnder the Kynges: not y e God gouerned not that people in tyme of the kyngs, but bycause hys administration shewed forth it self more in y e time of y e iudges. And in dede y e people was neuer led away into captiuity vnder y e iudges, although they were oftē times oppressed by outward [Page] tyrantes which they deserued by their wickednes. Almost al the iudges were good and holy men. That age therfore might be called as it were a golden age. Let vs marke also that there wer very few good and godly kings, but almost al the Iudges were good and godly. For although as they were men so sometymes they fel, yet we must beleue that they returned againe into the right way and repented, for they are not condemned at any time by any testimony or Iudgement of the scripture as far as I can perceiue. How notably Syrach iudged of them he playnly declareth in hys booke of wisdom the 46. chap. But we leauyng his testimony aside, let vs see what the Epistle to the Hebrues in the xi. chap. doth ascribe vnto them, where as it is thus sayd. The tyme wil be to short for me to tel of Gedeon, of Barach, Sampson, and of Iephthe &c. All these certeinly were iudges, and they are mencioned of there together w t other holy men, which were notable and of an excellent and wonderful faith.
Thou wilt aske peraduenture, If god loked so wel to hys people as long as the iudges were ouer them, Why the Israelites were so oftentimes oppressed of their enemies in the time of the iudges. how came it to passe then, that they were so often brought into bondage by their enemies? For bicause God handled with them faithfully and by a couenaunt.
The league that was made is written in the 30. and 31. chap. of Deut: where god promised the Hebrues that all things should prosper with them so long as they kept his lawes and worshipping of him. But if they should fall from hym to Idols, and cast away the lawes of their god, then should they be deliuered into the handes of their enemies, but in such sort, that if they repented and would desire ayde of their god, he would streightwaies be present with them, to deliuer them from al the euils wherwith they should be oppressed. But we shal not nede to stand long now about this matter, bicause it he proceding forward of the history, we shal manifestly perceaue, that the Israelits did oftentimes offend. And god chastened them as his children with iust punishments. But when they turned and cried vnto him, he had compassion of them, and deliuered them by iudges out of their miseries. This remayneth also for vs to declare, y t for as much as Christ is called the end and perfection of all the holy bokes, how these actes also of the iudges may and ought to be referred vnto him, and how they prophecie him vnto vs, as the other holy bookes do. To answer to this I will take that which Origen writeth in his first Homely vpon thys boke. Al the workes of god by themselues are great: After what sort the holy histories do cōteine & teach Christ but when they are conferred together, some of them may be called small, and other some greate. If god his leadyng of the children of Israel out of Egipte and throughe the wildernesse should be beholden by themselues, they are surely great woorkes: but if they be afterward conferred with this, that God loued the world so, that he gaue his onely begotten sonne for it, then shall this be a great worke, and the others small. But bicause in the greater things the lesse are comprehended (for that they are partes of thē) as the number of two is contayned in thre, and thre in foure. So these pryuate deliueries of the people which happened vnder the Iudges, for as much as they are comprehended in that principall redemption, which is geuen vnto mākynd by Christ, it must nedes be that they shuld expresse vnto vs y e same, for that they were certain assured partes and figuratiue shadowes, and had the same authour namely Christ him selfe. For he which before deliuered the Hebrues by iudges, did afterward redeme al men by him self. And euen as the miseries of thys lyfe, the spoyling I say of goods, banishments, woūdes & torments are very greuous to the flesh whē they are pondred by themselues: so when they are conferred w t the anger of god & euerlasting death, into y t which we incurre by reason of our sinnes, they may most rightly be estemed small thinges, for that these are most greuous. Wherfore when we consider how the Iewes were deliuered frō outward [Page 3] miseries: Let vs call to remembraunce, those most great euils, frō which Christ of his singular goodnes hath deliuered vs. And when as the children of Israell do oftentimes escape by iudges out of their afflictiōs, they do as it were point with their finger Christ vnto vs, raised vp from the dead, they shew vnto vs also y e last resurrectiō of the saints, wherin they shal be altogether deliuered from al afflictiōs & infirmities. Wherfore as wel this booke as also other holy histories, do w t much profit admonish the readers of Christ and his members.
And bicause I think I haue spoken enough already of the matter and subiect of this boke. I wil now go to declare the forme of the writing therof. What kind of writing is obserued in this boke. The definition of an history. It consisteth altogether of an historical kind of writing, as may easily appeare to al the readers. An historye is (as Quintilianus writeth in the second boke, & 4. chap: of hys Institutions) a setting forth of a thing done. From which Augustine differeth not much, who writeth on the second chap: of Gen: vpon the letter. An history is whē a thing done either by god or by mā is set forth, & in this diffinitiō he cōprehēdeth as wel prophane histories as holy. But our boke doth chiefly for the most part set forth those things which wer done by god. But bicause al setting forth of thīgs done are not of one kind, whē as som ar called chronicles, & other some named histories, we must se in which of these two, this our declaration must be placed, & that can we not wel do except we seperate these y e one from y e other. Cicero in his 2. boke de Oratore, touching these, writeth after this sort. The difference betwene an history and a chronicle. The gretians at y e first wrote euē as our Cato, Pictor & Piso did: for an history was nothīg els but a collecting together of things done yerely, which thīgs that thei might y e better be kept in memory y e chief bishop frō the beginning of matters of Rome euen to Publius Mutius y e chief bishop wrote al things that wer done euery yere & brought thē into a commō place, & set thē out on a table in his house y t the people also might frely haue knowledge of thē, & they be they which are now called the great yerely Chronicles. This forme of writing many haue followed, which haue without any deckings or ornamēts left behind them onely the monumēts of tymes, men, places and of things done. Therfore as Pherceydes, Hellanicus, Acusilaus & very many other we amōgst y e greciās, so is our Cato, Pictor, & Piso, who cared not for the eloquēt kind of writing, & while that mē might vnderstād what they spake, they counted shortnesse to be the onely prayse of speaking &c.
He addeth afterward, The nature of things desireth the order of tymes, it requyreth also the description of countreyes, bicause in weighty matters and worthy of memory, first counsels are loked for, then the acts, & afterward the endes. And as touching counsels is signified what the author alloweth. And in things done is declared not only what is done or spokē, but also how &c. By these things we may gather what is the nature of yerely chronicles, and also what of an history: and me thinketh that these our narrations are rather to be counted histories thā yerely chronicles, for bicause not only things done are set forth, The narratiōs of this booke are histories & not yerely chronicles. The opinion of Aulus Geilius as touching yerely chronicles and an History. but also y e causes, counsels and maners are declared. Also orations, admonitions, and reprouings, are sometimes added not without some ornamentes: All which thinges pertayn rather to an history thā to bare yerely chronicles. But now y t we haue heard Cicero his opiniō, let vs also heare what Aulꝰ Gelliꝰ writeth in y e .5. chap. of his 5. boke, which writeth this: Some do thinke that an history differeth frō a chronicle in this, y t whē both of thē are a declaratiō of things done, yet an history is properly of those things at y e doings wherof he y t wrote thē hath bene presēt. &c. He folowed not this distinctiō, & not w tout cause, which neuerthelesse Seruiꝰ Grāmaticꝰ embrased, & Isidorus in his first boke of Etymologies folowed hī, which is maruel bicause he is not only against Cicero, which saith y t an history is a gathering together of thinges done yerely, but also against Vergil whose verse in y e first of the Eneydos is. And now haue we laysure to heare the yerely chronicles of our labours. Where he declareth, that yerely Chronicles pertayne [Page] also vnto things at the doyngs wherof we our selues were present. But nowe agayne to Gellius. He sheweth that there were other which thought histories to be either an exposition, or els a demonstration of thinges done. But yerely chronicles were, when things done in many yeres were compiled together, obseruing the order of euery yeare. &c. According to which sentence, this our booke cannot be called a yerely chronicle, for that in the narrations thereof, it oftentimes noteth not the yeres wherin things were done. Moreouer the same author I meane Gellius addeth Sempronius Asellios mynde therin, but this was the differēce betwene those whiche woulde leaue behinde them yearely chronicles, and those which enterprised to write of thinges done by the Romaynes. The yerely chronicles did declare that onely whiche was done and in what yeare it was done, but that was not sufficient for an history to declare what was done, but it must also shew, by what counsell, and after what sort they were done. And a little after the same Aselio writeth in the same booke: for neither can the bookes of the yerely chronicles any thing stirre vp the readers to be more quicke to defend the common wealth, nor yet more slow to cōmit thinges vnaduisedly. Furthermore bicause that by the knowledge of this booke men are admonished and stirred vp to the true worshippyng of god to repent, to put their trust in god, and to practise all dueties of lyfe cherefully. It conteyneth an history and not yerely Chronicles. Peraduenture I haue expounded these thinges with to many woordes, but yet as I suppose with some fruicte.
The number of the yeares that the history of the iudges conteyneth.But the space of the tyme which is comprehēded in these declarations (if we may beleue Augustine in his xviii. booke de ciuitate dei, and 22. chap.) is 329. yeares, which he gathereth thus. Whē Rome was builded, the Hebrewes had bene in the land of Chanaan. 718. yeares, of which (as he saith) 27. perteyned vnto Iosua, 329. to the Iudges, & 362. are referred vnto the kinges. For Ezechias the king lyued in the tyme of Romulus.
God is the author of histories.An history is not to be counted a thing of mans inuention when as god him selfe was the author therof, which would haue the elders to expoūd to their children and their posteritie those thinges which he had done for Israell in Egipte, in the sea, and in the wildernes. And he commaunded also (as it is written in Exodus) that the warre which was had against Amalech, and the victory which the Hebrewes got of him, Histories wer before Moyses time. should be put in writing, yea and this kind of writing began before Moyses, for he maketh mencion both of the booke of the battails of the Lord as also of the booke of the iust men. I will not speake of the Prophetes which with their prophecies oftētimes mixed histories. I passe ouer Dauid, who adourned here and there the psalmes whiche he song with histories. I skip ouer our Euangelistes and the Actes which Luke wrote, in which are written moste profitable histories in the new Testament. If god be the author of these bookes as we must nedes beleue, thē god must be counted the author of histories, which is not a thing for him vnsemely, for an history is a noble thīg (as Cicero writeth in hys 2. The praise of an history. boke de Oratore, it is a witnes of times, y e light of truth, y e life of memory the maystres of life, the messenger of antiquitie. &c. These prayses certainly are great, and they agree not with euery kynde of histories, but with those onely, in which those rules are obserued, What are requisite to a true history. The Latin Historiographers are more faithful than the Grecians. which y e same author hath set forth in that place namely, that it set forth no lies, or be afraid to tel the truth, that there be no suspicion of fauour or flattery.
Which order although the Latin Historiographers haue more faithfully accō plished than the Grecians (for Quintilianus saith in his iiii. chap. of his secōd boke that the greke Historiographers vsed as much licence in writing almoste as the Poets did) yet Augustine in his .131. epistle to Memorius the Bishop, when he amōg other liberall disciplines attributeth much to histories writing of the truth [Page 4] therof, saieth, that he cannot see, how those histories whiche are written of men, can wel follow the truth: for that the writers are compelled to geue credite vnto men, and oftentimes to gather together the brute of the vulgare people, The holy histories are most true. whiche writers neuerthelesse are yet excused, if they kepe liberty and write nothing disceitfull, but there can be nothing at al more true than the histories reuealed and written by the inspiration of god as our histories are.
Besides the truth, whose knowledge without controuersie is most excellēt, The commoditie of an historye. by the reading of histories, we get also other cōmodities, and those very excellēt. By them we attayne to matter, and most aboundant plenty of moste profitable arguments. For (as Quintilianus writeth in the .iiii. chap. of his .12. boke) Exā ples and histories are iudgementes and testimonies. The vse of examples is double. And the profit of the examples is at the least way two fold. One is, that we should imitate, vse, allow, and commend those thinges which we are taught to be done of holy mē. We vnderstande by the diuyne historye that Abraham was a holye man and dearly beloued of god, and also one that kepte very good hospitalitie. Whereby we learne that hospitalitie is a noble vertue, and very deare vnto God, and againe we are taughte to auoyde those thinges, which we see these godlye men to haue auoyded. For when we consider howe Dauid woulde not kil Saul hys deadly enemye, hauing twice libertie to doe it, we gather that it is not to bee permitted that priuate men althoughe it laye in their power shoulde [...] reuenge their priuate iniuries. The other vse of examples is that of these thinges whiche are there declared perticularly, when we shall perceaue that they be al like, we may of them gather generally and vniuersally some one profitable sentence.
By the history of the Sodomites we note how greuously, god punished most horrible fleshly filthines, and that the tribe of Beniamin for the same cause was almost cleane put out, and Ruben the first begotten son of Iacob for incest was put besides his place and dignity, Dauid for committing aduoutry, incurred horrible punishmentes, and Ammon and Absolon for committing incest came to a most wycked end, and Troy (as the heathen testifye) was vtterly ouerthrowen for aduoutry sake. Of these things therfore in such sort considered which happened perticularly, we plainly say that all these wandring and vnlawfull lustes of men are most greuously punished of god. To which propositiō if we shal adde this sentence that now also throughout all Christendom such free and wādring filthy lust raigne euery where, we may strongly conclude, that for this horrible wickednesse there hangeth vpon this our world most sharpe punishments.
Yet in this kind of arguments that vice is most diligently to be taken hede of, Of examples we reasō what vices are to be eschewed. which creapeth vpō one before he beware thereof. And y e commeth two maner of wayes. First that we take not vpon vs to follow those doynges of the sainctes which they sometimes committed vnaduisedly. For euē as men, they fell sometimes, & that most filthily. Wherfore y e things done by thē, which we do set forth as examples to be folowed of vs, must with great iudgement be examined. Augustine. Augustine writeth of this thing in his 2. booke against the 2. epi. of Gaudētius after this sort. We must not alwaies imitate or allowe whatsoeuer good men haue done, but we must adde therunto y e iudgement of y e scriptures, & marke whither thei allow these dedes. This father doth very wel admonish vs here, y t although they wer holy mē, & pleased god very many waies, The fallings of the sainctes are not to be folowed. & the holy scriptures witnessed excellently well of them, yet are not all their actions to be iudged absolute and without fault. For euery man both is a lyar and oftentimes sinneth. For who woulde followe Dauyd his horrible aduoutrye and betraying of faythfull Souldiours, or the forswearyng of Peter or hys wycked dissimulation? surely none which hathe but euen a cromme of godlinesse. Moreouer it sometymes happeneth that that worke whiche is done well and rightly by some excellent [Page] person, is forbidden of other men, bycause God whiche hath geuen a lawe to men, is not so bounde vnto the same, that he may not lose some frō that common bonde, when it semeth good vnto him. It is not lawfull for any man to steale, God will some times haue certaine thinges done of godly men whiche be not lawfull for others to do. and yet the Hebrewes when they were led out of Egypt were permitted yea and commaunded of god, to cary awaye the Egyptians goodes whiche they had borowed of them euen agaynst their willes and without their knowledge. What shal we do then? Thus truly, we must well and diligently cōferre those thinges which are expounded in the holy histories, with the general rules of the cōmaundementes of God wherewith when we do perceaue that they do agree, The doynges of saintes must be weighed by the rules of gods Law. let vs boldly vse them. But if they disagree from thē, let vs recken them either for certaine fallinges or singular prerogatiues of some, and kepe our selues backe from following of them. And these prouisoes beyng added, great profit shall come by reading of histories and especially diuine histories. And that did Chrisostome very well vnderstand when as in the preface of his exposition vpō the Epistle to Philemon, Chrisostome. he wished that all those thinges had bene written for vs, which the Apostles spoke and did, when they sat downe, what they did eate, or what they did write & other thinges of this kynde. And the same Chrisostome writeth in his 57. Homily vpon Genesis, that histories were geuen vs by the holy ghost to the entente we shoulde followe them. Augustine. Also Augustine, in his seconde booke and 28. chap. De doctrina Christiana, teacheth that many darcke and hard thinges may some times onely be opened by the knowledge of an history. Moreouer who soeuer muche exerciseth him selfe in redyng ouer of histories, he doth not without fruite reuolue with him selfe the doinges & examples of our times. There was vpon a tyme a certaine man euill fauored enoughe, Note a pleasaunte historie. who neuerthelesse was meruelous desirous of beautifull children: and yet he maryed a fowle wyfe, wherfore he was mocked of euery bodye. This man went into the Citie. where he bought most fayre ymages, whiche he set in his chambre, and gaue his wife charge that for a certayne space she should euery day most earnestly looke vpon those ymages. She obeyed her husbandes commaundement, and by that meanes brought him forth most beautifull children. So wil it also come to passe with vs, which thoughe we by reason of naturall sinne grafted in vs are defourmed & lothsome, and are continually prouoked as well by the deuill as by wicked men to vnlawfull thinges, yet if we will attentiuely & diligently gather together the exāples of the sainctes, trimly paynted forth in the diuine histories, and if we reuolue the same in our mynde, we shall forthwith shewe forth most excellent workes & acceptable to God. And now that I haue entreated enough (as I suppose) of the matter and forme of writing of this booke, the nexte is to speake some what of the efficient cause.
What is the efficient cause of this booke.If we would searche to knowe the man, by whom God would haue these thinges written, that can we not vnderstand by the holy Scriptures. The Hebrewes affirme that Samuel put these thinges in wryting: but they speake that without testimonie of the Scriptures. Other also thincke that euerye Iudge wrote suche thinges as were done in his own time, which monument of theirs being in sondry pampheletes Samuel afterwarde compiled into one certain body or volume. Agayne there be some whiche ascribe all this to Esdras or to Ezechias the king, which Ezechias the booke of Prouerbes mencioneth to haue gathered together some of the sentences (or as some call them) the parable of Salomon but I thincke it is not mete for me to stāde about this matter, for there is no cause why we should curiously searche out those things which God will not reueale in his oracles wherfore I will returne to declare the principall efficient cause of this booke. The spirite of God is properly the aucthour of this Booke. We must ascribe al what soeuer it is to the spirite of God. For Paul writing to Timothe sayth that the scriptures were reuealed by god, [Page 5] and there is no doubte but he spake then of the bookes of the olde Testament. But thou wilte aske who shall persuade vs that the holy bookes were reuealed vnto men by the holy ghost? The spirite of God testifieth vnto the faithful that the holy Scriptures came frō God. Euen the same spirit which hath prouided to haue these things written, doth make vs assuredly to beleue that they are not the inuentions of men. For nether can the holy lyfe of the teachers nor yet miracles be sufficient to persuade vs of this. It is the spirite, the spirit I say of god which testifieth vnto our spirite of this thyng.
The moste daungerous error of the Antichristes must diligently be taken hede of, whiche dare affirme, It is not the Church which geueth authoritie to the Scriptures. that it is the Churche which bringeth authoritie to the holy Scriptures, when as it is cleane contrary. For what soeuer authoritie or estimation cōmeth vnto the Churche, that all whole cōmeth of the worde of God. It is horrible to be heard, that the holy oracles and wordes of god should get their credite by men which are otherwise lyers. But these things they faine to the entēt that seyng they are manifestlye founde often tymes to haue decreed and ratified in the Sacraments & doctrines farre otherwise than the holy scriptures will beare. Whiche thing they would defend y t they may do it, bycause the Churche whiche doth bring authoritie and credite to the worde of God, may alter things in the holy Scriptures, as pleased it. Wherfore we must resiste them by all meanes possible in this thyng which they take vpon them to do. We may not suffre our selues to be brought to thys poynte, to thincke that the Scriptures haue had their credite and authority by the Churche. And yet do I not write these thynges as thoughe I woulde despise or contemne the dignitie of the Churche, vnto the whiche, There be three offices of the Churche touching the word of God. The Churche as a witnesse kepeth the holy Bookes. I do attribute thre offices and them moste excellent as touchyng the worde of GOD. The firste of them is, that I do confesse that the Church as a witnesse hath kept the holy bokes. But thereby it can not be proued, y t it is lawful for it to peruert or alter any thing in the holy bookes. Experience teacheth vs that publique and priuate wrytinges are committed to scriueners (whiche are commonly called notaryes) to be layd vp and diligently kept of thē. And yet there is none that is in his right wittes which wil say that he may alter any thing in them, or wil beleue that their authoritie is of greater force, than their willes were whiche desired to haue the same written. The worde of God reuealed and written. Neither shall it be here vnprofitable to obserue the difference betwene the worde of god as it was reuealed at the beginning to the Prophetes & sainctes & as it was afterwardes preached or written. For we do easely acknowledge betwene these, that there is onely difference of tyme, and not of the authoritie or efficacie.
For we confesse that the worde vnwritten was more auncient, than that which was afterward appointed to letters, and we graunt that either cōferred together was geuen to the Churche, but in suche sorte, that the Churche (as we haue sayd) can not by any meanes wrest or chaunge it. The office of the Churche is to publishe and preache the worde of God. And this vndoubtedly is the second office of the Church, to preach & publish the wordes committed vnto it by God. In which thing it is lyke a common crier, who althoughe he do publishe the decrees of princes and magistrates, yet he is not aboue the decrees or equal vnto them in authoritie. But his whole office is faithfully to pronounce all thynges as he hath receaued them of the princes and magistrates. And if he should otherwise do, he should be counted altogether for a traytour. Wherfore the ministers of the Churche ought to care and study for nothing so much as to be founde faithfull. We acknowledge also the last office of the Churche to be, The Churche discerneth the holy bokes frō counterfaite & such as are Apochriphas. y t seyng it is endued with the spirite of God, it must therfore discerne the sincere & vncorrupted bookes of holy Scriptures from the counterfaite and Apocriphas, whiche is not yet to be in authoritie aboue the worde as many do foolishely dreame. For there are very many which can discerne the true & propre writings of Plato and Aristotle from other falsely put to them, & yet in comparison of iudgement [Page] they are neither of greater lernyng nor yet of equall, with Plato or Aristotle. And euery one of vs cā easely know God from the deuill, & yet are we not to be coūted equal with God, & much lesse can we thinck that we do excel him. So the Churche ought not bycause of this to preferre faith or authoritie thereof before the Scriptures.
Augustine.But they say, Augustine sayeth, I would not beleue the Gospell except the authoritie of the Churche did moue me therunto. But in that place is read (to moue together) for in very dede, Faith is not poured in by the minister but by God. it is the spirite of God, which poureth faith into the hearers of his worde. And bycause the ministers of the Churche are his instrumentes, they are rather to be sayd to moue with, than absolutely to moue. The same Augustine writeth in his 28. booke and second chap. against Faustus, that the Maniches ought so to beleue that the first chap. of Matthew was writtē by Matthew, euen as they did beleue that the Epistle whiche they called Fundamentum, was written by Maniche, bycause vndoubtedly they were so kept by their elders, & from hande to hand deliuered vnto them. This is it therfore that the Churche moueth withall to beleue the Gospell, bycause faithfully it kepeth the holy scriptures, preacheth them, and discerneth them from straunge Scriptures. The same father manifestly witnesseth in his 6. booke of his confessions the 4. and 5. chap. that God him selfe in very dede did geue authoritie to the holy scriptures. Tertullianus Irenaeus But Tertullianus and Irenaeus hauing to do against heretikes did therfore send thē to the Apostolicall Churches, bycause they did not admitte the whole scriptures: Wherfore they would that they should take their iudgemēt of those Churches which were certainly knowen to be Apostolical. For it was meete that those Churches should continuallye remayne both witnesses and also keapers of the holy scriptures: and yet therfore they did not decree that the authoritie of the Churche should be preferred before the scriptures.
What is to be thought of a certayn rule of the Logiciens.But the aduersaries say, that they are led by the sentence, whiche is cōmonly vsed among Logiciens: Euery thyng is such a thyng by reason of an other, VVherfore that other shal more be counted suche. Wherfore they reason after this maner: If by the Churche the Scripture hath hys authoritie, it must nedes be that the Church much more hath that authoritie. But they remē ber not that this sentence put by the Logiciens taketh place onely in finall causes, and is of no strength in efficient causes. For althoughe our inferior worlde be made warme by the sunne and the starres, yet doth it not thereby followe that they are farre more warmer. And agayne when immoderate men by wyne are made droncke, we can not therby conclude the wyne to be more dronken than they. Yea the Logiciens teache this, that this their sentence is then strong and of efficacy in efficient causes, when such efficient causes are brought forth whiche are whole and perfect, and not whiche are perciall and maymed, whiche rule is not obserued of our aduersaries in this argument. For the Churche is not the whole and perfect efficient cause of that faith and authoritie whiche the holy Scriptures haue with the faithfull. For if it were so, then were it very easy to persuade the Ethnickes and Turkes of the holy Scriptures, and to bryng the Iewes to receaue the new Testament, and how true this is, the thing it selfe witnesseth. And I thincke. I haue spoken enough of the efficient cause of this booke and of the holy Scriptures.
Of the ende of this booke.And now lastly order semeth to require, y e seyng we haue spoken of the matter, forme and efficient cause of the holy bookes, we shoulde also entreate somewhat to what end they were written. Wherin I thincke it not nedeful to kepe the reader long, for that before when I entreated many thynges of an historye, I haue expounded also the profite and commodities whiche come therof, whiche no doubte of it, belong vnto the ende: but nowe presently I will say thus much [Page 6] compendiously, that all these thinges are mentioned by the holy ghost, that we shoulde behaue our selues vprigthly both in prosperitie and also aduersitie.
For we learne by the examples of holy men, when we are afflicted with sundry troubles and miseries, stedfastly to holde our faith, to put our hope in God, to call vpon him only, & therewithall to repent vs of our sinnes whiche thinges if we do, he will no lesse be presente to helpe vs, than we know y t he oftentimes deliuered the people of the Iewes. And this Paul declared, when he sayde to the Romaines, whatsoeuer things are written, they are written for our learning, that we thorough patience and consolation of the Scriptures might haue hope. Moreouer we are instructed, in prosperous thinges to kepe the feare of god, lest we fal into grieuous sinnes, by whiche meanes we might be made guiltie both of punishement in this lyfe, and also of euerlastyng damnatiō. Finally we may moste manifestly gather the ende of reading of these bookes out of the Apostles doctrine, whiche he deliuered to Timothe, writing after this sorte in his second Epistle and third chap. All Scripture geuen by inspiration of God is profitable to doctrine, to reprouing, to correction and to instruction which is in righteousnesse, that the man of God may be perfect and prepared to al good workes.
And now that as I suppose I haue spoken enough of the end and other causes of this booke, I will come nygher to the exposition of the same, & first I wil declare whether this booke according to the sentence of the Hebrewes be the second booke of the firste Prophetes, whose coniunction is so great with the history of Iosua that a man woulde easely saye that they be both one. Whether the booke of Iosua ought to be reckened with the booke of Iudges. And peraduenture there be some which suppose that Iosua should be reckened with the iudges: to whom I will not subscribe. For iudges were raised vp of god, when the people were oppressed with outwarde enemies, but when Iosua was proclaymed prince, all the affaires of the Israelites were in good prosperitie. For Sihon and Og most mightie kinges were ouercome, and that office was cōmitted to Iosua, wherby Moyses being dead he might leade the people ouer Iordane and take possessiō of the lande of Chanaan, and deuide the promised lande by lottes vnto the children of Israell, and besides that the people did set their handes to a decree whiche they had made of Iosua, that he whiche obeyed not his voyce should be killed, as we read it written in the first chap. of his booke. But there is no mention made of suche thynges as concernyng the Iudges. And yet both the bookes are so like and of such affinitie, that many thinges are repeated in this our booke especially in the beginning, whiche no doubte were done when Iosua was yet lyuing.
There resteth now to admonishe the reader somewhat of the partes of this boke. The partes of the booke of Iudges. There are as many principall membres in it as there were Iudges to Samuels tyme. For y t in euery one of them still riseth vnto vs a new historye. But the first of all was Othoniel, of whom we will speake in the third chap. So that all those thinges whiche are written vnto that place do contayne the thynges done from the death of Iosua vnto Othoniel. And certainly bycause the Iewes, as long as Iosua liued, worshipped god a right, & kept the lawe as muche as the weakenesse of mā coulde do: god stil wrought with them accordyng to his couenaunt, & gaue thē a great victorye ouer their enemies, so that euery tribe ouercame his enemies for the most part which were yet adioynying to their borders. And then when the Israelites obteynyng the victorye did transgresse the commaundements of their god, & did not cleane destroy the nations which they had ouercome as god had commaunded them, yea they made them tributaries vnto them, god therfore grieuously admonished them by his messanger, bycause they had not onely saued their enemies, but also had moste filthyly honoured theyr gods. So that god was not w tout a cause angry with them, and deliuered them [Page] into the handes of outwarde tyrannes. But when they were sorye for it and called vpon their god, he had compassion of them, and raysed them vp Iudges, by whom they might be deliuered, & when they were deliuered, they fell agayne to Idolatry & they were afflicted againe, & they repented, wherby in course their deliueries and oppressions are set forth. But their first oppressiō worthy of memory was vnder Chusan Resanthaim, from the which Othoniel the first of al the iudges reuenged them, of whom we will speake in his place. But now we will put here vnderneth the wordes of the holy history.
The first Chapter.
1 IT came to passe after the death of Iosua, that the childrē of Israel asked the Lord, sayeng: Who shall go vp for vs agaynst the Chananites to fight first agaynst them?
2 And the Lorde sayd Iudah shal go vp, beholde I haue deliuered the lande into his handes.
IT semed good vnto the children of Israel to take warre in hande, for as it is writtē in the xiii. chap. of Iosua, they had not yet at this tyme conquered all the promised land, so that in euery tribes lotte there were enemyes remayning. And when they sawe there was no remedy but that they must dryue them out by force, they doubted not whether they shoulde make warre agaynst them, but their doubte was whiche tribe should fight before all the other. The Israelites aske counsell of God. The matter seemed to be of such great importaunce, that they asked counsell of god, whiche was the chief gouernour of their publicque weale. Iosua that worthy captayne was no more a liue at whose becke and pleasure they hanged. The Israelites affaires had euill successe whē they were done without God hys counsell. Neither yet had they forgotten howe euill successe they had, when not long before they toke weighty affaires in hand, without asking counsell of God. For in their settyng forth to battaill against the citie of Hai, they sped very vnluckely in the battail, bycause they went to warrefare without oracle, as it is written in the vii. of Iosua. It is also written in the same boke in the ix. chap. that the Gabaonites were receaued into league without the oracle of god, and it is also writtē in the boke of Numbers that the Israelites were slayne by the Amorrhites, when they fought cōtrary to gods will. This peoples iudgement therfore is worthy to be praysed, for it is excellently well done, in most weighty affaires to aske counsell of God first of all. And that must be done conueniently, and holyly, otherwise it profiteth not. For the Israelites whē they should make warre agaynst the tribe of Beniamin, although they asked coūsell of God, yet were they twice put to flight & slayne, & cowardly tourned their backes to their enemies, bycause they behaued not them selues well in asking counsell of god. Wherfore they asked counsell of God. And it is to be beleued that the Hebrues after the death of Iosua considered this with them selues, that their hong a great matter in those first warres whiche should be enterprised after the death of Iosua bycause if they happened to be ouercome of those nations in one battaill or two, then would those nations thincke with them selues, that the good lucke of the Israelites were chaunged with the death of their captayne. By whiche opinion they would easely haue ben boldened and their affaires should haue had better successe dayly. But on the contrary if it happened that the Israelites gotte the vpper hand in the first battailles, they sawe that the power and audacitie of the nations woulde euery daye diminishe, and beyng made feable and faynter they should the easelyer be ouercome. God was also asked counsell of in the tyme of Iosua. They did not therfore without cause aske coū sell of God in so great a matter: which also to do the cōmaundement of the law did vrge them, which is writtē in the boke of Numbers. Neither must it be now thought, y t they so required the oracle, as though they did not the same whē Iosua [Page 7] was lyuing, for they required also answers of God verye often when he was a lyue, but after his death it is said that they enquired for this thing chiefly & principally, namely which tribe should go vp to battail before all y e other in al their causes. And thys is the signification of the hebrew word Lanu that is, for vs. And this woord to go vp is mencioned, bycause they saw that they should fyrst vanquishe the hyly places.
Against Chanaan. This is somtimes a general name, What y e people of Canaā were & containeth al these nations, which God had decreed to destroy out of Palestine, whereby all y e lande was afterward called Channan. And sometimes it signifieth particularly some one nation of that people. And that lay chiefly about Tyre & Sidon. Which the Euangelical history proueth when it calleth the woman a Chananite which offered her self to the sonne of God, when he was goyng to Tyre & Sidon. And of that nation peraduenture, bicause it was mightier than the other, were the rest called Chananites. And I wyl not ouerskip this by the way, that y e people which is singularly called Chanaan, when they wer driuen out of their coastes by the Israelites, they departed to Aphrica, where they remayned safe, euen to the time of Augustine. Augustine. So that y e father writeth in his booke of the exposition whych hee begon vpon the epistle to the Romaines thus: Our rusticals beyng demaunded what they wer, they answered in the Affrick tong, Chananites. And theyr language is very nye to the Hebrewe tong, The Africans ar Chananites as the same Augustine writeth in hys booke of questions vpon the Iudges the .16. question. For by Baal in the Affrick tong they seme to say Lord, whereby by Baal Samen is vnderstoode as thoughe they would say, Lord of heauen: bicause these tonges differ not much one from an other. Hierome also agreeth therw t, Hierome. writing vpon Esay the prophet, when he enterpreteth these woords: Behold a virgin shal conceaue, in the Affrick tong (saith he) which is said to haue had his ofspring of the Hebrues. Virgil. A virgin is properly called Almah. Also Virgil when he called Dido an Aphrician & a Sidonian & the inhabitants of Carthage Tirianes hath most manifestly confirmed that Dido & her people came of the Chananites. Wherfore it is no maruel if they almost kept in remembraunce the Chananishe tong. But these thinges I haue spoken by the way. But now Chanaan signifieth no one special nation, but is a cōmon word for al those nations which the Israelites should ouerthrow. For the tribe of Iudah which is said to haue gone vp first of al to the war, For what thing the Israelites asked councell of God. had in his lot the Iebusites, & not the Chananites. Moreouer I admonishe the Reader y t the Hebrues asked not counsel of God for their Captaine, neither desired they to know what man should be made chief ruler ouer the Israelites going to battail against the Chananites, but which tribe should begin the battel first. Othoniel y e first Iudge should be of the tribe of Iudah. But we entreate not of him now presently.
And bycause it is said that the children of Israel asked counsell of the Lorde, Howe many waies y t elders asked councell of God. some wil aske after what sort the Iewes accustomed to aske anye thing of hym at that time. It may be answered, that ther wer three accustomed & ordinarye waies which are rehersed in the .28. chap. of the first booke of Samuel namely by dreames, by Vrim & Thūmim, & lastly by prophets whē ther wer any to be had, & therfore Saul complained in y e booke, that God had answered hym by none of these waies, when he would haue asked counsel of hym of the successe of y e most daungerous battail. I finde also other waies in the scriptures of asking coūsell of god, but they wer extraordinary waies. One is by reuelacion of angels, or of god him self, expressing him selfe vnder some forme. An other way was, when som holy men by y e mouing of god did appoint to themselues certayn tokens of thinges to come, which did signify before, whether they happened this waye or that, what should be looked for.
So Abraham hys seruaunt decreed with hymself that she should be his Lordes wife, which only amongest many maydens comming to the well, offred drinke [Page] of her owne mynde to hym and to his Camels. Ionathas also the sonne of Saule had then the victory promysed him, when the Philistianes shoulde say, Come vp hither to vs, and contrarilye, if they shoulde byd him tary till they came downe thither. I haue called these extraordinarye wayes bycause they were not commonly vsed, neyther are they often red in the Scriptures. Lottes also are of this kinde. There is mention made of them in the fyrst booke of Samuel, when Saule should be declared King, all the tribes standing there before the Lord, Beniamin was caught, which R. Selomo expounding ascribeth the same place to Lottes, and sayth that the names of euery tribe were fyrst writen in scrolles, and hurled into a certayne potte, out of the which they were afterwarde drawen by the hand of the Prophet. This is his iudgement. Although. R. D. Kimhi thinketh y e that iudgement was geuen by Vrim and Thumim. But howsoeuer it was it skilleth not much, for no man ought to doubte but that there were lots vsed at that tyme. For Salomon sayth, that lots were caste into a pet and gouerned by god. Yea and the promysed lande of Chanaan was no otherwise deuided vnto the people thā by lots. But by what meanes, in what places, or after what sort they were had, it is no place here to declare. It were to long to tell what Vrim and Thumim properly were. R. D. Kimhi speaketh aboundauntly of that matter in the booke, which we now haue in handes, when he expoundeth the history of the concubine reuenged agaynst the Gabaonites, And I will set forth an other time in a more fytte place what it should seme to be. The manner to aske counsell of Gods hand was before the lawe geuen. Neyther dyd thys custome for asking councell of God florysh only in the tyme of Moyses law, but also in the patriarches tyme. For we learne in the booke of Genesis that Rebecka desyred an oracle. The heathen also asked councell eyther of theyr Prophetes or els of their southsayers. The heathen had their oracles and diuinations. Balak king of the Moabites called vnto hym Balaam. They had moreouer Sibelles and Delphos, Apollo and Iupiter Amnō, and were euer to much geuen to diuinations, but such as were corrupted and false. Only amongest the Hebrues wherof we are certayne the maner of oracles was pure: Bycause God was knowen onely in Iudea, as Dauid hath song.
Why Iosua deuided the lande not yet possessed.Moreouer it is demaunded why Iosua deuided y e land to the .xii. tribes at y e cō maūdement of God whē as he had not at that time conquered y e same? I answer he dyd it that he myght leaue a testimoniall, howe certayne they oughte to be of those things which God had promised them, namely that they myght be as certayne of the possession of that lande whiche was promised them, as if they had it already in theyr hands. It would seme to haue bene folyshly done, if the obtayning of that land should haue bene hoped for eyther by chaunce, or by mannes strength, Cesar. or els by warlyke power. For the which cause Cesar in his Comment. doth not vnworthily laugh & wonder at the madnesse of the Pompeians, whiche when they had not yet fought, would yet bargayne among themselues in their tentes concerning the diuision of priesthoodes, dignities, patrimonies & Cesars goods. But thys distribution of the Hebrues, which was ordayned by the commaundement of god, could not be frustrate. And moreouer the Israelites, when that partitiō was made by Iosua, had obtained alredy many victories, & had possession of a great deale of y e land. Besides these things this ordinance was very profitable for this purpose, to take away frō the tribes controuersies for y e limits of their land. Yea and thei made war in better order, after that euery tribe knew who were their enemies that they should fyght agaynst. And finally when as profite and rewards for labours are set forth, they do not a litle stirre vp men, stoutly to venter vpon any daunger and labour. By the same counsell vndoubtedly hath Christ our sauiour the sonne of god, geuen vs alreadye eternall lyfe, although we haue it presently but only begonne. For we must labor & wrestle very much before we come thither, although the fight be not vncertaine to them which put their trust in God.
There are three causes alledged, Why God destroyed not by and by all the Chananites. why God would not by and by destroye all the Israelites enemies out of the lande of Chanaan. The fyrste is, bycause the Iewes at the beginning wer not so many in numbre, as coulde inhabite all the land, So that by that meanes if all the Chananites should haue bene destroyed, most part of the land should haue lyen waste. Whereby many and sundry wilde beastes (wherewith the regions in the East abound) would maruelouslye haue encreased, destroyed the possessions, and brought no small damage and destruction to the Hebrewes. This reason is alledged of God hym selfe in Exodus. An other cause was that the Hebrewes myght throughly learne to fyght, and to be expert in warres agaynst their enemyes, and they coulde not doo that neyther in Egipt, nor yet in the wyldernes. The thyrd cause was, that they might therfore feare God more and more, for they vnderstandyng that they obtayned victories and possession of the lande as long as they obserued their religion, and contrarywyse, how they were oppressed with most greuous misfortunes, troubles and miseries, when they forsooke the obedience and woorshipping of God, they myght at the least by thys meanes be styrred vp not to faynt from theyr fathers lawes and most holy ordinaunces of God. I would to God the same causes, especially the two latter whych are described in the thyrde chapter of thys booke myght teache vs, why God wyl haue them whych are hys to be subiect in thys lyfe to so greuous and so many temptacions, namely that by fyghtyng and wrastlyng we myght be exercised wyth fruite and profytte, callyng vpon God continually.
But why God chose the tribe of Iudah, The prayse of the tribe of Iudah. to begynne the battayle first against the enemyes, many reasons may be alledged. Fyrst, that tribe was very populous, of great force, valiaunt of courage, warlyke, and verye experte therein. Whych neuertheles I speake not, as thoughe the election of God were moued by these gyftes: yea rather in that poynt the cleane contrarye is to be affirmed, namely that thys trybe was therefore valiaunt and warlyke, bycause God himselfe had destinied it to exercise those offices. Neyther is it to be doubted, The election of god tarieth not for our gyftes and vertues. but that both valiauntnes and warlyke strength are hys giftes. But that reason whych I haue declared is thus to be vnderstand, that these excellent gyftes which wer freely geuen of God to the tribe of Iudah, made it apt to begynne the battayle fyrst against the enemies. Neyther had it this kind of office cōmitted vnto it only at this present, but also afterward when they should make war against y t Beniamites, God being asked counsel of, decreed that marchyng forwarde to battail should be by the tribe of Iudah, to geue to it that it might be as it were a chiefe captayne to all the other Israelites. In the booke of Numbers for pytching the Campes, it had the chiefe place. Also the kinglye power was attributed vnto it by the oracle of Iacob. And as the Hebrewes write, it was the fyrst of al the rest that passed ouer the red sea. But for thys it is woorthy to beare awaye the garland, bycause of that tribe Messias should be geuen not onely to the Iewes, but also to al the world. Neither happened these priuileges and dignities to Iudah by order of birth. For it was reckoned the fourth amōg the sonnes of Iacob. Ruben in deede was fyrst borne, but bycause of his vile incest, wherby he abstayned not euen from his fathers bed, he was throwne downe from hys proper dignity, and in his steade as concerning the kyngdome Iudah was substituted. But the dignity of birthright was geuen to Ioseph. Wherein Iudah excelled the tribe of Ephraim. Wherefore his first tribe called Ephraim was not onely valiant & mighty, but also was exalted to the kyngdom of ten trybes: which kingdome neuerthelesse was both vnconstant, and also abode not alwayes in that famyly. But the principallity of Iudah is euerlasting, bycause it was not taken away from it euen to Christes tyme, and he comming of that family, raygneth and shall raygne for euer. All whych thynges Iacob [Page] hym selfe confirmed wyth hys noble prophecye, wherein he fore sayde to hys children what thynges shoulde happen to them in the latter tymes. Wherfore it is not to be maruelled, if his Prophecies be in some parte fulfilled now. For the spirite of god doth euer wel agree with it selfe, as it whiche bringeth those things to passe, which are agreable to his prophecyes.
How farre the oracle geuē to the Israelites pertaineth vnto vs.And that which is sayd here to be answered to the Israelites let vs thinke also to be answered vnto vs, that if we will be sure to obtayne the victory agaynst the enemyes of mans saluatiō, we must haue him to be the captaine of our battayle, which by the holy Prophecye of Iacob is called y e Lyon of y e tribe of Iudah. If by hys conductyng and name we wil fyght agaynste the deuil, the fleshe, the world, death and hell, our victorye shall not then in any poynte be doubtfull but most certayne. And yet would I not haue the reader to thinke, bycause I haue put thys allegorye in, y t therfore I will vse many allegoryes in thys historye, for I will vse them rarely and very seldome, Allegoryes are not alwaies to he discōmēded not y t I would haue theyr pleasantnes and elegancye be vtterly dispised. (The old fathers certaynly delited very much in them, I will not say to much. Yea and we fynde them sometymes applyed in the holy Scriptures. For Christ in the gospell compared hymselfe allegorically both to Salomon and to Ionas, and also to the serpent which Moyses at the commaundemente of God hong vp in the wildernesse. I will not speake of Paule who writing to the Galathians,, made Isaac and Ismaell the sonnes of Abraham two peoples, and pronounced Sara and Agar to be two Testamentes, applying the Hebrewes to the Mounte Sina and the Christian Church to the Citye of Ierusalem) but euen as Allegoryes are not vtterly to be dispised, Allegories must not be rashly vsed. so are they not to much rashly to be vsed. For although it be free for euery man in thys kynde of interpretation, to deuise what things he lyste, so y t he straye not from the rules of fayth and holy Scriptures, yet haue we not therby any strong or certaine argumentes for the confyrmation of the doctrine of fayth. Therefore there is smal profyte by the labour taken in them. Neuerthelesse I except those which are put in the holy Scriptures, Whither firme argumēts may be brought frō Allegories. for they are to be counted the wordes of the holy ghost. Wherfore theyr authoritye is great both in prouing & alledging of testimonyes. But the other, wherin the wits of men haue dalied, although with Godlynes, and in a ryght vnderstanding, bicause they are the inuentions of men, theyr cō clusions and argumentes are very weake. For men being the authors of them myght both be deceaued, and also deceaue. But thys Allegorye by me broughte forth, namely that the aunswere of God for the appoynting of the tribe of Iudah to be captaine of the warres doth no lesse belong to vs than to the Hebrues, hath no small certaynty and scarcely pertayneth to allegoryes. For whatsoeuer they were that defended the people of God in the olde time, Christ was theyr hed and captayne. Wherfore whatsoeuer they dyd in defendyng of hys members, they did it as his ministers and vicars. Wherby he which religiously reuolueth their actes in his minde, and then putting them asyde, doth behold the hed and chiefe captayne, Howe those thinges agree with Christ which seme to be spoken of Dauid & Salomon. by whose conducting they obtayned the victoryes. He I saye doth not straye from the marke, which the holy ghost had in the holy bookes. After thys maner those thyngs which are red in the holy Scriptures, both of Salomon and also of Dauid and seme to be spoken of them in respecte of the historye, are not allegorically applyed by the Apostles in the new Testamente to Christ seing y t the holy ghost spake them purposedly of hym. Wherefore I haue not absurdely sayde, that the oracle geuen to the Israelites shoulde be thoughte to bee spoken vnto vs.
Behold I haue geuen the land into his hands. God sheweth forth in this place his liberal & boūtefull goodnes. He doth not only geue answer to y t which he was demaūded, but also addeth therunto a most notable promise. He first appointeth [Page 9] the tribe by name, which he wyll haue to make warre first before the other tribes against the Chananites. Then he promised to geue them the land of the Chananites whych he dyd to their great commoditye, for he made the Iewes more cherefull to fight, in that he sayde that he woulde helpe them. Moreouer, he wold not haue the possession of those regions ascribed vnto their own strength or power, but vnto him selfe. Ye shall not take it (saith he) but I haue deliuered the land into their handes. And he vseth a verbe of the preterperfect tense, wherby the certainty of hys sayinges shoulde be expressed.
Of this place we may iustlye gather, We must aske counsel of God when wee take any thinges or affaires in hād. that in busines which we take in hande what so euer they be, God must alwaies be asked counsel of. And thys maye be proued not onely by this example, but also by infinite other whych the treasures of the holye scriptures minister vnto vs, to which cōmeth a most strong reason. What so euer is not of faith (sayth Paul) is synne, wherby it followeth, that no man should attempt any thing without fayth. And that is no fayth whych leaneth not to the woorde of God. For as the same Apostle hath taught, From whence the woord of God is to bee sought. faith commeth of hearing, and hearing commeth by the woord of God, which woord we cannot haue by any other accustomed rule and ordinary way, than out of Gods oracles which haue bene set foorth vnto vs in the holy scriptures.
And it wer good to marke the difference which is found betwene the asking counsel of God in the old time and ours at this present. Howe wee and the elders do diuersly aske coū sel of God. They were very much carefull for the successe of thinges, and they almost desyred alwayes to knowe when they tooke warres in hand, or attempted anye other thyng, whether they should speede wel or il in them. And that was not hard for them to do, for they had an oracle prepared of God for them for that purpose. And God had promysed that he would answer them out of the mercy seate, what soeuer they should demaunde or aske of him. But we, if we should aske counsel of the holye scriptures for the successe and end of our enterprises and purposes, cōcerning earthly infelicities and misfortunes, we should seeme, and that not vnwoorthily, to play the fooles. For there is no place there at all, which answereth anye thyng for our singular and priuate thinges. But that onelye remayneth for vs to enquire for, whether that which we begyn or go about, be allowed to be iust, holy, and acceptable to God by the testimonies of the holy scriptures.
But why the Iewes had proper and certayne oracles geuen them for theyr matters, and we haue nothing answered vs particularly. Why we haue not oracles as the Iewes had I thynke there be no other cause, but bycause vnto that people a certain assured publique wealth was due by the immutable coūsel of God, which should endure to the time of Christ, and therefore there were prepared for it certaine extraordinarye aydes aboue the power of nature, whereby it should be kept and defended by God. But vnto vs there is no such promise made of any certain seate or publique wealth, seing that our church is dispersed throughout the whole world, whereunto is no certaine seate or place promised, and therefore it needed not, that concernyng humaine thinges our publique wealthes should be particularly gouerned by certaine oracles & answers for temporal thinges. Besides this, the volumes of the holy scriptures are more aboundaunt in our tyme, than they were at that time with the Hebrewes when these thinges were done whych we nowe expounde. They had but the law onelye, we haue receaued nowe the bookes of the Prophetes and of wyse men, vnto which are added also al the writinges of the new Testament. And seing that those writinges are so manye & so excellent, it is no maruayle if we are not euery day enstructed of god by new oracles & answers. Neyther ought we to thinke bicause of that, that God setteth lesse by vs than he dyd by the Hebrewes. I wyl not speake howe hys spirite is geuen to vs thorow Christ more aboundantly and more openly, than it was in the olde tyme [Page] to the Iewes. Finally, our publique weales, dominions and kingdomes at endewed with many more artes which serue for peace and warre, than the people of the Hebrewes were. How we ought to behaue our selues in asking counsel of God. Wherefore it is no maruel if we being heaped vp with so many other gyftes, be destitute of singular oracles. It shal be our part therefore aboue al thinges, when we haue any affaires to take in hand, diligently to consider the woord of God, wherein is opened vnto vs hys commaundement or wyl, & afterward to embrace the same with a firme and stedfast fayth, wherby we maye bee vehementlye kyndled to cal vpon our heauenlye father, by the which we may be able to fulfyl that which he hath commaunded, and to obtayn that which he hath promysed.
3. And Iudah said vnto his brother Simeon: Go vp with me into my lot, that we may fight agaynst the Chananites, and I wyl also go with thee into thy lot. And Simeon went with hym.
The tribe of Iudah doth associate to it selfe the Simeonites to make warre against the Chananites, which most euidentlye testifieth that the answer of God dyd not speake of any one singuler man, but of the whole tribe of Iudah. For neither Othoniel, Why Simeon is taken into felowshyp wyth Iudah. nor yet Caleb had any brother which was called Simeon, and therefore there is no mencion made of them by Gods oracle, but it comprehendeth the whole tribe of Iudah. But the cause why Simeon is called of Iudah to be as a companion of hys warre, and that they twoo ayded one an other is, bycause the possession of the tribe of Simeon was mingled and scattered among the fieldes and countries belonging to the tribe of Iudah. Neighbourhed therefore made them to defende and succour one the other. And this coniunction of these two tribes is most manifestly gathered out of the .xv. chapter of the booke of Iosua. It is not agaynst fayth to vse the ayde of men. Let vs learne hereby, that it is not agaynst the true fayth for vs to vse vsual aydes and mans strength, when occasion serueth, to obtayne the easelyer those thinges which God of his goodnes hath liberally promised vnto vs. God had promised vnto the tribe of Iudah, that he would geue the land of Chanaan into their handes, which althoughe they of Iudah faythfullye beleued, yet were they not afeard to cal vnto them the Symeonites whych were their neighbours, that they myght bee ayded of them in their fight. For by that meanes they thought they should be the stronger to ouercome their enemies. Christ hath no otherwyse confuted the deuyl, which counselled hym to cast him selfe down hed long, vnder the pretence of Gods promise, wherin he sayd, that he had now committed his health to the Angels, whych sentence he put foorth out of the holye scriptures. But the sonne of God answered, that God must not be tempted, but he must rather vse staires which were made for that purpose, to serue to come downe by. Moreouer, al they are counted to tempt God, which trusting to gods promises do neglect humane helpe, which are already or maye be easelye prepared and gotten. Dauid in the latter booke of Samuel setteth him selfe foorth vnto vs as an example, who beyng wonderfullye adourned with the promises of God, vsed for al that in the insurrection of Absalon, not onely to flye away, but also the diligence of Chusay the Arachite and of the Priestes. Yea and Paul the Apostle as it is written in the Actes of the Apostels, althoughe his onelye confidence was in Christ, yet he appealed vnto Cesar, & made a discension betwene the Pharisies and Saduces, and testified that he was a Citizen of Rome. It is euident therfore by these manyfest examples, that we must vse the helpe of nature and wysdome to obtayne those thinges, which God hath promised to geue vs. Yong men are to be exhorted to good studies Wherefore the yong men of our tyme are diligently to be admonished to labour to attayne vnto languages, good artes and sciences, and that wyth great study. Which they may (when oportunity serueth) vse in preaching and defending [Page 10] the Gospell. For although God haue promised that the preaching of hys woord shalbe fruitful through the benefite of his spirite: yet must euerye man instruct him selfe in hys vocation according to his hability. Neyther ought men to bragge out of season (as phanatical men are accustomed to do) God according to hys promyse wyl be with vs when we shal speake. He hath promised in dede, and wyll surely perfourme, when tyme wyl not serue, or that a man can not either thincke or meditate what to speake. But if libertye be geuen, and leasure graunted to fynde, dispose, and wysely to deuise those thinges which we should speake, then can we not be excused, but that we tempt God, when as we neglect to do these thinges. Yea rather let vs plucke all thinges vnto vs, what so euer they be, so farrefoorth as godlynes permitteth, and occasion offereth it selfe, to helpe our labour to obtayne those thinges which are already promised vs.
Furthermore, Princes & publicke weales may make leagues somtimes this coniunction of Iudah wyth Simeon doth admonishe the readers, that it is lawful in those warres which ar taken in hand iustly to make a league, whereby Princes or publique weales maye be ioyned together to defende honest thynges, The godly ought not to ioyne them selues wyth the vngodly. as Iudah now ioyned fellowshyp wyth the Symeonites to fyght against the Chananites. But thys must be taken heede of, that such coniunction and league be ioyned together wythout fault, neyther ought the godly to ioyne them selues in league wyth the vngodlye. For the scripture reproueth Iosaphat, who otherwyse was a godly kyng, for making league wyth wycked Achab, and other kynges are often tymes reprehended by the Prophetes, for ioyning them selues in league eyther wyth the Egiptians, or els wyth the Assirians. But surelye this Simeon was of the same region that Iudah was, and both their endeauours tended to thys ende, religiously to fulfyl the wyll of God. I knowe there be some whych by the example of Asa kyng of Iudah beyng well praysed, defende suche leagues made wyth Infidels. For he beyng greuouslye oppressed of Basa kyng of the ten Tribes, as it is wrytten in the fyrst booke of the Kynges, sent vnto Benadab kyng of Siria (as appeareth in the .xvi. chapter) a certayne somme of gold and syluer, and he made a couenant wyth hym of that condicion that he shoulde inuade the kyng of Israel, whereby he myght bee deliuered from hys oppression. But they whych affirme those thynges, should consider wyth them selues two thynges. Fyrst, that the kyngdome of the tenne Tribes had now fallen from God, and from woorshypping of hym. Wherfore if an vngodlye kyng was styrred vp agaynst it, the same is not for all that to be conferred wyth those, whych confessing them selues to be Christians, do incense Tyrannes whych are of a straunge religion agaynst other Christians. Besydes that, thys deede of Asa kyng of Iudah is mencioned in the holy scriptures. But we cannot fynde that it was allowed to be well done. Yea if we looke vpon the latter booke of Chronicles the syxtene chapter, we shall see that that kyng was most greuously rebuked of God by the Prophet for suche a wycked deede. For it is thus wrytten: At that tyme came Hanani the Sear to Asa kyng of Iudah, and sayde vnto hym: bycause thou haste trusted in the kyng of Siria, and not rather put thy trust in the Lorde thy God, therefore is the hoste of the kyng of Siria escaped out of thyne hande. Had not the Ethiopes and they of Ludim an exceadyng strong hoste wyth many Chariotes and horsemen? And yet bycause thou dyddest put thy trust in the Lorde, he delyuered them into thyne hand. For the Lorde and hys eyes beholde al the earth, to strengthen them that are of perfect hart towarde hym. But thou herein hast done foolyshly, and therfore from hence foorth thou shalt haue warres. &c. For I shewed before that we myght without daunger discommende thys example whych they bryng of thys kyng, when as God doth so sharpelye chasten hym by hys Prophet. But we wyll entreate of thys more largely afterward.
4 And Iudah went vp, and the Lorde deliuered the Chananites and Pherezites into their handes and they smote them in Bezek to the number of ten thousand men.
The victorie whiche the two tribes obteyned ouer the Chananites is described, and accordyng to the manner of the holy Scripture, the same is set forth and comprehended in fewe wordes, afterward the maner howe the thyng was done is more amplye expounded. Now briefly is declared that they of Iudah obteyned the victorie and slew ten thousand of their enemies.
Why suche as are ouercome are sayde to be deliuered of God into the handes of their ouercommers. And the Lord deliuered the Chananites. The holy Scripture obserueth his olde order, to say that they whiche are ouercome in battaile are deliuered into their enemies handes by God, and speaketh thus to adminishe vs, that victory is not the worke of our owne strength, but of the goodnesse and counsel of God. Wherfore souldiours and emperours whē they haue the vpper hand in battailes, they must bridle them selues from boasting and gloryeng, which Ieremy also faithfully geueth counsell to do. For he sayth, let not him that is mightye glory in his owne strength. Nebuchadnezar kyng of the Babilonians folishely despising this, was so vexed & tossed with madnesse, that he was almost chaū ged into a dumbe beaste. Wherefore the administration of the kyngdome was taken away from him, & he liued in great misery of long time, who out of doubt had not fallen into so great misfortune, if (as it was mete) he had confessed that what soeuer he had gotten was geuen him by the prouidence and coūsel of God. But as Daniel mencioneth, he being puffed vp with the noblenesse and dignitie of his actes, most presumptuously and proudly bragged of them: for he sayd, that in the strength and might of hys owne arme, he had established the kyngdome of Babilon.
In the bookes of the Ethnikes thou shalte very seldome or peraduēture neuer fynde any suche kynde of speache. For men whiche are destitute of faith, do not ascribe those good thinges vnto god, which they thinke they haue attayned vnto by any labour or industrie. Yea and they ascribed the chaunces of warre not to come by the fauour of God, but by strength and pollicye, and sometymes by fortune. Wherfore Cicero in his boke of diuination affirmeth that the victory of the Decianes whiche they gotte by vowing of them selues to the people of Rome, Cicero. Howe Cicero interpreteth the vowing of the Decianes. was an excellent and polliticque deuise of warre. So farre is he from attributing it to the prouidence of the gods. They knew (sayth he) that y e strength & force of the Romayne people was such that if they sawe their captaynes either to be in extreme daungers, or els to be slayne, or to be taken of their enemyes, that they would by no meanes suffre such dishonor, and thincking with thē selues by that meanes to stay the flight, they thrust them selues into the thickest of their enemies, setting before them the shewe of their vowe and religion. So that by that meanes the harts of the soldiours in maner discouraged might be called agayne more fiersly to fight with their enemyes.
But we are taught by the holy Scriptures, that when we either see or heare of any that are conquerours, or els are slayne in battailes, we must by and by ascribe vnto God al that whiche is, or hath ben done, who (after the most accustomed phrase of the holy Scriptures) is sayd to deliuer them whiche are ouercome into the handes of their enemies. God without any iniury deliuereth some in to the hādes of their enemies. The Chananites were defiled with moste detestable wicked dedes.
When it is sayd that any are deliuered of God into the handes of their enemyes we must thincke that that is done without any iniurye. And as touchyng this place we know that those nations of the Chananites were full of most heynous wickednesse, and for that cause, god punished them most iustly. Whiche cause is confirmed by that whiche we read in the booke of Genesis, where God bringeth a reason, why he held the posteritie of Abraham so lōg tyme in Egipt, [Page 11] namely bycause the sinnes of y e Chananites were not yet full. God punisheth the vngodly with two kindes of punishmentes. And this is not to be forgottē, that God vseth according to his iustice to deliuer synners to be punished two manner of wayes, or to two sortes of enemies. For sometymes he doth this in geuing them ouer to be vexed with lustes and filthy affections as to certein furyes of hell. Augustine. God punisheth synnes with synnes. And that is it which Augustine oftentimes sayth y t sinnes are punished with sinnes. So Pharao hys vnfaythfulnesse and cruelty was punished by hardning & stubbornesse of harte. And Idolaters as Paul teacheth to the Romaines: were geuen ouer of god to their owne filthy lust, so that they most vylie contamined thē selues with most horrible sinnes. But bycause this kynde of punishement is not sene nor felte of mad men, as it is mete, god therfore deliuereth the vngodly, into the handes of straunge enemies, to be vexed, and at the length vtterly to be destroyed. And that this order was obserued with the Chananites, the Scripture manifestly teacheth, for they were not onely addicted to Idoles, but as it is written in the xviii. & xx. chap. of Leuit: They miserably defiled them selues with incestes & most filthy lustes. They were first therfore deliuered of God into a reprobate sense, and then were they deliuered to theyr enemies the Hebrues, of whō they were spoyled both of their life, and also of their most riche kingdome.
God deliuered them into their handes. That is, into their power. This is not onely an Hebrew phrase, but also a latine: for we say, This is my hande, that is, it lyeth in my power.
And they smote them in Bezek to the number of ten thousand men. To smite is here, to kill. And seing that the hoste of the Chananites was great & there were nowe slayne of it but onely ten thousand men, we must thincke that the rest fled awaye, in whiche flight as afterwarde shalbe declared Adonibezek was taken. But where as these two wordes Chananites and Pherezites are ioyned together in this place. They are thus to be taken, that if thou vnderstande the Chananites after the common signification, wherin were cōprehended those 7. or 9. nations, then this name Pherezites should be added bycause of interpretation, that by it might be expounded that whiche before was not expressed in the word Chananites. But if by this word Chananites we shall vnderstand any one especial or peculiar people of those nations, then must we say that that host was gathered of both the peoples, of the Chananites I say and the Pherezites.
5 And they founde Adonibezek in Bezek, & they fought agaynste him and slewe the Chananites and Pherezites.
6 And Adonibezek fled, and they followed after him & caught him and cut of the thombes of his handes and of his feete.
7 And Adonibezek sayd: 70 kynges hauing the thombes of theyr handes and feete cut of, gathered their meat vnder my table: As I haue done, so God hath done to me agayne: and they brought hym to Ierusalem, and there he died, &c.
After mencion made of the victorye it is here more expressed by partes, for the place of the battaile is expressed namely Bezek: Bezek. but where this Bezek should lye it is not very certain. For there was a certaine Bezek whiche was a city belonging to the tribe of Manasses whiche was situate 17. myle from Sichem as ye go to Bethsan. Ierome. And Ierome testifieth that in his tyme there were two Townes which were called by this name. And it is not very likely that Iuda and Symeon would passe with their hoste to the tribe of Manasses, whē their purpose was only to ridde the Chananites out of their owne lottes. Vnlesse peraduenture, that king whiche was called Adonibezek althoughe his kyngdome were in the tribe of Manasse claymed and vsurped by violent tyranny many places in the inheritaunce [Page] of Iudah and Simeon. This kyng had prepared an hoste to go agaynst Iudah and Simeon, and to let them from recouering of their own. Which thing being knowen, Iudah and Symeon made towarde him, that he should not entre into their borders. Wherfore it chaunced y t they fought with him not farre frō his kingly citie Bezek, or els it is to be thought that this Bezek was a certain citie either in the tribe of Iudah or els of Simeon, wherof is no mencion made in any other place.
Malchisedech Adonisedech.This kyng was called Adoni-bezek whiche is a compounde name, wherin y e leter Iod is placed betwene two wordes as Malchi-sedech, Adoni-sedech, euē as R. Selomo testifieth. This king semeth to haue fled, for that he sawe his hoste both slayne to the number of ten thousande men, and to turne their backes and flye, he would therfore saue him selfe by flight, but he was brought backe agayn by the Israelites and suffred most grieuous punishement, as he had iustely deserued. Bohan. Behonoth. For they cut of the thombes both of his handes and of his feete. This word Bohan signifieth in the Hebrew a thombe, & it is in the feminine gender, wherfore it is said in the plurall nomber Behonoth. Although R. Dauid Kimhi do interprete that worde into fyngers, and the Chaldey paraphrast doth interprete it anckles.
And Adoni-bezek said: 70 kings. This tyranne acknowledgeth the iudgement of God, but whether he spake this of true faith or pure repentaunce, it can not be knowen by the wordes of our history. But it is most lykely, bycause he called not vpon God, implored not his mercy, neither shewed any tokens of true conuersion, The law of rē dring lyke for lyke. that rather anguish did extorte from him this his true sayeng, than the godly feling of the minde. We gather hereby that the lawe of rendring like for like semeth euen to the wicked by the light of nature, iust & right, which at the length wil they or nill they are compelled to acknowledge the iudgemēts of God. For they haue certein principles of that which is right and honest written in their hartes, although they expresse, not the same in dedes. But euen as Paul hath written to the Romaines they holde the truth of God after a certeine sorte captiue in vnrighteousnesse, & when they knew the righteousnesse of God, neither was it hidden from them, that they whiche do such thinges are worthy of death, yet for all that they not onely do them, but also they consent to them whiche do them.
As I haue done, so God hath done to me agayne. Bycause he spake of gods iudgementes, therfore in naming of god he vsed not this worde Iehouah but Elohim. The name Iehouah and the name Elohim. By whiche worde the scripture vseth rather to set forth the myght and iustice of god, than his mercy. This most cruell tyranne confesseth, that he had most cruelly cut of the feete of 70. kinges, and brought them to that poynte, y e they were faine to gather their meate vnder his table. It is not to be laughed or hissed at as a lye, bycause in that prouince beyng not very large were 70. kinges. Euery citie in the olde tyme had their king. For it may be that at that tyme that custome was in vse, that euery citie had his king. Neither ought the gouernment of a king to be separated from other formes of gouernmentes by largenesse or bredth of borders, but in what societie or multitude of men soeuer it be, Definition of a kyng. Iustine. where as any one mā is lawfully made gouernour, so that he depend not of any other superiour power, the same man may by good right be called king, yea and as Iustinus writeth, euery king before Ninus tyme was content with the boundes and limites of his owne citie. And such a custome if I should speake the trouth I can not but greatly commende. It is not profitable to haue large kyngdomes.
For what shall it profit kinges most amplye to dilate the territory of their empyre, when as afterward they are ouerwhelmed with ouer much weight therof, neither are they able to gouerne it by reason and counsell. But what should man do? The Monarches in these dayes are so set on fire with such great ambition, [Page 12] that they haue not a respect how many they are able to gouerne, but onely haue a regarde to this, how many they may reigne ouer. Neither doth this disease (whiche is the more to be lamented) raigne onely in worldly princes, The Bishops seke to haue large diocesses but it is also most filthyly spred abroade in the Churche where Byshoppes couet by all meanes to haue most large diocesses, of whiche (although they neuer looke to them) they may receaue most plentifull fruites.
But nowe I returne to the matter and aske the cause why the Israelites did cut of the thombes of the handes and feete of Adonibezek. Wherfore Adonibezeb was so maymed of the Hebrues. R. Leui aunswereth to this interrogation, and sayth that it was therfore done, that the cruell Tirant might be made altogether vnapt to do any thing, and especially to make warre. For they whiche are so inaymed are neither able to drawe sworde, neither to take or ouercome any man in battaille. Moreouer by this so sharpe punishment other princes whiche were yet remayning might easely be made affeard to lifte any weapon agaynst the Israelites. These thinges are somewhat lykely, but the wordes of the same tyranne teache vs that we must consider some deeper cause, namely that it was so done by the prouidēce of god, that cruell and bloudy princes should not at the length escape the iudgemēt of God, yea rather they should haue experience on them selues of that whiche they had committed agaynst others. And in that thing bycause it is good sometymes to be taught by the example of wicked men, God would now also admonishe vs by this Adonibezek. He teacheth vs that we should not muche staye in inferiour causes whiche are nexte vnto vs, We must not staye in the inferior causes but rather cōsider the highest causes. but rather by these examples strayght wayes to lift vp the eyes of the mynde to consider the wonderful and most highe iustice of the decrees of God. The selfe same most cruel tyranne doth not ascribe vnto the Israelites that they had feabled hym by cutting of his handes and feete, but by and by sayeth. As I haue done to other, so God hath done to me agayne. Which same thing also Christ hath taught vs, for this also was his sentēce, With what measure ye meate, with the same shall other meate vnto you.
Of this lawe of rendring like for like, let the cruel tyrannes of our tyme be affeard, whiche neuer make an end of killing, tearing, and burning of holy and innocent mē, as thoughe wisedome neuer admonished them: By what soeuer a man sinneth, by the same also is he punished. Neither haue they at any tyme heard Habakuc the holy prophet cryeng thus. Why tyrannes do so cruelly rage? Bycause thou hast spoyled many nations, others also shall spoyle thee. Those be bloudy tyrannes, when they do so extremely rage, being altogether vnmindful of humane chaunces, neuer thincking how the same thinges may happen vnto them selues, wherwith they do so cruelly afflicte others. For if they would remember this, they would vse them selues more mekely not only toward innocent men, but also euē to them which are giltie & iustly condemned by them. Let vs learne in all thinges whiche shal happen, what soeuer they be, to consider as well the iudgementes of god as also his goodnesse, and therby we shall get good matter either of repentaunce, or els of thankes geuing.
But there is a doubt, why the Israelites killed not this king by and by, Why Adonibezek was not by and by slayne of the Iewes. and why they brought him to Ierusalem, there to die miserably? I aunswere, to testifie vnto all men, that he being woūded was not gloriously killed in the battaille, for his horrible tyrāny deserued not so famous an end of this life. Neither is it to be meruealed that when he came to Ierusalē he was not holpen by the diligence and remedies of Phisitians: for the Iewes did it not of cruelty, but bicause they were affeard to violate the commaundement of god, who commaunded that all their enemies the Chananites should be slayne euery one, amongest whom this Adonibezek deserued not one death but a thousand: besides that, it was done that his most shameful end might be an exāple to al mē. He worthily [Page] therfore being maimed and despised, departed this life in a most famous citie. But it semeth to be demaunded, for what cause when he had so vilye maymed 70. kinges he would also haue them vnder his table to gather their meat there? He did it surely to the setting forth of his victories, and also whē he should eate meate, he would not onely refreshe his body with meate and drinke, but he would also reioyce his haulty and proude minde after a certein horrible sort, he thought to him selfe that he had the fruition of no vulgare pleasure, when as in his dayly banckets he renued after a sorte by that terrible sight the victoryes which he had hitherto gotten. Sapor King of the Persians. We read of the like example of one Sapor king of the Persians, who when he had taken in warre Valerian the Emperour of the Romaines and father of Galien he bounde him w t an Iron chayne and drew him with him, & set his feete vpō his backe, as oftē as he would get vp vpō his horse. Tamerlanes also king of the Scythians, Tamerlanes. caried about with him a tyranne of the Turckes taken by him and inclosed in an Iron cage. Tirannes are infected with boasting and cruelty. By these and such like examples we se that the mindes of cruel tyrannes are wonderfully sicke of the diseases of vayne glory and cruelty.
And hereby we gather that to much cruelty doth greatly displease god: and therof I thincke it came to passe that as wel by gods lawes as by mās (I speake but of those whiche are counted iust & honest) certain punishmētes were prescribed for crimes according to the grieuousnesse of thē, whereby iudges had y e lesse libertie geuen them to exercise tyranny. Punishmentes are rather to be diminished thā augmented. Yea & the lawyers added this rule, that punishmentes should rather be diminished by iudges thā augmented: whiche is for all y t to be vnderstād, as much as the nature of the faulte & cōmoditie of the publicque wealth suffereth, whiche I therfore speake, bycause some times those cōditions which cōmonly they call circūstaunces, make the crime so terrible and horrible, y t the iudges must nedes there augment the punishments whiche haue ben prescribed by the lawes, & that to the entēt to feare away others frō so grieuous mischieuous dedes, & so Dauid when Nathā the prophet declared vnto him an execrable & horrible thing, he decreed a more grieuous punishment against him that was guiltie, than the law had ordeyned for common thieues & stealers of cattel. Three kyndes of death in the lawe of God. I haue therfore made menciō of these, bycause there were in y e law thre kindes of death appointed for euil doers, I meane, hanging, stoning, & burning, vnto which some Hebrues adde the fourth, namely the punishment of the sword: but bycause there is no mencion made therof in the lawe (as farre as I know) I haue therfore left it out. We read that Adonias, Ioab & Agab king of Amalech & many other were thrust thorough with swordes, But we finde it not prescribed by any lawe or precept that the guiltie should be put to death by the sword. Seing I say the matter is so, The Hebrues vsed an extraordinary punyshment in their tentes. we se that the children of Israel vsed nowe in their tentes a certein extraordinary kinde of punishmēt against the king Adonibezek. And I beleue they did it not w tout the instinction of god. For god would punish the cruelty of this tyranne w t an exquisite punishmēt, which was neuerthelesse of rendring like for like, which kinde of wicked doing to the entent we may the caselyer auoyde, it shall not be grieuous vnto vs to speake somewhat of it.
From whence this word cruelty is deriued.This word cruelty is deriued either of this latin word Cruor, which signifieth bloud, wherin cruel mē like wild beastes do delite, either of Crudae earnes which signifieth rawe flesh, which fierce & barbarous people somtimes do eate, & may be defined to be a vicious habite wherby we are inclined to sharpe & hard things aboue reason. The definition of crueltye. And somtimes it happeneth y e cruelty is coūted for a pleasure, w t which wicked affectiō or habite how tyrānes haue sometimes ben infected, it is manifestly to be sene by many exāples. This holy history setteth now before our eyes this Adonibezek, & the euāgelicall history maketh mēciō of Herode. The Ethnike poetes haue made report of the cruelty of Atreus & Thyestes: [Page 13] and the most horrible wicked act of Xerxes king of the Persians is set forth by Seneca in his third booke de ira, & .xvii. The cruelty of Xerxes. chap. which Xerxes when a certain man named Pithius, who had well deserued at hys handes, came vnto him and desyred him to spare him one of his fyue sonnes which he had, and he bad him as though he would graunt him his request, to chose him whom he lysted to abide at home from battaile. And he did as he was bidden. But this most cruell tyranne commaunded that the yong man whom he had chosen should be drawen one syde of him one way, and an other the other waye, so that at the length he was torne a sunder, of the whych one part hee commaunded to be fastened in one corner of the way, by the which the souldiours shoulde go, and the other in an other corner, saying that after this sorte he purged his hoste. But not long after he was with much dishonour ouercome and beaten of the Grecians, and constrayned to flie through heapes and dead carcases of his own men. Silla. Silla banished an infinite nomber of Citizens of Rome, but at the length he was most horribly eaten vp of Lyfe. Euen after the lyke sort dyed that most cruel Herode, as it is manifestly declared by Iosephus. Vnto this most wicked vice, clemēcy is directly cōtrary, which as a wonderful vertue doth maruailously wel agree w t princes, & is a singuler ornamēt of Christian men. Augustine in his boke of .83. Augustine. What clemencye is. Certayn foolish mercy. Quest. in y e Quest. 31. defineth it thus. It is an habite wherby men styrred vp to hatred agaynst any man, are through goodnes kept backe. This vertue is a meane betwene cruelty and foolish mercy. I cal it foolish mercy, by which our mynde is so moued wyth other mens miseries, that it declineth from sound counsell and iust reason. And we are ouercome with this affection for this cause, by reason wee woulde neuer suffer such thinges wherwith we see others afflicted iustly and worthily, and because we our selues abhorre from such thinges, we therfore leaue of from punishing y e guilty. Mercy is a profitable affectiō Mercy in dede is an affection profitably planted in our hartes of God, whereby we are styrred vp to helpe and defende others. But we must take heede, that by it we be not made so soft and effeminate, wherby we should commit any thing against the commaundementes and wyl of God. Preposterous mercy is condemned in holy letters. The holy scriptures reprehend Achab king of Samaria, bicause he spared Benadad king of Siria. Of whom he said: if he be on lyue, he is my brother. They condemne Saul also by the voyce of Samuel the prophet, bicause he saued Agag kyng of Amaleck o [...] lyue. And euen as it was said vnto an other by the messenger of God: Whether syns are to be pardoned. Seneca. Thy soule shalbe for his soule, so Saul being a litle before placed by God in the kyngdome, was depriued therof. What shal we do then? Shall we not forgeue synnes? Seneca in his second booke of clemency and .6. chap. writeth: Pardon (sayth he) is a remission of punishment due, by which he is forgeuen which ought to haue bene punished. Wherfore he thincketh it is not a wyse mans part to geue pardon, bicause a wyse man wyl neuer commit any thyng whych ought not to be done, or leaue any thyng vndone which ought to be done. This reason of his seemeth to be very good and effectuall enough. But least we should be deceiued therby, we must here set a profitable distinction of persons, that is of God, of princes, God maye forgeue synnes. and of priuate men. No man ought to doubt, but that god may forgeue whom he wyl, whē as he is not bound to any other mans lawes. Wherfore in forgeuyng he is not sayd to remit that which he ought to haue punished. Besydes this, he hath not so forgeuen men their faultes, A Magistrate ought not to suffer faultes vnpunished. but that he hath punished them in hys onely begottē sonne Christ. But we must otherwise thinke of the Magistrate, to whō it is not lawful to forgeue the punishmentes of synnes, bicause he is commaunded to geue iudgement by the lawes. To whom neuerthelesse it is graunted eyther to release or to aggrauate the punishmentes according to the wayght and quantity of the crimes. Wherfore when he that is guilty is not wythout hope of amēdement, neither hath geuously offēded, the magistrate is contented w t an easier punishmēt, & somtimes he addeth som reprofe or som sharper admoniti [...]. [Page] Wherfore let him neuer leaue synnes vnpunished, & the same mā in punishing is not cruel, yea he rather correcteth, amēdeth, & healeth. Which worke is both iust and also most milde, so far is it that it should be ascribed to fiercenes or cruelty. Seneca. Many executions ar a dishonour to the magistrate. Howe priuate men should forgeue iniuries. I wyl also adde this by the way which is written of the same Seneca, that to haue many executions is no lesse dishonor to the Magistrates, than many corpes are to the Phisitions. But now cōcerning priuate men, me thinketh it must be answered thus: It is their duty to forgeue iniuries don to them selues, neyther can Seneca his saying take place in them, namely that a wise man wil leaue nothing vndone that ought to be done, bycause reuengement is forbidden them by the law of almighty God. And they are commaunded after a sorte to punish such as sinne against them, in admonishing (I meane) and reprouing them. And they are wylled to be content with that punishment when those which haue offended them are amended and made whole. But cōtrarily if they perceiue that they be stubborne, they by the cōmaundement of God ought to complain to the church, by whom at the last they are excluded, vnlesse they wil be obedient to it. And when they are excluded out of the church, they maye also be accused to the Magistrate. In which thing yet is nothing cōmitted against clemency, bycause this is the mynde and purpose of them which accuse, namely vtterlye to take away euyl according to Gods commaundement by al meanes possible. And these thinges are now sufficient concerning cruelty and also clemency.
They whych worke of fayth obtain the promises.Bycause Iudah and Simeon obtayned the victory according to the promyses of the oracle, it shalbe our part diligently to consider and marke, that they which worke with faith by the woord of God do without doubt obtaine his promises. For God hath not left those destitute of his ayde, which haue endeuoured them selues to go forward faithfully in their vocation. The promises of God surelye are constant, and although heauen & earth should at any time vary or be chaunged, yet shal they alwaies be firme. And therefore when as man is pronounced to be a lyer, God contrary wise must bee confessed and celebrated as moste true. Neither is there any thing found so hard or difficult, but that by faith it maye be performed. Wherfore it is very well written in the .xi. chap. to the Hebrewes, that the saintes by faith haue ouercome kingdomes, and obteyned the victorye. That sentence certainly hath a principal respect vnto these histories of the Iudges. This ought to be so manifest and playne vnto vs, that for the obtaynyng of the promises of God, We attayn not to the promises of God by merites. we ought to attribute nothing to our own workes and merites. Yea, let vs rather bee assured, that what so euer happeneth vnto vs, that the same commeth onely of the goodnes of God, which promised the same. Our endeuour also and labour are required therunto by the scriptures, as we see here also to be done, where the victory is geuen to Iudah and Simeon when they fought, and not when they ceased. Not bycause God could not haue geuen them the victory ouer their enemyes, although they had done nothing, as sometimes he dyd: but he hath decreed, to bring vs by the crosse and labours after hys accustomed maner, to the rewardes which he freely promised. Neither yet for al that, that our studies and labours are required as causes to obtayne the promyses, when as God doth geue vnto vs frely, and of his own mere liberality those thinges which he hath promised vs. This is principallye true in those promises, which do wholy passe mans capacity, as are eternal life, and regeneration. For they beyng the chiefe and last endes of our vocations, doo farre and muche passe the dignitye and pryce of our woorkes, Promises of the Gospel and of the law. though they bee most perfect. And there is a certayne profitable and necessary distinction, whych is not to be forgotten, namelye that some promyses are of the lawe, and other some of the Gospell. And this is the nature of promises of y e Gospel to be offred vtterly frely to men. But to promises of the law some worke is euer anexed. And y e is required to be [Page 14] most perfect & absolute in all pointes. Which bicause we can not performe, [...] altogether fal down vnder our burthen, neyther can we attaine to these pro [...] ses of the lawe in respecte they are of the law. Promises of the law are not vayne. Thou wilt say thē that this kin [...] of promises of the law is vaine? Not so, how is it y e they be not geuen in va [...] if none can attaine vnto thē? They are to this end set forth, y e mē vtterly leau [...] the confidence of workes, should hope to obtaine thē by fayth in Christ: Whic [...] when it is done, they are chaunged frō promises of the law into promises of [...] Gospell. And although they be frely graunted, In euangelical promises although they be frely geuen yet must we work as though they were legal. yet in atteining vnto thē we [...] our endeuor & studye no lesse than if they were promises of the law. But yet [...] touching those good thinges whiche endure but for a time and passe not ma [...] strength & labour and the rewardes of them are temporall it is not to be deny but y t our workes are much auayleable. For it is sayd that they are oftentim [...] gottē by them. Although also in obtayning them y e fauor of god is nedeful th [...] unto, which is aboundauntly bestowed on thē which worke by y e word of God by faith. Which thing is manifestly sene of y e readers of this history: for it decireth that god graunted y e victory to a fewe Iewes being straungers and you [...] souldiers, agaynst strong & warlike men, many more in number than they, of monstrous stature, and inhabiting most strong fenced cities and castles.
8 And the children of Iudah fought against Ierusalem and tooke it & smote it with the edge of the sword and set the citie on fyre.
9 Afterward the children of Iudah descended to fight against the Chananites, that dwelte in the mountaine, and in the south and in the lowe countrey.
10 And Iudah went agaynst the Chananites, that dwelt in Hebrō (and the name of Hebron before was Kiriath Arba) and they smote Sesay Ahimman and Thalmay.
11 And from thence they went to the inhabiters of Debir (and the name of Debir before was Kiriath Sepher.)
The things which are now red vnto the xvii. A briefe rehearsal of things in the booke of Iosua verse are most part transferred hither out of the booke of Iosua the .xv. chap, and are now declared by a certain briefe rehearsall of things, and it is done to this end, that we might vnderstand that y e tribe of Iudah had obtayned Ierusalem when Iosua was yet liuing so that it was the easier for him to lead away Adonibezek captiue thither. And these be the things which are repeated in thys place out of the booke of Iosua. The conquering of Ierusalem, Hebron, and Debir, the matrimony also betwene Achsa & Othoniel and y e departure of the Kenites from the citie of Palmes. That al these things (I say) are now declared by a certaine repetition, it is therby manifest, bicause it is written in the booke of Iosua, that the king of Ierusalem was taken, & we read in the end of the xv. chap. that the same citie of Ierusalem came into the handes of the people of God, and that the children of Iudah dwelt in it with the Iebusites. Besides that these things which are now rehearsed of Hebron are contayned in the .x.xi. and about the end of the xiiii. chap. in the booke of Iosua. And y e historye of Achse and Othoniell is red in the xv. chap. of the same boke. How farre this parenthesis extendeth. This repetition therfore or parentheses extendeth to these wordes: And Iudah wet with hys brother Simeon, &c. In which place y e author returneth to make mention of the actes which the tribes of Iudah and Simeon ioyned together dyd at this time performe. Which thīg also by this appeareth the more manifest, bycause strayghtway is declared how Gasa was taken, which citie is sayd in the xi and xiii. chap. of Iosua to haue yet remained in y e hands of the enemies, The per [...]erfect tence is expoū ded by the preterplusperfecte tence. & is numbred among those cities which were not conquered vnder Iosua. Wherfore the wordes of the preterperfect tense which are red in this repetition are to be interpreted in that time past, which we call the preterplus perfecte tense, that the [Page] order of the historye might be made more playne and manifeste.
They smote them with the mouth of the sword. This is a Metaphor in this maner of speche, very often tymes vsed in y e holy scriptures, wherin by y e mouth of the sword we ought to vnderstād the edge therof, bycause it semeth to deuour and consume those thinges whych are smytten, in maner lyke a mouth. And wher it is said that They set the city of fyre, we must vnderstand it by this figure Hypallege, when the thing is cleane contrary, for fire is throwne into the city, and not the city into the fyre. Neither ought this to be vnderstand thus, as though they had then burned the whole citye. For it is wrytten in the booke of Iosua, and afterward it shal be expounded in this booke, that that city was after that inhabited by the tribe of Iudah and Beniamin, and also the Iebusites, yea and the castle therof which was very wel fensed was not deliuered vp to the Israelites, The city of Ierusalem was taken when Iosua was yet a lyue. tyl in Dauid his time, as it is declared in the latter booke of Samuel. Neyther ought that to moue you bycause it appeareth not in the booke of Iosua that the city of Ierusalem was taken. For although this be not plainly and manifestly spoken, yet may it be vnderstand by those thinges which are there intreated of, namely that the king of Ierusalem was taken, and that Iudah dwelled in that city, neither could he yet cast out the Iebusites from them. Al these thinges I say are signes that the city was taken at that tyme, although it was not yet possessed fully and in al partes.
It seemeth also somewhat obscure, that it is wrytten that Iudah descended, when he should go fight against the Chananites, who dwelled on y e mountaines. When as we accustome in going to mountaines to ascend, and not to descende. But we must vnderstand that those countries wer ful of mountaines. Wherefore when the host remoued from one mountaine to an other, it must nedes descend first into the valley, from whence it might afterward ascend vpon an other mountaine. Thou wylt peraduenture aske whether Iudah at that tyme cōquered the plaine or the valley which was betwene? No verely. He assaulted them in dede, but he could not ouercome them. For we shall heare in thys chap. that those which were not ouercome of Iudah in the valley, had yron Chariotes, so that by that meanes they were not ouercome.
And Iudah went against the Chananites, that dwelt in Hebron. These thnges are now therfore repeated, that we should vnderstande that it was not of necessity that the city Hebron should be taken of Iudah then when the Israelites were in this iourney on warfare, which they tooke in hand after the death of Iosua, namelye at that tyme, wherein the publique wealth was gouerned by elders without any certaine Iudge, Iosua being yet alyue.
Why Hebron was called the city Arba. And the name of Hebron before time was called Kiriath-Arba, and they smote Sesay, Ahimman, and Thalmay. The reason of the name of this city is not of euery man taken a like. The cause of the diuersity is this word Arba whych in his vsuall and proper signification signifeth the number whych the Latines cal Quatuor, It is not certain that Adam and his wyfe were buryed in Hebron. & the Grecians [...] which is foure. Now some suppose the number of foure to be referred to the foure couple of men wyth theyr wiues, which they say wer buried in that city. Yet the holy scriptures make mē cion but of three: for in the booke of Genesis & .23. chap. we reade that Abraham and Sara wer buried there, & also in the .35. & .49. chap. of the same booke we rede of Isaac and Rebeckaes burial there. And lastly in the .50. chap. we fynde that Iacob was caried thither, & he him selfe before that had there buried his wife Lea. But concerning Adam & Eue his wife, whō they haue added vnto these, we can finde nothing thereof in the holye scriptures. For that which they alledge out of the .14. chap. of Iosua maketh nothing to the purpose, for y t the word Adam in that place is not the name of the first man. Wherfore they can gather nothyng [Page 15] out of that place, but that Arba was a certaine great man among the Anakims. These are the words there: Ha Adam Hagadol be Anakim Hui, that is: he was a great man among y e Enakims. But our interpretour translateth it thus: Adā was counted the great among the Enakims. Wherby it appeareth y t he thought that Adam was a proper name. But he was two wayes deceaued: first he dyd not marke that the article Ha is ioyned to the word Adam, which is neuer ioyned with proper names. Wherfore it must needes be a common name, whych must be referred to that woord Arba, for that name was put a litle before. The other errour is bycause we reade no where that the first man was reckoned amongst the Enakims, that is to say Giauntes.
The opinion of others is that Hebron was called the City Arba, bycause it was inhabited of .4. Giauntes, namely Sesay, Ahimman, and Thalmay vnto which three brethren they adde Annak their Parent. But the opinion of these men is easely confuted, bycause that in the .14. chap. of Iosua toward the end, it is by manifest wordes declared that this word Arba is the proper name of a Giaunt. Wherfore it is manifest enough that this woord must not be referred to the number of four. And by that meanes not onely this latter sentence, but the first also is confuted, which would haue this name Arba to haue a respect to the foure couple of men with their wyues, buried in the old tyme in that City. And vndoubtedly for the same cause also, the opinion of others is not to be allowed, which do thinke that the City was so called, bycause although it were but one City, yet it consisted of foure Cities, and that this woord Arba is all one wyth this greeke woorde [...] whiche is foure Cities. Wherefore I iudge it best to thyncke that it was so named of the buylder thereof named Arba, Arba had three chyldren. who how he came by that surname it is vncertaine. Onely this we maye gather out of the scriptures, that what so euer he was, he had three chyldren which are called in this place and also in the booke of Iosua, Sehai, Ahimman and Thalmay. And it is very lykely that they were deade long tyme before Iosua. And when they were now dead, then was there mencion made of them, bicause their families which seme to haue bene of a wonderful huge stature were destroyed by Caleb and Othoniel. And this is the reason why I suppose that these three brethrē liued not in Caleb and Othoniels tyme, bycause this Citye as it is written in the booke of Numbers, was a most auncient city, and was buylt .vii. yeares before zoham that is, Thamin the kingly Citye of the Egiptians. And in zoham dyd Moyses and Aaron woorke the wonders before Pharao. And if so be it was the kingly and noble city then, it must nedes be built long time before. Wherefore if Hebron were built before it, and had the name thereof of Arba, how could his children be on lyue at this time? It cannot be so. Besides thys, Abraham had a lodging in this City, & bought there a double caue. And from that time to Iosua his time wer almost .400. yeres. It is not therefore very likely, that the sonnes of him which builded so auncient a city should lyue tyl Iosua his tyme, vnles any man wyl fayne that the same city was built long time before, & called by an other name, & then in processe of tyme casting away the first name, it should be named by this most strong and mighty Giaunt. But whether it be thus or no, neither skilleth it much, neither semeth it curiously to be sought for.
But this might somwhat moue some, bycause Arba, wherof we now speake, is called in the .15. chap. of Iosua, the father of Enak. For if he had .3. sōnes which were named as well here as in the same booke of Iosua, it wil then he doubtfull who that same Enak was. What Hanack signifieth. In which thyng (sauyng the iudgement of a better learned) I would thinke might be answered, that it was not a proper name but a cōmon, wherby at that time men of huge stature, but such as were noble & excellently adourned, wer called. For this word Enak in hebrewe is to gird or to [Page] compasse, and is chiefly referred to chaines which are worne about the necke for comelynes sake. And thereof is this name Enak deriued, & in the plural number hath both the masculine & feminine forme, & it signifieth a chaine, and is transferred to noble & worthy men, whom thou mayst cal chained. Wherfore Sesay, Ahimman & Thalmay may be called the sōnes of Arba, who was not called the father of them onely, but also the father of Enak, bycause euery one of his sōnes was noble, Why giauntes were called Enakim & wore a chaine, or was a Giaunt, for Giauntes also were called Enakim, either bicause they wore chaines, or els bycause they were of a notable stature of body, for it may be that that word was applyed to all kynde of ornaments. Of them is mencion also made in the booke of Numbers .13. chapter.
By how many names giaūtes are called in the holy scripturesSeing we are now by chaunce in hande with giauntes, and that there is often mention made of them in the holy Scriptures, it shall not be vnprofitable, somewhat to speake of them. Fyrste we muste knowe that they are called by diuerse names in the holy Scriptures as Enakim, Eimim, Zemasmim, Nefalim, Rephaim. Why they were called Enakim manifestly appeareth by those things which we haue spoken before. And they were called Eimim, of the terror which they draue into others by their loke, They were called Zemasmim, of mischiefe, bicause they trusting to their owne power and might, were dispisers of lawes, iustice, and honesty, and euer went about wicked actes. For Zemah in Hebrue signifyeth mischiefe. They were also named Rephaim. Bycause they made men which met them to be after a sorte amased, for that worde signifyeth sometimes the dead. Lastly they were called Nefalim as oppressors, bycause they assayled al men tyrannously, of this worde Nafal which is to fall or subuerte. Some thinke that they are sometimes called Geborim: but bycause we vse to referre y e worde to power, and properly strong men are called Geborim, therfore I woulde not put it among these.
When glaūtes began. Augustine.Furthermore if thou wilte demaunde when giauntes beganne to be, if we may follow Augustine de ciuitate Dei, the .xvi. boke and xxiii. chapter. We must say that they beganne before the floude. And therfore we beleue him, bycause he hath proued it by the testimonye of the holy Scriptures: for it is written in the vi of Genesis that giauntes were at that time on the earth: whose kind although it was kept after the floude, yet as he beleueth they were not in so great number. Whether Giauntes were begotten of mē Besides this it may be doubted concerning their procreation and parents: for there are some whiche thinke that they were not begotten of men, but that Aungels or deuils were their parentes. And this sentence they say is confirmed by that which is written in the booke of Genesis. The sonnes of God seing the daughters of men that they were fayre, they tooke them to wiues, and of them were borne most mightye men or giauntes. Concerning this fall of the Angels many of the old writers agree that it was bicause they vsed company with women, and among other is Lactantius in his second booke and xv Chapter. For his opinion was (as it is there written) that God feared least Sathan to whom he had graunted the gouernement of the worlde shoulde vtterly haue destroyed mankinde, Lactantius. and therfore he gaue vnto it Angels for tutors by whose industrye & care it mighte be defended. But they being prouoked as well by the wilinesse of Sathan, as also allured by the beauty of fayre women, committed filthines with them. Wherfore they were throwen downe from their dignitie and made souldiers of the deuill. This was Lactantius opinion, but yet he sayth not, that Giauntes were borne of those copulations of Angels with women but earthly deuils which abide on the earth to our greate hurte. Eusebius of Cesaria Eusebius of Cesaria in hys .v boke de preparatione euangelica, doth nothing in a manner disagree from them. For he also sayth that Angels which fell, begat of women whom they filthilye loued those deuils, which afterward troubled the world many wayes, and to thē [Page 16] he referreth al these which the Poets and historiographers haue writtē to haue bene Gods, & haue eyther in Metre or in Prose made mention of their battailes discordes, lustes, and sundrye and grieuous tumultes, Augustine. But Augustine in his xv boke de ciuitate Dei. xxiii. Chap. thinketh that this opinion of these old men can not be gathered out of that place of Genesis. Men of the stocke of Seth were called the sonnes of God. For he sayth that those which are there called y e sonnes of god, were in very dede men, namely cōming of y e stock of Seth. For whē they worshipped god truely and sincerely, and called vpō him holily and purely, being adorned w t his fauor & grace, they are called by y e scriptures y e sonnes of God. What was the fal of the sonnes of God. But whē at y e length they began to burne in filthy lust with those women which came of the stocke of Cain, and by that meanes fel into fellowship with the vngodly, taking them to their wiues and cleauing also to superstitions and wicked worshippings, they were chaunged from y e sonnes of God not only into men, but also into fleshe. And thys will I say by the way, Aquila. Aquila translating these words out of Hebrue, They wer not (saith he) y e sōnes of God, but the sonnes of Gods: for thys cause so called (as I suppose) bycause their progenitors were holy men, Simmachus. but their children miserably fell from god and godlines by inordinate loue of women. And Symmachus translateth it, The sonnes of the mightye. But nowe to Augustine againe, he constantly affirmeth that there can be nothing gathered out of that place of Genesis concerning the carnall copulation of Angels with women, but thinketh rather, that farre contrary may be proued by the wordes of God written in the same place. For whē the scripture had there sayd, that there were Giaunts on the earth, and that the sonnes of God (as it is sayd) were gone out of the right way, and Giaunts were brought forth, there is added: And god sayd, my spirite shal not abide in man for euer, bicause he is flesh. By this sentence he declareth, that those which so sinned were called men, and not only as they were by nature, but also they were called flesh, wherunto by their filthy luste, they did to much cleaue. But they which be of y e contrary opinion do thinke that they do bring a strong witnesse of Enoch which was the vii. from Adam, of whom Iudas maketh mention in his canonicall Epistle. Enochs booke Augustine. For in the booke which is intituled to be Enochs booke it is writtē that giauntes had their of springs of Angels and not of mē. But Augustine answereth vnto this, and sayth that that booke is altogether Apocripha, & therefore such fables as are rehearsed in it, are not to be beleued. It is not to be doubted he sayth but that Enoch wrote some godly thinges, when as Iudas the Apostle manifestly testifieth the same: But it is not necessary that we should beleue that all thinges which are written in that Apocriphal booke shoulde be of hys writing, Forasmuch as they haue no sure authoritie. Neither, although Iudas brought thence some one certaine sentence, is it supposed that therfore he by his authoritie hath allowed the whole booke: Vnlesse thou wilt saye that Paule allowed all the things which were written by Epimenides, Aratus and Menander bicause he brought one or two verses out of thē. Ierome. Which thing Ierome in his exposition vpō the first chap. of the Epistle to Titus declareth to be a very absurde thing and worthily to be laughed at. And now as concerning Enoch, it semeth meruelous, how he being but the vii. from Adam could write of those things of the altercation betwene Michael and the deuil, for the body of Moyses, when as if there wer any such thing (as there is no doubt but there wer) they must nedes haue come to passe a thousand and almost .500. yeares after. Vnlesse we wil say y t those things wer reuealed at that time by some notable strength of prophecy.
Neyther is it to be forgotten, that those whiche do thinke that giauntes had Angels to their parentes & not men, do therfore seme to suppose so, The reason of them which thought giaūts were not borne of men. bicause they thinke it is not possible, y e huge giauntes can be borne of mē of vsual bignesse & stature. Wherfore some of thē haue gone so farre, y t they haue affirmed that the first mā was a giaunt, and y t Noah also & his childrē were Giaunts bicause they [Page] beleued not that y e kind of mē could be either before or after y e floud, except their first progenitors had bene such, if it were thought they should be borne of men. But Augustine proueth that to be false & sayth, Augustine. A womā giaūt that a litle before the ouerthrow made by y e Gothes, there was a womā at Rome of a giauntes stature, whō very many out of diuerse countreyes came to see. Which womans parents neuerthelesse exceded not y e cōmon accustomed stature of other men. The naturall cause of y e great stature of giāts But as touching the cause of this huge bignesse of giaūtes, if we should loke vpō nature thē can we bring no other reason, but a strong naturall heate, & also a moysture which abundauntly & largely ministreth matter, for y e heate doth extende y e same not only into length, but also it poureth out & spreadeth it both to breadth & also to thicknesse. Giaunts therfore begā before the floud, they wer also before the accō panieng of the sonnes of god with the daughters of men, & after that also continued their generation. Men therfore begat them, and had a naturall cause such as we haue sayd. There were also some without doubt after the floud, for there is mencion made of them in the booke of Num. Deut. Iosua, How huge the giauntes were Iudges. Samuel, Paralip, and other holy bookes. Concerning their bignesse & stature we may partly gesse and partly we haue it expressedly described. The coniectures are bycause Goliah had a cote of male weing v.m. sicles, and a speare like a weauers beame, and the Iron or top of his speare weighed 600. sicles. We coniecture also that Og kyng of Basan was of a wonderfull bignesse and that by hys bed, whiche being of Iron contayned 9. cubites in length. And the Israelites compared with Enachim seemed as grassehopers. These he signes wherby we may iudge howe bigge these men were. But the bignesse of Goliah is described properly and distinctly in the booke of Samu. For it is sayd that he was 6. cubites and a hande bredth highe. A cubite with the Grecians & Latines. And a cubite with the Grecians is two feete, but with the Latines a foote and a halfe. Some alledge the cause of this difference to be, bycause the measure may be extended from the elbow to the hand, being some tymes closed, and sometymes open or stretched forth. And thus much as concerning the stature of giauntes, so farre as may be gathered by the holy Scriptures. But we read among the Ethnickes farre more wonderfull thinges, The Ethnikes opinion of gianntes. Philostratus. The common stature of men in our tyme. The measure of a foote. & such which seeme to some incredible. Philostratus writeth in his booke of noble men, that he sawe the carkase of a certain giaunt which was 30. cubites long, and an other 22. cubites long, and certain other also 12. But the cōmon stature of men in our tyme passeth littell aboue .5. feete. And the measure of a foote agreeth both with the Grecians & with the Latines, for they both geue to euery foote 4. hand breadthes: and euery hand breadth conteineth the breadth of 4. fingers, that is, the length of the litle finger. But if the last fingers, the thombe I saye and the litle finger should be stretched abroade, then euery foote cōtaineth but two hand bredthes. I thincke it not amisse also to declare here what Augustine writeth in the .15. Augustine. booke de ciuit. Dei. 9. chap. where he reproueth those whiche obstinatly contend that there were neuer any men of so wonderfull huge a stature, and testifieth y t he him selfe sawe vpon the coaste of Vtica a tooth so great, that being deuided, it might easely be iudged to be an hundred fold bigger in forme and quantitie thē vsuall teth in our tyme are, Vergil. he also declareth in the same place, that there were in oldetyme very many such bodyes of men, by the verses of Vergil whiche are written in the 7. booke of Aenedos, where he sheweth how Turnus tooke vp so great a stone from the groūde and threw at Eneas that 12. such men as the earth bringeth forth now of dayes could scarsely lifte, whiche place he tooke out of the 6. boke of Iliades of Homere. We may adde also vnto these, the verses which the same Vergil hath writtē in y e first of the Georgikes, he shall wonder at the great bones digged out of the graues. Moreouer Augustine bringeth Pliny the second, who affirmeth in his 7. Pliny booke, that nature the longer it procedeth in her course, [Page 17] the lesser bodyes doth it bryng forth dayly. Cipriane. Whether the bodies of men haue decreased from the floud to our tyme. And he maketh mencion also of Homere whiche made complainte sometymes in his verses. To whom I might adde the testimonie of Cipriane against Demetrian. But if I should be asked the question, whether I thought that the bodies of men whiche were brought forth after the floud are lesse than those whiche were before the floud, I would peraduenture graunt vnto it: Aulus Gellius but that they haue alwayes decreased from the floud euen to our tyme, I would not easely consent to that, and especially bycause of Aulus Gellius wordes whiche he wrote in the third booke, where he sayth, that the measure of the growth of mans body is 7. feete, whiche seemeth also to be the measure at this day in mē of the bigger sort. But lest I should dissemble any thing, we read in the Apochriphas of Esdras the 4. booke about the ende of the .5. chap. that our bodyes are lesser nowe, and shalbe euery daye lesse, bycause nature is alwayes made more weake. And the same doth Cipriane (as I haue a litle before sayd) seme to affirme. But why I would not so easely assent thereunto, this is the cause, for that I can se almost nothing altered in our time from the measure whiche Gellius defineth. Pliny. But now to Pliny agayne who sayth in his 7. booke, that in Crete, when a certayn mountaine was rent by an earth quake, a dead body was founde standing whiche was 46. cubites long, whiche some beleued to be Orions body, other some Othus. It is also left in writing that the body of Orestes being digged vp by the commaundement of an oracle, was 7. cubites long. But that whiche Berosus affirmeth, Berosus. that Adam & Seth his sonne were giauntes, and Noah also with his children, as it is put without testimony of holy scriptures, so may it also be reiected.
Now it seemeth good to declare, Why GOD woulde haue so huge giauntes some tymes. for what cause god would haue some men sometymes to be borne with so huge bodies. It was done for this cause Augustine thincketh in his boke before alledged 23. chap. to leaue a testimony vnto vs, that nether the beauty of the body, neither the bignesse of stature, nor strength of the flesh are to be accompted among the chief good thinges, when as they are no lesse commune to the godly sometymes than they are to the vngodly. They surely which are desirous of godlinesse will iudge that spirituall good thynges are farre to be preferred before them, Forme and stature auayle nothing to saluation. partely bycause they are an helpe vnto vs to saluation, and partely bycause they make vs more noble in dede than others. And that giauntes had no helpe by their huge stature to saluation, he confirmeth it by that which Baruch the Prophet hath writtē in the .3. chap. There are giauntes from the beginning of the worlde, famous men, expert in warres: those hath not the Lord chosen, neither hath he geuē them the way of knowledge, but they haue perished bycause they had not wisedome. Giauntes toke not godly causes in hande to defende. Also if a man shall read ouer the holy scriptures, he shall neuer almost fynd that they tooke in hand any good or godly cause, whiche they would defend, and for the whiche they would fight: yea he shall rather se that by their peruersenesse and pride, they haue alwayes ben agaynst God. So did Og king of Basan behaue hym selfe, so also did Goliah and his brethren. All these were most deadly enemies to the people whom God loued and had chosen from the rest to be peculiar to him selfe. Giaūtes were ouercome in battaile of weake persons There is an other thing also besides, whiche may much confirme our faith, for the holy scriptures do alwayes declare how such mōstrous giaūtes were filthyly ouercome in battaile, and that by feable men and very vnexpert in warlike affaires, namely by Dauid being yet but a shepheard, & the people of Israel which were thē but yong beginners in matters of warre, wherby the spirite of god doth admonishe vs to be of a constaunte and valiaunte corage when for godlinesse sake we must fight against such monsters. We must haue no regarde there to our owne strength, seing that the holy oracles do so often declare, that it is god whiche deliuereth such beastes into their handes whom he defendeth. Whiche thinges seing they [Page] are so, this without doubt cometh to passe, that we shoulde by no meanes be affeard of tyrannes, whiche are almost alwayes agaynst God, and trust to their owne great might, when they defend vngodly partes, and thincke that they can robbe and spoyle as they list them selues the flocke of Christ which is feable and weake: seing the might of gods word & power of his spirite will make vs mightie and inuincible agaynst them thoughe we be neuer so lowe and weake of nature. Moreouer if we should follow humane reason, beyng compared with thē, we should easely seeme either wormes or grashoppers: but being hedged & fensed w t the might of god, we shall not only be superiours, but also, (to speake as Paul speaketh to the Romaines) we shal ouercome also. For Christ will ayde vs, who bindeth the strong armed man, & taketh away the most riche spoyles which he had gathered, he hath luckly wrastled with the deuill and his members, & we by him shal haue good successe in our warres, and shal obteyne a farre more noble victorye than that whiche the Poetes haue fayned that their gods obtayned of the Ciclops Titans, Why Giaunts haue resisted God. and other giauntes, whiche were (as they fable) destroyed by the lightnings of Iupiter at Phlegra. It is a playne token why gyaūtes in the old time & mighty princes now of dayes do w t the wise men of this world resist god: surely bicause they cleaue & trust to much to their own strength, whereunto they ouermuch stickīg, God accomplisheth his thinges by humble persons & not by giauntes. there is no mischief which they dare not enterprise, there is nothing which they thincke is not lawful for thē to do. But god vouchesafeth not by such men to accomplish those thinges whiche he hath decreed to bring to passe, but to set forth his might & power farre abroad he vseth rather to accomplish such things as he hath decreed to do by Dauid and any abiect persones.
Whether Og were the last of al the giaunts.Of this thing I would thincke that I had spoken enoughe, but that there is a certein place remayning to be expounded: namely how it should be written in Deut. that there was no more of the giauntes remayning but only Og king of Basan. I am not ignorante what R. Salomo fableth, but his exposition is so childishe, & so worthy to be laughed at, y t I am ashamed to rehearse it. I iudge therfore that it was not spokē absolutely & simply, that there were no more remayning but he, as thoughe there were no more giauntes in all the worlde but he: but it is meant that he onely was remayning in those places namely beyonde Iordane. The Moabites also draue Giauntes out of their coastes. Moreouer we must vnderstand that not onely the Israelites destroyed the giauntes out of those regions but also the Moabites as it is written in the second chap. of Deut. draue them out of their coastes, which must also be thought to haue ben brought to passe by them thorough the fauour of God: for it is in the same place written that god gaue vnto the Moabites those regions to inhabite. Now will I returne to the wordes of the holy hystory.
And from thence they went to the mountaynes of Debir, and the name of Debir before was Kiriath Sepher. Why this citie is called the citie of Letters. It is commonly translated the citie of letters, and therfore would they haue this citie so called, bycause the first letters wer found there, or els bycause learning or good studies florished in that Citie, as they do at this daye in vniuersities, where good sciences are openly taught. Some thincke that lawyers liued there, whiche kept the recordes of iudgementes. There be some also whiche write that there was a notable library there. R. D. Kimhi affirmeth that Debir in the Persian language signifieth a letter, but y e worde Sephir in Hebrew signifieth not properly a letter or a figure but rather a litle boke or scrolle written vpon. The Hebrues do make mencion that Othoniel did in this place expound certein rules of the lawe, whiche before that tyme were almost blotted out, and of that dede was the citie so afterwarde named, but this cā scarse be probable, bycause it seemeth that that citie had that name before the Israelites possessed it. We must know moreouer that this citie also was taken when Iosua was a lyue, whiche is shewed in his owne booke.
And that by no meanes can be fayned to be sayd there by preuenting or (as they say) by anticipatiō. For it is written in the .11. chap. And Iosua came at y e tyme & [Page 18] destroyed the Enakims from the mountaynes, namely Hebron, Debir and all the mountaynes of Iudah. If these things should haue ben mencioned in y e place, as things whiche should come to passe sone after the death of Iosua, then had it not ben well spoken, to haue sayd, And Iosua came at that tyme. And this I thincke the reader shall playnly see proued, if he will not thincke it paynfull, diligently to read ouer the 10, and 15. chap. of Iosua.
12 And Caleb sayd: He that smyteth Kiriath Sepher and taketh it, to him will I geue Hacsah my daughter to wife.
13 And Othoniel the sonne of Kenatz Chalebs yōger brother toke it: and he gaue him Hacsah his daughter to wife.
Here is wont to be demaunded, how these cities Hebron and Debir should be written in the booke of Iosua to haue ben taken of Iosua, when as it is here put that Chaleb conquered them, Chaleb desired to haue these regions assigned him for his inheritaunce. whereunto I aunswere that all that warre was gouerned by the conduicte of Iosua, who was the chief and principall gouernour of the whole hoste, but the principall settyng forward agaynst Hebron and other places adioyning thereunto was committed vnto Chaleb the chief of the tribe of Iudah, and that not without a cause. For he, as it is written in the xiiii. chap. of Iosua, desired to haue that parte assigned peculiarly vnto hym for hys inheritaunce: whiche requestes he easely obtayned. For he required the same, trusting to God hys promises: Chaleb was a faithfull espye. for when he was sent with other spyes to view the lande of Chanaan, he faithfully made relation of the things as they wer in dede, & not vnfaithfully as his fellowes did. Neither was he an author of the peoples seditiō as the other were, yea he rather encouraged the peoples myndes, and diminished those thinges whiche his fellowes had amplified concerning the fence of the cities, of the giaūtes also, and of the strength of the Chananites. For he regarded not mās strength, but with a singular faith, most constantly remembred the power, the goodnesse & promises of god. Wherfore god being angry with the rest, destroyed them in the wildernesse, so that they came not to the promised lande. But he promised Chaleb for his faithfulnesse this inheritaunce, whiche when he afterward demaunded, he put Iosua in remembraunce of the thyng before done, and of the promises of God. God promised Chaleb the lād whereon he should treade. And the place where the promise is contayned is in the 14. chap. of Num. there God promised him that land wheron his foote should treade, whiche wordes the Iewes thincke thus to be expoūded. The rest of the spyes being amased for feare of the giauntes, and putting small confidence in god durst not entre into the citie of Hebron, whiche Chaleb him selfe searched with a valiaunt courage. The promise therfore of this possession was made vnto him in the second yeare after the deliuery out of Egypt. Chaleb surely declared a valiaunt & noble hart, when as he did not only require the possession of these places, but he enterprised also to conquere thē for al that they were fenced & inhabited with most strong giaūtes. Wherfore we must beleue, that he tooke in hand such & so great an enterprise not by his owne power but by gods promises.
And here ariseth no small doubt, howe Chaleb being of the tribe of Iudah, Hebron was one of the Cities of refuge. could obtayne y e citie of Hebron which by lotte belonged to the Leuites. For god had cōmaunded that certain cities as wel beyond Iordane as on this side, should be had for refuge sake, The cities of refuge belōged to the Leuites that thither might flye as many as had slayne any man by chaunce, and not of pretensed purpose. And the possession of those cities whiche were therfore appoynted belonged to the Leuites. Wherfore it was not lawfull that Hebron should be geuen to Chaleb, The Leuites had the citie of Hebron, but Chaleb had the grounde and Lordship. seing it was numbred amōg the cities of refuge. These thinges are true, but we must vnderstand in the meane tyme, that the Leuites myght possesse but their cities only, & the suburbes adioyning to the walles of them. But as for the grounde or dominion whiche they call at this day Lordship, it was not graunted them to haue. Chaleb therfore desired to [Page] possesse the grounde, but as for the citie whiche he had in his handes, he let to the Leuites as the lawe commaunded. It is most certein that there is mention of the citie Hebron in the booke of Gen. when as it is there written, that Abraham liued in the groue of okes of Mamere, & the same had (if we may beleue Ierome) a precious turpentine tree, which grew there from the beginnyng of the world, and continued till the time of Constantine the great. It is said to be 12000. paces distaunte from Ierusalem. Dauid reigned in it some while, before he was anoynted king ouer all Israel. Neither haue we any thyng to do to write nowe of the auncientnesse therof, seing I haue somewhat spoken of it before.
And Chaleb sayd: he that smiteth. This whole history is declared in the 15. chap. of the booke of Iosua, word for word, wherby it appeareth that y t is most certain whiche I before admonished you of, The conqueryng of Debit was harde. namely that all these thinges are now mencioned by a certain repeticiō. The conquering of Debir semeth to haue ben paynefull and daungerous, and meruelously much desired of Chaleb, when as he offreth so ample & noble a gift to the conquerour therof: namely his owne daughter to wyfe, being him selfe the prince of the most noble tribe of Iudah.
And Othoniel the sonne of Kenaz Chalebs younger brother tooke it. It is certain that Othoniel obtayned the victory: but whether be were Chalebs brother, or his brothers sonne or some other kinne to him it cānot be gathered by these words. But how they were kinne it wer good to know, partly for y e knowledge of the history & partly to vnderstand whether the matrimony which followed betwene Othoniel and Achsah were lawfull. In the first booke of Paralip. Hefron was called also Iephuna. and second chap. the father of Chaleb is called Hesron, whiche man was the third frō Iudah: for Iudah had Pharez by Thamra his sonnes wife: and Phares begat Hefron, which was called by an other name Iephuna, for which cause Chaleb is very often written the sonne of Iephuna. R. Salomoh. Of whiche thing I can not tell what fonde inuētion R. Salo. writeth, namely that he was so called, bycause he disagreed from the mynde and counsell of the other spyes. Panah signifieth in Hebrew to depart or to decline, wherfore he thincketh that this surname was geuen to Chaleb for the cause now alledged. Neither maketh that any thing agaynst it (as he sayth) that he is called the sonne of Iephuna, Howe the Hebrues vse this worde Sonne, sometymes. when as in the holy scriptures it is a cōmon vse, y t this phrase, the sonne of death & the sonne of perdition, are all one with these, he is worthy of death, and a mā lost. And by the same kynd of speach (saith he) y e sonne of declination & turning away is all one in this place, as if he had ben called declining & turning away from the counsell & wicked will of the rest of the spyes. I will not deny peraduenture but that this opiniō of R. S. is prety, Many of the Hebrues had two names. What Othoniel was. but yet I thincke it maketh nothing to y e purpose. For other seme to speake more simply whiche say that Hesron was also called Iephuna. Wherfore Chaleb was sometymes called the sonne of Iephuna and sometymes the sonne of Hesron, neither is it a rare thing or vnheard of in y e holy scripture, that some one man should be called by two names. Nowe we se what Chaleb was, namely the fourth from Iudah the sonne of Iacob: wherfore we must speake somewhat of Othoniel. He is here written to be the sonne of Kenaz, and so is he likewise in the boke of Iosua, Othoniel was also called Iā hes. and also in the first booke of Paralip. and iiii. chap. where he is called Iambes also, and renowmed to haue bene noble and very excellent, his mother called him Iambez, bycause she bare him with most bitter payne, for so doth that name signifie in Hebrew: whiche the father as an vnluckye name chaūged, and in stead of Iambez named his sonne Othoniel. We read that the same happened vnto Beniamin, whō the mother as she was dyeng, named Benoni, whiche name bycause it was not very pleasaunt nor luckye, Iacob turned and would haue him called Beniamin for Benoni. Neither was Othoniel notable only in strength and feates of warre, but he was very godly and religious, for in the boke of Paralip, and in the place now alledged his prayers are described, [Page 19] wherwith he most faithfully called vpō God. Three excellēt condicions in Othoniel. Wherfore the scripture testifieth that his praier was heard, the Hebrues haue added therunto y t he was excellently wel learned in the law of the Lord. And these thre vertues in one mā are most rare, namely to be a good warriour, to be religious, and learned.
But now seing his fathers name was Kenaz, What kin Chaleb & Othoniel wer together. & Chaleb had Hesron or Iephuna to his father, how neere of kyn were they then? Some hold opinion that Kenaz, when Hesron or Iephuna was deade, maryed his wife, who had not onelye her with him, but also kept her sonne namely Chaleb, being but a litle one, whō she had by her first husband, then they say he had Othoniel by her, whereby they conclude that Othoniel and Chaleb came both of one mother, but not of one father. Wherefore Othoniel was by nature the sonne of Kenaz, but Chaleb was called also the sonne of Kenaz, bicause he & Othoniel were brought vp together with Kenaz. R. D. confuteth thys opinion, R. D. [...]imhi. bycause it is neuer red in the holye scriptures that any Israelite tooke his surname of hys mother, and much lesse of his Stepfather: The surnames among the Israelites wer taken of the fathers. For euery one in that publique wealth tooke alwaies their surnames of their fathers, as the Gersonites, Merarites, & Leuites. And by the booke of Paralip. he saith may be knowen that that maner was so styl kept & obserued. This reason if it be true in dede, as it semeth to be probable refelleth a certaine opinion of others, which say that Chaleb had a brother, a great deale elder thā him selfe, who was called Kenaz, with whom Chaleb was brought vp lyke a son together with Othoniel Kenaz sonne. Wherfore they seming after a sorte to be both of one age, & being nourished vp together, were easelye counted brethren, namely the sōnes of Kenaz, wher as in dede Chaleb was Kenaz brother. Wherfore it came to passe that they wer both of them called the sōnes of Kenaz. This I say doth R. D. Kimhi iudge absurde: for if no man could attayne to any kynde of surname by the mother or stepfather, then vndoubtedly coulde he not haue it by the brother. But the same R. D. Kimhi thinketh that they were brethren euery way, bycause they had both one father and one mother. And therefore bothe of them are called the sonnes of Kenaz, but not by their next Parentes, but by the name of the family, seyng that both brethren were borne of one and the selfe family, what shal we then do? The Hebrues and our mē differ among thē selues of the kinred of Othoniel & Chaleb. We are not holpen by the history which we haue in hand, & we cannot dissolue the question by the places conferred euery way together. Yea and the Iewes agree not in it among them selues, neither doo they onely vary one from an other, but our writers also write nothing like one to an other of it. Lyranus doth vtterly deny that they wer brethren, which neuertheles Paulus Burgensis affirmeth, yea & that more is, Lyranus agreeth not w t hym selfe, for as in the interpreting of the booke of Iosua hee denyeth that they were brethren, so afterward vpon the first booke of Paral. in the second & fourth chap. he graunteth they wer brethren. But when I more diligētly weigh the reason why in the booke of Iosua he contendeth that they were not brethren, I gather it to be this, bicause he thought y t if they had ben ioyned together with so neare a bond of kinred, y t ther could haue ben no mariage, wherby Othoniel should haue had to wife Hachsah his brothers daughter, seing y t it was forbidden by y e lawe (namely y e .18. & .20. chap of Leuit.) y t no mā should mary his aunt. Wherfore he thinketh it must nedes follow, y t the niepce by the brother is prohibited, bicause that we are ioyned w t the same degree of kinred to the aunt, by which y e vncle is ioyned to y e niepce by the brother. But if Hachsah & Othoniel wer brothers children, then shal this absurdity be wholy auoided: for mariage betwene these was neuer forbidden by Gods lawes. But Burgensis a man otherwise very wel learned, contendeth y t they wer vtterly brethren, & saith y t the vncle might by Gods law mary his niepce by y e brother, & that the Iewes thē selues which otherwise are most diligent obseruers of outward lawes do kepe this custome at this day. He saith moreouer, y t it cōmeth to passe oftentimes, as concerning mariages, y t in degrees either of consanguinity or affinity, ther is found the like distaūce betwene persons, of y e which neuertheles the one is forbiddē, & the other graūted. [Page] And often tymes the prerogatiue of the men and baser condicion of the wyues altereth the thing. For in matrimony man is the head of the woman, as Paule hath said in the first to the Corinth. In mariages the fyrst order of kinred maye not be peruerted. Wherfore ther must alwaies bee a regarde had, that in mariage the order of kinred bee kept, least the order which was before should be peruerted. For it is meete that mariages should obserue and not violate honesty of order among men. Which honesty should he violated if euery man might take to wife hys Aunt, his vncles wife, or mothers sister. For bicause that women ioyned vnto vs by this degree of kynred are to be reuerenced as mothers. But if they be made wyues then by the law of matrimony, they are made subiectes, and ar bound to honour, to obey and reuerence their husbands, whom otherwise they ought to haue had in place of childrē. Which semeth nothing els, than to commit thinges repugnaunt to nature. But if it be contraryly done, then is there no peruerting of order incurred. For hee which is an vncle either by fathers syde or mothers syde shoulde be honoured and reuerenced lyke a father, when he taketh to wyfe his niepce, the husband is made her head, and shalbe honoured and obeyed of her no lesse than if he wer her vncle, eyther by the fathers syde or mothers syde, neither commeth there any perturbation of order by coniunction of matrimony. These thinges Burgensis alledgeth. Wherfore this place doth not onely admonish, but in a maner also cōpel vs, somwhat to entreate of degrees prohibited in contracts of matrimony. Yet wil I leaue at liberty whether Chaleb & Othoniel wer brethren, or whether they were ioyned with any other affinity together. This is most certain if Othoniel wer y e sonne of Chaleb his brother, the mariage then was very lawfull. But the state of the question is, whether it wer lawfull for Othoniel by the common lawe to marye hys brothers daughter.
In the law are not rehersed all the degrees in which maryages ar prohibited.This seemeth first to bee agreed vpon, that in the .18. & .20. chap of Leuit. are not rehearsed al persons or degrees, in which mariages are prohibited: for there is no mencion made of Graundmother, when as neuertheles al men wyll confesse it to be most filthy, if anye man shoulde take to wife his Graundmother, which is farre aboue him in his yeares. The wife also of the Graundfather is not mēcioned of: & though the wife of the vncle by the fathers side be spoken of, yet is there nothing spoken of the wife of the vncle by the mothers syde. Yea, & that we more maruayle at, there is no prohibition for the father to marye hys daughter, when as al men confesse that these mariages are most incest. Wherfore it is to be thought, that in that place are set forth by the holy ghost certayne degrees prohibited, & those not many, but yet such, that by them as by certain exquisite and manifest rules we may iudge of the like. Wherfore we must thinke that those thinges which are spoken of the mother, are also commaunded of the Graundfather or Graundmother or wife of the Grandfather, seing that al these are to bee reckoned for Parentes. Those thinges also whych are spoken of the wife of the vncle by the fathers syde, do manyfestly declare, what is to be done with the wife of the vncle by the mothers side. For as much as these aliaunces or degrees are of one space or distaunce one from an other. Wherefore I am of this opinion, that I thinke the prohibitions mencioned in the law, are therefore set forth that by them we might euidently vnderstand, what is meete to doo in the lyke degrees. I graunt neuerthelesse, concerning Paulus Burgensis reason, that they doo muche more violate the law which do concract matrimonies with persons forbiddē, Who syn more greuouslye against the degrees prohibited. It is vncertain whether the Iewes doo abyde in y e right obseruyng of their lawe. and therwithal peruerting also the order of kinreds. For it semeth to me that he doth farre more vilye which marrieth his Graundmother, than he which marryeth his niexce by the brother, although I thinke that bothe these matrimonies are not lawful.
What the Hebrewes do in our time I passe not much to know: yea I much doubt of that which Paulus Burgensis taketh vnto him as a thing sure & manyfest, namely that the Iewes are at this day most diligent in obseruing of theyr outward lawes. For me thinketh that I should doo well in not geuing to them [Page 20] more dignity or religion than to Christians. Wherfore as it is manifest inough that we haue for mens traditions very much straied from the right obseruation of the comaundementes of God, and also from the right knowledge of the scriptures: so is it also lykely that the same hath happened vnto the Iewes, especially in this our age. Wherfore I am not iniurious against them, whē as I wyl not geue more to them, than to our selues. The Iewes haue added mani other degres to the degrees expressed of god Neuertheles I wil not omit that the Rabines haue added to their prohibited degrees in the law many more as wel in ascending as descending, which I see the most learned man Paulus Fagius hath declared in his annotacions vpon Leuit. nether can I be perswaded that they wer added by them for any other cause, but onely bicause they thought that those degrees wer comprehended in the degrees expressed by God. What we must haue a respecte vnto, in iudging of degres. Wherefore to geue iudgement of any lawful mariages, that shal not be sufficient in my iudgemēt, if the degree wherin they are contracted, shal not be prohibited by manifest & proper wordes in the law, neither the order of kinred peruerted, for it maye be that the like degree, & of the same distaunce be forbidden by authority of the law. The scripture declareth not by manyfest wordes the peruertyng of order, which is to be taken heede of in mariages. Nether doth the scripture as far as I can see, alledge in any place y e reason concerning peruerting of order, although (as I haue before said) I doo not vtterly abiect that reason. Some man peraduenture wil saye: what matter is it for vs of this age, either to know or els to obserue those preceptes which ar contained in the .18. & .20. chap. of Leuit. seing that we after the cōming of Christ are no more bounde to the ciuill lawes of the Iewes? I confesse that the Christians are not bound to the ciuil preceptes of the law: but yet I ascribe those preceptes whych are there geuē for mariages not to ciuil lawes, but rather to moral. And I think that I maye bring a reason out of the same place to confirme my sentence. For God, when he gaue those lawes, added these wordes therunto: The Chananites ar reproued bicause thei had defiled thē selues with incest Take hede therfore, that ye defile not your selues with whordomes & such incestes, as the Gentiles haue done, whom I haue driuen out of those regions which I haue now geuen vnto you, for for bicause those nations haue ben polluted with so grieuous wicked actes I haue therfore so destroied them, & will do y t like vnto you, except ye shal diligently auoid those thinges, which I cōmaund you as touching these euils. I thinke no man wil doubt but that the Chananites whych receaued not the law by Moyses, neither wer Citizens of the publike wealth of the Israelites, could not by that law be condemned, bicause they obeyed not the lawes of the Hebrues. They wer subiect only to the law, which is called morall. Wherfore seing God for that cause reproueth them, bicause they wer defiled with such fylthy lustes & incestes, & affirmeth that for the same cause he depriued them both of their lande and lyfe: it is manifest that these lawes must bee ioyned not to ciuil preceptes but to morall, which al men are bound to obserue.
Neuertheles this semeth at the first sight to be against this sentence, Abrahā & Amram seeme to haue maryed prohibited wyues. bicause Abraham (a man otherwise most holy) is thought to haue maried his Brothers daughter namely Sara. Amram also had Iochabed his aunt to wife, of whom he begat Moyses, Aaron, & Mary. And it semeth that so godly & holy mē would not haue done this, if the moral law (as we haue saide) had bene against it. The law of nature was darkned by synne. To thys we answer, first y t the law of nature was much blotted by corruption & wickednes, which ouerwhelmed al mankind sone after synne, & for y e cause they whych contracted such matrimonies, thought peraduenture that the same wer lawful, and therfore although they cannot altogether bee excused by that ignoraunce, yet it is to be thought that they committed lesse synne, than those which durst do such thinges after the lawe was geuen. I adde moreouer, that amonge the fathers certaine thinges are now and then spoken of, It is not certaine whether Abrahā & Amram maried prohibited wyues. which other men must not take example of, whē as they are somtimes to be interpreted as prerogatiues or certain priueleges geuen to thē. But how soeuer it be, we may not (as I think) much labour to excuse y e fathers in althings. Although I know there be which do say y t Sara was not the daughter of Abrahams brother, but som other way of [Page] and therfore she might be called his sister after the auncient maner of speaking, as though she were of some kinred vnto him, but yet not so nere kyn, but that they might mary together. And in like maner they say of the kinred of Amram and Iochabed. But I wyl omit these thinges, seing that the whole matter may be made playne by these two kinde of answers before alledged.
It might also be demaunded, if the preceptes of Matrimonye be morall, and pertaine to the lawe of Nature, why God woulde also constitute them in hys lawes? The ten cōmaū dementes were blotted in the hartes of men before the law. Bycause the lyght of nature was come to that poynt that it was not sufficient, the brightnesse of it was daylye more and more blotted in the hartes of men: which thing doth manyfestlye appeare not onelye in these, but also in the tenne commaundementes, where it is commaunded that men should abstayne from theft and murther, and yet we reade in hystories that robbyng on the sea, and also on the lande got suche dominion, Plato. that they were counted ful of honour and dignity. Plato in hys fyft booke of lawes thought, that concerning procreation of children we should abstayne from Mothers, Graundmothers, and the degrees aboue them. Again from Daughters, Niepces, & degrees beneath them. But as for other persons he made free. Ierome. Hierome testifieth in his seconde booke against Iouiniane, that the Scottes in his tyme had no certaine mariages, but they accompanied with their women as they lusted them selues, euen suche as came first to hande. He sayth moreouer, that the Medes, Indians, Ethiopes, and Persians confusedly contracted Matrimonies with their mothers, sisters, daughters, and Niepces: which semeth neuerthelesse to disagree with that which Heroditus writeth of the Persians. For Cambyses (as he testifieth) desired to marye hys sister, for the which thing he asked counsel of his Lawyers and wyse men, and demaunded of them whether that matrimony wer lawful or no. To whom they answered, that they in dede had no law, by the which it myght be lawfull for the Brother to mary the Sister, but yet they had an other law among them, whereby it was lawful for the king of the Persians to do what so euer him selfe lusted. Surely they answered wel in their first part of their answer, but in the latter part they most filthily flattered the tyranne. Howbeit the thyngs whych are written by this Historiographer (although sometymes he wryte fables) and those thinges which Ierome writeth, vary not. Bycause the vulgare people being now corrupted with fylthy and wycked custome, contracted suche matrimonies, the wyser sorte neuerthelesse, in whom the lawe of nature dyd shyne, vnderstoode that the same were not lawful, althoughe beyng blynded wyth couetousnes they abstained not from them. Whom Paule to the Romaines hath greuously reprehended, saying: which men, though they knowe the righheousnes of God, Incestuous persons haue afterward abhorred those whō they haue poluted. not onely doo suche thinges, but also haue pleasure in them that do them. And these matrimonies by their own nature are so well knowen to be vnlawfull, that they dryue an exceading great horrour into them whych do heare that such thinges haue bene done: yea and they them selues which haue commytted the same, when their lust asswaged, semed to abhorre those whom they haue polluted. Cynara & Myrrha. The Poetes make mencion of Cynara and Myrrha hys daughter, how after the father vnderstoode that he had accompanied wyth hys daughter, yea, euen vnwares so hated her, that he persecuted her al that euer he might. Ammō beganne so to hate hys syster Thamra whom he had defyled, Incest almost haue euer had horrible endes. Ptholomey. that he commaunded her to bee violentlye thrust out of hys syght. Thou shalt also neuer almoste fynde if thou looke in histories, that incestuous mariages or carnal copulations came to good ende. Ptholomey kyng of Egipt tooke to wyfe by fraude and guile hys syster Euridices, Anthonius Carocalla. Nero. which the Historiographers and especially Iustine haue manifestly set foorth to haue had yl successe. Anthonius Caracalla who maryed hys stepmother, and Nero whych committed fylthye fornication with hys mother, came not onelye to a most vnhappye ende, but according to their desertes they were wonderfully hated of the people, and were openly called Monsters of humane [Page 21] nature. Wherefore we graunt both, that these commaundementes which do prohibite those sinnes pertayne to the law of nature, and were for iust cause renued by God in his morall lawes.
It may also be manifestly ynough declared by an other reason, Romaine lawes forbad y e mariage of the brothers daughter. y e incestuous mariages were forbidden by the light of nature, seing that they were earnestly forbidden by the Romane lawes, which were counted among the excellentest & honestest lawes, & these by name, wherby any man should marrye his niepce by the brother. Although Claudius Caesar whē he would marry his brothers daughter Agrippina, caused the fyrst law to be abrogated, and to be decreed that euery man might haue his brothers daughter to wife. But there was neuer a one at Rome except it were one or two which would follow his example. And y e Romaines obserued the first law which was most honest. The Romaine lawes in prohibiting mariages had certaine lawes not mentioned by God. Neuerthelesse we muste vnderstand, y e diuerse persons were prohibited by the lawes of the Romanes, of whom the law of god hath made no mention, and yet their prohibition was not without a reason. Wherfore the Citizens of Rome were bound to obserue thē, although by the light of nature they could see no cause why they should so doe, which lawes were wont to be called a peculiar kinde of lawes, bicause it semeth to be priuate for certain places. I will make the thing more plaine by examples. The tutor might not marry his pupill. The Romaines would not as it is written in Codice that matrimonies shoulde be contracted betwene the tutor and pupill committed to his charge. Bycause they saw that this would easely come therby, that that tutor which had consumed his pupils goodes, least he should be compelled after his tutorship to render accompt of those goods, might sollicite the mayden to mariage, which being obtained, he should be free from geuing accompt of her goods. This surely was a good law, but yet it was not perfectly obserued. Cicero otherwise a graue man, Cicero. was euill spoken of for the same cause: for being farre in other mens debt, when he had forsakē his wife Terence, he maried his pupill, of whose goods & affayres he had charge ouer as a tutor.
The Romanes deceeed also, A prisident myght not marry a wife of hys prouince. that no president of any prouince should take to wife eyther to himselfe or to any of hys, any out of the same prouince wherein he gouerned. For they knew right wel, that it might so happen, that the Pretor Proconsul, or President in a prouince cleauing to his families and kynsfolke cō ming to him by his wife, might make new tumultes, and at length be alienated from the publique wealth. They saw also a great daunger to hang theron, least he should not be iuste and seuere in geuing iudgement, bycause he woulde gratifie his kinsfolke more than others. Lastly mariages shoulde not haue remayned at libertie in prouinces, bicause Magistrates might in a manner compel thē of the prouince to contracte matrimonies either with thēselues, Felix had a Iew to hys wife. or w t their frendes. We see also this most honest law violated. For Faelix which gouerned Iewrye vnder Nero, as it is writtē in the xxiiii. chap. of the actes of the Apostles, had Drusilla a Iewe to wife. But what nede I rehearse that these lawes of a small weyght were not obserued, whē as that people had shaken of, euen those lawes which we called morall and are knowen by y e law of nature? Cicero. The monstrug lust of Sassia. Cicero declareth in his oratiō for Cluentius, y e one Sassia a most wicked womā, was so prouoked w t filthy lust, y t she instigated her sonne in law Aurius Melinus, to whō she had before maried her daughter, to repudiate his wife, wherby he shuld marry her self in stead of her daughter: which thīg at y e lēgth she got him to do. And whē y e dede was coūted ful of dishonesty, yet was it not punished by the lawes, neither do we rede that y e matrimonye, whiche Cicero cōtendeth to be cōtracted by no good grounds, by no authors, & altogether vnluckely, was dissolued by y e power & cō maūdemēt of y e magistrates. Wherfore hereof cōmeth a good reasō also, why god would againe inculcate by a law those things whiche by y e light of nature were iudged honest. For y e bonds, barres, & windowes of nature, were brokē by y e impotent lust of mē, therfore it was necessary they should be boūd w t an other bond [Page] For the Israelites were no more shamefast in keping of natural honestye, than were the Romaines. Neither is this to be left out, y e god had certaine proper things in his law, whiche may be called peculiar thinges: for all men were not bound vnto thē by y e lawe of nature, but the Hebrues onely. For he woulde not haue them to contracte matrimony with the Chananites, Hamorrites, Iebusites, &c. And other people seme not to haue bene bounde to y e law, neither should we at this day (if there were such nations still, Matrimonyes ought not to be contracted in cōtrary religiō Augustine.) be letted, but that we might ioyne our selues in matrimony with them. Although the cause of y e law, ought at this day to be holden: which cause is, y e matrimonies shoulde not be contracted with them which be of a contrary religion. For it is not conuenient that the Godlye should be ioyned with the vngodly. I know that Augustine writeth concerning vnlawfull mariages to Pollentius in the second booke and of the Sermon of the Lord vpon the Mountaine, y t there is not a place in the new Testament, wherin by expresse words, matrimonies with infidels are prohibited. But of this matter I will not write much at this present, seing that I haue largely entreated of it in the Epistle to the Corinthians. This will I saye more ouer, that a good man ought in contracting of matrimonyes, to follow chiefly that which is honest, and not lightly to depart frō cōmendable orders & vsuall customes which are not agaynst y e word of god. And if there happen peraduenture any doubt, let him not thinke it much to aske coūcell of his magistrate, otherwise he shal rashly put both himselfe, his wife and his children to daunger. For if he be maryed in any of the degrees prohibited by the peculiar law, he shal not then be counted a husband, but a whoremonger, and his wife a harlot, & their childrē bastardes. Howbeit the magistrate, although concerning matrimonie he maye forbid certaine other contractes besides those which God hath forbidden, yet can he not, neither ought he to remit any of those which God hath commaunded, & whiche he hath prohibited by his law, yea he must most diligently see that he burthē not the people to much, The pope hath grieuously sinned concerning these lawes. or without an earnest cause, as we see the Pope hath done, who hath two wayes sinned in this thing: fyrst in that he durst vsurpe the office of making of lawes in a common wealth, which vndoubtedly pertaineth not vnto him, Secondly bicause in his lawes he followed not the word of god, but with out reason forbad fyrst al degrees euen to the seuenth, which when he saw afterward was not obserued, and al was ful of confusion, he cut of his prohibitions to the fourth degree. In which thing he is yet constant & hardened, if there come no money in, but if money be offred (wherof he must haue much brought hym to fyl his filthy cofers) he setteth at libertie as pleaseth him, both his own lawes and the word of god.
This we must also knowe, that God had in his lawes an other decree whiche may lawfully be called peculiar, bycause it extendeth no way to other nations, neither ought it to be in force at all tymes. And that was, that when any husband deceased without children, the brother which remained on liue, or some other next of kynne, should mary the first mans wife left, so that the first childe which should be begotten of that mariage shoulde be counted the sonne of hym that was dead, and should fully succede him as touching his inheritaunce. For God would not in that publique wealth, that men should altogether be extinguished, and he prouided that the same distinction of landes shoulde be kepte as much as might be. And seing the same is not vsed in our publique wealthes, neither hath God commaunded that it shoulde, it therfore pertayneth nothyng vnto vs. Wherfore we must keepe oure selues vnder the generall and common lawe, She that is left of y e kinnesman ought to he maryed. namely that no man presume to mary the wife of his brother being dead although he dyed without children.
Let vs also knowe that in the beginning, when onely the familie of Adam lyued on the earth, brethren were not forbidden as they were afterwarde [Page 22] For brethren were driuen of necessity to mary their sisters. But afterward whē men were increased in number, shame shewed it selfe forth, and they began by the instinction of God, or by nature, either to abstayn from prohibited persons, or at the least to know that such coniunctions were ful of ignominye. But what tyme they began first to abstaine, it appeareth not by the history. The Gods of the H [...] [...] ried [...]h [...] Systers. Peraduenture the Heathen Poetes haue declared that necessity of the elders whych compelled the famyly of the first Parentes to constrayne the brother to mary the Syster, when as they fable that their Gods had their Systers to wyues: for the chiefe of them, namelye Iupiter had Iuno, whych in Virgil speaketh thus of her selfe: But I whych walke the Quene of the Gods both syster and wyfe to Iupiter.
And although the woorde of God, Causes [...] manye deg [...]es in mariages a [...] forbydden. Augustine. and instincte of nature were sufficient by them selues to make vs to abstayne from the foresayde coninunctions, yet are there many good causes of prohibition alledged by diuers wryters. Augustine in hys .xv. booke De ciuitate dei and .xvi. chap. writeth that the same abstinence was very profitable to dilate more amplye the bondes of humane fellowshyp. For if mariages should be included wythin the walles of one family, thē should there come no kynreds with others. Furthermore, it is not meete, that one and the selfe man should occupye the persons of diuers kynredes, namelye that one man should be both vncle and husband of one woman, and the same woman to be both Aunt and wyfe of one man. Which reason Cicero also hath touched in hys fyft booke Definibus, and also Plutarch in his .108. probleme. And they being both Ethnickes could not haue sene this but being illustrate by the light of nature. This also is the third reason, bicause these persons, from whom we should abstain, do dwel together often tymes in one house. Wherefore if there shoulde be manye maryed folkes together, they woulde not vse them selues so grauelye and seuerely as domestical shamefastnes requireth. Plutarch. The causes of strife betwene kinsfolk ought to be cut of. Plutarch in the place before sayde, hath set forth two other reasons, besydes those which we haue declared: One is, bycause betwene kynsfolkes, discordes are to be feared. For they would soone complayne that the right of kynred should be taken away: whych saying I doo vnderstand thus, if eyther she or he which should ouerskyp the nearer degre, and marry with the degree farther of, she which were nearer would thinke that she had iniury done vnto her, as though in ouerskipping her, he would put her to shame: as it is a common vse in wylles and Testamentes, where they which are nyghest of kynne maye not nor oughte not to bee forgotten of hym which maketh the wyll. And in the lawe for raysing vp seede to the brother already deceased, the fyrst place must be geuen to the nyghest of kynne, who if hee refused to vse hys right, was made ashamed, as that law doth more amplye declare the same. Wherefore seyng discordes betwene al men are to be abhorred, Womē for that they are weake ought not to haue their patrimonies diminished but increased. much more are they vtterly to be detested betwene kynsfolkes. Plutarch also bryngeth an other reason, bycause women are weake, and therefore they haue neede of many & sundry patrones, wherefore when they are maryed to straunge men, if they shoulde be euyll handled by their husbandes, as often tymes they are, they haue al their kynsfolkes easely for Patrones: but if they be wyues to their own kynsfolkes, and happen to be euil entreated of them, they should then haue very fewe to defende their cause. For other kynsfolkes woulde not bee so ready, for their sakes to fall out with their own kynne, which they woulde not be greued to doo wyth straungers.
But nowe that I am in hande wyth Plutarch, I remember that whych he hath wrytten in the syxt probleme, Of the matrimoni of brethrē and Systers chyldren. Plutarch. and I thinke it is [...] vnprofitable to declare it, although it seme to disagree from that whych Augustine wryteth in hys .xv. booke De ciuitate dei .xvi. chapter of the matrimony of Brothers and Systers chyldren. For he affirmeth there, that before hys tyme, the same was lawfull, although those kyndes of maryages semed very rare, bycause men after a sorte [Page] eschewed to contracte with persons so nigh: but he saith that y e licence was afterward taken away. Which I surely can not perceaue in y e Romane lawes, which were publikely receaued & allowed: which yet wer vsed thorough out Aphrica. Wherefore it maye seme obscure to some of what lawes Augustine speaketh, wherby he sayth that in his time those kindes of matrimonyes were prohibited. But we must vnderstand, that in his time the law of Theodosius the elder was of force, who was the fyrst among the Emperoures that I know of, which prohibited matrimonye of this degree. Which also Aurelius Victor and Paulus Diaconus do testifye. And that is found at this day writtē in the boke called Codex Theodosianus, concerning incestuous mariages, by these wordes. Let this sentence remaine concerning them, whosoeuer from henceforth shall defyle hymself with the mariage of his cousin Germaine, or of his sisters daughter, or of his brothers daughter, or of his wiues daughter, lastly of al whose mariage is forbidden and condemned. But that law is not in these dayes found in y e Digestes, neither in the booke of the Code, nor in the Authentikes. Which neuerthelesse Clother the king followed, as it is red in the lawes of the Almaines, entituled of vnlawfull mariages, yea and it is confirmed by the ecclesiasticall Canons and decrees in Gracian. 35. Question the second and third, also by the counsel of Agathen in the 61. Canon. And Gregorye the fyrst in the same place is found to be of the same opinion in the chap. Quaedam ex Romana, &c. This answereth to the sixth interrogation of Augustine Bishop of Cantorbury, and affyrmeth that those which be ioyned by the degree of cousin Germaines, ought to abstaine from contracting of matrimony one with an other. Yea and long before Gregorye his time, Ambrose hath in his 66. Epistle ad Paternum, condemned the mariage of brethrens children, & he testifieth that it was forbiddē by the law of Theodosius which I haue also brought. And if I should vse coniecture, I thinke Theodosius did it by the persuasion of Ambrose, who had a singular respecte to publique honestie. Neither was that law so seuere at that time, but that sometimes it might be released as he declareth in that Epistle to Paternus. In that Ambrose affyrmeth there that such mariages were prohibited by Gods lawe, It can be made probable to none, which shall attentiuely consider the wordes of the law of god, and doings of the fathers. How the Romanes haue behaued themselues, toward their cousins, as concernyng matrimonyes in the old time, this I haue obserued Ligustine sayth in the 2. booke and 5. decade of Liuy, that his father gaue him his Vncles daughter to wife. Cicero also writeth in hys oration for Cluentius, that Cluentia had lawfully maryed her cousin Germaine M. Aurius. And M. Anthonius the Philosopher tooke to wife Faustina his cousin Germaine, as Iulius Capitolinus testifieth. And before Rome was builded the mariages of Turnus and Lauinia were in hand, which came of two sisters. Howbeit Plutarch writeth in the place aboue mentioned, that at the fyrst when Rome was builte, it was forbidden by a lawe, that they whiche were nighe of kinne shoulde not marrye together. But yet he writeth that the lawe for brethren and sisters children, was vppon thys occasion released, bycause a certayne man beyng both honeste, and also well beloued of the people of Rome, when he was greuouslye oppressed with pouertye toke to wife his sisters daughter which was ryche, and welthye, for the whiche cause he was accused of inceste. But the matter being decided, he was quyted by the iudgemente of the people of Rome: for he was greatly fauoured in the citye. Then after that, it was decreed by the consent of the people of Rome that from thence forth it shoulde be lawfull for brethren and sisters children to marry together. These thinges I thought good to declare of this kinde of matrimonye both out of Gods lawes, and the old & new lawes of the Romanes, and also out of the fathers and ecclesiasticall Canons. [Page 23] Whereunto I will adde that there be very many Cities professing the gospell whiche do not admitte the mariages of brethren and sisters children, as Surike, Berna, Basile, Schapusin, Sangallum, Biema, &c. In the kingdome also of England when I was there, that degree was excluded from matrimony. Wherfore in places where the magistrate forbyddeth these mariages the faithful ought for those causes whiche I haue before declared to abstayne from them.
But now I will go to the present matter, If Othoniel as I haue before sayd were cousin vnto Achsa, he might mary her by the lawe of God: but if he were her vnckle, it was not lawful by the cōmō lawe. But he maried her. Wherfore we must nedes saye one of these two thinges: either that it was a faulte, for the fathers as we haue before sayd were not alwayes free from sinne: or elles that god would haue this done by a priuilege or certain prerogatiue, whiche we may not for all that take example by. Neither is this to be forgottē, that after the accustomed manner of Scriptures, Kinsfolkes in scriptures are called brethren they whiche were any way of kinne together were called brethren, as Loth is called the brother of Abraham, & the kinsfolkes of Iesus Christ the sonne of God are called in the history of the gospel his brethrē. So may it also be in this place that Othoniel may be called the brother of Chaleb, when as he was but only some other waye of kinne vnto him. And the interpretours do vse this expositiō oftē times, which I would not disallow, but y t I se this particle in the texte, The yonger, whiche is not wont to be added, but when sisters and brethren in dede are compared together. But now wil I go to other thinges whiche are to be considered in this history.
Chaleb had promised him which should cōquere the citie of Debir, Whether Chalebs promisse were a rashe promisse. his daughter to wife. What if any wicked persone had performed that, should he by the vertue of the promise haue ben made y e sonne in law of Chaleb? surely it semeth not. For what other thing had this ben, than to betraye his daughter? Therfore it may appeare that he promised rashly. For a wise man ought to foresee those thinges whiche might happen. How be it we must consider that there were not at that tyme such wicked and flagitious men among the Israelites, for as long as those elders lyued, whiche gouerned the publicque wealth together with Iosua, as it shalbe declared in this hystory, the people feared god. Wherfore it followeth, that they vsed to put those to death by the lawe whiche were guiltie of very grieuous crimes. Therfore there was no daunger lest any such mā should conquere the citie, to whom for that act Hacsah should be geuen to wife of duetye. But if there remayned certaine smal and common faultes in him which had conquered it, the same might be recompenced by his other vertues. For there is is none so absolute and perfect, but that some times he may fal. Moreouer there were some hope of amendement of life. And the conquerour might be so nighe of kynne, as peraduēture this Othoniel was, that he could not mary the daughter of Chaleb. Wherfore it seemeth that at the least in that part it was a rashe promise. But I do not thincke it can be accused of rashenesse, A constant rule of all humane promises. for as much as all promises ought among the godly so farre forth to be of force, as they do agree with the word of god, which thing if Iepthe had diligently considered, he would neuer haue suffred hym selfe to haue committed so vnworthy thinges agaynst his daughter. This cōdition surely in all couenaunts and promises ought to be counted for a most constant rule.
We gather also hereby, that it is lawfull to go about a wife by iust wayes and meanes, as we se Othoniel now to haue done: and as also holy Dauid did, A man by iuste meanes may go about a wife. who did not only kill Goliah the giaūt, but also he gaue Saule an hundreth forekynnes of the Philistianes, for the obteyning of Michol to wife. We are hereby taught also, that wise parentes ought to seke them a sonne in law, not by riches not by power or nobilitie, but by vertue. Now of days they do not so, Howe a sonne in a lawe should be sought. and therfore the miserable daughters are very often tymes betrayed by their parentes, and very many mariages haue vnhappy successe. Wherfore I can not discommend [Page] the sayeng of Themistocles, The sayeng of Themistocles. who being demaunded why he had preferred a poore man to be his sonne in law before a riche and wealthy man, he aunswered: that he had rather haue a sonne in law whiche wanted money, thā to haue money wanting a man.
It is lawfull to set rewardes for good dedesWe learne moreouer by this history, that it is lawfull for princes to stirre vp men couragiously to enterprise honest actes, and whiche they ought otherwise of dutye to haue done, to set forth vnto them some rewardes. For we see that Chaleb did so nowe, and also Saul, when he promised his daughter to hym whiche could kill Goliah, and we remember Christ hath promised them an hundreth fold in this life, Good & honest actions are of them selues to be sought for. whiche for his sake should leaue father and mother, children and brothers. Wherfore we must knowe that good & honest actions, are by them selues sufficient to be sought for, for asmuch as in this worlde nothyng can happen more sweater, thā to obey god, & with a good conscience to be ioyned vnto him, in liuing vprightly according to his cōmaundementes. Wherfore admitte we should obtayne no other thing, yet a sufficient reward & gayne should be rendred vnto vs, Why God set forth rewardes and giftes. if we may haue a quiet and pacified conscience, and be inwardly filled with spirituall ioye, but god (such is his goodnesse) would moreouer set forth vnto vs giftes and rewardes. For he seeth the disposition & nature of a mā to be feable and flowe to all thinges that be good, healthfull and honest: he would therfore stirre vp the same by promising manifold & sondry rewardes, whiche kinde of remedy we had not neded, if we had continued perfect and absolute, as we were created. Who I pray you, nedeth with reward to be stirred vp to drincke whē he is thursty, or to eate whē he is hūgry? surely no body. Wherfore neither nede men, if they hungred and thrusted for righteousnesse, (as they ought to do) a rewarde to stirre them vp to it. A mother also vseth not to be intised with rewardes to geue sucke, to feede, and care for her own child, that it perish not. Promises and threatnynges are added in y e lawe to the cō maundements. Wherfore the promises of god are therfore necessary vnto men, bicause they by reason of synne haue waxed colde from a vehement affection and zeale toward godly and holy workes, we be altogether dull and sluggishe to the offices of godlinesse and righteousnesse: wherfore God of his gētlenesse would adde spurres of promises: which appeareth most manifestly in the law, where almost for euery cōmaundement are both threatninges & also promises added. Wherfore seing holy men haue done this oftentimes, seing also the lawe of God hath done so, and the same is found in the new testament, we may conclude without doubte that it is lawfull. For then is that whiche we do, to be allowed, when it agreeth with the example of god him selfe, and rule of the scriptures, or els with the excellent actes of holy men.
Whether it be lawfull to do good for rewardes sake.But now must we se, whether he whiche doth good workes, and performeth y e whiche he is bounde to do by the lawe of God, ought to be moued with hope of the reward, or whether rather he should only haue a regard to goodnesse, righteousnesse and gods pleasure? To aunswere to this question, I thincke that thys must be the first grounde, that a man is not only appoynted to some certein end, whē as god doeth nothing rashly or by chaunce, but also he is appoynted to many endes, which neuerthelesse are so ioyned together, y t they do mutually serue and helpe one an other by a certain order. How mā is appointed to an end. First we are created to set forth the glory of God: then that by the sight and perfect knowledge of God we shoulde come to be happy: and that whilest we liue here, we should lyue together among our selues in an acceptable fellowship to God. Souldiours do therfore beare weapons and make warres, to defende honest and iust causes, and that in that sorte by whiche God in his lawes hath commaunded to be defended, which men moreouer ought so to be encouraged to bring this thing to passe, that thoughe there were no other reward or gift comming vnto them, yet ought they to enterprise it. Moreouer men vse to fight to defend their country, wiues, children, kinsfolkes, & friendes. And if so be that they besides these looke for iust stipēdes, [Page 24] whereby they may honestly norishe both thē selues & theirs, no man will counte that for a vice in them. For what things we may auoyde wicked actes. For the Apostle hath sayd in the first Epistle to the Cor. Who goeth on warfarre at his owne cost? But now to descend to things more perticular, when any mā tempereth him selfe from any grieuous wicked act, he ought to do y e first to the entent he may obey the cōmaundementes of God, as it is mete. Then that therby he may escape either eternal or ciuile punishementes. Moreouer that he may not offend the myndes of the brethren, and plucke them backe from a holy conuersation and pure life, by his wicked example, and finally that by his wickednesse he prouoke not the wrath of God, either against him selfe or his familye, or against the people. Wherfore it is manifest, that the end of our actions is not simple, but sundry and manifolde.
And this being thus finished and concluded, we must diligently take hede, Whiche end is to be preferred before the rest. that when many endes are set before vs, we may preferre that before the rest, whiche by good right excelleth the rest. For if it should be otherwise done, and if those thinges whiche are hindermost and of smaller valew should be preferred before the better, we should be iustly condemned for peruertyng the order of thinges. Wherfore we must take hede, that we directe not God him selfe or the worshipping of him, either to our owne commoditie, or els to any other endes. For thē should that surely happen vnto vs which Augustine doth so sore detest, Augustine. y t we should haue the fruition of those things which we only ought to vse, & contrariwise we should vse those things which we should haue the fruition of, than which peruersenesse in humane actions no worse thyng cā be thought. What is the chief peruersenes of humane actions. Wherfore when it is demaūded, whether it be lawful in well doyng to haue a respect to the gayne or rewarde. We can not well deny but y t it is lawfull: for as much as god him selfe hath promised a reward to them whiche lyue godly: neither did God that for any other cause thā by his giftes and allurements to stirre vp men to iust, good, godly and holy workes. Neither is the rewarde onely to be desired, neither y e chief partes must be ascribed vnto it But although we do not vniustly in hauing a regarde vnto the reward offred vs by God, whē we are occupied in good workes: yet this is diligently to be taken hede of, that we be not moued onely bycause of the rewarde whiche is offred vs. Neither is this sufficient, for if a mā would say that he would in doing good both obtayne the rewarde set forth, and by the same worke obey God, he must take hede, that he attribute not the chiefest partes to the gift or rewarde, bycause alwayes (as I haue already sayd) that among the endes eche of them as he is more excellent by nature, so ought it to be preferred in the first place. And in this there nedeth a singular diligence: bycause it oftentimes happeneth, that we deceaue our selues, falsly supposing that nothing is more excellent or dearer to our mindes than god, from whom neuerthelesse we are by litle and litle withdrawen and plucked backe by reason of to much desire and delite of reward or gift. Wherfore it afterward happeneth, If we preferre other things before god we incurre into grieuous punishementes. that we come to great miseries therby: For when god perceaueth y t we more esteme those thinges, whiche ought to be of lesse estimation with vs, he withdraweth them away, lest they should more and more plucke vs away from him. Whiche thing happened many tymes to the Israelites, frō whom God sometymes toke away riches, libertie, and the promised lande, to call them agayne to him selfe, whom they lesse estemed than their riches, possessions, and also Idols. Wherfore those thinges being marked and obserued whiche I haue rehearsed, I doubt not but that it is lawfull for godly men after the sincere & earnest desire of God to do good for rewarde and gift.
Neither am I ignoraunt that Bernarde writeth in his litle booke of louyng of God, that charitie by it selfe can not be empty, althoughe it behold no reward. Bernarde. &c. By which words he putteth vs in mynde of two things: both that y e workes of charitie in them selues haue so much delectatiō, pleasure and commoditie, as may be sufficient for them whiche lyue well, although of that their well doyng they should haue no other rewarde geuen them of God. And that we in louyng [Page] of God should looke for no other reward, but this, that he according to his goodnesse wil not suffer, but faithfully to rendre those things which are to be rēdred vnto vs. And therfore no man ought chiefly to be moued with the desyre of the rewarde. A comparison of the loue of the children & of the wife. And he addeth, that he doth farre preferre the loue of the wyfe toward her husband before the loue and obeysaunce wherwith the children loue the father. For as much as the sonnes do so loue their father, bycause they hope they shalbe enriched of him by his inheritaunce: wherfore their loue (as he thincketh) is not so pure. But the wife if she be such a one as she ought to be, she wisheth good to her husband for his owne cause and his owne sake, although she hopeth or looketh to obtayne no good at his hand. Many haue thought that the sentēce of this father ought to be allowed, & haue gone about to make playne the same by a certain distinction not so circumspectly inuēted by them in my opinion: for they affirme that we may measure God or his nature by our worthynes, or that we may beholde him, according as our perfection & vprightnesse is. Moreouer they say that we must do what soeuer we do, for his sake in the first consideration, and not in respect that he is our chief goodnesse and felicitie. And this they thincke that Bernarde ment by the wordes now alledged. For they bryng these words which he writeth in another place, We must worship god also in that he is our felicitie & blessednesse. namely that he suspected al that loue wherewith we loue any thing besides God. But these men do not marke that by this distinction, which is founde out rather by the iudgement of men, thā by the veritie of the Scriptures, that they are agaynst the sentence of God. For he sayd vnto Abraham as it is written in Gen. I am thy reward and that very ample: walke thou therfore before me, & be perfect, vndoubtedly by these wordes God offreth him selfe vnto vs, not imagined by him selfe, or plucked away from our commodities, but in respect that he is our rewarde.
Moreouer, as I sayd now at the first, god would not adioyne promises, gifts and rewardes to his commaundementes, in vayne or without effect, but aduisedly and moste wisely. Did he that I praye thee that we should close our eyes and ouerskip them? To looke for a rewarde set forth vnto vs by God is not only of such as are vnperfecte. I thincke not. Neither canst thou say that they serue for the ruder sorte, and such as be not yet absolute and perfect: for I will demaunde strayght waye of thee, whether Abraham, Moyses, Dauid, the Prophetes and Apostles were not so perfect, as either the nature of men in this life can be, or is required of vs? If thou wilt say they were imperfect, then can not I tell what excellencye or perfection of men thou faynest to thy selfe. Paul certainly setteth forth him selfe vnto ythers as a perfect man, in such sorte, as a man may in this lyfe be perfect, when he wrote be ye perfect as I am perfect. I speake not how the Scripture yea god him selfe pronounceth Moyses to be most meeke, he commendeth Dauid also that he was made accordyng to his will and harte. Wherfore if thou wilt graunt that these were notable excellent and perfect men (as men may be in this world) neither canst thou deny the promises and rewardes offred to them of god. This without doubte followeth that men of the excellenter sorte may in well lyuing and doyng lift vp their eyes to the rewarde.
Augustine.And I thincke Augustine hath trimely made manifest this thing where as he sayth in his booke of confessions, he loueth thee not (speaking to God) whiche loueth any thing besides thee, We may loue gayne and rewardes for gods sake. which he loueth not for thy sake. By these words is gathered, that we may loue gayne and rewardes for gods sake: for it is lawfull to embrace the meane endes for the last and chief goodnesse. Neither are we forbidden but that we may sometymes wishe for meat, drincke, and cloth, and such thinges as are nedefull for this lyfe, yea and Christ hath commaunded by expresse wordes that we should aske them, and he hath promised them to those whiche seke for the kyngdome of God: for he hath sayd, first seke the kingdome of God and these thinges shalbe ministred vnto you. Wherfore it is true, that these may be so hoped for, regarded and receaued of God as gifts and rewardes, and not as the principall thinges. For they also are to be referred to a farther [Page 25] end, according to Paules most wholesome admonition, who hath written: whether we eat, or whether we drinke, or whether we do any other thing, let vs do it to the glory of God. And finally seyng God him selfe, his glory, What is the foundation of earthly promises. beneuolence & fauour are the roote and foundation of other promises, and of euery rewarde, so often as we shall beholde these other thinges, for as much as they are comprehended in those former thynges, we must neuer suffer to haue one separated from an other, but in the latter continually looke vpon those whiche are first. Wherby as Augustine hath geuen vs counsell, we shall loue nothyng besides God which for his sake we should not loue. And thus much of this said question, In latter promises the firste are continually to be beholden. now we will returne to the history. For as muche as it is now manifest that it was lawfull for Chaleb to set forth a rewarde to all them, whiche should conquere the citie of Debir, to encourage them to performe that, whiche they ought otherwise of duety to haue done: it was counted no sinne in Othoniel (of whome we now entreate) couragiously to fight for the obtayning of a wife, whiche he knew otherwise to be acceptable to God.
14 And it came to passe, as he went, she moued him, to aske of her father a fielde and she lighted of her Asse, and Chaleb sayde vnto her: What wilt thou?
15 And she aunswered him, geue me a blessing, for thou hast geuen me a drye lande, geue me also springes of water. And Chaleb gaue her springes both aboue and beneath.
In the xv. chap. of Iosua, where all these things of Achsah and Othoniel are rehearsed in maner, by so many wordes, Dauid kimhi onely thre differences are perceaued in the word. One is, that which is here Techitioth and Alioth, is there Techitith & Alith. Moreouer there it is said Tinna & here is Hicah. Lastly there is Scadah & here is Haschadah. R.D. Kimhi hath noted these things. For y e interpretors of y e Hebrues are most precise, yea in obseruing the very prickes, I would they were as quicke in sight & diligēt in rendring reasons of annotatiōs. Hachsah persuaded & prouoked her husband, to aske the field of Chaleb her father, which I therfore tell you, bicause the Latine trāslation is corrupted. For it hath that the husbād persuaded the wife to aske the field of Chaleb. The pollicy of Achsah. Furthermore by this we may consider the sharpenesse of the witte of a woman. She therfore moueth her husband, to aske the field, bycause she was persuaded with her selfe, that her father would not deny him that whiche he should aske. (She thought moreouer that if her husband obtayned the field, she should easely by her selfe afterward obtayne the waters, wheras if she should haue asked them both at one time (namely the field and the waters) it might peraduenture be hard to obtayne both together. But if the field were first geuen to her husband, her father might be coūted very hard, if he should deny his daughter the waters, she requiring thē of him. And in asking she wisely watched a fitte tyme, namely when she should be brought to her husbād: for then parents are wont to shewe thē selues more gētle towardes their childrē, whē they se y t they shalbe by & by taken frō thē. Wherfore thoughe they were at other times hard, thē yet they somwhat relent. In this reason of the petitiō I haue followed Leui the sonne of Gerson, Leui the sonne of Gherson. who expoundeth that Hachsah would therfore haue her husbād to aske y e ground first y t she might the better afterward desire the waters. But R. D. Kimhi. in interpreting of y e boke of Iosua, sayth, y t he, namely Othoniel would not aske it, D. Kimhi. wherfore the womā her self was constrayned by her selfe to aske her father. And this semeth to be y e meanyng of this interpretor, Chaleb had before geuē vnto his daughter y e field, as lād for her dowry, y e soyle wherof was dry & barrē, wherfore y e witty maydē toke occasiō to aske, y t it might be fertile thoroughe water. But howsoeuer it be, it skilleth not much, let vs only deligētly marke this, y t Chaleb was liberal & honorable. For [Page] that he graunted his daughter both the waters aboue, & the waters beneath.
She lighted of her Asse. She lighted, to declare her due obeysaunce towardes her father, and to make her peticion the more acceptable, and she so lighted that she kneled on the grounde with her knees, as the Hebrew word signifieth. For the Hebrewes vse that worde, Sanach, when they will signifie a stake or wedge or any such thyng to be driuen. To be shorte, she asked vpon her knees those thinges whiche she desired. Rebecka also, as it is written in the booke of Gen. whē she sawe Isaak to whom she was brought for to be hys wife, she lighted of her camele wheron she sat. Neither let vs meruayle that Achsah beyng the daughter of a prince rode on an Asse: Asses are very vsed in Siria. seing that in Siria Asses are very muche vsed: for this kynd of beast, whiche is of his owne nature cold, is more vsed in hotter countreys, than in regions towarde the northe. And as we shall heare in this historye, fifty sonnes of a certain iudge road vpon fiftye Asses. Mephiboseth also the nephew of Saul the kyng, and Balaam the Prophete vsed this kynd of beaste. Riuers & fountaynes of waters are muche set by in Siria Why GOD brought hys people to drye regions. Neither is it in vayne that this request for waters is so diligently described in this place: for as muche as Siria hath grounde fertile enoughe, but that it wāteth water here and there. Wherfore it commeth to passe that riuers and fountaynes of waters are muche estemed in those places. And God of purpose brought his people to these so drye regions, neither would he haue them dwell in watery places, that they wayling for water might continually depend vpon hym, and thereby might haue the better occasion, to pray the oftener to the heauenly father, and the more seruently to obserue his commaundements. Neither hath God him selfe left this his counsell vnmēcioned of in the holy scriptures.
The Hebrewe maydēs which had dowerye landes, myght marye out of their own tribeSuch things as Chaleb geueth his daughter, belong (as some thincke) either to the dowery or to the augmentatiō therof, whiche might be done by the ciuile law of that nation. For it was not forbidden, y e wiues might not geue ground, and landes to their husbandes in the name of a dowery, so that they maryed in their owne tribe and familie, as now Achsah was geuen to Othoniel, who assuredly was of the same tribe and familie that she was of. But if she had maryed in an other tribe, it had not ben lawfull for her to geue grounde and landes to her husband by the name of a dowery. For God had commaunded, and that diligently and precisely, that grounde and landes in especiall commyng by inheritaunce should not be alienated from their families for mariages sake. And the daughters of Zalphead gaue an occasion of this lawe makyng, as it is written in the booke of Num. the 27. and 36. chap. For those maydens, hauyng no brethren, obteyned of God by Moyses, that they might not be put beside their Fathers inheritaunce, but that in the deuisiō of the lande of Chanaan those landes might be assigned vnto them, whiche should haue ben geuen either to their father or to their brethren. But this was expressedly commaunded them that they should not mary out of their owne tribe and familie.
Whether husbandes in the olde tyme receaued doweryes of their wiues.But whether husbands receaued doweryes of their wiues before the law, it is vncertain. The seruaunt of Abrahā rather gaue giftes to Rebecka thā receaued, for as much as he brought with him golden and siluer vessels in the name of Abraham and Isaak to be geuen to his wife. But there is no mētion made of the maydens dowery. Iacob also serued for his wyues, so farre was he frō receauyng any thyng of thē in the name of a dowery Sechē also the sonne of Hemorh inordinately louyng Dina the daughter of Iacob, with whome he had committed fornication, sayd vnto the sonnes of Iacob: Increase her dowery as ye list, I will refuse no condition, so that I may haue your sister to wife. How be it I can not tell, how y e custome of the auncient fathers in not taking but geuing doweries to wiues which they shuld mary, ought to be cōmēded, yet I thought good to rehearse those thinges which I haue read of this matter by y e way. And to begyn w t Magadorus (as it is in Plaucus) in his comedy Aulularia when he should take to wife the daughter of a poore mā, Magadorus of Plautus. being also without dowery, commendeth [Page 26] hys counsell by these wordes. If (sayeth he) other men would do after my example, the Citie would then be in better concorde, and enuie should not be so ryfe among vs, as it is. They, namely the wiues will feare vs the more, and we shall kepe them with much lesse cost, &c. When I consider these things, they seme to be very wisely spoken. For now & then it happeneth, that one citie is after a sort deuided into two parts, whē as the daughters of poore men are without hope, to mary with them that be more riche, either bicause of the smalenesse of their dowery, or els bycause they be altogether without dowery. For they obtayne that neuer but by a certain happe, or els very rarely. Wherfore the richer and mightier sorte are much enuied & grieuously hated of the poorer sorte. Besides that, wiues that haue good doweries do not feare their husbandes, yea they contemne and despise them, countyng them as vnworthy to be matched with them in mariage. Lastly their ornamentes and lustes can not be satisfied but with extreme charges Plutarch sayth in the Apothegmata of Licurgus, Plutarch. whē he was demaunded, why he had cōmaunded by a law that virgines should mary without dowery, he aunswered, to the intent some should not be left vnmaried for pouertie sake, or other some should be to much laboured for, and estemed bycause of their riches, but that euery man diligently considering the manners of the maydens, might chose him a wife by her vertue. He sheweth also in the 30. probleme, The lawe of Decemuiri. that a bride brought to the bridegromes house onely a distaffe and a spindle. The Decem viri of Rome decreed also by the lawes of Solon, that a woman should be without a dowery, and should bring from her fathers house onely thre garmentes & also certayne vessels of smal price, bycause they would declare that the fellowshyp of mariage is not confirmed by money, but by the loue of children. These certainly agree very trimme with that whiche is written of Paul and Vulpiā in the Pandectes of gifte betwene the husband and the wife. It is written also of the Egiptians, The custome of y e Egiptiās. that if they receaued dowery of theyr wiues, they should be then counted, as their wiues bondemen. Whiche custome did manifestly teache, that it seemeth both full of ignominie, and also vnprofitable, to seke a dowery for wyues, when as nothing is more noble than libertie, and nature hath ordayned that the husband should rule the wife. The maner of y e Spaniardes And it is written that the Spaniardes had a custome that the wyues should bring to theyr husbandes a distaffe with flaxe on it, in steade of a dowery. I coulde make mencion of a great many besides, to shewe, that all the men in the olde time allowed not, that husbandes should haue doweryes geuen them when they maried their wyues. But certainly the lawes of God make mention very oftentymes of a dowery. And I am assured that it was vsed somewhere before the lawe. In Exodus, he which had defiled a virgin, was bound to mary her, so that her father were content: which if he were not, then was he cōpelled to geue her a dowery, as the lawe sayth the dowery of virgins is. Furthermore in the first booke of kinges .ix. chap. Pharao gaue for a dowery vnto Salomon which had maryed his daughter Gazar, a citie whiche he had taken from the Chananites. Besides this the Romane lawes, whiche otherwise are most ful of equitie of all other lawes, do make much mention of doweryes, and haue many whole titles, in whiche this thing onely is entreated of.
But now seyng we are come thus farre, The definition of a dowery. it were good to defyne what a dowry is, that therby we may the eassyer knowe, howe much of godly men is to be attributed vnto it in contracting of matrimonyes. A dowery is a right to vse things, whiche are geuen to the husband by his wife, or by others in her name, to sustayne the burthens of matrimonye. And althoughe a dowery be properly sayd a right of vsyng, yet notwithstanding those thynges which are geuen vnto the mā, are oftentimes called by this word dowery. But the end is chiefly to be marked in this definition, namely to sustayne the burthens of matrimonye. It semeth also that seyng the husband bestoweth very muche in noryshyng hys [Page] wife, and honestly mayntaining her, iustice and equitie require that somewhat be recompenced vnto him agayne. An errour concerning dowry Wherfore for as much as a dowery hath this foundation of iustice, there is no doubt but that it is a thing lawfull. But in it is an error not to be suffred, bicause some are not ashamed to say, that by a dowery concorde betwene man and wife is the easelier obtayned. Frendshyppe grounded on profit and pleasure is weake. This both reason and experience teacheth to be most false. Who is ignoraunt, that that kynde of amitie whiche hath a respect onely to profit, and whiche is founded only vpon pleasure, is very fraile and transitory? Moreouer experience teacheth, that mariages so contracted that no other thyng be considered but onely beautye of the wife, & the dowery, haue very ill successe. Wherfore those are reprehēded by the cōmon prouerbe, Agaynste to great dowryes and such as be against all vertue & honesty. Qui vxores oculis & digitis ducunt, such as marry wiues with their eyes and fingers: that is whiche are moued onely with beauty and money. Wherfore iust lawes ought not to take away dowryes, but seuerely to forbid, that they be not to much encreased, or that they be not contrary to vertue and honestye. Therefore the Romane lawes commaunded those doweryes to be cut of, whiche were greater than the abilitie of the geuer could beare, as it is written in the Digestes of the lawe of doweryes. And contrarywise we must take hede, that the parentes or tutors being ouercome with couetousnesse geue not lesse than honesty requireth, as it is written in the title de dote inofficiosa. And bycause doweryes are geuen to sustayne the burthens of matrimony, those can not be excused, whiche when they haue receaued them of their wiues, are not affeard afterward to vse their wyues vnworthily. They be besides that vniuste bycause they violate the lawe of God, by whiche they ought to loue their wiues as them selues and their owne body, when as they will not conueniently helpe them with their owne goods. Yea there be some, whiche if they were not letted by publicque lawes would consume, sell and vtterly alienate their wiues doweryes. And y t that should not happen, lawes, chiefly the Romane lawes haue diligently prouided for: for they decree that the dominion of the dowery should remayne with the wiues althoughe the husbāds had y e fruit & vse therof as lōg as y e mariage should last. But what, I pray you, shall I say of thē, which do suffer so grieuous & intollerable burthens of matrimony to be dayly augmented, in to much cokering & flattering of their wiues? Surely they sinne most grieuously, for as much as now neither their own patrimony, neither their wiues doweries cā be sufficient, they will so abound euery way in ornamēts & sumptuousnesse. How beit godly husbāds & holy wiues ought to appoint all thinges moderatly. But why thinck we haue y e lawes ordained so many things, & by so many ways cōcerning doweries? Why the dowry ought to remayne for the wyues. Bicause they would kepe y e citizēs w tout hurt or damage, whē they marry & are ioyned together in matrimony. For it is expedient for the publicque wealth, y t if the husbād do dye, y e dowery may remayne whole vnto y e wife, wherw t if she wil she may mary agayn. Or if y e wife dye before, y t the dowry may serue to nourishe, apparell & bring vp the children gottē by matrimony.
But thou wilt aske, wherfore are doweries sayd to be geuen by this title to susteyne the burthens of matrimony? A dowery is not the price of matrimony. Least the same dowery should be counted a price, as thoughe wiues & mariages were thinges to be sold. For whiche selfe cause in the digestes, giftes betwene the husband & the wife are prohibited, namely, that in matrimonyes already contracted, giftes betwene the husband and wyfe should not be receaued. Furthermore when as diuorcements were geuen by that ciuile lawe, if giftes betwene man and wife had ben lawfull, mariages should most easely haue ben dissolued. [...]. For if one of the maried would not geue vnto the other as muche as he would demaunde, he shoulde by and by haue ben repudiated. The men in dede might geue certaine giftes vnto their wyues before the mariages, whiche were called ioyntures, as some certaine recompencinges of the dowery. But when they were once maried together, the Romane lawes permitted not that they should geue giftes one to an other. Of whiche [Page 27] thing Plutarch also hath made mention, out of whom neuerthelesse is brought an other reasō, thā y e which I shewed to be taken of y e lawes. These be y e words in the 35. &, 36. precept of matrimony: Certain bodies are said to consist of seuered things, as an host, & an nauy, other bodies of things ioyned together, as a house and a ship: other some are vnited & congeled together as al liuing creatures are. Wherfore matrimony which consisteth of liuing creatures is vnited and setled together. But y e matrimony which cōsisteth either for dowry sake, or for childrē longeth to bodies ioyned together. And y e which consisteth for pleasure & carnal copulation, may be numbred among the seuered bodies. For there man & wyfe may be said to dwel together, but not to liue together. And as in liuīg creatures the temperatures of humors run through out all the partes: so mariage muste mingle bodies, money, frends & kinsfolkes together. And y e maker of y e Romane lawes forbad persons coupled in matrimonye to take or to geue giftes one to an other, not to the entent they should not be partakers of any one thing, but that they should thinke all things to be cōmon, &c. Certayne maydens had dowryes oute of the treasorye. But these things are to be vnderstand of free giftes & not of doweryes, which otherwise were both lawful & also much vsed in the Romane publique wealth. For the daughters of Scipio, Curius and Cincinnatus had dowryes out of the treasorye, bycause of the pouertie of their parentes, to the intent they should not be maried without doweries.
Yea and y e generall councell holden at Orleaunce (as it is rehearsed in the .30. The generall councell holden at Orleaunce. Questi. 5. chap. Nullum sine) decreed y t no matrimony should be contracted without a dowery. Let the dowery (sayth it) be according to the habilitie, neither let any person presume to marry but publiquely. It is false that matrimonie can not be cōtracted without a dowrye. This Canon I gladly allow in y t it condemneth secret mariages: but in that it decreeth y e matrimonies can not be contracted without a dowery, for as much as it is not confirmed by the testimony of the word of God, I can not admit it. For there are & haue bene very many which haue maried wiues cleane without any dowery, yea & those mē of so great honestye and authoritie, y t it should seme very rash to condemne their fact, seing the holy scriptures are not against it: neither do I iudge that matrimony should by any meanes be denied to those womē which are without dowery, if thei haue nede of matrimonye. Paule furthermore testifyeth, y e matrimonye shadoweth the coniunction of Christ with the church: wherfore if we should loke vpō the truth, the church had nothing which it could offer vnto Christ in the name of a dowry, yea rather (as Ezechiel teacheth) God found it rolled in bloud and myre. The fathers in the old testament seme to haue had wiues sometimes withoute dowries. Wherfore it semeth to be decreed, y e men may and y t it is lawfull to receaue doweryes when they are geuen, & that the same custome is honest, so that y e iust meane be not exceded, and he which marieth be not allured to matrimony by y e name of the dowery as the principall cause. The manners and godlinesse of the wyfe ought chiefly to be regarded, neither ought any man by and by to persuade himself. If I shal marry a wife without a dowery, I shall therefore haue her the better and the quieter, Ierome. The wyfe of Law. seing (as Ierome declareth in his fyrst booke against Iouinian) Cato Censorius had Actoria Paula to wyfe, who was borne of a base kinred, who was poore also and without a dowerye, and yet for all that shew as a dronckard, weake, and proud vnto the same Cato.
16 And the children of Keni Moyses father in lawe, went vp oute of the citye of the Palme trees with the children of Iudah, into the wildernesse of Iudah, that lieth in the south of Arad: and went and dwelt among the people.
In the conquering the citie of Hebron and Debir there is mention made also of the children of Moyses father in law: they were Ethniks in dede by kinde, Of the Kenites [Page] but they wer ioyned w t the Israelites in will and fayth, from whō also in y e fyrst ofspring of kinred they wer not straungers: for as much as they came of Madian the sonne of Abraham by his wyfe Keturah. And the same Kenites constantly abode with the Hebrues tyll theyr captiuitye into Babilon, for as much as the Rechabites came of the Kenites, as it is written in the booke of Paralipomenon. But why they were called Kenites it is vncertaine. But some thinke y t it came of this, bycause the sonne of Iethro, namely Hobab, the brother of Moyses wife, was called Kin by an other name. He therfore in the beginning with his familye dwelled together with the Beniamites in the fieldes of Iericho, when the Israelites passing ouer Iordane vnder Iosua possessed the city of Iericho. But after when they sawe that the tribe of Iudah possessed the cityes of Hebron & Debir, they went vnto thē, and dwelt more cōmodiously in y e plaine of Harad, although they had no certayne houses, but liued continually as it were in tentes.
The citie of Palmes.Although some suspecte the citie of Palmes to haue bene Engaddi, yet moste part of the expositours interprete it to be Iericho, with whom Iosephus de Antiquit. Hebr. agreeth, and also Paraphrastes Caldaicus, yea and the booke of Deut in the xxxiiii. chap. testifyeth the same. For as much as that citie had a notable groue of Palmes of a hundred furlongs, Strabo. which thing Strabo also testifyeth. And yet we may not thinke that y e Kenites reedifyed the citie of Iericho: for it was accursed by the commaundement of Iosua, who amongest other thinges published this (as it is to be beleued) in the name of God, namely that he which should attempt to repayre it, should wrappe himself vnder the curse which came to passe in very deede: For in the time of Ahab the wicked king, one Aiel builte it vp agayne, but to his own great hurt. Fo his two sonnes Abiram & Segub perished whē y e citie was in repayring, as it is written in y e first boke of kings .xvi. chap. But the countrey or ground thereof belonged by diuision vnto the tribe of Beniamin. The fielde of Iericho belōged to the tribe of Beniamin. And these Kenites as it semeth had pitched tentes there, eyther for warfare, or els for keping of shepe, in which thei liued for a time eyther about y e cicie or els betwene y e decaied places of y e city. And there was a regard had vnto thē in distributing of y e land, & in assigning of fieldes (as Iosephus also testifieth) according to y e promise made vnto thē by Moyses, which is writtē in the x. chap. of Num. And it is thought to be very lykely y t their lot was in the tribe of Iudah which being not yet possessed by the children of Israel, they dwelled (as it is said) in the land with the Beniamites in the field of Iericho. This exposition semeth ful and manifest inough.
KimhiBut Kimhi followeth an other opinion, and thinketh that the children of Israell, when they after they had conquered Hebron and Debir in the time of Iosua, had determined vtterly to destroy the citie of Iericho, vnderstanding that the Kenites dwelte there lyke straungers as I thinke (bycause they came of the stocke of Madian) before they ouerthrew al the city, they called them away, that they might not perish with the other Chananites. The same curtesie dyd Saule shewe vnto them, when he should make warre agaynst Amelek, as it is writtē in the fyrst booke of Samuel xv. chap. For he commaunded the Kenites to depart, least they shoulde be destroyed with Amelek: and he shewed a cause, namely bycause they were good and gentle vnto the Israelites comming vp out of Egipt. Kimhi addeth moreouer, that Amelek and the Kenites were of a farre contrarye affection toward the Israelites. For the Kenites loued thē wonderfull wel. But Amelek hated thē deadly. Wherfore euē as god had bound himselfe by an othe, y e warre should be continually made agaynst Amelek: so would he haue y e Kenites recōpenced alwayes with benifites. This interpretation should be very likely, if this departing of y e Kenites frō Iericho, were not put by our history after Hebron and Debir were conquered. But Iericho was conquered of Iosua fyrst of all after he had passed ouer Iordane: and certainely before he had gotten Hebron & Debir Besides thys oure historye entreateth eyther of the Kenites whiche remayned [Page 28] in Madian, or ells of those which had ioyned thēselues in fellowship with y e people of Israel. It semeth y t this can not be spoken of the first, whē as Iericho is not in Madian, yea it is farre distant frō thence, but if we shal vnderstand this to be spoken of those which came with Israell, how shuld it be vnderstand y t they dwelt in Iericho, before Iosua toke it? Moreouer it is not found in y e texte of the history, y t they were called forth as Kimhi writeth: but it is playnly written y t they went frō thence to Iudah. Wherfore I can better agree with Iosephus, Iosephus. Why y e Kenites departed from Iericho. who writeth y e they therfore departed frō thence, bicause in y e deuision of the land, & distributing of fieldes (as I haue before sayd) their inheritaunce fell about the tribe of Iudah wherfore they got thē vnto it when Hebron & Debir were conquered. But why frō the time they came ouer Iordane euen to this time they dwelt rather about Iericho thā in any other place, seing the scripture speaketh not of it, I am cōtent to lacke the knowledge therof.
But bicause this Kenite (as many Hebrues confesse) was the father in law of Moyses, which thing also Ierome confyrmeth in his booke of traditiōs or Hebrue questions vpon the first boke of Samuel & vpon Paralip. we must therefore call to memory Iethro, of whom is mentiō made more largely in the boke of Exodus. That Iethro was he to whō Moyses came when he fled out of Egipt, What this word Cohen signifyeth. who was also either prince or priest of Madian. For y e Hebrue word Cohen signifieth both, & therfore the holy historyes writeth of y e sonnes of Dauid y t they were Cohenim y t is princes, & highly exalted amongest magistrates: ii. Sam viii. Aben-Esra for so were kynges wont to exalte their children. Although Aben-Esra affirmeth Moyses father in law to haue bene priest of Madian. And sayth y t he ministred not to Idols, but to the true god: for the pure worshipping of god was not so peculiar to the people of Israell, but y t there were godly men in other places, which worshipped god sincerely. There is no doubt but y e Melchisedech was such a one, whō the scripture calleth the priest of the high god. Moyses defended the daughters of this Iethro frō the shepherdes at the wel, by which meanes he was made his sōne in law. And afterward when he fed his shepe not farre frō the mount Sina he was called of god, to deliuer the people of Israell frō the Egiptian bondage. Wherefore he asked leaue of him to depart & went his way to Egipt, & frō thence after wonder full works of god, he led the people into the deserte, and fought agaynst Amelek in whose land Kenite the Madianite dwelt. And when Moyses had obtayned the victory, Iethro, who was not with Amelek in the warre, came vnto Moyses hys sonne in law, & reioyced at his happy successe in the battaile, he did sacrifice, and cōmunicated together with his sonne in lawe, & the rest of the Israelites in geuing thankes to god. He gaue also vnto Moyses wholesome coūsell, not to weary himself in hearing al causes: But rather that he should haue men chosen out, which might both heare & also determine cōmon and light causes, & such as wer harder, to be referred only to him: and he for y e most hard matters to aske coūsel of god, and loke what god had answered & commaunded, the same to be decreed for the people. Whē Iethro or Kenite had done these with Moyses in the wildernesse after the warre of Amelek before the law was geuen, he returned into his own countrey as it is written in the xviii. Chap. of Exodus.
But concerning his returne into his own countrey, there are two opinions, Of the returne of Moyses father in law into his countrey. both of the Hebrues & our men. Some say that he returned to dispose and set an order in his domesticall things, and to make preparation for his familie to iourney with the Israelites. Which things being al finished almost in one yeares space, he returned to his sonne in lawe, and went together with him and the Israelites to the land of Chanaan. And so they say, although it be sayd in the historye that he departed before, yet it is truely put in the boke of Num. that Moyses spake with him, in the second yeare from the departure out of Egipt, when the tabernacle was then finished, & orders appoynted, wherby the Hebrues shoulde go forward. For he destred him, not to depart frō him, but to be as it were an eye [Page] to the Israelits in this their iourney into straunge countryes, for that he knew all the places of y e desert very well, bycause he was borne in the countrey adioyning vnto it. Not bycause the pyllers and cloudes led not the Israelites safely & soundly, but bycause this man was very cunning in pitching and camping an hoste. Moyses woulde therfore (as they say) haue him to instructe the troupes of Souldiours which shoulde goe forth, and to prouide that they going forwarde, shoulde abyde ioyned together, and shoulde keepe the iuste manner of warlyke order. Whereunto thys also was a helpe, for that by reason of hys knowledge of the countreyes he coulde easely admonyshe the Israelites of the nature of those places, and howe farre distante and nyghe they were together. Howbeit other say, that Iethro so returned to hys house, after he had reioyced with Moyses that he retourned not vnto hym agayne: for as it is to be beleued, he was very aged, and therfore he spent the reste of hys age with hys neyghbours and familye in Madian, exercisyng his office eyther of a prince or ells of a priest. Neuerthelesse they thynke y t he left a sonne with Moyses, called Hobab, to the entente he might be throughly enstructed by Moyses hys kinnesman, and by Aaron, and other excellent men of the Hebrues, in Godlinesse and knowledge of worshipping of God. Therfore they wil haue this man to be he, whō Moyses spake vnto in the .x. of Num. and made ouersear for pitching of the campes. Besides y t they say y t this mans sonnes & familye were now at this present called Kenites. And I my self, to say what I thinke true, do much agree with this latter sentence.
For Balaam the Prophet in the .24. chap. of Num. prophecied peculiarly of the Kenites, Balaam the Prophet. that they should haue their habitations in the most fenced places, and y t thei should there abide, til they were led away captiues by the Assirians, & he ioyneth them (as it appeareth manifestly in that place) with Amelek: for (as I sayd before) they inhabited al one land with the Amelekites. Wherfore it is gathered that Iethro so departed from Moyses into Madian, to dwell there continually. And so it might be that Balaam the Prophet ioyned the Kenites with the Amelekites, of which Kenites neuerthelesse part were with the Israelites, for as much as Iethro (as it is sayd) left his sonne with them.
Besides this in the .x. chap. of Num. Hobab was desired of Moyses, to come & go with the Israelites, whether they went: who refused to goe any farther, bycause he was mynded to returne home into his countrey. For he was left there of his father to be better instructed in the worshippyng of God, and he abode with the Israelites tyll they were readye to depart thence, And then he thought to haue returned into his countrey: but being desired of Moyses, he consented at length to iourney forth with y e Israelits. But these things could not haue bene so, if we should thinke y e Hobab had bene Iethro, which after he had deuided & set his things in order should haue returned againe to Moyses, with y e minde & purpose to haue gone forward with y e Israelits. For what neded Moyses to haue entreated hym to do that, for which cause he came from hys owne house to doe? Or why shoulde he haue chaunged hys purpose to retourne into hys owne countreye, whiche he had before vtterly forsaken? Lastly why shoulde he afterwarde haue denyed to goe, which he had before decreed with hymself to do? I know in deede there be some but not many which affyrme, that Iethro was that Hobab with whom Moyses spake in the booke of Num. which thyng let thē affyrme for me, howbeit I thought good to declare what I iudged most likely.
And that the familye of the Kenites dwelled long among the Amelekites or very nyghe adioynyng vnto them, the fyrste booke of Samuel testifyeth, where it is written that Saule called forth the Kenites, least he should haue destroyed them together with the Amelekites. Wherefore it semeth that parte of the Kenites dwelled with the Amelekites, & part with the Israelits, of whiche both of thē were alwaies most frendly to y e Hebrues. And god declareth y t he had excellētly adorned thē in their publique wealth, & that w t three principal giftes. [Page 29] For they excelled in the study & knowledge of the law. Three thinges God seemeth to haue geuen to the Kenites. They were also notable in obtaining of a great victorye. Lastlye they liued vertuously and godlye. And concerning the study of the law, wherein they floorished, the first booke of Paralipomenon 1 and seconde chapter towarde the ende, is a wytnesse vnto them. For there is mencion made of them with the family of Iambes, that is, of Othoniel, and they ar said to haue bene Scribes: wherby it appeareth that the tradition of the Hebrues is not to bee despised, that in the doctrine of the lawe, they were the disciples of Othoniel: for they ar reckoned in his family. And it is a very common thing, to count disciples in the place of children. Ierome. Ierome also in hys questions vpon Paral. alloweth this opinion, which (as it is said) seemeth to agree with the scriptures. Neither do I thynke that for anye other cause there is mencion made of them in this place among the actes of Othoniel, Why mencion is made here of the Kenites. but onelye bycause they lyued together alwaies with his family most louingly. They ar also counted with the tribe of Iudah, although they were not of the stocke of the Israelites. Wherfore they amongst other wer a fygure of the callyng of the Gentiles. The other notable ornament of theirs in that publique wealthe was that 2 noble victory, which is declared in the .4. chap. of this booke. For Iahel, the wife of Aber the Kenite slew Sisara the captayne of warre of Iabin king of Chanaan, and God would by the hand of a woman of this familye graunt great health to the Israelites. Lastly that they wer wel manered, and obseruers of their fathers 3 commaundementes, the family of Ionadab the sonne of Rechab hath declared. They dronke no wyne, which at that tyme was the maner of the Nazarites, Prayse of the Rechabites. and notably despising earthly thinges they dwelled not in houses, but lyued in tentes, and exercised the arte of a shepherd which is most simple. For which thing they are very much commended of Ieremy the Prophet, and adourned wyth a most ample promisse aboue the Iewes, bycause they had geuen more seruice & obedience vnto him namelye Rechab their parent, than the Hebrues had done vnto God himselfe, which neuertheles dyd continually boast in that father and holy progenitours. Wherefore we knowe that to be most true which Paul hath taught to the Romanes, that they in dede had Abraham to their father, whiche followed the steppes of hys fayth, they were not Iewes by nature, but by wyl and faith were made Proselites, and in godlynes and holynes farre passed very many of those which were by nature Iewes.
We gather moreouer hereby, It is very profitable for men to ioyne them selues to good & godly persōs. that it muche auayleth vs to ioyne our selues with good men, and with the fellowshyp of the godly. The Kenites which wer the posterity of Hobab, if they would haue rested (as the most part of men do) in their own countrye, and in the place where they were borne, they had fallen at length into the ignoraunce of God and of his lawes, wherby they should easely haue bene lyke vnto their neighbour Amalek. But bycause they despising theyr owne thinges, and kyndled with the faith of the promisse of God, ioyned themselues vnto the Israelites, What are the moste honest causes of peregrination. therfore God gaue them suche good successe in theyr thinges. We ought to remember with our selues the moste honest cause of the peregrination of these men. For al good men trauayle not into straunge countries for one purpose. There be very many, which do therfore often tymes leaue their countrey, bycause they may not worship God there after the sincere & lawful maner of worshipping, yea they are grieuously troubled there, if they endeuour them selues therunto. So Abraham was called out of his lande and from hys kynred, least he should styl haue gone forwarde with his elders to contaminate him selfe with idolatry. So Christ also said, if they shal persecute vs in one city, let vs flye vnto an other. But ther be other, which though they be not letted at home from the true godlynes, yet for al that they wil go see those places, wher they thinke they may yet get more profyt, Plato his pergrination is praysed. and be more certainlye enstructed in thinges deuine and necessary for saluacion. For which cause Plato is commended, bycause he came to the Egiptians, & went to a part of Italy, that is great [Page] Greace: he went also vnto diuers nations, as though he should follow wisdome flieng from him. So in like wise Saba the quene is commended in the holy scriptures, which trauailed from so farre countries to heare Salomon: after this maner the Kenites (of whom we entreate) folowed the people of Israel: for although at home they knew & worshipped one God, whose Priest their father also was, yet neuertheles they desired to be styl more instructed, and more absolutelye to receaue the lawes, institutions and worshipping of God.
They are also very much worthy of praise, which do for this cause only trauaile into other countries to profyt others, and to helpe and deliuer them from the miseries wherewyth they be oppressed. After which sorte the Poetes haue sayd that Hercules wandred through the world, Hercules. by his might to destroy wicked and hurtful men, which miserably afflicted mankinde. Neither did the Apostels trauaile throughout the whole worlde for any other cause, than to deliuer men out of the mouth of the deuyl, and by the preaching of the Gospel to loose them from their chaines of errours. Christ also for this selfe same cause would trauail and iourney among men, that by his doctrine and death he might delyuer mankind frō eternal destruction. Wherfore the Kenites may be numbred with these: for they also adioyned them selues companions with the Israelites, to helpe thē through the deserte. For (as it is said) they hauing good knowledge of those places, might stand the Iewes in great steede. These counsels are plainlye iudged good and honest, for whose causes peregrinations which are taken wythout cō pulsion, are honest and prayse worthy.
There maye be other reasons also of peregrination, which as they be not alwaies to be refused, yet are they nothing to be compared wyth these, eyther in praise, or els in worthynes. Wherfore let godly men take hede when they iourney into farre coūtries, that they apply them selues as much as is possible vnto these causes & reasons now mētioned. And as God hath not defrauded these Kenites of the fruit which they looked for, but made them partakers and that plentifully of those good thinges which he had prepared for his people, so seyng also he is now the same God which he was then, we must beleue, that he wil not suffer him selfe to depart from his accustomed maner and perpetuall goodnes, so that we obserue the good and iust causes and reasons of peregrination.
Seneca What is chiefly to bee obserued in peregrination.But in that thing we haue nede of great warenesse and diligēce, namely that chiefly (as Seneca hath wel admonished in his .105. epistle to Lucillas) we depart from our selues, that is that we laye awaye our wicked affections, bycause the chaunging of places do lytle profit, if we cary about together with vs the same affectiōs, which we had before. Yea and y e chiefly helpeth to the renuing of godlynes, that we bee made other from our selues. For what had the good lawes, honest maners, and chaste religion which the Iewes professed, profited the Kenites, if they would haue brought their own thinges with them, and continued in the same wherin they wer conuersaunt before? Wherfore they which do trauaile into other countries for studye and godlynes sake, ought not to haue thys purpose before them, to behold the Cities, buildinges, riuers, fieldes, vineyards woods, playes and qualities of men: For all these thynges although they somewhat delite the beholders, as chyldren which with pleasure do maruayl at euery new and straunge thing, yet they do nothing, or very lytle helpe. The chiefe cause ought to be, y t they onely study aboue al other thinges to be made better, as touching godlines & doctrine. For if they shal despise this, they shal be sayd to wander, rather thā iustly to iourney. Let them not therfore retaine with them any longer those euyls which are to be auoided, yet let them aboue all thinges iourney from the ignoraunce of God, from the vnskilfulnes of the holye Scriptures, from corrupt affectiōs, and from wicked and pernitious examples. This is the iust cause of peregrinatiō, which the Kenites by their dede do declare vnto vs. If the Lacedemonians had had a regard to thys, they would not by theyr [Page 30] lawes haue prohibited peregrinations: But I suppose that they regarded thys, The Lacedemonians prohibeted peregrinations. which they marked so to come to passe for the most part, that the citizens in trauailing into straunge countries, learned of the straungers whom they went to see, not their vertues and wisdom, but rather their vices and errours, and afterward being infected with many euyls, they returned into their country, where they destroied their Citizens by a certayne pestiferous contagiousnes. Whych thing surely no man doubteth but that it is a grieuous euyll and discommodity to a publique wealth. Why peregrinations do profyt. And yet we may not therfore decree that al peregrinatiōs are hurtful. For there can be found no City, no people, nor no publique wealth in the world, which hath not many things vnperfect in maners & lawes, which may be amended and corrected by the sight and knowledge of others. Licurgu [...]. Lycurgus certainly which made that law, profited much in trauailing into straunge coū tries. Yea and the Decemuiri of the Romanes went them selues into Graecia, Decemuiri of the Romanes. to the end they would know the lawes of that people, and by that meanes they wonderfully prouided for their publique wealth. And thus muche for peregrination.
And now let vs finish this history, iudging that the children of Kenite were of that stocke which wer begotten of Hobab in y e wildernes among the chyldren of Israel: And that Hobab was the sonne of Moyses father in lawe, & hys wiues brother germaine. Neither ought this to moue vs bycause it is saide in the .x. Aben-Esra. of Num. Chothen bycause as Aben-Esra there testifieth, that woorde signifieth not onely a father in law, but also the brother of the wife, and some haue translated the same woorde there not for a father in lawe, but a kynsman. But these Kenites departed out of the fielde of Iericho, that they might obtayne possession with the tribe of Iudah. And therfore they ar sayd to haue dwelled with the people. For first they followed them in iourneyeng with them, & nowe by the same right they are sayd to haue dwelled with them. And they ascended, The situation Iericho. bycause Iericho was situate in a valley, and betwene it an Ierusalem was a deserte longing to Iudah, which as it is very lykely had in it wooddy places, and mete for pasture. And that it was so, it is easelye gathered out of the Gospell of Luke, where Christ put foorth a parable, namely that a man descended from Ierusalem to Iericho, and fel into the handes of theeues. And certainly if he descended, it is manifest y t these ascended, when they followed the tribe of Iudah going toward Ierusalem. And bycause the place was ful of wooddes, it was an easy matter (especially in the time of Christ when the common wealth of the Hebrues was very much out of frame) for it to be ful of theeues. There certainly (as farre as can be perceaued) the Kenites receaued their lot. And I think I haue spoken inough as touching this hystory.
17. And Iudah went wyth Symeon his brother, and smote the Chananites dwelling in Zephat, and vtterly destroyed it, and called the name of the City Horma.
18. And Iudah tooke Hazza and the borders therof, and Ascalon with the borders therof, and Aekron with the borders thereof.
Now we are come to that place where the long parenthesis (which I before admonished you of) endeth. And whatsoeuer followeth after these woordes: The children of Iudah fighting against Ierusalem tooke it. Here the aforesaid parenthesis endeth. &c. to thys place, are declared by a parenthesis. For al those thinges happened not after the death of Iosua, but when he was yet lyuing. And now the history retourneth to that setting forward to battaile which they of Iudah and the Symeonites tooke in hand, styrred vp by the oracle of God. And therfore it is written: And Iudah went wyth Symeon hys brother, and smore the Chananites dwellyng [Page] in Zephat, and vtterly destroyed it, and called the name of the Citye Horma. The vowe of Cherem that is of the curse. The Hebrues did not vtterly throw downe nor destroy certain cities which they possessed, but dwelled in them. Howbeit som they cursed and cleane defaced. And their vowe was called in Hebrew, Cherem, of the thing that was promised, deriued from this woord Charam, which is to waste, to destroy, to kil, to deface, & to geue vnder curse. The Grecians called that woord [...]: They called [...] also, [...], and [...] as thinges consecrated and put apart. And it may be that so they called them, bycause they were hanged vp in temples, and were seperated from the vse of men, neither was it lawfull to remoue them out of that place. Yea and men somtymes wer called by that name. Paule also vsed that woord many tymes, for he saith to the Galathians: Let hym be accursed whosoeuer shal preache any other Gospel. And to the Romanes he wished him selfe to be made a curse for the brethren. And to the first of the Corinthians he saith: he y e loueth not y e lord Iesus, let him be accursed, Maranatha, wher he taketh this woord [...] for this woord Cherem, that is, a thing seperated and seioyned vtterly from mans occupying or vse, so that it was wycked either to touch it, or to put it to any vse. Wherfore we haue a testimonye in the booke of Iosua, Why the cytye of Iericho was made a curse. the .6. chap. of the city [...]cho. And it semed to haue bene so accursed bycause it was after a sorte th [...] [...] fruites of the Cities that were taken. For after they were passed ouer Iordane, it was the first of al the cities that was conquered, and that by no mans helpe, for that the walles therof fel downe of their owne accorde, and through the woorking of God. And therefore it was mete that the spoyles therof should altogether bee consecrated vnto God.. Whether the destruction of cities pertayne to the worshipping of God. But that semeth to be vtterly farre from the worshipping of God to destroy both cities and men, and these seme to haue a shew of cruelty, rather than of religion. To that I answer, that the destruction of townes in dede of their own nature, belong neither to religion nor yet to godlynes, but so farre forth as they ar referred to the glory of God. And that may happen two maner of wayes. As whē that destruction is counted as a certayn monument of the seuerity and iustice of God against those nations which he for their wickednes would haue destroyed, or as a certain testimony of Gods goodnes and mercy towards the Israelites, whom in that expedition he mercyfully helped. Therefore the ouerthrowing of the city, houses, men, and beastes, did shew the iustice and seueritie of God. And the consecration declared the goodnes, helpe and mercy shewed to that people. Moreouer God would by that meanes proue the obedience of his people in abstaining from the spoiles which wer consecrated vnto God. God by these curses proued hys people. For we know that souldiours when they haue gotten the victory, are hardlye restrained from the pray. But they which obeied not the curse published, wer most grieuously punished: which the holy history of Iosua declareth to haue happened vnto Acham, bicause he vsurped vnto him selfe some of the spoiles of Iericho. We know also that Saul for this cause was depriued of his kyngdome, bicause he had reserued Agag the king, and certain oxen and fat cattel of the pray which wer bound before to the vow of the curse.
The forme of the curse.Of the forme and end of the curse we haue spoken enough. For the forme is the destruction of cities, men and beastes, and the consecration of gold, siluer, yron, brasse, precious stones, and costly things, which wer appointed onely to the vse of the tabernacle. But the end was that they might be monuments of Gods goodnes and iustice, The end of the same. and also an exercise and trial of the Israelites. Now resteth somewhat to speake of the matter and efficient cause therof.
The matter was, what soeuer was found on lyue in those cities, for al that ought to be killed, The matter of the same. and the buildinges and other garnishinges of the city ought to be cleane destroyed: but as for the ornamentes and riches, they were (as it is sayd) consecrated vnto the worshipping of God. But ther is to be marked, that none wer vowed vnto so horrible a destruction, but such as were already declared [Page 31] and knowen to be enemies of God: for it is not lawfull to kyll Innocentes. Wherfore they sinned most grieuouslye which so vowed Paules death, that they would neither eate nor drinke tyl they had killed him. And at this daye they behaue them selues more than wickedly, Iephre. which saye that they haue vowed them selues most cruelly to kil al the Professours of the gospel. Yea, and Iephte without doubt was deceaued, Agamemnon. which bicause of hys kynde of vowyng thought that his daughter should either be slaine, or els compelled to perpetual virginity. Agamemnon also is to be condemned, which (as Cicero declareth in his booke of offices) vowed vnto Diana the fairest woman that should be borne in his kyngdome. And to performe this foolish vowe, he sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia. The efficient cause of a curse But the efficient cause of the vow Cherem, somtimes is God, as it is written in the .vii. and .x. chap. of Deut. For ther it is commaunded that places dedicated to Idoles, aulters, ymages, groues, & monumentes should be vtterly destroied, and that was a perpetual curse in the land of Chanaan, and to be alwaies obserued. Somtimes the Prince made such a vow, as we reade of Iosua, and somtimes the people, as we find in the .21. chap. of Num. The prophets also somtimes did this, & so Samuel cōmaūded Saul, cleane to destroi al things belōging to y e Amelekites
The name of this city, wherof we now entreate, was afterwarde called Horma, for it was not so called before, and it was so called of the woorde Cherem. For such a name were they wont to geue vnto such places as were wasted and destroyed by a curse. In the booke of Num. 21. chapter a certaine portion of the Chananites, which the Israelites possessed by violence, was by reason of suche a vowe called Horma.
But some peraduenture wil aske, These destructions of Cities are not agaynst charity. Augustine. whether these destructions of townes wer against charity? To whom I answer no. Bicause such enemies were chosen to be vtterly destroyed of the Iewes by the iudgement of God, and not by the lust of men. But as touching the loue or hatred of enemies, wee must vnderstande that Augustine hath written toward the ende of the first booke vpon the sermon of the Lord on the mountaine, that he doth ascende one steppe of righteousnes, which loueth his neighbour, although he yet hate his enemy. But then shall he performe beneuolence and gentlenes at the commaundement of hym whyche came to fulfyl the law, and not to breake it, when he shall stretch it euen to the loue of the enemy. For that degree, though it be somwhat, yet it is so smal, that it may be commō also with Publicanes. Neither that which is said in the law: Thou shalt hate thine enemy, It is not lawfull for the vnperfecte to hate their enemyes. is to be taken as a commaundement vnto the iust man, but as a permission to the weake. Thus much he writeth, with whom (yf I should speake as I thinke) I do not agree, but am certainly perswaded, that to hate our enemies is not permitted of God, no not to the vnperfect. For it is an euerlasting precept, that we should loue our neighbour as our selues. Who is oure neyghbour. And he is our neighbour whom we helpe by anye occasion, as Christ hath declared in the parable of the Iewes and of the Samaritan. They were compared as enemyes one to an other, wherefore the condition of enmitye when it happeneth, can not let, but y t such as are enemies one to an other be yet neighbours. Moreouer for as much as we se y e Dauid & other prophets did oftentimes curse their enemies, by what meanes can we cal thē weake, whō God gaue liberty to hate their enemies. For they wer holy men and very perfect. Augustine, Neither doth that seeme to make much to the purpose, which the same Augustine saith, namely that the sayinges of these holy men were no vowes & desires, but rather forespeakinges & prophecies of them, who liuing vnder the old testament did oftentimes prophecye the chaunce of thinges to come. For the Apostels ar also found in the new testamēt not only to haue spoken words of cursings (as Paul when he saith: I woulde to god they wer cut of which do trouble you) but also to haue most grieuously punished some. For as much (as it is written in y e actes of the Apostels) the same Paul depriued Elimas the Magicien of his sight, and Peter slewe Ananias and Saphira. [Page] Wherfore we must rather say that these great mē did not such things of an hatred graunted to vnperfect men, but y t they wer driuen therunto by some other maner of meanes. Marke the distinction. And therfore me thinketh we must make this distinction, that they somtimes had to do for their own causes, & sometimes for gods cause. Whē they had to do for their matters, al their doings wer ordered w t al modestye and gentlenes. As we se Dauid to haue done, who many times spared Saul his deadly enemy. Moyses also & other holy men did constantly & valiauntly very often grieuous thinges. But when the matters of God wer in hand, the same mē behaued them selues seuerely & nobly. And if they should haue done that in theyr own causes, they might haue semed to wrest the swerd out of the hande of God and of the Magistrate, which they do which reuenge their own iniuries.
This is also to be added, that men which are appointed to take in hand & to defend Gods cause, What is chieflye to be taken heede of when Gods matters are in hand. although they may then do thinges sharpely & seuerlye, yet they must precisely & diligently take hede, that vnder that pretence, they cocker not their owne affections. The Apostels when they desired Christ to sende fyre from heauen vpon the Samaritanes (as they knew was done in the olde tyme, at the prayers of Helias) wer rebuked of the Lord, bicause they knew not of whose spirite they wer, which without doubt was a most apt answer. For they whom God sendeth to execute these offices, ought not nowe to be counted priuate or symple men, Whether it bee lawfull to pray against tyrans & to curse them Augustine. but such as wer prepared and enstructed of him, to be in hys steede vpon the earth. But whether it be lawful for priuate men to praye against vngodly and cruell Tyrannes, by whom the true worshipping of God is hindred, and to curse them, Augustine aunswereth, that it is alwaies lawfull for godlye men to pray vnto God against the kingdome of synne. And that maye be cleane taken away, when the vngodly forsake their wickednes, for whose vnfayned repentaunce we must alwayes pray vnto God. But if they seeme past all hope, it is lawful to praye that their synnes maye sometymes at the length come to an end: namely that when they are taken awaye, they myght cease both to hynder the woorshipping of God, and also to trouble the Saintes. For as much as it is not expedient that theyr synne shoulde escape vnpunished, for when it is leaste without punishment, it is mere vniustice. But when the punishment of God is adioyned vnto it, then ther is in him lesse deformitye. Wherefore God is of the same Augustine called verye wel not a cruell tormentor, Augustine. but a iust correctour. Moreouer, bycause holy men are very familiar with God, and therefore when by some heauenly reuelation, Saintes sometimes reioyce & also are sory for the destruction of the wycked. they are acertained of his wil, bicause they exceedingly loue him, they cannot but allow his sentence, yea they faithfullye praye that the same may be accomplished. Although (in that they be men) they be both sory, and also take it grieuously to haue their neighbours so vexed. After whych sorte Samuel mourned for Saul the kyng, whom be knew neuertheles to be reiected of god. Ieremy also wept for the captiuity which was at hand, and Christ wept for the City of Ierusalem which should be destroyed. For they which be mē in dede, God requireth not the not feeling of the Stoikes. can not chose but be sory for their neighbours and their own flesh when it is afflicted. Neither doth God require of vs that Stoike lacke of compassion. But as touching this matter, if the Reaver desire to know more, let hym looke vpon my Cōmentaries to the Corrinthians. But as touching this present purpose, that is to say, that the people of Israel in destroying & cursing of these peoples, followed not their own hatred, but the instinction of God, for they wer his Lieuetenauntes, and might be called his woorkemen, when as they destroyed those whom god himselfe had declared to be enemies, and cōmaunded that they should be destroyed by them.
And Iudah tooke Hazzam, and the borders therof. These words do al so cōfirme y t those things which ar now declared, wer don after y e death of Iosua, when y e publique wealth of the Israelites was gouerned by elders. For when in the booke of Iosua the .xiii. chap. those Cities were reckoned which were least [Page 32] vnconquered after Iosuas death, these cities Haza, Ascalon, and Accaron are expressed by name. But there is a doubt, after what sorte these Cities were sayde to haue pertained to the Philistians in the tyme of Samuel, when Saul dyd then raigne. Yea and the same is written in the third chap. of this booke. There are some whiche affirme that these Cities were not nowe altogether taken, but so possessed, that the Israelites obtained some part of the lande which belonged vnto them, which semeth not very lykely vnto me, seing that the historye sayth that not onely euery one of these Cities wer taken, but that also the endes and borders of them came into the power of Iudah. Wherfore I would rather iudge that their opinion is best, which affirme that Iudah dyd now in deede possesse these Cities, as it is written, but afterwarde when the Israelites synned, they wer agayne dryuen out of them by the Philistians, who wonne them agayne to their own vse, and so did wynne them, that they counted them as most principal dominions, for they dyd set ouer eche of them certaine noble gouernours. Neyther ought that much to moue vs, bycause the history doth onelye name Iudah now, & speaketh nothing of Symeon. For that might be, bicause the lot of both these tribes was ioyned together, and they had made a couenant to fyght together: therfore when we heare the name of the one, we must therwith also vnder stand the name of the other. And the name of Symeon is rather vnspoken of, bicause God hymself in his oracle gaue Iudah the principality in this expedition.
19 And the Lord was with Iudah, & he possessed the mountayne: for he could not dryue out the inhabitauntes of the valley, bycause they had yron Chariotes.
He possessed the mountayne. The figure zeugma. It is written in Hebrewe Veioresch Hahar, which if it wer properly translated is, he draue away the mountain, which without doubt is a figuratiue phrase, for the figure [...] is added, by whych figure, one and the selfe woord serueth for two members, bycause that woorde Ioschebe which is inhabitours, ought to be repeated: that euen as it is said that Iudah could not dryue out the inhabitours of the valley, so also must be vnderstand that the inhabitours of the mountaine were expelled by him, so that thys woord Hahar is the genitiue case, as is this woord Haamak, that is, of the valley. The conquering of both these was paynfull, bycause Cityes founded vpon mountaines are by nature of the place wel fenced, and they whych dwelled in the [...] valleys, wer very experte in a kynde of fence, I meane yron chariotes. But least peraduenture we should thinke that the inhabitors of the mountains wer driuen out of their place of Iudah by the strength of men ther is set before. And the Lord was with Iudah. As though it had ben said, bicause they fought by the fauour of God, therfore the hilly places wer conquered. Wherefore if God had ayded them of Iudah with the like fauour in their battayl in the valley, they should also haue ouercome those which inhabited the valley. There semeth also a cause to be geuen bycause they had yron chariotes.
He that shal reade the Iliades of Homer, shal easely perceaue that the men in the old time vsed chariotes in battails, & also the same may be gathered both out of the most auncient histories, & also out of the latter writers, Quintus Curtius. & amongest other Quintus Curtius writing the life of Alexander doth playnlye make mencion of such chariots in the battail fought against Darius. But I thinke no writer writeth more plainly of them than doth Liuie. Titus Liuius. For he in that battail wherin Antiochus was ouercome of the Romanes, which is in the .4. decade, & seuenth boke, thus describeth the chariotes whych he calleth hooked. He sayth that they were fenced chiefely after thys maner. The description of hooked chariotes. The poyntes aboute the draught tree standing out from the yoke, had as it were hornes, wherwith whatsoeuer they met they mighte thruste it throughe: and twoo hookes hoong oute at eche ende [Page] of the cart, the one euen with the carte, the other fastened downewarde to the earth, the former serued to cut asunder what so euer came on the syde of it, the other was made to crushe them which fel downe, or went vnder. There were also two sundry hookes fastened after the same sorte to the exetrees of both the wheles. &c. The vse therfore of these chariotes endured til the tyme that Antiochus was ouercome. Howbeit wee neuer reade that the Romanes vsed them. And that they wer horrible to behold, and hard to be conquered, may manifestly be gathered by the booke of Iosua: For ther in the .vii. chap. when the tribe of Ioseph complained bicause it was so many in number, and had obtained so narrow a lot, Iosua commaunded them, that if they had not roume inoughe, they shoulde go and dwel or els conquere the places of their enemies adioyning vnto them. They excused them selues, that they coulde not doo that, bicause their neighbours had yron chariotes. But to repeate more auncienter thinges, Pharao (as it is written in the booke of Exodus) when hee persecuted the Israelites which fled, is said to haue had chariotes, and with the same he tooke vpon hym to enter into the sea. But they beyng ouerthrowen by the power of God, hee was punished for breaking his fidelity.
Yron chariotes cānot resist godBut this is diligently to be considered of vs, whether either yron chariotes, or hooked cartes can withstand the power and promise of God, which if we shal deny (as in very dede we must deny) why ar they then put here as the cause that the victory was not obtained? Marke the distinction. Whereunto I aunswer, that in this place is set foorth vnto vs the nighest cause, namely that which was sene. And certainly it was a cause, if we should looke onely vpon mans strength. For the Chananites being so armed and appointed could not be ouercome of the Israelites, whych wer weaker than they, Why god graū ted not the hole victorye vnto Iudah. and not so wel armed and fenced. But if the power and might of God be considered, the same could not be letted either by chariots and weapons or els by power of souldiours. Why did not God therfore whych had geuen part of the victory, graunt the whole also? Kimhi aunswereth that God dyd it to proue the Israelites thereby. For if they should haue bene constrayned (as in deed they were) to dwel for a while with these nations, then experience should haue tryed how much they woulde set by theyr God, namelye whether they woulde perseuer in the lawfull woorshypping of hym, or whether they would enclyne to their owne madde customes and woorshipping of Idoles. Thys in deede is a true cause, and is set foorth also in the thyrd chapter of thys booke, and toward the end lykewyse of the second. There is also an other cause added, namely to teach them the arte and faculty of fyghting: for they whych lyued before their tyme, had no skyll of these thynges. And it is written in Exodus that it was done that wylde beastes shoulde not to muche abounde, whych must needes haue followed, if the land shoulde haue bene brought into a wyldernes, before the Hebrues could haue fylled it all. And of these causes I haue made mention before.
But the Paraphrastes Chaldaicus bringeth an other cause besydes these, and sayth that the chyldren of Israell had synned: Wherefore he thincketh it was done, that God iustlye and woorthylye withdrewe hys ayde and gaue not vnto them when they fought, the whole and full victorye. And that, though the scripture doo not now expresse it, may euidently be gathered by other places. For we are very often taught by the holy scriptures that idolatry and synnes were iust causes why the Israelites sometymes went without the victorye promysed vnto them. And though there had bene no other synne, we myght alledge thys, that their faith and prayers were sometymes somewhat more slacke than they ought to haue bene. When faith & praiers waxe fainte, then the victory is takē away. Whych manyfestly appeareth in that warre which the Hebrues made in the wyldernesse againste Amelecke for the enemye ouercame, when Moyses beganne to be faynte in prayer. And agayne, the victorye was restored vnto the people of God, when the fayth and prayer of Moyses was more [Page 33] earnest and vehement. Sinne therfore is not onely y e cause of death, but it bringeth also al infirmities, weakenesse and miseries. Contrarily faith is the cause of all strength, myghte, and victories. Wherefore it is very well written in the xi. Chapter to the Hebrues, that the Sainctes through fayth haue wonne kingdomes. Which may and oughte to be referred to the spirituall victorye. Wherfore Iohn doth faythfully admonyshe vs, when he sayth. This is the victorye which ouercommeth the world, euen our fayth.
By these may be gathered that God leaueth those destitute of hys ayde, God forsaketh thē that forsake hym. which do forsake hym. And that may easely be declared by oure fyrste Father Adam. Who, as he was created of God, before synne, he had that power of strength and will, that he myght if he had would haue resisted synne. Adam was not altogether forsaken of God after hys synne. But when he filthely fell from God, God also forsooke hym, but not vtterly, howbeit he forsooke hym so that he lost many of hys giftes, and much fauour. For God would not haue taken so many good thynges awaye from hym, but that he fyrste had alienated hymselfe from God through synne. After the same sorte happeneth it to those whiche are nowe borne a new, who although they haue not yet recouered a perfecte free will, neuerthelesse for so muche as they are somewhat restored, and may nowe woorke together with God, if they shall despyse the gifts whiche they haue in them, and will not vse them as it is meete they shoulde, God will iustely forsake them, seing they shrynke fyrste awaye from hym. As we maye see in the parable of the Lorde, wherein it is written, That the maister going into a farre countrey distributed money vnto hys seruauntes, to be encreased by theyr industrye and laboure, whiche thyng as many of the seruauntes as dyd, they were both commended of theyr maister when he retourned, and also nobelly rewarded. But he whiche despysed the commaundement of hys Lorde, was greuously reproued, and greuously punished, for the money committed vnto him.
But if we shall speake of the fyrst generation, Concernyng eternall reprobation, the reprobate are forsakē of God before they forsake him. whereby we are borne the children of wrath, and we all are of that masse, which lieth vnder the curse, from which God by his election deliuereth whom he will: and whom he will not, he forsaketh according to hys own will and purpose, which is alwayes iust, though it be hidden from vs. Seing that that is not brought to passe by works foresene, neither that we haue done any good or euill before we were borne, it is manyfest, that certayne, I meane reprobates, are forsaken of God as touchyng hys election, before that they forsake hym by theyr propre will, for so much as they had not it from the beginning. But we at thys present, speake not of thys matter, neyther will descend into thys question. But that which we haue now affirmed Augustine hath set forth in the .14. chap. of his Soliloquii animae ad deum. Augustine. Thou Lord (saith he) doest not forsake me, vnles I firste forsake thee. And in his booke de natura et gratia against the Pelagians in the .27. and .28. chap. he elegantlye expoundeth after what sorte God is forsaken of men before hee forsaketh them. By pride god is forsaken before he forsaketh. Among other vyces (sayth he) pryde whych is borne in vs, is the head of al euils. Which pryde vseth then to shewe foorth it selfe, when wee are doing well, and when we are in the chiefe course of the victory. There the vayne hart of man is puffed vp, so that euerye man thinketh hym selfe not to bee as other men are. Thys is for the most parte, the fyrst departure from God, whereby hee agayne wythdraweth hym selfe from vs. And euen as wee doo not departe from hym by steppes, but in hart and affection, so is he seperated from vs, not concerning place, (for, for as muche as he is infinite he occupieth all thynges) but he wythdraweth from vs hys fauour, gyftes, grace, and helpe. God vseth also to punyshe the electe to theyr saluation.
And when he is so departed, they whych are forsaken, vndoubtedly fal & come to great misery: which falles yet & miseries (as he is good) he vseth as remedies toward his elect, y t they may learne that in the same mysery whych before they had forgotten, namely, that their strengthe was supported by God, and that it [Page] was his mere gifte, in that before they dyd any thing that was good, or attayned to any prosperous things: that being so admonished, they myght retourne into the waye, and with moste faythfull prayers to emplore of hym helpe, ayde, and strength, as they whiche had nowe proued, by theyr own ill, that they had all these thinges of him when they stoode. And after thys sorte is that interpreted, whiche the Apostle writeth to the Phil. With feare and trembling, worke your saluation. For it is God whiche worketh in you both to will and also to perfourme, accordyng to hys good pleasure. Wherefore feare and tremblyng ought alwayes to be driuen into vs, least when thinges goe wel land prosperous with vs we waxe proude, and whilest we profite in our renouation and instauration. Then must we alwaies with feare and trembling marke that it is God which worketh in vs both to will and to performe. We must not liue in securitye Neyther dyd the Apostle say, liue rightly and holily with securitye: For he which is secure from himself, estemeth thinges so, as though they depended of himself, which is not to be suffred, when as it is God himselfe which worketh in vs both to will and to perfourme.
But peraduenture thou wilte aske, seing God from the beginning noblye promysed vnto Iudah, that he would deliuer the land into his handes, and hath not nowe graunted the perfecte victorye, Augustine. Whether the wil of god may be chaunged. whether he haue chaunged hys sentence? Heare what Augustine writeth of the will of God in hys .22 booke De ciuitate Dei and first chap. The will of God (sayth he) is not chaunged, but we are chaunged. But he semeth after a sort to be chaunged, when where as before he was gentle vnto vs, he now appeareth angry: and contrarilye where as before he shewed himself to be angry, he now in a manner gently offereth himself vnto vs. Wherefore when we our selues are chaunged we doe finde him after a sort, to be chaunged in those things which we suffer. Euen as the sunne semeth to be chaūged, when we our selues are halfe blind, or that our eyes be greued by some disease. For he which before was pleasaunt, mery, and swete, beginneth now to be troublesome & hurtfull, not as touching his own nature (which alwaies abideth one, & is vnchaūgeable) but by reasō of our disease & vice, wherunto we are newly fallen. What were the causes of the vnperfecte victorye of them of Iudah. Wherefore let vs more plainely gather y e causes of y e vnperfect victory. The nighest cause and y e true cause was, bicause y e Chananites had Iron chariots: for taking away Gods helpe, the Hebrues were not like vnto thē, being so wel fenced & appoynted. And god (as Ionathas y e Chaldeian testifyeth) withdrewe his fauor & ayde, bycause they had sinned. Wherfore a iuste punishment followed them, y t they went without the victory. But God whiche is alwaies very mercifull to his electe, vseth this punyshment to the commoditye of the Israelites: namely fyrst to teach them the arte of warfare: then y e his ayde, being withdrawen, they might fele their own weakenesse, & might see w t what māner of enemies they should haue to do. Besides this y t the earth might not be wasted of wilde beasts, & brought into a wildernesse. Finally, therby to trye thē.
What temptation is.Temptation is nothyng ells, but to take profe or triall of any thyng. Wherfore the end of temptation is ryghtly called knowledge: as they which wil passe ouer a water, The end of temptation. do trye oute the shallowe places, to knowe the depth of the water: woundes also are tried of Surgeons, to fele the depenesse of thē. In tempting therfore knowledge is sought. But God nedeth not that new and freshe knowledge, for such is his nature, that he knoweth al thyngs most perfectly. But whē he tempteth, he only doth it, to leade mē to the knowledge of those things which they ought to knowe. To what end holy men are tempted. Wherfore when he sometymes tempteth good & holy mē, he bryngeth into lyght and maketh open the fayth, obedience, strength and godlinesse, which before lay hid in theyr hartes, that they which see the same things, might glorifie God the author of them. And that they which are so tempted, whē they haue gotten the victory, may geue him thankes, and desire of him, that euen as he hath done now, so he would vouchsafe to helpe thē cōtinually in tētations [Page 34] Moreouer therby, thei do conceaue a greater hope, y e god wil be with thē to helpe them in time to come, when as they see y t he hath so louingly graūted vnto them the same helpe now. Wherfore the ende of these temptations is, not that God should know those things, wherof he was before ignoraunt, but that therby his giftes, fauour and grace might not be hidden. But bicause sometimes it happeneth, that in temptations, euen the elect are ouercome, god graūteth them after their fall, to rise vp againe frō sinne a great deale more modest than they were before, which the holy scriptures testifie to haue bene done in Peter and Dauid. The end theyfore of such temptations, is, y t we knowing our own weakenesse, might lay down our Peacockes tayle, and haue a regard to God him selfe, as to the fountayne of all good thinges. But the reprobate do fall in temptations, For what cause y e reprobate are tempted. and that alwayes from one euill to a worse, that their iniquitye, vnryghteousnesse and wickednesse might be manifested, which before lay hyd in theyr harts, and whilest they laye hyd, they myght easely appeare vnto men, good men. But God will haue those thinges brought to lyght, that hys iudgementes and condemnation vpon them may appeare, as in very dede they are most iust. And certainely after this manner were the Israelites tempted in the desert, as many as were reprobate.
If temptations turne to good for the godly, why do they praye agaynst them, Whether we may pray agaynst temptations. when as they pray in the Lordes prayer, Lead vs not into temptation? Whervnto I answere, that we may not pray against y e first kinde of temptatiō, wherin we get the victorye, except peraduenture for as muche as we are full of imfyrmitye whilest in that battayle we ouercome the enemye, we also our selues are in some part wounded. For godly men desyre that all fallynges, though they be neuer so litle, may be driuen from them. Temptations wherein we, ouercome are not of them selues to be prayed agaynst Howbeit we may not praye to be rid of these battayles altogether, wherin we ouercome: Yea holy men haue somtimes desyred to haue the same graunted vnto them. For Dauid sayd: Proue me God, burne my raynes and my hart, Iames also sayth that such temptations pertayne to our felicitye when he writeth. Blessed is the man which suffereth temptatiō, &c. So farre is it absent, that it should seme to be prayed agaynst. What kinde of temptation we must pray agaynst. But those are to be prayed agaynst wherin godly men slippe and are ouercome, although at length they turne to them to good: bycause that in euery falling, both God is offended and also his law violated, which we must by al meanes abhorre and deteste. For although we persuade our selues, that therby some good thinges will come: yet must we alwayes remember, that the same happeneth not by y e deserte of sinne, but by the goodnesse of god. And it is a constant rule that sinnes are not to be wyshed for, though we might get neuer so muche good thereby. The thyrd kynde of temptation wherby men fall into destruction, What the godly must wayte for when they are tempted w t aduersitye. must altogether be prayed agaynst, although they which be godly in dede, and the electe of god, are not affeard of y e kinde of temptation, For as much as they stand not in doubt of theyr saluation. But the godly must alwayes loke for this, when they are afflicted by the goodnesse of god, that it would please him to mitigate the temptations, and geue thē strength to beare them, for as much as he hath promysed by his Apostle so to do. For it is written to the Corinthians: God is faythfull, whiche wil not suffer you to be tempted aboue your power, but will with the temptation make a way out, But whether god doth stirre vp men to sinnes by temptation, shal be afterward declared. But now to the history.
20 And they gaue Hebron vnto Chaleb, as Moyses sayd: and he expelled thence the three sonnes of Enak.
21 And the children of Beniamin dyd not caste oute the Iebusites that inhabited Ierusalem: Wherefore the Iebusites dwelled with the children of Beniamin in Ierusalem, vnto thys day.
Thys sentence is therefore repeated, bicause now the warres of the tribe of Iudah are declared, of which warres, Chaleb without doubt was the captayne. Wherefore here is declared what he obteyned. Namely those thynges whiche God would haue done (as he had spoken by Moyses) as it is written in y e fyrste chap. of Deut. and .xiii. chap. of Num. and xiiii. and xxv. chap. of Iosuah. But that which is written after it how that the children of Beniamin dyd not caste out the Iebusites that inhabited Ierusalem, but dwelled together with them, perteyneth to those things, which the other tribes had to do with the Chananites, and it beginneth with Beniamin for thys cause, bycause that tribe was next to Iudah, yea and that which is now written of Beniamin, The citie of Ierusalem was cōmon to Beniamin & Iudah is declared of the tribe of Iudah in the booke of Iosuah toward the ende of the xv. chap. And I thynke that that was therfore done, bicause the citye of Ierusalem was in the limite of both the tribes, and was inhabited together both of them of Iudah, and also of the Beniamites. Yea and some affyrme that y e part of the citye where the temple stoode belonged to the tribe of Beniamin, and to that purpose do they wrest that, which Iacob the Patriarch sayd on his death bed, when he blessed hys sonne Beniamin: Beniamin is a rauenyng wolfe, early taking hys pray, in the morning, and deuiding the spoyles at euen: thynkyng thys oracle to belong to the morning and euenyng sacrifices of the Temple. But howe truly they so doe, I will not nowe reason. But yet they are not so farre oute of the waye, as Augustine, whiche drewe the saying of the Patriarche to Paule the Apostle, bycause he was of the tribe of Beniamin.
A fayned tale of the Hebrues.I am not ignoraunt, how the Hebrues write, that the Iebusites were not cast out for thys cause, bycause that Iudas and Beniamin would kepe the couenaunt, which (as it is written in the xxi. chapter of Gen.) was made betwene Abraham and Abimilech King of the Gerarites, where the moste holy Patriarche sware, that he woulde not molest neyther the same Abimilech, neyther hys children, nor yet hys childrens children, wherefore seing he and hys posteritye inhabited Ierusalem, and hys childrens children liued euen to thys tyme, they saye it was not lawfull for the Hebrues, for bycause of theyr othe geuen, to caste them oute. But afterwarde vnder Dauid, the tyme of the couenaunte was oute, bycause then were the childrens children of Abimilech worne out. And for that cause Dauid dyd caste out the Iebusites oute of the citye of Ierusalem, as it is written in the latter booke of Samuel the v. chapter. But these are but fables, yea if we looke in the foresayde booke of Samuell we shall fynde, that the strong fenced Castle of that citye was the cause that the Iebusites were not caste oute before.
For Dauid to y e end be would obtayne y e castle, promised a noble reward to him that coulde conquere it, namely that he woulde make hym Captayne of the whole hoste of Israel: Two causes why the Iebusites were not expelled oute of Ierusalem. whiche office Ioab obtayned, bycause he fyrste of all Conquered the Castle. There were two causes why they of Iudah and y e Beniamites dyd not caste oute the Iebusites out of the citye. One was bycause they obeyed not the worde of God as they should haue done: wherfore they are muche to bee blamed. The other cause was, bycause by the prouidence of God, and hys moste wyse dispensation, the whole victorye of these nations was reserued for Dauid and Salomon. For so God abuseth the synnes of men, that they hynder not but set forwarde hys Counselles, specially for the aduauncyng of hys electe.
But to retourne to the Hebrues howe shoulde they knowe that the posteritye of Abimilech dwelled in Ierusalem. The Scripture testifyeth no suche thyng. Neyther can they tel whether Abimilech & his stocke belonged to the Iebusites. Wherfore let vs leaue their fayned opinion vnto thēselues, Ierusalem was in the olde time called Iebus. & let vs follow this sentence nowe alledged, as the truer. But this is not to bee ouerskipped, that Ierusalem was sometymes called Iebus. For as muche as the .xix. chapter of this boke testifyeth the same, & also the fyrst booke of Paralipomenon in the xi. chap. [Page 35] The summe is, the Iebusites possessed the castle, whiche being well fensed, & for as much as God had iustly with drawen his helpe for the Hebrewes, they could not be dryuen out of it, but Beniamin and the tribe of Iudah obtayned the Citie in the meane time. Why Saul & Dauid triumphed in Ierusalem. Vnto whiche citie Saul and Dauid went after they had gotten the victory against the Philistians, and Dauid himselfe brought thether the hed of Goliah whom he had slayne. Peraduenture that citie semed mete for that triumphe, bicause it was cōmon to the tribe of Iudah and Beniamin, vnto which tribes Dauid and Saul belonged. For as Dauid was of the tribe of Iudah, so was Saul a Beniamite.
And the Iebusites dwelled in Ierusalem, vnto this day. That is euen to the time of Samuel who is thought to haue written this booke. For afterwarde came Dauid, when he ruled ouer all Israel and expelled the Iebusites from thence, as it is sayd.
22 In like maner they that were of the house of Ioseph went vp to Bethel, and the Lord was with them.
23 And the house of Ioseph caused Bethel to be searched (whiche before tyme was called Luz.)
24 And y e spyes saw a man come out of the citie, and they said vnto hym: shewe vs, we pray thee, the way into the citie, and we wil shew thee mercy.
25 And when he had shewed thē the waye into the citie: they smote it with the edge of the sworde. But let the man and all his houshold go free.
26 And the man went into the lande of the Hethites, and built a citie, and called the name thereof Luz: whiche is the name thereof vnto this day.
After the tribes of Iudah and Beniamin is also declared in a certaine ordre what the other tribes did. The house of Ioseph cōprehendeth with it Ephraim & Manasses. First therfore is declared what those tribes ioyned together did, afterward shalbe shewed of eche of their doings perticularly. This is chiefly set first, that God was with them, to make vs to vnderstand that this enterprise had good successe, bycause God wrought with them. The name of the citie (but afterward) was called Bethel, that is, the house of God, bycause Iacob when he had there sene God and his aungels ascending and descending vpon a ladder (as it is written in the 28. chap. of Gen:) so named it. Luz is not Ierusalem. But in the olde tyme it was called Luz, whiche worde signifieth in Hebrewe a Walnutte, or an Almond or els a Filberd Nut, bycause peraduenture that place was set with Wallnut trees, Filberd trees, Almond trees, and the like kynde of trees. They are very muche deceaued, whiche thought this citie to haue ben Ierusalem, for Ierusalem was taken long before, neither was it euer called Luz or Bethel. And besides that this citie pertayned to the house of Ioseph, A forged tale of the Iewes. but Ierusalem longed to the lott of Beniamin and Iudah. But that whiche the Hebrues trifle concernyng the gate of this citie, is not worthy to be rehearsed. For what is more childishe than to saye, that the way of entraūce into the citie was thorough a caue, at the mouth wherof was a nut tree, a tree I say great and hollowe, wherby they went down into the caue whiche would entre into the citie, and for that cause it was called Luz. They should haue spoken somewhat more likely, if they had sayd, there had ben a gate in some secrete part or side of the walles, the commyng wherunto should haue ben by certaine turnings, and circuites so that straungers should not easly haue found out the way vnto the same. Dauid Kimhi D. Kimhi writeth that there were many gardynes there.
If I should speake my fantasie herin, I thincke that the spyes of the Israelites [Page] did not aske him which came out of y e citie for the dore or gate therof, but whiche was the weaker part of the city or lesse fenced, that therby they might the easier take it. The third espiall mencioned in the scripture Now is rehearsed in the scripture the third espiall. For the first is written in the 13. chap. of the booke of Num: And other happened vnder Iosuah, when those two searched the citie of Iericho, whom Rahab the harlot kept with great fidelitie, and this is the third whiche we haue now in hand. Although I am not ignoraunt how Ioseph in the boke of Gen: layd to his brethrens charge that they were espies. What in y e office of spyes. But the office or worke of spyes is (as Chrisostome sayeth expounding those wordes of Paul in the second chap: of the Epistle to the Galathians, y t there were false brethren entred to espye out our libertie) to know the doynges of the aduersaries, that they & theirs may haue the easier entraunce to conquere or repulse them. The end of espiall. Now we vnderstand that it is an action, and we se to what end it is ordayned. Moreouer it commeth from enemies and from the mynde of an aduersarye, but it is done priuily and craftely. As it is lawfull to fight with enemyes by violence and weapons, when warre is iustly taken in hand: so is it iust and lawfull to vse the arte and subtelty of especials.
Ierome. Espyall is a thing īdifferēt.Wherfore Ierome vpon the 27. chap. of Ezechiel sayeth, that espiall, is an indifferent thing, namely whiche a man may vse both well and euill. Moses and Iosua vsed it wel, and also the house of Ioseph. If so be that the warre be vniust, the espiall also seruing thereunto must nedes be vniust. Wherefore the brethren of Ioseph, when he sayd vnto them, by the health of Pharao, ye be spyes, did put that away from them as an iniury or a rebuke. The punishement of spyes. But the punishment of spyes is, if they be taken, all one with the punishment, wherwith enemyes are punished when they fall into the handes of their enemyes. For it skilleth not whether a man fight with weapons, or by subtilty and craft. Wherfore they must be of a valiaunt courage, Spyes muste be valiaunt. Iosephus. which for the common profit aduenture their lyfe in playeng the spyes. For it is not euery mās office to be a good spye. Iosephus writeth that the spyes whiche were sent by Iosua, were Geometricians, bycause they ought well and clearly to knowe the situation of the lande of Chanaan. And Homer made Vlisses and Dyomedes spyes, Homerus. whiche otherwise were noble men. Paul the Apostle in the Epistle to the Galath. The place before mentioned the secōd chap. excellently referred the worke of espiall to cententions of Religion, where he writeth that there were [...], that is, that there were certain incommers being false brethren, whiche [...], that is, came in. [...], that is to espye out our liberty as though he should saye, they subtilely sought & searched out our opinion, to resist it, and made search with great diligence whether they that were with vs kept vncircumcisiō, and that was to espye out the libertie of the Churche, namely that by it, they might ouerthrowe Christians.
And the spyes saw a man come out of the citie. For what cause he wēt forth the history declareth not: but there may be many causes ymagined, either for that he went to seke somewhat to serue him for his houshold, or els bycause he would flye out of the citie being besieged, or finally, that he also might spye out what was done by his aduersaries.
And they sayd vnto him: shewe vs, we pray thee, the waye into the citie. They speake fayre vnto y e man, & they pray hym, y e matter is not done by violēce, but they go aboute by frendly wordes to allure him to betray the Citie.
Whether the spyes of y e Chananites coulde promise safely? And we will shewe thee mercy. Seing y e spyes had not the chief gouernment in the publicque: wealth, how durst they promise safety vnto this man, especially if they had no peculiar commaundement to do it. Thou wilt say peraduenture, they did trust that the Senate of the publicque wealth and Captaynes of the warre would ratifye that whiche they had promised. But the superiour power can not confirme that whiche is done by the subiectes, vnlesse it be also lawfull for the same power both to promysse and also to performe that whiche [Page 36] they did. And God had prohibited by expresse wordes that the Chananites & those proscripte people shuld haue their liues graunted thē. Peraduēture they had before their eies y t exāple of Rahab the harlot, whose lyfe in the time of Iosua was not onely spared, but also she was receaued with all that belonged vnto her, and had in honor of the Hebrues. And therby they iudged that it was in their power, The lawes made by god against the Chananites myght be mitigated. to promise mercy and safety vnto this man. And as touchyng the commaundement of God they thought gods lawes not to be so rigorous, but they might be mitigated with some equitie, as they remembred was done with the Gabaonites, who were neuer the lesse Heuites or Hemorrites. Thou wilt say peraduenture: They were so saued, that they were brought into bondage. Bondage is a ciuille death. And necessitie of bondage is a certain kynde of ciuile death: wherfore in that the life of the body was graunted them, the commaundement of the Lord seemeth not to be violated, for they were killed after a sorte. The question is not dissolued by this reason. For God prescribed by law that the Chananites should be put to death, he referred not that to a ciuile death, but to a naturall death: for otherwise Saul might haue excused him selfe, bycause he killed not Agag the king of Amalek with an outwarde death. For he might haue sayd that he had alreadye kylled hym ciuilly.
But bycause we are fallen into talke of the Gabaonites, Of the Gabaonites. I thincke it good to say thus much of them. God ratified the othe performed to the Gabaonites. First that God did ratifye that othe whiche the Israelites performed vnto them, for as muche as he ayded the host of the Hebrues in deliueryng their citie from the other Chananites. But if so be that they had violated the curse, whiche was set forth of God, he would not then haue done it. For, bycause of the sinne of Achan, who had by stealth saued somwhat of that whiche was cursed in Iericho, he did not helpe his people, but suffred them fowly to be slayne, when they fought against the citie Hay. Besides this it is writtē in the latter booke of Samuel that God plagued the Israelites thre yeares continually with most grieuous famine, bycause the Gabaonites were contrary to the othe slayne & of Saul miserably dispersed. Wherfore (according to their request) they had seauen of Sauls posteritie deliuered them to be hanged. These are most certayne signes that God ratified the couenaunt which was made with the Gabaonites, althoughe the Hebrues did grieuously sinne bycause they asked not counsell of God. Augustine sayth vpon the x. chap. of the Iudges, Augustine, when he interpreteth that place where it is written, that God promised Iosua that he would be with him in the defence of the citie Gabaon. For he sayd, be not affeard: for I will deliuer them (namely the Chananites whiche besieged that citie) into thine handes, if this league (sayth he) nowe made with the Gabaonites had displeased God, then would he haue commaunded Iosua, not to take in hand that expedition, but rather to haue broken the couenaunt made with that nation. But contrarily he encouraged hym, and of his owne accord, not called vpon, promised to aide him in the fight, as it may appeare by the history.
But why he did allow the league so made, Why God allowed y e league made with the Gabaonites. there may be two reasons geuen for it. One (which is there mentioned) bycause they had bounde it with an othe. And if the Israelites shuld haue violated that, their neighbours would haue coū ted them as irreligious and vngodly, and their God should haue ben mocked and contemned. Wherfore lest the name of God and the fame of the Israelites should haue ben euill spoken of, it was ratified, althoughe it was vnwysely and without prayse perfourmed. The other cause is, The Gabaonites were turned to the true God. bycause the Gabaonites did now beleue in the true God, and were redy to embrase his religion and worshipping. Whiche may easely be gathered by two argumētes. For they sayd (as it is written in the ix. chap. of the booke of Iosua) that they came in the name of the Lord beyng therfore moued therunto, bycause they had heard what thynges God had done for that peoples sake both in Egypt, and also in the deserte, and lykewise about Iordane. This is a tokē, that they now beleued the God of the Israelites. [Page] Moreouer the same appeareth in that they were appoynted by the Hebrues to cary and to prepare wood and also to draw water for the sacrifices whiche were done vnto the true God. Therfore they were made labourers and seruauntes of the tabernacle, and of the tribe of Leui, wherof they were called Nathinites.
Nathinites.And that y e lawes whiche were made of God agaynst the seauen nations which inhabited the land of Chanaan were by this equitie to be interpreted and mitigated that if they returned to y e true God, & would make peace with the Iewes, they should not be destroyed, it manifestly appeareth by that whiche is written in the xi, chap: of the booke of Iosua, namely howe those nations were therfore destroyed, bycause none of them (the Gabaonites only excepted) made peace with the Israelites. For God, to the end he would extinguish them, had hardened their hartes, and therfore they most obstinatly fought agaynst the Israelites.
Why god hardned the hartes of the Chananites.But the cause why God so hardned their harts was, bycause their sinnes were ful. Wherfore they beleued not as did the Gabaonites, neither adioyned they thē selues vnto the Israelites. And for that cause they continually resistyng them, fought so vnluckely, that at length they were cleane destroyed. But if so be that they had made peace with the Iewes, and not despised their godlynesse and religion, they should haue had the same geuen them whiche the Gabaonites had.
But in that they did not so, their former sinnes were the hinderaunce therof, for God for those sinnes tooke away his spirite and grace from their hartes, that at the last they might suffer most iust punishment for their wickednesse. This is the equitie and mitigations of those lawes against the Chananites.
Why the Gabaonites were brought into bondage.But there ariseth a doubt, why the punishement of bondage was imposed to the Gabaonites, if they nowe became so good and faithfull. Whereunto is aunswered, that they therfore fell into bondage, bycause they vsed fraude and guile.
For God would for this cause haue them so punished, lest he should seme to allowe disceate and euill artes.
Whether the Luzite repēted Ierome.Now resteth to enquire what this betrayer of Luz did, whether he beleued and embrased the true worshippyng of God. Out of the holy scriptures we can gather nothing of this thing. Peraduenture it may seme to some, that he abode still in his vngodlynesse, bycause he went awaye from thence, neither abode he with the Iewes. But this is but a weake reason. For Iethro also departed from Moyses, whō he came to se in the desert, although (as I thincke) he left his sonne with Moyses. Neither would Christ haue all those continually with him whom he healed, and whiche beleued in him: yea he sayd to one of thē, who would haue dwelled with hym, returne to thine owne and shew vnto them what hath happened vnto the. &c.
¶Of Prodition or treason.
THis place admonisheth vs somewhat to intreate of Prodition or treason, and it is demaunded, whether it be at any tyme lawfull: or whether it be alwayes forbidden? Ierome Ierome de optimo genere interpretādi to Pammachius sayth, that princes in dede do admitte treason, but they condēne the traytours, Antigonus. wherunto agreeth the sayeng of Antigonus the kyng, whiche is, I loue traytors so lōg as they are in betrayeng, but whē they haue betrayed I hate thē. Plutarch rehearseth the same of Rhimotalcus kyng of the Thracians, Plutarche. who fell frō Anthony to Augustus, and after his victorye, boasted of the same among his cuppes, Augustus. and that so insolently and aboue measure, that Augustus turnyng hym to his frend, said this sentence of him, I allowe the treason, but I prayse not the traytor. Which sentence thoughe it semeth allowable and iust at the first sight, yet ought it not to be counted either true or wise. For if wise men will allowe and prayse any action, they must also prayse and allowe the author therof. Neither doth any man that lawfully vnto others, whiche he would not suffer hymselfe. And there is no man whiche would be content to be betrayed hymselfe or [Page 37] any of his. Lasthenes. Furthermore one Lasthenes when he had betrayed his countrey Olinthus to the Macedonians, & thought that for the same he should haue ben highly honored of them, it happened farre otherwise vnto him. For he was called of the souldiers a traytor euery where through out the campe. Wherfore he grieuously complayned of the same matter to Phillip the king, who made him aunswere. Philip of Macedonia. That his Macedonians were very rude & rusticall people which knew not how to cal things by any other name, than by their owne & propre name. They call (sayth he) a bote, a bote. This was as if he shuld haue answered, Seing y u art such a one, thou oughtest not to be called by any other name. Asconius Paedianus. Asconius Paedianus in secundam verrinam sayth, that to betray is worse then to besiege. For the enemyes (sayth he) besiege, & it ought not to be coūted a vyce in them. But they betray whiche would seme friendes, and ought to be such in dede towardes vs. And therfore when they departe from their office of friendship, Ierome. Theodosius y e Emperour. they synne farre more grieuously than do the other. Ierome also in the place before alledged De optimo genere interpretandi ad Pammachiū, sheweth how Theodosius the Emperor put to death Hesychius the consull, bicause he opened the letters of the patriarche Gamaliel, neither was that any meruayle, bycause with the Romanes it was death, to open the secretes of any man, as it is writtē in y e digestes De re militari, in the law Omne, & in the third law & in the Codice de cōmerciis & mercaturis And in the digestes. Ad legē Iuliani maiestatis in the law 1. 2. 3. he y e geueth ouer munitions committed to his charge, falleth into the daunger of treason.
The example also of Camillus is worthy to be noted, Camillus. who commaūded the scholemaister of the childrē of the Phaliscians to be with stripes brought home of his disciples into his countrey, bicause he would haue betrayed them. The Phisition of Pirrhus. The Phisitiō likewise of Pirrhus, which promised vnto the Romanes that for their sakes he would kill his kyng, was by them detected vnto the king, that he might the diligētlier beware of him. Wherby peace followed betwene Pirrhus and the Romanes. Esay in the xvi. chap: doth therfore vehemently rebuke the Moabites, bycause they had so cruelly intreated the Israelites when they were oppressed of their enemyes, and admonisheth them, not to betray the Iewes flyeng vnto thē in their tyme for succor. And Paul writeth in the latter Epistle to Tymothe, that in the latter tymes there should be men corrupted with most grieuous and mischieuous dedes, among whiche he reckeneth traytors also. Bisides this the citizens are sworne vnto the Magistrates, to defend the citie or publicque wealth whē nede shall require. And thoughe they were not sworne, The mēbers of al liuing thīgs do endāger thē selues for the nobler partes. yet the natural and common lawe requireth the same of them: whiche thing the members of all lyuing thinges do testifie, whiche do willingly and most readily endanger them selues for the bodye, and for the nobler partes therof, I meane the hed or harte. Whiche selfe thing the citizens are by the lawes of nature bound to do for their countrey, if it be in dāger. Wherfore if they should betray it, they can not be excused, but that they sinne most grieuously.
But it were good before we go any farther, to define what proditiō is. What is to betraye. To betray semeth in Latine (as much as nedeth to this presēt purpose) to signifie thre things, namely to bewraye, to deceaue & deliuer vp. Prodition therfore is an actiō, wherby by guile, bewrayeng or deliuering vp, our neighbours or their goods are hurt, and that especially of those, which ought rather to defend the same.
But there be many kindes of prodition. For they do betraye, Many kyndes of prodition. Augustine. which do by subtile guile detecte the faultes of their brethren Augustine. confirmeth this kynde of proditiō in his 2. questiō first, chap. Si peccauerit, where he sayth reprehend thy brother secretly, of whose sinne y u hast priuate knowledge: for if y u shalt do it before al men, y u shalt not then be a corrector of sinne, but a betrayer. Also he which circumuēteth an other, & bringeth him into dāger, he betrayeth hym. Wherfore Ierome (as it is written 24. question the 3. chap. Transferunt: Ierome.) sayth that the same belongeth principally vnto false Prophetes & euil Pastors, which by their euill [Page] doctrine and examples destroye the shepe of Christ committed to their charge, whome they ought to defend. They are numbred amongest them, which deliuer castels and munitiōs vnto their enemies. Wherof it is written at large, 22. question the .5. chap. De forma. They are also counted betrayers, which do detecte & open secretes cōmitted vnto thē, especially such as are of great waight, & bring in danger the life, estimation or goods of their brethren. And this kind is noted in the title. Chrisostome. De paenitentia, distinct. 6. chap. Sacerdotes. Finally Chrisostome vpon Matthew the .25. homely, as is alledged in the decrees 11. question the third, and chap. Nolite timere. Not onely they are sayde to betraye the truth, whiche in the place of it speake a lye, but they also which do not frely professe the same. Wherfore there are reckoned many wayes or kyndes of prodition. But we will not speake of them all nowe presently: but onely will touche those kyndes whiche make for our purpose.
One man some tymes is both a betrayer and a spye.Howbeit I thincke it good, this to be added, that some iudge that prodition & espiall do not much differ one from another, and that it maye sometimes come to passe, that one man may be both a betrayer & a spye. For if any Citizen be corrupted with money by the enemyes, the same is both a betrayer of his countrey, & is also in the meane tyme a domesticall spye. But this semeth not to be wisely spoken, bycause the nature of these things (as it appeareth by their definitions) doth very much differ, although sometimes they cleaue both in one mā, so y t the same man, may be both a betrayer & a spye. Euen as musike & Grammer differ much one frō an other, & yet it oftētimes happeneth y e one mā is both a Grāmarian & a Musitian. Neuerthelesse y e differēce (which I haue before mencioned) is for y e most part obserued, although not alwayes, namely y t espial cōmeth of enemies, and prodition of them which be amongest vs, whom we trust as friendes.
Whether prodition be at any tyme lawful. Augustine.But to the end we may the playnlyer know, concerning prodition, whether it be at any tyme lawful? I thincke it best to cal to memory those wordes which Augustine writeth against the letters of Petilianus y e second booke and 10. chap: We may not (sayth he) heare the complaynts of such as suffre, but seke out the mynde of them whiche are the doers. This the man of God wrote agaynst the Donatistes, whiche accused our men, as betrayers & persecutors. And to them he answereth y e Paul also deliuered vp some to Sathā, whose saluatiō neuerthelesse semed to be committed to his charge: but for all that, bycause he did it of a good mynde, namely to teache them not to blaspheme, and that their spirit might be saued in the daye of the Lorde, he could not be accused either of treason, or els of deliueryng vp, bycause (as it is before sayd). The complaintes of them whiche suffre are not to be heard, What proditiō is good. but we must seke out the mind of the doers. Wherfore when warre or controuersy shall happen betwene any, of which the one part is knowen to haue a iust & good cause, if the other part which defendeth the worser cause, & therfore doth vniustly, wil by no meanes be brought to any good & reasonable conditions, surely good men whiche peraduenture are founde on the same syde, ought in such sort to helpe & to defend the other part as they may aduaunce iustice. And if it be nede, they ought to fall from the vniust to iust men. Neither can their prodition be condēned iustly as ill, although before they were neuer so much friendes & very nighe vnto those, which worke vniustly.
What cause y e Israelites had against y e Chananites. Epiphanius:Now must we speake somewhat of the Israelites cause agaynst the Chananites whiche may be considered of vs two manner of wayes, namely either by common lawe and ordinary lawe of nature, or elles by fayth, and by the worde of GOD. Concerning the naturall or common lawe Epiphanius writeth that the lande of Palestine pertayned in very dede to the children of Sem, by occasion whereof Melchisedek reygned there, whiche was either Sem hym selfe, or elles one of hys children. But the Chananites whiche came of Cham, passyng ouer the boundes of Egypte and Africa, whiche were appoynted vnto them, dyd caste out of Palestine the sonnes of Sem. And therefore the Hebrues, whiche were the posteritie of Sem, when they required to be restored to their Fathers [Page 38] landes, semed to do it iustly, and rightfully. Wherefore (as he sayeth) GOD did both restore vnto the Israelites the countreys whiche belonged vnto their auncestors, and also punished the Chananites for their wickednesse, and this he did all with one and the selfe same worke. Howbeit I can not easely agree to Epiphanius opinion, for there was past prescription of very long time, for at the least there were fyue hundreth yeares. Wherefore it could not be sayde that the Chananites possessed that lande vniustly. If we should go by this reason now in our tyme, then should there be none in a manner counted a lawfull prince and iuste possessor, when as their auncestor came to the possession of those prouinces and kingdomes by violence, driuyng out botht the kings and the inhabitors that were in them before. Wherfore the Israelites semed not to haue any iust causes by mans lawe, by whiche they might make clayme vnto the land of Palestine as to their owne, neither alledged they at any tyme any such reason. And yet for al that they had good ryght therunto for as much as god testified as wel by words as by wonderfull workes, that it was his wil that the Hebrues should haue the possession of those regions, to whom (as Dauid hath wel said) both the earth and the fulnesse thereof belongeth. Neither could the Chananites murmure agaynst the iudgement of God, for as much as they were iustly cut of from their ryght, for their sundry and manifold wicked Actes. Wherfore none could in this cause iustly defend the Chananites if they wil cleaue to the true God, and beleue his wordes. Wherby it followeth that this Luzite which betrayed hys citizens dyd it either of faith, as did Rahab in Iericho, or els by some humane bargayne. For the kepers or spyes sayd vnto him, VVe will shewe thee mercy. If he were stricken with feare, howe could that (as they say) happen vnto a constant man (for he was after a sorte a prisoner, and was fallen into the handes of hys enemyes) then was he brought to it by humane conuention, and then did he fowly, for it is not lawfull for any man, to make any fylthy couenauntes agaynst hys countrey. Neyther can he be excused bycause of feare, It is not lawfull for any mā to make any fylthy couenā tes against hys countrey. for nothyng is to be done agaynste iustice and conscience, althoughe what feare so euer he should be stryken with, but if he were stirred vp vnto it by fayth, and for that he sawe hys citezens obstinately to resiste the worde of God and his workes, then he did well, neither can hys treason be either disallowed or elles condemned. For no lawes, no vowes, no couenaūtes or bondes, thoughe they be neuer so strayte, Feare must not cause vs to do any thyng against iustice. can bynd any man to fight agaynst or to resiste the worde of God: whiche worde all men must earnestly labour to haue done and fulfilled. For this sentence abydeth and shall perpetually abyde: That we must obey God more than men. Neither can any man (as Christe sayeth) serue two maisters, specially if they commaunde contrary thinges. It is lawfull for the magistrate priuely to send inquisitors. Moreouer the Magistrate is to be ayded in rooting out of vice and naughtynesse, and to hym without doubte is lawfull priuely to send men, to make enquiry, and to deiecte wicked Actes, that the offendors may be punished, and (as God hath commaunded) that euill maye be taken awaye from the worlde. Yea and it is also lawfull for hym to offer rewardes to men confederated together for some ill purpose, It is lawfull for them to offer rewardes to conspirators to open theyr conspiracye. Augustine to allure them to open and detecte the conspiracye, bycause that assuredly pertayneth to treason. Howbeit heresy is neuer either to be dissembled, or to be praysed, or any wicked Acte to be committed that lawfull kynde of treason shoulde haue good successe. Wherefore Augustine in hys latter booke of Retractions testifieth, that he wrote hys booke de Mendatio chiefly for thys cause, bycause some, to the ende they woulde detecte the Priscillianistes, fayned them selues to be followers of the same heresye, for that the same Priscillianistes when they were accused, Of the Priscillianistes. affirmed with greate stoutenesse, that they were farre from any suche doctrine. But for all that afterwarde they disclosed them selues vnto those, whome (beyng deceaued by theyr dissimulation) they thought they myght well haue trusted. But Augustine in the same booke De mendatio, teacheth that by this dissimulation of the [Page] Catholickes, very many euils & daungers chaunced. For there they commende Priscillianus, they vniustly praise his boke which is entituled Libra, they allowed the heresy, pronouncing many things which could not be spoken without blasphemie. Moreouer y t which they did was dangerous: for if they whiche after this sort dissēbling were of any authoritie or estimation, the heretikes might by their commendation be confirmed in their opinion, & those specially with whom they did so dissemble. For those peraduenture were Priscillianistes before (althoughe not very firme & constant) which after they heard their heresy to be praysed of a graue man, did then sticke more & more in their error. Furthermore in thus dissembling, and beyng conuersaunte with the Priscillianistes, the dissembler also might easely fall into danger, that he him selfe at length might become of a Catholicke, a Priscillianiste. And finally the heretikes them selues by the dissimulation of our men, might easely gather, that they did very well, in hyding, dissemblyng and denyeng their doynges. But that betrayeng is sometymes lawfull in a iust cause, and such a cause as is without the dangers aboue mencioned, not onely the reasons whiche we haue before alledged do declare, but we may also proue it by very many examples written here and there in the scriptures. The Gabaonites. Rahab. The Gabaonites betrayed the rest of the Chananites, when they fell from them to the Hebrues. Rahab also betrayed her publicque wealth or kyng, in receauyng, hydyng, and sendyng awaye them whiche were deadly enemyes vnto it: who is sayed neuerthelesse in the Epistle to the Hebrues to haue done those things by faith. Iahel. Iahel also the wife of Aher the Kenite betrayed Sisara, for she by a meruelous craft slewe him whom she had called into her and closely hidden: as it shalbe afterward declared in his place in this hystory of the Iudges. Ionathas. Yea and Ionathas the sonne of Saul betrayed vnto Dauid the wil and counsels of his father, as it is written in the first booke of Samuel. Husay the Arachite. Besides all these Husay the Arachite betrayed Absolon the sonne of Dauid, when he withstandyng the counsell of Achitophel did thrust in his owne counsell whiche was farre worse, and shewed all things vnto Dauid. I might bring in a great many more examples. But I thinke these are sufficient for the ware reader.
Certein cautions are to be added to lawfull prodition. The first caution.Now resteth only to declare certain cautions or prouisoes, wherewith lawfull treason is to be decked and adorned, and not to be condemned. The first is, that he which betrayeth be by a certain faith assured that the cause is iust which he aduaunceth: whiche can not be done, excepte that he haue sure proofe of the goodnesse therof by the word of God. Neither do I at this present argue, whether the same word be reuealed vnto him in harte, The secōd caution. or whether it be opened vnto him in the holy scriptures. Then must he take hede, that being now well assured of the righteousnesse and honesty, wherunto he is inclined, he be only prouoked therunto with the loue therof, and not with the hope of rewarde or gayne, or for feare of any misfortune, whiche he desireth to escape, or to satisfy his hatred and enemities deceaued. The third caution. For so should he seke his owne, and not iustice, neither the obedience of hys fayth, and of the will of God. Furthermore it is very necessary that a man be not dryuen to that but then when all other kynde of remedyes wante. For Rahab so did: for except she had then so kept the Hebrew spyes, they had bene by mans reason vndone, neither was there then any other waye to saue them. And certainly it oftentymes chaunceth, that all other ways & meanes being tryed, the worse parte will not be brought to sobernesse, so that there is no other remedy, but onely by prodition. And I would therefore haue these cautions diligently obserued, bycause that men are to muche prone to proditions, and that such as are both filthy and wicked. Wherfore we must take hede that by the exāple of good men they flatter not thē selues as though they were innocent. The fourth caution. Moreouer Paul hath admonished vs not only to auoyde that which is euill it selfe, but also y e shew therof. Howbeit we must vnderstand this doctrine of his in such sort as we may accomplishe it. For it is lawfull sometymes to cōmitte a [Page 39] thing whiche is euill to see to, but not euill in very dede: whilest yet there is hope that the thing may be straight way made playn, so that y e which at the first sight semed euill, may manifestly be knowen to be good. So the Apostle hym selfe circumcised Timothe, and shaued his hed, whiche of them selues and in very dede were not euil, although they semed to haue had a certayn shewe of euill vnto certayn of the Ethnickes which were cōuerted, & wer not yet wel strēgthned. The fifth caution. Finally periury or lyeng are not to be mingled w t those proditions whiche may be allowable. For as much as it is manifest by the Apostolical rule, y e euils are not to be cōmitted, wherby good things may follow. I know there be some which go about to defēd those kynd of lyes which are called officious or honest. Honest and officious lyes are not to be allowed. Augustine. But Augustine doth not allow that. Whose reasons they which are desirous to know, let thē read his boke Ad Consentiū. I assuredly agree vnto his opinion. For though there were no other reason, yet me thincketh this were sufficient, bycause the lyer bringeth himself out of credite, wherby nothing y t he afterward speaketh cā scarcely be beleued, for they which heare it wil suspect it alwaies as a lye. And besides this y t scripture doth euery where detest lyes. And we are cō maūded (as Peter saith) to speake as it wer the wordes of god. And these wordes are pure, neither must we graūt y t there is any lye foūd in thē, as Augustine hath very wel writtē vnto Ierome. What is to be aunswered cō cernyng y e lyes of the sainctes. And thoughe we read y t the sainctes did somtimes lye, yet we must either not excuse thē, seing they were mē, or els we must thinke y t it was done by the wil of god. For then y e actiō, which of his own nature, appeareth to be vicious, ceasseth [...] to be sinne, when it is manifest y t god hath cō maūded the same. And after this sorte Abrahā is excused, in that he would haue killed his sonne. The Israelites also are defended, whiche when they departed, tooke away with them, those things which they had borowed of the Egyptiās.
These cautiōs at this presēt offer thē selues vnto me, He answereth to the reasons put in the be-beginning. wherby may be adorned this kind of proditiō, which may be allowed or defended, whiche otherwise is a thing to be cursed & detested, as it is manifest y t the prodition of Iudah was. Neither cā the reasons which I haue alledged in y e begynning, any thing hinder but y t some prodition may be approued. We declared first by y e authoritie of Ierome, To the first. Antigonus, augustus, & Philip of Macedonia y e traitors haue ben accustomed to be euil spokē of. I answere y t therfore y t happened, bicause proditiōs for y e most part lacke these cautiōs before declared. For they which are traytors haue not for the most part a respect to y t whiche is iust & honest, neither are they sure of y e will of god, neither haue they any sure proofe y t the cause is right which they follow, but are only brought to betray for hatred, & for their own cōmodity, & for feare & wicked affectes. And they might also oftētimes haue defēded iustice by other wayes & meanes. Besides this they are not afeard therin to make lyes, & to cōmit manifest sinnes. Furthermore I repete y t agayn which I sayd before, y t it was euill said of thē in pronoūcing y t they loued y t treasō, & hated y e traitors: seing either semeth either equally to be allowed, or els equally to be cōdēned. And to be brief, y e testimonies which wer brought cā only take place in naughty & dānable treasōs. And to such as cōsider of thē selues, y t they would not thē selues nor theirs to be betrayed, & therfore wil not y t any kind of prodition should be coūted good, we must answere as S. Augustine sayth. That the complayntes of such as suffer are not to be heard, but we must seke out the mynd of the doers.
Secondly we declared by the oppinion of Appianus, To the second. that prodition was farre worser than besiegyng, bycause thys namely besiegyng is done by ennemyes, but the other by friendes. We wyll easely graunte to that: for if a naughtye and vniuste prodition be conferred also with an vniuste besiegyng, As some besieging is iust, so also is some prodition good than shall prodition be iudged farre worser, for as muche as it commeth from friendes, of whom we looke neither to be hurt, nor yet to receaue any damage. But euen as some besiegyng is found iust, what inconuenience shall it be then, or not agreeyng with the truth, if some prodition also be found iust? The cōparison therfore [Page] of Appianus, is so to be vnderstād, that either of the things compared together be euill. For as the Grāmarians say, the comparatiue degree alwayes r [...]quireth the positiue degree, wherin the comparison is made. And in that Theodosius the Emperor (as Ierome testifieth) did put to death a betrayer, it is no meruayle, when as the Romane lawes so ordayned in the digestes, & in the Codice as it is before shewed & they determine so of y e prodition, wherby places of mūnitiō are deliuered vp to the enemies, Euill proditiō is to be coūted amonge moste grieuous crimes. & likewise for treason. And assuredly that prodition which is euill, ought to be coūted for a most grieuous crime. For if therby come any losse of name or fame, then is it against the cōmaūdement of god, which cō maundeth. Thou shalt not beare false witnesse. But if it bring losse of good and possessions, then is y e cōmaundement broken which is ordained against theft. Finally if it be y e cause of losse of body & life, it violateth y e precept, wherin god hath cōmaunded, Thou shalt not kill. And there is no doubt, but y t of proditions such murthers oftentimes happen: for the inhabiters of cities which are betrayed, are wont to be slayne of their enemies. Naughty proditions are iustly punyshed with death. Wherfore when y t warre is vniust, the wicked betrayer is guilty of the murther whiche therof followeth. And therfore if lawes or princes haue ordayned death for this wicked crime, I thincke it is not vniustly done: but y e letteth not, but that there may be good proditions founde. Who doubteth but that thieues should be hanged, when as neuerthelesse it [...]s lawfull in iuste warre to take spoyles from the enemies.
To the thirde.The Romanes (as it was afterward declared) toke vēgeaūce of y e scholemaster of the children of the Phalisciās, & they detected vnto Pirrhus his phisitiō which would haue betrayed him. These things are true in dede, but I may easly aunswere y t the Romanes had here a regard to two things. First y t these (namely the scholemaster & the Phisitiā) had not in y t which they did, a regarde to iustice, but were only stirred vp therunto by couetousnesse or hatred. Wherfore they semed to haue deserued not a reward but a punishmēt. Furthermore y t Romanes had a wōderful great desire of glory, which they called valiātnesse of mind. And being stirred vp with y t, they thought y t victory in a maner vnworthy, whiche they got not by force, but after this sort, which semed to be very cowardly. And it is possible, that they thought to wynne those agaynst whom they warred, and rather by benefites, or at the lest way no lesse by benefites than by force.
To the fourth. The Edomites [...]nd Moabites did vniustly betraye the Iewes. Isai (as it was sayd) admonished y e Moabites in y e name of God, y t they should not betray them whiche did flye vnto them, bycause they semed to do that of enuie and malice, and not that they were desirous to set forward the will of God. For God had not commaūded the Moabites to afflicte the Israelites. Wherfore when the Hebrues were betrayed of the Moabites or of the Edomites, that could not be done but of crueltie, for as much as the lawes of neighbourhed & kynred were violated. And that Paul spake vnto Timothe of a wicked prodition, it is more manifest, than I shall nede now to declare.
To the fyft.Lastly were obiected othes & lawes of nature wherw t citizens are bound to defend their countrey. Of which I answere, y t all these are so farre forth to be obserued, as long as the othes and promises be not agaynst the worde of god and good lawes. Which thing if it be afterward knowē, thē are they of no force, yea they are thē vtterly voyde. To these I adde, y t it manifestly appeareth by y e cautions now alledged, y t we must neither for sweare nor lye, wherby a laudable & good proditiō should succede. Wherfore they which sweare vnto their magistrates, The prodition of the Counsel holden at Constantia. & promise to defēd the citie, cā not be excused, when their minde is to betraye & to deceaue. This haue the Antichrists done in y e counsel holden at Constantia. For y t they might thē eassier allure thither Iohn Husse, & Ierome of Praga, they promised him safety by publique fayth. And therefore they can not defend their prodition (admitte it were nothyng els) as iust and honest. But they were without doubt treacherers and wicked betrayers in swearyng & promysing that by their letters whiche they would not performe.
But now we must returne to the history. Howe the Luzite might be suffered of the Israelits to go in safety. It is not certain (as it is sayd) whether this Luzite had faith, or whether he wer an infidel. If he had faith, his prodition is to be commended, otherwise it is to be discommended. But if he beleued not, neither cleaued vnto the true God, why did the Israelites let hym go? Forsooth bicause he of his own wil went into banishment. Neither seemed this to be against the counsel of God. For God woulde therefore haue those people cut of, least they dwelling together with the Hebrues should haue geuen them an occasion of falling and offence. Wherefore when they departed, and chose wylful banishment, that came to passe, which God would haue to be done. But thou wilt say: By this meanes might al those nations haue bene sent away, Why the Chana [...]it s departed not, & giue place to the Israelites. neither ought they to haue ben slain as god had cōmaūded. What might haue ben done I nede not to answer, for as much as that is demaunded which coulde not be done. For so manye and so great were the sinnes of those nations, that they vtterly deserued death. Wherfore god taking away his spirite from them, dyd so harden their hartes, that they endeuoured not them selues to depart, but rather to resist the Israelites as much as in them lay. They made many battailes therfore, in which as god had ordained, and as they had deserued, they came to vtter destruction, although a very few of them were saued in departing, or els in embracing the true religion.
And they smote the cyty wyth the edge of the swoorde. This is not to be ascribed to cruelty, but rather to obedience and religion towarde the true god: for so was it his wil to be done, and so had he commaunded.
But they let the man and his houshold go free. Howe they coulde discerne this mans family from the rest it is not writtē. But it is most lykely that either he entred with the Israelites into the city, or els he shewed vnto them his house, by some token, wherby they might leaue it safe and vntouched according to their purpose. Rahab certainly in Iericho hong a purple corde in the window of her house, to auoid the misery and sacking of the souldiours.
And the man went into the land of the Hithites, Kimhi wryteth that these Hithites were none of those seauen nations, which were commaunded to be destroyed in the land of Chanaan. But he declareth not what these Hithites wer. And these are the names of those nations, which should haue bene destroyed of the Israelites. The Chananites, the Iebusites, Hemorrhites, Gergesites, Pheresites, Hithites, and Hiuites. These are the nations which god commaunded to be weeded out of the land promised vnto the Israelites. But this is to bee noted by the way, that there is a difference betwene these woordes Kethim and Chethim, for that which is written by Kaph signifieth, as they interprete, the Italians, or such as dwel in Ilandes, or the Macedonians: and that woorde is found in Esay, Ieremy, and in the booke of Num: where the prophecies of Balaam are mentioned. But that woord which is written with this letter Cheth, signifieth either one of the seauen nations of the country of the Chananites, or els those to whom it is sayd that this Luzite went.
And he built a City, and called the name of it Luz. The maner of banished mē in buildyng or adourning of citi [...]s. So men that wer driuen out of their countrey wer wont to do, that being moued with the loue of their country, to cal the places which they did build, either by the name of their country which they left, or els to builde them as neare as they coulde in forme like the other. So it is said that Aeneas dyd in Italy buyld Troy, & the city of the Pisites was in the same country built by the Graecians. Like wise the Israelites leauing the land of Palestine, decked vp a city graunted vnto them in Egipt, like vnto Ierusalem, building a temple there, ordaining also Priestes and sacrifices, as they had before in Ierusalem. In which doing they synned most haynously, although neuerthelesse they were moued thereunto by the loue of theyr countrye whych they had forsaken.
Vnto thys day. The tyme of Samuel is by those woordes noted, who is thought to be the writer of this history. And by this sentence the Hebrues do gather, that that City and the name therof, endured to the time of Samuel.
27 But Manasses did not expel Beth-Sean, with her townes, and Thaanach with her townes, the Inhabiters of Dor wyth her townes, the inhabiters of Iibleam with her townes, nether the inhabiters of Megiddo with her townes. And the Chananites began to dwell in the land.
28 And it came to passe, that as sone as Israel was waxed mighto, they put the Chananites to tributes, and expelled them not.
29 In lyke maner Ephraim expelled not the Chananites that dwelt in Gazer, and therefore the Chananites dwelt styll in Gazer among them.
30 Neither dyd Zebulon expel the inhabiters of Kitron, neyther the inhabiters of Nahalol, wherfore the Chananites dwelt among them, and became tributaries vnto them.
31 Aser also dyd not cast oute the inhabiters of Acho, and the inhabiters of Zidon, & of Achlab, Achzib, Helbab, Aphik, and Rehob.
32 And the Aserites dwelt among the Chananites the inhabiters of the land: for they did not driue them out.
33 Neither did Nephtalim driue out the inhabiters of Beth-Semes, nor the inhabiters of Bethanath: but dwelt amōgest the Chananites the inhabiters of the land: and the inhabiters of Beth-Semes, and Beth-Anath became tributaries vnto them.
The synnes of the Israelites.In this place the holy history setteth foorth the synne of the Israelites, in that they did not cast out and destroye those peoples, as God had commaunded them, but made them tributaries vnto them. Before the other tribes Manasses is reckoned: and the names of his Cities, which are here mencioned, ar rehearsed in the booke of Iosuah, the, 17. chap. where almost these selfe same woordes ar rehersed, namely how Manasses although he did not conquer them, did for all that make them tributaries vnto him. But that is not so to be vnderstād, as though this sinne were then committed: for as long as Iosuah lyued, the people dyd not so openly fal, yea rather the people did their duty diligently all Iosuas time, and al the time of the Elders, which had seene Moses, and had liued together wyth Iosua, as we shal heare straight way in this booke: but these thinges are spoken in that place by [...] that is, by anticipation.
And the hebrewe phrase is to be noted, namelye: And Benethiah, that is, her daughters. For it signifieth litle suburbes, townes and villages, whyche when they are compared with greater cities, do seme to be daughters of those Cities. The same kinde of speaking is vsed also in other languages. Cities called Matrices and [...]. Scithopolis. For we call often times the principal Cities Matrices, that is, chiefe Cities, and the Grecians call them [...] and [...]. Beth-San was a City in the tribe of Manasses, which was afterward called Scythopolis, of which city both Ptholomey and also Ierome haue made mencion. Thaanach is reckoned to be .x. myles distant frō Cesaria, in the way to Ptolemais.
But the Chananites began to dwell in the land. This hebrewe woorde Ioel, which the latine interpretour translateth presumpsit, and we haue turned it caepit, that is, began, signifieth also to wyll, to be at rest, and to sweare. The sence seemeth to bee this, that the Chananites, seyng they were not rooted out, [Page 41] would haue gladlye bene content to haue taryed in those places, where before they dwelled, and that peraduenture with a bond and an othe, but in such sorte that they would haue giuen a certayne tribute vnto the Israelites, which nowe had preuailed. But they of Manasses, bicause they could not cast these out, were punished for their smal faith. For if they had perfectly beleued, euen as God was with them in the conquering of Luz and other Cities, so would he also haue ayded them, in casting them out: but bicause their fayth was so diminished, God withdrew his ayde from them, but in the meane tyme hee referred this punishment (as I haue before said) to profitable endes, & meete for his prouidence. And they although they could not vpon the sodayne expell their enemies, yet ought they not to cease of from making warre against them, neither was it lawful for them to make any couenaunt or league with them.
And it appeareth that they required tribute of these nations, and bargained with them without anye lawfull cause: for thus speaketh the scripture. And it came to passe that as soone as Israel waxed mighty, they put the Chananites to tribute. Wherefore they preuayled against them, and they wer stronger than those nations: and therefore they can not be excused, in that they most filthilye made couenauntes with them. For they seemed to be entised thereunto by couetousnes of money and seruitude of those nations.
And in expellyng dyd not expell them. What the doubling of a word signifieth w [...]h the Hebrewes. Thys doublyng of woordes in the hebrew expresseth a perfect and absolute action, and this signifieth as muche as if it should haue bene said: And they brused them, and some of them they expelled, but they did not vtterlye destroye them, as God had commaunded. But what can we answer of Salomon, Salomon also brought these nations vnder tribute. which (in the first booke of kings the .9. chap. and in the .8. chap. of Paralip.) is written to haue brought vnder tribute the rest of the Amorrites, Hethites. &c. I beleue verely that the rest of those nations embraced the religion of the true God. For Dauid, who was otherwyse a most noble king and valiaunt Captaine, and who possessed his kingdome perfectly, suffered them not to worship ydols in his dominions. And if Salomon dyd afterward lay a greater burthen on them, than hee did on the Israelites, hee can not lawfully be blamed: for he did so also with the Gabaonites. For it is meete that the Israelites should be handled more gentlye of their King, than straungers. Neither should Salomon be excused, if he did that for to muche greedye desire of money, or if he did bargaine with them for money, that they keeping still theyr idolatrous and false worshipping, might liue vnpunished in his kingdome.
Ephraim also expelled not the Chananites. It is not declared that this tribe did put their enemies to tribute: which I thinke neuertheles they dyd, whē as it was declared before that Manasses did so, and we shall heare straight way that the tribe of Zebulon did the same. For it is not verye lykelye that those Ephraites wer better than their felowes. As touching the city Gazer, Ierome saith that it was .4. myles distant from Nicopolis, which is Emaus: and is called by an other name Gazer. Kitron also in the tribe of Zebulon and Nahalol were compelled to pay tribute, that they might haue Chananites to be their citizens. The city Acho was afterward called Ptolemais. Ptolemais. Dispa. Achzib also was called afterwarde Dispa, being .ix. miles distant from Acho in the way toward Tire. Likewise the tribe of Nephtalim brought the Chananites vnder tribute.
¶Of Masse.
BIcause in these places there is often mencion made of this hebrew woorde Masse, which signifieth tribute, of which word is deriued Mishah, Whence the woorde Masse is thought to be deriued. whyche of some is taken for tribute, which was wont to be payde of euerye person: And some of the Popes hirelinges thyncke that their Masse had hys name from thence, therefore peraduenture it shall not bee vnprofitable somewhat to write of it. That woord is red in Deut. the .16. chap. whē God commaunded that [Page] seauen weekes should be reckoned after Easter, and then should be kept the feast of Pentecoste. Thou shalt appeare (saith he) before the Lord, and shalt geue Missah Nethobath Iedecha, that is, a free oblation of thine owne hand. And that oblation was so called as an yearely tribute, which neuertheles was willing and without constraint. Howbeit, other (and peraduenture more truly) do interpretate that woord to signify sufficient, namely that ther should be geuen as much as should be inough and sufficient: for in the .15. chap. of that booke, where the Lord commaunded the Israelites to open their handes vnto the poore, & to lend him that which might be sufficient, that hebrew woord Dai the Chaldey Paraphrast enterpreth Misshah. In which place I take it that there is a regard to be had as wel of the pouertye of the poore, as of the abilitye of the geuer. For that was commaunded to be osberued in voluntary oblations, namely that so much should be geuen, as the ability of the geuers could beare, and as much as seemed mete for the worshipping of God. From hence do these our Papistes think their Masse to be deriued, as though it were a tribute, and a willing oblation, which might be offered euery where vnto God in the church, for the quicke & the dead. But I thynke not so. Certeyne Hebrew wordes are obserued in the latin church The hebrew words cam not vnto the latine church but by the Greeke churche. I know right wel, that the church hath borowed certayne words of the hebrues, as Sathan, Osianna, Zebaoth, Halleluia, Pasah, or Pascha, and such other mo. But we must marke, that those woordes came not vnto the Latine Church, but by the Greeke Church: for as muche as those woordes are found in the new Testament, as it is written first in Greeke, & also in the translation of the old Testament, as it was turned by the .lxx. Wherefore wee haue no hebrew woordes deriued to our Church, which the Greeke Churche had not first. But if we shal diligently peruse ouer the bookes of the Greeke father, we shal neuer find this woord Missa which is Masse, vsed of thē. Wherfore I thynk that this woord of Missa is not deriued from the Hebrues.
[...].The Greeke church called the holy supper [...], which woorke signifieth a common & publicke woorke. Neither is that woord proper to holy things: yea it is also applyed vnto prophane actions which ar publike. And who knoweth not that the administration of the supper of the Lord is a thing pertaynyng to Christian people? For as many as be present, ought to be partakers thereof, and to communicate together. An argument against priuate masses. And least I should ouerskyp thys, the etimologie of this woord bringeth no smal argument against priuate Masses. Bisides this that woord pertaineth not only, to the Lords supper, but also it is attributed to other holy functions, wherefore it is written in the actes of the Apostels the .13. chap. [...], whcyh some haue tourned, whilest they did sacrifice, whē as rather they should haue said, whilest they serued or wrought publikely, namely in a holy thing which they did without doubt in preaching of the Gospel. Names of the holly supper among the Latynes. This holy function namely the Lordes supper had other names among the Latines. For it was sometimes called the Communion, sometimes the supper of the Lord, other sometimes the Sacrament of the body of Christ, or the breaking of bread. And our fathers haue often tymes called it as the Greeke fathers dyd, dreadful misteries and [...]. Howe the fathers called the supper a sacrifice. I wyll not speake of, how they vsed to cal it oftē times by the name of a sacrifice, not therfore (as our aduersaries do foolishlye imagine) bicause that there the body & blood of Christ is offered vnto God for a sacrifice for the quicke & the dead. Although the fathers abhorred not from that kinde of speche, whereby they sayde that the body and bloud of Christ was offered vnto God. But what they vnderstoode by those words, if they be diligently red, they do manifestly expound, namelye that then were thankes geuen vnto
The most auncient fathers vsed not y e maine of Masse. Augustine.By those names did the most auncient fathers call the Lordes supper. But they made neuer mencion of the Masse. For it thou shalt reade Ireneus, Tertulilan, Ciprian, Hilary, and their like, thou shalt neuer finde that woord in them in that signification. Augustine maketh mēcion twice of it, namely in her sermon [Page 42] de tempore. 237. where he maketh mencion of the Masse of those that were to be instructed before baptisme. In that place he exhoreth men to forgeue iniuries one to another. For (saith he) we must come to the Masse of those that are to bee instructed where we shal pray: forgeue vs our trespasses, as we also forgeue our trespassers. And be writeth also in the sermon de tempore .91. these woordes: In the history which is to be red at Masses. Some are in doubte whether those sermons were of Augustines writing or no, Whē the name of Masse begā to be vsed. but to me they seme to be the style and sentences of Augustine. And as I coniecture, I thinke that this name Masse began almost to be vsed at that time: howbeit but seldome, and not often. For if it had bene then a woord in much vse, Augustine in especial who framed hys wryting vnto the vulgare people, would oftener haue made mencion of it.
They alledge Ignatius in his Epistle ad Smyrnenses. Ignatius An argumēt against priuate Masses. But that place maketh very much against the Massemongers: for asmuch as there Ignatius ordayned that Masses shoulde in no wyse be had, vnlesse the Bishop were present, wyth such great warinesse did antiquity abhorre priuate cōmunions. For he would haue al men to be presēt at y t doing of it, & specially the Bishops. These thinges haue I said, as grautning vnto the aduersaries, that it was the very booke of Ignatius, The epistles of Ignatius are Apocriphas. & that it containeth in it the word Masse, which yet we ar not compelled to graūt: For it is Apocripha, yea, and that as their own Gratian testifieth. Moreouer those Epistles were written in Greeke, and therefore I am assured, that be which turend it into latin, did put this word Masse for [...]. For thus it is written in Greek, [...]: and straight way after that, [...]. &c. This is the Greeke sentence of Ignatius, wherein as appeareth ther is no mencion made of this woord Masse.
Leo also is cited in his .9. Epistle to Dioscurus, Leo. And argumēt againste priuate Masses. where I confesse that that father made mencion of Masse, but yet in such sorte, that in the same place he is wonderfullye againste priuate Masses. For he was demaunded, seing that the temple was not so large, that it coulde not containe the whole people, which came while holy thinges wer administred, what the rest of the multitude should do which remained without and could not be present. Leo answered, that when that part of the people is gone forth which was before present at the holye celebration, the residue might succede and repeate againe those holye thinges. If so be that priuate masses had bene then in vse, what needed of that matter to haue asked counsell of Leo the bishop of Rome? Surely this question is a manifest token that Masse was not vsed to be had but once.
They wer wont also to bring Iohannes Cassianus, Iohannes Casianus. who lyued in the tyme of Honorius, and was driuen out of the Churche of Ierusalem by heretickes, from whence he came to Massilia, and was a Monke by profession. For hee maketh mencion of Masse in his .3. booke .7. and 8. chap. but he wresteth the signification of that woord farre otherwise than to the holy Communion. For by Masse hee vnderstandeth perfection, finishing, and absolution. Wherfore he saith: praestolatur congregationis missam. Let him tarye the ende or fulnes of the congregation. That is, that the multitude and congregation maye be absolued and fulfyled. And by and by after, Contenti somno, quia missa vigiliarum vsque ad lucem conceditur, That is, being content with the sleepe which is permitted them frō the end of the vigiles vnto day light: wherby this woord Missa he vnderstandeth that time of the watch wherin the vigiles wer ended. For then was it lawfull for the Monkes to slepe vntil day light. Neither must I ouership, that ther is mē cion most manifestly made of Masses in the exposition of the .xi. chap. of the Prouerbs of Salomon, which exposition is ascribed to Ierome. The exposition of y e Prouerbes is falsely ascribed to Ierome. But that boke without cōtrouersy is none of Ieromes writing. For Gregory is there alledged, who liued long after Augustine and Ierome. Bruno Amerbachius in his epistle which he set before the booke, saith that he saw in an old booke, that that interpretatiō [Page] was entituled to Beda. Many abuses in the church in the time of Beda. And if it wer so, then it is no maruaile, if hee made mention of Masses, for then in the time of Beda the priest, many abuses had crept into the church. I do therfore admonish you of that, bicause in that place that coū terfait Ierome affirmeth that the souies of such as are dead, are by the celebrations of Masses deliuered out of Purgatory. Ierome was not so wont to speake
From whence thys woorde Masse cōmeth.Now resteth to declare from whence the name of Masse, which vndoubtedly is a latin word, semeth to be deriued. The old fathers, if a man wyll diligentlys marke their writinges, did put this word remissa, which is forgeuenes, for this woord remissio, Tertullian. which is also forgeuenes. Tertullianus in his .4. booke agaynsts Marcion, the .249. syde. We haue spoken (saith he) de remissa peccatorum, that is of the remission of synnes. Ciprian. Ciprian de bono patientiae, saith: Qui remissam peccatorum erat daturus lauatro regenerationis tingi non est dedignatus. He whyche came to geue remission of synnes, disdained not to be washed with the lauacre of regeneration. The same man writeth in the .14. epistle of his .13. booke. Qui blasphemat spiritum sanctum remissam peccatorum non habet, that is, he which blasphemeth the holye Ghost, hath not remission of sinnes. Wherefore seing in steede of remissio they haue said remissa, they may be counted also in stede of missio to haue vsed this word missa. Therfore that which was done in the Church post missionem Cathecumenorum, Cathecumenites, that is after the sending away of the Cathecumenites, they called Missa, that is Masse. [...] (to declare that also by the way) is to teache & to enstruct, especially by voice, and not by writing: whereof they wer called [...] which wer not yet washed with the lauacre of regeneration, but wer instructed of their faith. Tertullian called them Audientes or Auditores, that is, hearers. But Augustine called them Competentes, that is desirers, or requesters (that is of baptisme.) For before they should be baptised at Easter, they signified their names .40. daies before, in which space they wer instructed, & not onely their faith, but also their life and maners wer examined of the Pastors of the church. The Cathecumenites & not cōmunicantes wer sent out by the Deacon. Cyrillus. Gregory. But in the holy assembling when the holy scriptures wer red, & the sermon done, the Deacon cryed: Exeunto Catechumeni, that is: let the Cathecumenites go forth, & the Grecians said [...], that is, holye thinges for holy ones: as it is gathered out of the seruice booke of the elders. Also out of Cyrillus vpon Iohn the .xii. boke & .l. chap: yea in Gregories time (as hee testifieth him self in his second booke & .23. chap. of his dialogues) it was sayd: if any man cōmunicate not, let him geue place. And that maner maye appeare to be very like vnto a certaine custome of the Ethnikes: For in a certayne vsage of their seruice of God (as Festus declareth) the Sargeant said: Festus. A maner of the Ethnikes in a certaine seruice of theirs. Apuleius. Exesto hostis victus, mulier, virgo, that is, let the ouercome enemy, the woman & the maide go foorth, for in that kinde of seruice it was forbidden that those kinde of persons shoulde be present. And Apuleius in his .2. booke saith, that the Priest did vse when he offered sacrifices, to say thus: [...], that is, who shal abide here? To whom was answered: [...], As though it should haue bene said: honest & good men, when as they which wer polluted & vnworthy wer gon. So was it done in our church: [...]. for after that saying aforesaid of the Deacon, [...], fallers away, & such as wer put to repentance went their way. Of these orders Dionisius made mencion. They wer called [...], which wer vexed with euyll spirits. Peraduenture they wer excōmunicated, for those at that time, I meane in the primatiue church, wer deliuered vp to Sathan.
Missa as it wer Missio. Ambrose.Therfore (as it now appeareth, by that which we haue said) the Latin church called the celebration of the sacrament of the holy supper Missam, as it wer missionem, that is, a sending away. For Ambrosius also said in a certain place, missas facere. And surely this sentence semeth muche more probable vnto me, than doth theirs which thinke that name to be deriued of this hebrew woorde Masse. But now that we haue entreated of the name of Masse, Partes of the Masse. we wyl also set foorthe the partes thereof, as they were had among the elders. The Grecians seeme to [Page 43] haue begon their [...], that is, the exercise of the Lords supper at [...], [...]. [...], that is, Lord haue mercy vpon vs, As though before al they would implore forgeuenes of their sinnes. Which phrase the latin church hath borowed of the, which some attribute to Gregory. But whylest the people gathered together, and before they were assembled, they song a peece of some Psalme, Introitus. or some part of the scripture, and that song they called Introitus, that is an entraunce, bicause that at that time the people might enter in. And they make Celestine authour of that. After [...], the people being in a maner glad, for the obtaining of pardon for their synnes, to geue thankes vnto God, Gloria in excel [...]s Collectes. did syng this hymne Gloria in altissimis, that is: Glory to God on high, which they wil haue to be the inuention of Telesphorus. Then had they Collectes, which are ascribed vnto Gelasius. Moreouer, certain lessons were rehearsed out of the holye scriptures, either out of the old testament, or els out of the Actes, or Epistles of the Apostles. The Epistle. Whiche lessons being done, there was to be rehearsed some part of the Euangelicall hystory. But when the Readers had red vnto the church the fyrst lessons, the deacon stoode vp in a high place, or pulpit, namely to be sene, and to be vnderstande of al men, The Gospel. The graduale. Halleluiah. wher he distinctly pronounced that which was to be redde out of the Gospell. But whylest hee went and ascended vp the stayres, the people vsed to syng some verses of Psalmes, which commonlye they called Graduales, that is, stayre songes. They added also vnto them, Halleluiah, that is, prayse the Lord, as it were clapping of hands with a ioyous cry, for the glad tidinges of the gospell. This hebrewe woord Halleluiah, semeth to be taken out of the Churche of Ierusalem: whereof there is mencion made also in the Apocalipse, and in the tytle of certayne Psalmes, When the Deacon had red the Gospell, the Byshop, A Sermon. or the Pastor of the Churche added thereunto an interpretation and exhortation: wherin vices were reproued, and deliberation taken of such as wer to be excommunicated. Which thinges being thus finished, The Papistes haue transposed the sendyng away of the people. the Cathecumenites and others which woulde not communicatr, were sent awaye. But in our tyme, bycause there are found very seldome any Cathecumenites, and they whych do not communicate doo stande myngled with the rest, yea almost none communicate except it be the Sacrificer alone. The Papistes haue differred that Missio, that is, that sendyng awaye, to the ende of their abhominations. For then they vse to say with a loude voyce, Ite, Missa est, That is: Go your way, Ite Missa est. nowe is the departure.
But in the olde tyme, those thinges being finished, The Symbole of the fayth. whyche wee haue rehearsed, they which abode to be partakers of the holy Supper, dyd sing the Simbole of the fayth, that they might diligentlye instruct one an other in the principal heades of religion, wherein they consented. For in Symboles is comprehended the fumme of faith, whiche comprehension or summe, The Symbole is called the tradition of the Church. Tertulian. The counsel of Nice. if a man wyll diligently reade the olde Fathers, he shal finde to be called Traditio Ecclesiae, that is the tradition of the Churche, which is both taken out of the holy Scriptures, and also necessarye to be beleued for saluation. And sometimes Tertullian bringeth it agaynst the heretickes which denyed the holy Scriptures. The Synode holden at Nicena made a full and perfecte Symbole, but not the fyrste, for as muche as there were certaine Symboles before, as we may know euen of Tertullian hym selfe. Then whyle they soong the Creede or Symbole, such as were present offered of theyr goods suche thynges as they thought good. Three vses of oblation. The offering serued for three maner of vses, for parte of it was spent on certayne moderate banquets, whiche the Christians dyd at that tyme verye religiouslye celebrate among them selues, and they were commonly called [...], Charitable banquetes. that is charitable banquets. Part of that which remained was distributed vnto the poore. And finally some of the bread & wyne was layd vp for the vse of the holye Supper. And that thys oblation of thinges was then added, Offertory. Collectes. twoo thinges doo testefye. Fyrst certayne verses which were soong by the people, whilest the offering [Page] was in doing, which was therfore called of thē Offertorium, that is an offring. The same is also knowen by those collectes which are redde in that part of the Masse. Yea, and Iustinus the most auncient Martyr hath made mencion of the same oblation in his Apologie or defence, and Ciprian also, and some of the old Fathers. Sursum corda. After these thinges, when they came to administer the holye Supper, they sayde Sursum corda, that is: Lyft vp your hartes, as the Ethnickes vsed to cry in their holy thinges, Hoc age. Hoc age, that is, do this. And surely the Christians said so verye aptlye, and in conuenient time, thereby to admonishe them selues, to thinke at that time vpon no carnal nor earthly thing, but wholy to lyft vp their myndes vnto heauen, where Christ is to be sought, and not in earth, as thoughe he were included in the breade or wyne. After that they gaue thankes, when they sayd: Gratias agimus tibi. From whence is had the name [...]. Proper words of the Supper The Lordes Prayer. Sanc [...]us. Prefaces. Canon We geue thankes O Lorde holye father, almightye, and euerlasting God, through Christ our Lorde. &c. These thinges are moste auncient, and are found very often in old ecclesiasticall wryters. Yea and that mystery of the bodie and bloud of Christ was called [...], that is, geuing of thankes, bycause all the accomplishing thereof dependeth vp on thankes geuing. And when the people had sayd: Through our Lorde Christe, he went to the proper woordes of the Supper. Which being rehearsed, there was said the Lordes praier. But Xystus before the rehersall of it, would haue the people to sing Sanctus Sanctus. &c. that is, holy, holy. &c. And that there might be better occasion geuen to come to that song, certaine prefaces were put before. And to those they peeced theyr Canon, which one Scolasticus (as Gregory mencioneth in his Register) made: whiche in deede the same Gregory alloweth not, bycause he woulde put in thinges of hys owne, and neglected the Lordes prayer. The kysse of peace, is sayd to be the inuention of Leo the seconde. Kisse of peace. Which seemeth not so to me, for as muche as that maner was in the Churche, euen in the tyme of the Apostels, that Christians shoulde entertayne one another wyth the kysse of peace. Yea and Paule in hys Epistles hath made mencion of that kynd of saluation. Agnus dei. And Iustine also the martyr in his second Apology hath mencioned of this kysse. The song of Agnus dei, that is the Lambe of God, Distribution of the sacrament. is said to haue beene brought in by one Innocentius. And when all these thinges were finished, they came to the distribution of the Sacrament. Whych whilest it was in doing, or when it was finished, they song a song of thanks geuing, Post cōmunion Praiers at the end. which they called Post Communionem, that is, an after Communion. And all these thinges beyng finished and ended, the Minister sent away the people, blessing them with a lucky blessing.
All these thinges, althoughe they led awaye the Christian people from that fyrst simplicity of vsyng the Lordes Supper, very manye thinges beyng added as it seemed good vnto sundrye men: neuerthelesse after a sorte they mighte bee borne withall, neyther can they iustly be accused eyther of superstition, or els of Idolatry. Rites were not like in all churches. The churche of Millayne. Howbeit they were not a lyke in all Churches, neyther were they obserued after one maner. For yet in the Churche of Millaine it is otherwyse vsed after the institution of Ambrose. But afterward the Romanē Antichristes corrupted all thynges, as I shall declare in an other place.
And that by the olde institution were obserued those thinges whych I haue mencioned, Tertulian. I coulde easely proue by most auncient wryters. Tertullian in hys Apologye sayth: we assemble and gather together, that wee praying might embrace one another, as though we would make a rushing into God with our praiers. This violence is acceptable vnto God. We pray also for Emperours, & for their ministers & powers, for the state of the world, for the quietnes of things, & the tariyng of the end. These things declare the sūme of the collects. And for the rehearsing of the Scriptures, hee addeth: wee assemble together to the rehearsal of the holy scriptures, if the quality of the present time doth compel vs, either to foresee any thing, or diligently to acknowledge any faults, we do assuredly fede our fayth wyth holye woordes, wee erecte our hope, wee fyxe oure confidence, [Page 44] and yet we continually repeate discipline, by inculcating the preceptes of God. Ther are also exhortations, castigations, and sharpe iudgementes of God, for there was iudgement with great waight. &c. These are the thinges whych wer done in the holy assembly. Wherunto those thinges are also to be added, which the same authour saith in an other place, namelye that the Lordes Supper was wont to be receaued at the handes of the chiefe Ministers. &c. We may by these woordes perceaue the principal partes of the Masse which we haue made mencion of.
Iustine the Martyr in his second Apologie maketh mencion that the Christians assembled together on the Sonday, Iustine martyr but he writeth nothing of other feast daies. There he saith was rehersed the holy scriptures, whereunto the Byshop dyd afterward adioyne his exhortation. Which being finished (saith he) we ryse and pray. He addeth afterward: The bread and drinke is brought to the bishop, ouer which he geueth thankes as earnestly as he can: to whom all men answer, Amen. These two words declare that they wer not carelesly to be passed ouer. First thankes were not geuen rashlye, but with as muche earnest as might be, that is, with a singular affection. Moreouer, it is manifest that all these thynges were spoken with a loud voyce, seing al the people answered, Amen. Afterward (saith he) is distributed the Lordes supper, then is the common geuing of thankes, and the offering of almes.
Dionisius in Hierarchia Ecclesiastica maketh mencion almost of these same things, namely of the reading of the scriptures, singing of Psalmes, Cōmuniō, Dionisius. and other thinges, which wer to long now to rehearse. But (which is muche to be maruailed of) he maketh no mencion of the offering of the body of Christ. The workes of Dionisius ar not hys whych was the Areo-Pagite. Yet we must not thinke that he was that Areopagite, of whom the Actes of the Apostles haue mencioned. But whatsoeuer he was, it is not to be doubted, as farre as I can iudge, but that he was an old wryter. But why I can not thincke that he was an Areopagite, these are the reasons that leade me thereunto. First, bycause the kinde of writing which he vseth, especially of the names of God, and de Hierarchia celesti, containeth in it rather the doctrine of vayne Philosophye, than the pure doctrine of Christian religiō, and vtterly wanteth edefiyng: moreouer those bookes ar in a maner voyd of testimonies of the holy scriptures. Monkes were not in the churche in the Apostles tyme. Furthermore in his Hierarchia Ecclesiastica hee maketh Monkes as a myddle order betwene a Clarke and the Lay men. When as in the Apostles time, that kynde of life was not yet in the Churche. Besides this, the auncienter Fathers neuer made mencion of those bookes: which is a good argument, that those wrytinges wer none of that Martyrs doing. Gregory the Romane was the first of all wryters that made any mencion of him, who in one of his Homelies mencioneth of his writinges. But let vs leaue him and come to Augustine. Augustine.
That father in his .59. epistle to Paulinus, when he dissolueth the .v. question, expoundeth the .4. words which ar written in the .1. epistle to Timo. the .2. A place to Timothe expounded. 1, Tim: 2. chap. And these are the woordes: [...], and [...]. And he affirmeth [...], to go before the celebration of the sacramēt: but [...] he maketh prayers, which are said in the administration of the sacrament, wher after a sorte we vow our selues vnto Christ, and he thincketh [...] to bee peticions and requestes, with which the Minister of the Church prayeth for good thinges vnto the people standing by. And finally [...] he affirmeth to be the cōmon geuing of thankes. I could to these bring a great many more monuments of old writers, but that I thinke these are sufficient at this present.
But now to returne to the name of Missa, Note an other kind of mission I see ther haue bene some whych haue thought it to haue ben deriued of the word Missio, that is sending, bicause those thinges which wer offered of the faithfull, were sayde to be sent, and they thyncke that this hebrewe woorde Missath gaue the occasion to that name, bycause in Penticoste the Iewes vsed to send gyftes. But why I doo not thyncks [Page] the name of Missa to be deriued of the hebrewe woorde, I haue before declared. And nowe I adde this, that if Missa were so named of the oblation of thinges, which wer geuen of the godly, then do the Papistes abuse that name, who haue no regard at al to the almes of godly men, but onely to the oblation of the bodye and blood of Christe, which they commonlye boast, and that impudently, that they doo offer it vnto God the father for the quicke and the dead. But of these thinges I thinke I haue spoken inough and inough.
34 And the Amorrites draue the childrē of Dan vnto the moūtain, for they suffered them not to come downe into the valley.
35 And the Amorrites began to dwel in the mount Heresch in Aialem, and in Saalbim: and the hande of Ioseph preuailed, so that they became tributaries.
36 And the coast of the Amorrites was from the going vp of the Scorpions, and from Petra and vpward.
They of the tribe of Dan distrusting the mercy and fauour of God, wer driuē by the Chananites or Amorhites, into the hilly places, wher they were scarse able to abide. For their enemies began to vsurpe the mountaine of Heresch, whych was appointed to their lot: but the house of Ioseph aided them, and so preuailed, that they made the Amorhites tributaries. The borders of the Amorrites wer very large And how farre the borders of the Amorhites extended, is brieflye touched. For they reached vnto the going vppe of Scorpions, which is a place in the South borders of the tribe of Iudah, not farre from the dead sea, almost euen to Petra, which city is the Metropolitan or chiefe city of Arabia, Petra. Strabo. from which it is called Arabia Petrea. Strabo describeth it, that it was situated in a plaine ground, compassed in with high rockes, from the bottomes whereof flowed moste plentifull fountaynes, when as the whole region which lieth by it, was altogether dry and a deserte.
Whether it be lawfull for Christiās to dwel with infidels.
BVt seing the Israelites fel, bicause they dwelled together with vngodli nations, and did rather exact tributes of them, than vtterly wede them out, according to the cōmaundemēt of God. I thinke it good to entreate whether it be lawful for godly men to be conuersant and to dwell together with the vngodly. Reasons which proue that. The first reasō
And assuredly ther are many reasons, wherby that maye seme to bee lawfull. First, bicause Christ despised not the feastes af Publicanes, Phariseis, and Sinners. Reason. 2 Secondly, Paul to the Corinthians the first epistle, geueth not libertye to a faithful wife, to depart frō an infidele, so that he be content to lyue & dwel together Reason. 3 w t her. Moreouer, the same Apostle writeth, that if any infidele byd you to a feast, and ye wyll go with them, then eate suche thinges as are set before you. Reason. 4, By these his woordes therefore he maketh it free. Furthermore, the same Apostle in the same epistle, saith that he had admonished the Corinthians to auoyde whooremongers, rauenours, euyl speakers, and suche lyke: but not al (sayth he) for so must you go out of the world, but if any be called a brother. &c. Wherfore we are not forbydden to auoyde the fellowship of al the vngodly. Besides these Reason. 5 Abraham was called out of Chaldey, and commaunded to dwell as a straunger among nations, which were farre from true religion. Wherefore hee dwelt in Reason. 6 the land of Chanaan and Egipt, whych places were altogether geuen to idolatry. Yea, and Lot seperated him selfe from the fellowshyppe and familye of his Reason. 7 kinsman Abraham, and went and dwelt in Sodome. Naaman also the Sirian returned to his idolatries. Christe also retayned not with him al those whom hee Reason, 8 had healed of diseases, but sent them agayne, sometymes to their owne, to declare there, what had happened vnto them. Finally by ciuyl lawes certaine heretickes Reason. 9 haue had places appointed vnto them, as the Nouatians had in the citye [Page 45] of Constantinople, and at this day the Iewes haue euery where leaue to dwell among the Christians.
This questiō surely as it is weighty, so hath it also very many doubtes. A distinction. Wherfore we must fyrst make a distinction, what may be lawfull to Magistrates, and what to priuate men. An other distinction. Then must we vnderstand that the conuersation with infidels hath two considerations: one is, wherby men are driuen by compulsion to Idolatrous and vnpure worshipping of God, & an other, whereby they remaine at libertye. Then we must marke, The third distinction. y t they which liue together with the vngodly as touching religion, are sometyme learned and strong, and sometimes they are both weake and also vnlearned. Wherfore I thynke it good to be iudged as touching priuate men, that if they be learned, The learned & strong may be conuersaunt with Infidels. and haue with theyr learning adioyned constancie, so that they be not compelled to cōmunicate with vngodly rites, may lawfully haue to do and be conuersaunt with men that are infidels, prouided that there be certayne cautions added.
The fyrst caution is, that they do it with thys minde, The fyrst Caution. to teach those which are without godlynesse, and to bring them to the sincere and pure religiō. And therfore whilest they are conuersaunt among thē, they ought not to cease: but ought alwayes to go about that purpose, for which they dwell in those places. And that theyr instruction and doctrine may be fruitful, they must take diligent hede, that they be courteyse, gentle and bounteous towarde those, whom they thynke to ioyne vnto Christ. For vnlesse they be fully persuaded, that they which do admonyshe them and instructe them do loue them, & haue them in price, the thing, which they haue taken in hand shal haue but euill successe.
Furthermore they must take hede, that they liue holily, iustly and honestly, The second Caution. for if the infidels should be offended with theyr maners, their ministerye would vtterly be vnprofitable: for as much as it nothing auayleth to build with one hand and to destroye the same with the other hand.
Moreouer this most of al is to be sene vnto, The third Caution. y t vnder the pretence of gentlenesse or frendship they myngle not themselues with vngodly vsages no though they were persuaded, that they could that way allure thē the easlier vnto Christ. For the rule of the Apostle must abyde vnshaken, which is that euil thinges are not to be committed, wherby good thyngs may happen.
They must beware also, y t in being conuersaunt with thē, The fourth Caution. they seke not theyr own cause or commodity. For some there are found, which although they make a pretence that they are desirous to haue the Gospel spred abroad. Yet neuerthelesse in very dede follow & seke for their owne pleasures, & gayne or aduantage. Wherfore if there be no hope (which neuerthelesse can seldome iustly happen) of the health of such infidels, we must no longer haue to do with them, but so much as eyther our necessitie or theirs requireth: that is, if peraduenture they shoulde be very sore sicke, and could not be holpen no other waye but by our helpe: or if we our selues shuld not be able to get things necessary for our liuing any other where but among them. It shall be lawfull also to be conuersaunte with them, as much as naturall and ciuile necessityes requyre, as if they were our princes, fathers, wiues or maisters & such like. Now resteth to cōfyrme this sentence, Proues oute of the holy scriptures. Math. 9. either by testimonies of y e holy scriptures or els by examples. Christ assuredly did so, who for this cause was cōuersant w t publicanes, sinners, pharisees, & scribes to instruct thē of saluation, & to conuert thē frō sinnes to vertues, and godlinesse, Wherfore Ierome on y e 9. chap. of Mathew hath thys saying: Ierom [...]. Christ in dede went to the feastes of sinners, but to that end y t he myght haue occasion to teache thē & to recōpence theyr biddings with spirituall meates: neyther are there any other things in the rehearsal therof spoken, but such as Christ himselfe spake or dyd, and what was the power of his doctrine, &c. Thys same manner dyd the Prophets in the old tyme vse, when they were conuersaunt w t an Idolatrous people [Page] And in lyke sorte dyd the Apostles, when they were sent by Christ, to go abroad among the Ethnikes. Neyther dyd Paul disdayne when he came to Athens, to vewe the temples of the Idols, and there curiously & subtilly to loke vpon y e titles and inscriptions of the altares, wherby he learned that inscription Ignoto Deo, that is, To the vnknowen god, and therof he tooke matter to make an excellent Sermon there, that he might after a sort reproue the men of Athens out of there owne proper tables. I thynke these thynges are sufficiente to confyrme the sentence before alledged. How we maye be conuersaunt with excommunicates. But before I goe from thys matter, I thoughte it good to admonyshe you of thys, that the same cautions being added, it is lawful for godly mē to be conuersaunt with such as are excōmunicate, namely to bring them into the way, so that they communicate not with them in their faulte, or haue to do with them for affection sake. The weake & vnlearned ought not to haue to do with infidelles.
But let vs go forward, and declare what is to be iudged of the weake and vnlearned men. They, although they are not cōpelled to pollute themselues with Idolatrous customes, yet ought they not to dwell together with Infidels. For being vnlearned, they haue no pretence of teaching. For if they should go about to enstruct others, The ignorance of Christiās as touching fayth is to bee reproued. they should by their vnskilfulnesse easly cause y e true doctrine of Christ to be had in derision. And surely the ignoraunce of such men is earnestly to be reproued: forasmuche as among Christians, there is none so very an Ideot founde, but that he is bounde to be able to rendre a reason of his fayth and in a sorte able to enstructe straungers. And certaynely all men moughte quickely do that, if they would suffer themselues to be instructed euen meanely in the Cathechisme. Neuerthelesse such as are infected with thys ignoraunce ought to seperate themselues from hauyng familiar fellowship with Infidelles as much as nede of the body and ineuitable necessities will suffer.
But what shall we saye of Scholemaisters? they are oftentymes enemyes to pietye which yet are appoynted to teach good artes and Philosophye. We maye not haue to do with vngodly scholemaisters. I say that it is daungerous to vse them, for as muche as they doe instille oftentymes peruerse thynges into the myndes of the hearers, and when as the Schollers are wonte to haue a meruelous opinion of a learned Scholemaster it easely afterward commenth to passe, Godly scholemaisters do easely aduance religion. that they beginne to reuerence them, and that exceedingly. Wherfore when they see that they are eloquente and very well learned both in the liberall artes, and also in Philosophy, they can scarce persuade them selues, that those Scholemasters can erre or myserablye be deceaued in the true religion. Origene. For on the contrarye part we see that Origene the Adamantiue, being besydes the religion of Christ, wherin he was instructed, wonderfully indued also with good artes and Philosophy, dyd in teaching disciplines of the Ethnikes bring very many of hys hearers to Christ. Augustine. We know also that Augustine, when he willingly gaue eare vnto Ambrose for hys eloquence sake, was turned from a Manichite to a Catholyke. So, yea and that more easlye (for as muche as we are more prone to euill then to good) it may oftentymes happen that they which are weake and vnlearned in religion, may as touching vngodlynesse very much increase vnder vngodly Scholemaisters. And vndoubtedly by thys meanes fell Iulianus the Apostata from Christ, in takyng Libanius, Iamblicus, and Maximus to be hys Scholemaisters. Wherfore for as much as suche Scholemaisters can not be had without greate daunger, my iudgement is that we should altogether leaue them.
Thou wilt say peraduenture y t Paul the Apostle in his fyrst Epistle to y e Cor. hath not written these cautions or exceptions of the weake and vnlearned ones, when as he plainly writeth: If any that is an infidel shal cal you, & ye wil go, &c. By these words he semeth to testifye, y t al that is referred to our wil. Wherunto I answere, y t the Apostle did not permit y t to be free to euery wil, but to a wil y t is ryghtly & wel instructed. For if a mā should go to these feastes, to be dronke to pamper his belly or gorge, or to solace himself w t filthy talke without doubt he [Page 46] can not be excused w t the permissiō of Paule, but is earnestly to be reproued, for his vnhonest wil and wicked purpose. Likewise if a mā being cōuersaūt with infidels should doubt of his own constancie, & should see y t he could nothyng profite them, among whō he dwelleth, vndoubtedly y e man can not go thither with a sound conscience, or an vpryght will. And if he should go, he should not directe y t which he doth, to to glory of god (as he is cōmaūded.) Furthermore although Paule hath not in the same place by expresse wordes put thys caution alledged, yet it followeth not therby, that the same is not to be added: forasmuch as it is both by firme reason manifest, & also proued by other places of y e holy scripture, y t that is in no case lawful. And y t self same Apostle sayth in the same Epistle the vi. chap. that he doth well, which surely purposeth in his hart, y t he wil kepe his virgin: Howbeit he addeth this condition, so y t he haue no nede, and that he hath power ouer his own wil. For if he should otherwyse appoynt thē his daughter would, or had nede, then vndoubtedly he should not do well. To the goodnesse of an action it is not sufficient that it be not of his own nature euill. Wherby it appeareth y t to the goodnesse & vprightnesse of y e worke, it is not sufficient to see that y e work it self of his nature be not euill, or repugnant to y e word of god. But more ouer thys is required, y t we attempt the same with an vprighte, perfecte & whole mynde. Wherfore euery one y t is vnlearned & weake, ought to separate himself frō the fellowship or familiaritie of y t vnfaythfull, as much as naturall & ciuile necessity suffreth. For seing y t he perceaueth that therby will come some danger to his soule, he can not with a good minde & sound counsel be conuersaunt with thē. Howbeit he may do such duties vnto them as are cōmaunded in the law of God, least he be made guiltye of y e sentence of Paul, where he sayth: whosoeuer hath not a care of hys, & especially of hys houshold, he hath denyed the fayth, & is worse than an Infidell. Yea and the same Apostle hath commaunded, that seruauntes of necessitye should obey their Maisters.
Now resteth to shewe reasons & testimonyes of the holy scriptures, Testimonies of the holy scriptures for y e sentence alledged. for y e dysalowing of this conuersation. Fyrst our Sauiour feared not to say in Mathew the 5. and 18. chap. If thy hand, fote or eye be an offence, or let vnto thee, cut him of, and cast him from thee, And these (as the wyser interpreters do declare) spake he not of the members of the body, but referred thē vnto those, which are our familiars, & most nygh of kynred vnto vs. They al are to be seperated frō oure cō pany, although they seme profitable and cōmodious, when they eyther seperate vs frō God, which is the euerlastyng saluation, or do put lets and hynderāces, wherby we are called frō hym. Chrysostome. Chrysostome in a maner intreating the self same argument sayth in the 56. Homely vpon Iohn: If we cut of a rotten membre frō the body, least it should corrupt the other partes of the body, which vndoubtedly we do not, bycause we despyse that member. For who at any tyme hated hys owne fleshe? How much more should we do the same in those which are wickedly ioyned vnto vs, not that we should despyse them, but that we should prouide that our saluation be not there indaungered, where we see y t we can nothing at al profite them. Wherfore in thys case, it is muche vnprofitable to desire, or to seke for familiaritie or concord. To this also doth y e law of Christ tend which he gaue in the 18. of Mathew, y t they which are in a manner past hope of saluatiō, & wil not heare their brethren iustly admonishing thē, yea and also despise y e voyce of the church correcting them, let them be counted as Ethnikes and publicanes. Which thing Paule also hath taught, who in the fyrst of the Corrinthians the v. chap. commaunded the incestuous person to be excōmunicated, that a litle leuen should not pollute the whole dough of the sainctes.
Moreouer the same Apostle taught, and y t in the same Epistle the 15. chap. out of a verse of Menander y t Poet, y e euil cōmunications corrupt good maners. And therby he shewed, y t the ryght fayth of y e resurrection, was greuously weakened among y e Corinthians, which were newly come vnto Christ, and y t for that cause bycause they had lightly geuē credite vnto y e arguments & prophane reasons of [Page] Philosophers or rather heretikes. It is not possible to be thought, how y e bewitching of wicked words corrupteth the tēder fayth of the weake ones. Wherfore profitably and conueniently were the Corrinthians admonished, & with thē all such as are weake ar exhorted, The coūsels of Phisitions to auoyde contagiousnesse. to abstayne frō y e fellowship of infidels. The phisitions also do counsell, y t when a contagious disease shal infect either a familye or the next familie vnto it, y t such as yet are of perfect health goe not vnto them which are sicke. For y t in the bodyes & temperatures of men there is a certayne agrement, wherby an affection easly issueth frō those which ar sicke to thē which are whole and sound, [...] the poyson wherof, though it be not byandby felt, of those which take not hede vnto themselues, yet for al y t within a litle whyle after it deadly corrupteth. Wherfore seing we are bidden so diligently to beware of the diseases of the bodye, muche more ought we to prouide agaynste the vices of the mynde that we no way prouoke them vnto vs.
Our nature is on euery side subiect to corruption.Furthermore our nature is so framed, by reason of our naturall or originall sinne, y t we are on euery side subiect to corruption, as both y e holy scriptures, and also very many experiences do daily teach vs, so that it is not to be doubted, but y t we should easly sucke in the poyson of other mens sinnes, if we shoulde not w t great diligence auoyde them. And those synnes as they do without any laboure cleaue vnto vs before we beware, so being once conceaued, they can not be plucked from vs but with great paynes. Chrysostome. Wherfore Chrysostome in his 56. Homely vpon Iohn which I a litle before brought, semeth wisely to saye: If we coulde make thē the better, and not hurt our selues (he entreateth in y e place of infidells and vngodly ones) we should do all things: but when we can do them no good, bycause they are past amendment, and that we may greuously hurt our selues, then are they vtterly to be cut of. And to confyrme hys sentence more strongly he bringeth in that which Paule writeth in the fyrst Epistle to the Corinth. the .5 chap. which is, Take away euil from among you. Which wordes of the Apostle can not be vnderstand of synne, forasmuche as the Greeke woorde is [...], that is euil. By which kynde of speache a wicked man is signifyed. Wherfore I shall nothyng erre, if I a litle bend the wordes of the Apostle to the commoditie of the weake ones, saying: Take away your selues from among the euill ones. For if ye, being weake and vnskilfull, shall company with them, ye must nedes both see and heare very many thynges agaynst godlynesse & the religion which ye professe. And bicause ye are not able neyther to confute, nor to reproue them, ye shall seme to be called as witnesses of blasphemies and reproche of the truth. And peraduenture there shoulde remayne a styng in your myndes, wherewith your conscience should be vexed longer than ye thynke for. Let vs herken vnto the wyse mā, who hath wel and faithfully admonished, That he which toucheth pytche shal be fyled with it, and y t he which hath fellowship with a proude man, wil proue like vnto him. The vices of other men are like vnto pitch. Take vpon thee no greater burthen, than thou art able to beare, & ioyne not thy selfe vnto a mightier thā thou thy self art. Ecclesiasticus the .13. chap. These things do two wayes serue for thys present matter. Fyrst in that the vices of other men are lykened vnto pytche, whiche sticketh wonderfull fast to the fyngers of them which touch it, We must haue a regard to our own strength. and also to garments. Secondly are we faythfully admonyshed to haue a regarde to our own strength.
Examples of y e holy scripturesLet the examples of y e holy scriptures in any wise teach vs. The Israelits were 70. yeres captiues in Babilon, & were so infected with y e conuersatiō of vnfaythful natiōs, y t afterward whē they had leaue geuē thē fyrst of Cirus & thē of Darius y e most noble kings to returne home, very many of thē wold not returne, but being ouercome with y e cōmoditie of houses, fields & marchandises, they remained stil among y e Chaldians, Medes, & Persians: So cold became they in y e loue of godlinesse & study of religiō. Exodus. [...]2. They were reproued in dede by Esdras, Nehemias, & Zachary, but they were litle y e better therby. And how much y e Hebrues wer corrupted [Page 47] by their long conuersation with y e Egyptians, the things which were by & by done in y e wildernesse, do playnly testifie. For although they had yet before theyr eyes y e singular benefites of God towards them, yet they fell frō hym to Idolatry, and bycause in Egypt they had sene an oxe supersticiously worshipped, Numeri. 2 [...]. they therfore instigated Aaron, to make them a calfe to worship. Whiche beyng geuen thē with great reioysing they began to crye. These are thy gods O Israell, which brought the out of Egypt. Besides this, they iorneyng, thorough the wildernesse, when they came to the borders of the Moabites, and were conuersaunt with that nation more familiarly than was mete, they were brought to thys pointe, that they did not only commit filthy whoredome with the shamelesse womē of the Moabites, but also they offred sacrifice vnto the most filthy idole namely Baal-Peor and suffred them selues to be admitted to his most vnpure sacrifices. Peter the chief Apostle, Mathew. 26. when he had entred into the vngodly hawle of the chief Priest, and had there ben conuersaunt with the maydens and vngodly seruauntes, forswore his maister Iesus Christ our sauiour. For the whiche faulte afterward, when he departed, he wept most bitterly. Isay. 6. Isay when he sawe God syt in the temple like a iudge, and angels standing about hym, whiche most purely celebrated prayses vnto him, althoughe he semed not to himselfe to be guilty of his owne faulte, yet he cried out: Wo vnto me bycause I dwell in the middost of a people, y t haue vncleane lippes. For y e man of God felte, that he had gotten no small infection, by reason he had dwelled so long with an vncleane people.
Alexander that Macedonian, Alexander of Macedonia. which by strength and most noble victoryes had subdued vnder him the most part of the earth, was so weakened and effeminated by the maners of the Persians, that those whom he ought to haue drawen to his own maners and qualities, he himselfe tooke their garments, weaknesse, hawtenesse and pride, so farre was he from bringyng them to the institutions of the Macedonians. Wherfore he rā into great hatred of his soldiours. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that long conuersation of the godly with infidels (except there appeare some fruite of their cōuersion, and that the same be by all meanes sought for) doth breede a let or hinderaūce to their saluation. For when they perceaue that our men do liue so familiarly with them, they thinke that the superstitions and idolatries, wherwith they are infected are not so euill, and so much to be detested. And peraduentur they are brought to this poynte, that in perseueryng in them, they distrust not but that they may attayne to saluation. For vnlesse it were so, they could not persuade them selues, that our men would dissemble it. Besides those things, there are very many of our men, whiche by the example of this mingled conuersation do thinke that they also may do the same, which they se others to do. Wherby by the dede or exāple of certain, euill should spreade abrode more amply, and our fayth and godlynesse should be had in derision of the Ethnikes and Papistes. And that oftentymes cōmeth to passe, which we know to haue happened in the tyme of Paul (as it is written in the first Epistle to the Corinthians) that they which otherwise were faithful, by this conuersation do communicate with wicked and polluted rites. For by ouermuch familiarity with the Infidels, is by littell and littell made a steppe to followe theyr superstition and Idolatry. Wherefore not without a cause did the Apostle crye: Flye from Idolatry. I will not speake also, how that it is not possible, but that, where our men whiche are weake & without learning and knowledge, are conuersant with infidels, sometymes there may happē some talke of religion, wherin althoughe they slippe not, yet when they can not ouerthrowe the Sophistical and crafty argumentes of their aduersaries, brawling and strife sometymes ariseth & frō y t they fall into hatred, cursing & reproches, which haue no edificatiō, but rather hinder it, so farre is it of to get a steppe to set forwarde. To this serueth y e which Paul hath written in the secōd Epistle to y e Corinthians: draw not y e yoke w t vnbeleuers. For what fellowship hath righteousnesse w t vnrighteousnesse? What participatiō hath light with darckenesse? or what concorde betwen [Page] Christ and Belial? what part hath the faithfull with the vnfaithfull? or what agreeth the temple of God with Idoles? These things are so manifest, that they nede not the light of interpretation: neither ought they to be vnderstand onely for contracting of matrimonyes, when as they extend farre and ouer all, & pertayne also vnto all kinde of conuersation with the vngodly, whiche we haue w t them for our owne cause. I know that the shadowes of the olde law are now by y e benefite of Christ remoued frō vs. Howbeit, it is not to be doubted but y t those things abide, of which the people of God was by them at that time admonished.
What was meante by the hemmes of the Hebrues.Wherfore I demaunde, what God ment, when he commaunded the Iewes, to sowe hemmes to their garmētes which they ware? Vndoubtedly this he mēt, that they beyng taught by that signe, might vnderstand y t they were seuered frō the Ethnikes, and that it was not lawfull for them to ioyne them selues with them, but as muche as necessitie should compell. God oftentymes forbad them that they should not returne into Egypt, and that they should not seke ayde of straunge nations. For he would haue cut of from his people all occasions of superstitions and Idolatry, yea and the place, whiche we are now in hande with, testifieth that the Israelites grieuously sinned, bycause they had brought these Idolatrous nations vnder tribute, and had made a league with them, and dwelled together in the same cities & fieldes with them. And assuredly to what euill it torned them vnto, the history it selfe declareth: for they brought not the Chananites to the true worshippyng of God, but they them selues rather forsakyng their God, became lyke Idolaters.
I speake not, how that the conuersation betwene the Hebrues and Samaritanes was so odious euen to the tyme of Christ, that the woman of Samaria (of whom Iohn mencioneth) sayd vnto Christ, Iohn. 4. that the Iewes were not wonte to be familiar with the Samaritanes. Moreouer it is not mete for Christians, to take away from them selues the boldenesse and liberty, frely to speake of Christ. Whiche they must nedes do, if they dwell among infidels. For if they dwellyng with infidels should familiarly haue free talke of Christ, either should they be laughed to scorne, or elles they should not be suffred. Vndoubtedly the holy fathers in the old tyme, were both grieued and also mourned, when by any necessitie they were compelled to dwell from the people of God. Dauid therof is witnesse, who sighed when he was by reason of the vniust violence of Saul constrayned to lyue in deserte places. And it appeareth in the Psalmes, how grieuously he complayned and lamented that he was forced to dwell among straungers, & such as were farre frō god. Daniel & his fellowes mought haue had the fruition of the kinges table, and of most delicate meates, and yet they abiected those commodities & pleasures, lest they should defyle thē selues with the delicate meates of the Ethnikes, and with the vncleane bankettes of the vnbeleuers. Moses also (as it is written in the xi. to the Hebrues) whē he mought haue ben counted the sonne of the daughter of Pharao, and therby haue attayned to great honor, he contemned all this, and went vnto his brethren, which were oppressed with miserable seruitude, in making bricke and tyles. They whiche followe not these examples, do manifestly declare, that they haue small mynde of the glorye of God, and that they will not redeme the same with their own losse or binderāce, thoughe it wer neuer so smal or littel. Do we (sayth Paul to the Corrnth. 1.) prouoke God? Are we stronger than he? Wherfore they whiche are weake and vnlearned, It is not lawfull to dwell with infidelles when we are compelled to cō municate with theyr vngodly rites. whilest they take vpon them to dwell among infidels, they do without doubt tempte god, and in a maner prouoke him, as thoughe they would be strō ger thā he. I could gather a great many more reasons for this sentēce: but these whiche I haue brought, shalbe sufficient at this tyme.
Now let vs come to those, whiche do so dwell among infidels that they are compelled to be present at their vnlawfull rites, whether those be learned or vnlearned, whether they be strong or weake, what they be, in this case, it maketh [Page 48] no matter: For I comprehend them altogether. I say that none of them, such an habitation or coniunction is to be suffred: but either they must flye from thence, or rather suffre death, than to commit Idolatry. Paul sayd (as I haue before declared) Flye from Idolatry. The lawe and Prophetes, the olde and new Testament are full of ordinaunces, commaundementes, lawes, admonitions, rebukes, wherby straunge worshipping is forbidden. Daniel. 3. Daniels fellowes chose rather to be cast into the fornace, than they would worship the ymage set vp by a moste mighty king. Machabea the mother with her children would rather dye, Machab. 7. than she would against the lawes of God eate swynes fleshe. I could reckon an infinite numbre of Martyrs, which most cōstantly suffred death, rather than they would forsake theyr godlynesse, which they had professed, hauing this sayeng alwayes before their eyes, feare not them whiche can kill the body &c. Paul in his first Epistle to the Corinthians affirmeth the same, bycause we are the temple of God, the members of Christ, and partakers of the table of the Lord, which table can haue nothyng common with the table of deuils.
All these thinges are to be applied vnto our tymes, when in the tyme of Papistrie godly men, if they dwell with the vngodly are compelled to be at their Masses and most filthy seruices: whiche of all thinges is not lawful vnto them. But some take these probations by me now alledged to be vnderstand of sacrifices done to Idoles, and not of the superstitions, whiche are now vsed in the tyme of Papistry. An outwarde worke can not be counted for y e worshipping of God, excepte it be grounded by hys worde. But they ought to remember that no outward worke is to be had for the true worshipping of God, vnlesse it be appoynted by the worde of God: whiche if it be not, it can be nothing els but an inuention of man. For we can not without faith worship God: and fayth can haue no place, where y e word of God is withdrawen. Wherfore in humane actions, how goodly in shewe so euer they be, vnlesse god by his word do allow them, they can be no worshipping of him. Surely if we would honor men, we are wont chiefly to marke, A similitude. in what things those men do delite in: and when we haue found that out, we thinke we haue bestowed our labour well, when we haue shewed vnto them those thinges wherin they were wont to reioyce and delyte. Why then do we not after y e same sorte with God, to serue him with that kynd of worshipping whiche he hath allowed by his oracles? Let vs heare him in Esay, how that in the oblations, sacrifices, incenses, and offringes which were brought into the temple without faith, he was rather weryed than reioysed in them. He abhorreth and detesteth these kyndes of sacrifices as the Prophetes haue taught vs. Yf these thinges are spoken of those sacrifices whiche they by the word of God vsed, & that for that cause only, bycause they were offred without faith: what thinke we is to be iudged of the inuētions of men, & fayned worshippinges, which beyng voyde of y e word of God cā not be done with faith? There is no true god which delighteth in fayned worshyppynges. we may verely say that they pertayne vnto Idolatry. And that may be manifestly gathered hereby, bycause there is no true God whiche wil be worshipped with these thinges. Wherfore it followeth that the vngodly whilest they adioyne such rites vnto their holy seruices, they do not worship the true God, but him whom they haue fayned with them selues to delyte in these thinges. And for as much as in the whole nature of thinges there is no such, they worship the Idole of their owne mynde, and therfore iustly and worthely they may be called Idolaters.
But they say that those thinges which are sayd & done in the Masse, We must haue no regarde to the begynning of Ceremonies but whether they agre with the worde of God. had their beginning by the institution of Christ, althoughe they were afterward vitiated thoroughe mens defaulte. That helpeth them nothing, for as much as in these thinges we may not haue a regarde or consideration to their begynning but to their nature and forme. And we must diligētly marke whether they agree with the worde of God. The brasen Serpent by the commaundement of God had his beginning, it was also endewed with miracles, The brasē Serpent. for the Israelites were by looking vpon it deliuered from their venemous byting. The same Serpent neuerthelesse, [Page] when the Iewes worshipped him, and offered incense vnto it, the godly men detested it. So that the most holy king Ezechias brake him in pieces, & therwithall vtterly put away the worshipping therof. We must not therfore haue a regard to the originall of a thing, What the Hebrues meante whē they made thē selues the golden calfe. but we must looke how it is vsed, whether it agree with the first institution. The Hebrues when they compelled Aaron, to make them a calfe to worship, had not that mynde to fall from the true GOD, when as they confessed that he brought thē out of Egypt. This was onely their entent, to worship him vnder some signe or visible forme, and they chose that forme wherby they had sene the Egiptians expresse their God by. The maner of of y e Ethnikes in their Idolatry. So the Ethnikes testified that they worshipped one God, as the chief author of all thinges, which they fashioned vnto them selues by dyuers and manifold shapes. For by Pallas they say was signified his wisedome: by Mars his power and myght. By Iupiter his iustice and goodnesse. Wherfore rites and ceremonyes are not to be estemed by the counsell and will of men. No otherwise must we thinke to haue happened of Ieroboam the sonne of Nabat. The counsel of Ieroboam. For he would not (as he pretended) plucke away the people from worshipping of the true God, but bycause he was affeard of his kingdome, and sawe that it might easely happen, that if his men should often go vnto the temple of Ierusalem, they would fall from him, and returne vnto the familie of Dauid. He sayd therfore, that to worship the true God, they neded neither the tēple of Ierusalem, nor yet the arke of the couenaunt. For that God Iehouah, as he was signified vnto the Iewes by the wodden arke and tēple of Salomō, so also might he be expressed vnto y e Israelites by signes of golden calues, so that that worshipping which they should performe at Ierusalem, they might commodiously celebrate vnto Iehouah in Bethel & in Dan. This man therfore went about no other thing but made an outward worke, whiche he obtruded as a worshipping of GOD, and that vtterly without his worde, whiche wanting, all y t was done was mere superstition and Idolatry. Tyrannes therfore and princes, when they compell men to polluted rites, although they say they do them for a good intente (as they terme it) and how soeuer they pretend some certain beginning of aūciēty, are not yet to be heard. Paul doth in this maner admonish the Ephesians. Communicate not with their vnfruiteful workes, but reproue them. He called them their workes, bycause they could not be called the workes of God, What is to be done when superstitions are obtruded vnto vs. for so much as they very much disagreed from his worde. But, what is then to be done, whē they are obtruded vnto vs? Surely we ought to reproue them, and with great libertie (when nede requireth) reprehend them. But that is dangerous (say they:) we shall lose our goods and dignities: we shalbe put to death. I graunt that, but none of vs hath vpon this condition receaued the religion of Christ, that hys lyfe, goodes and dignities, should remayne safe vnto hym selfe. Yea Christ hath by expresse worde testified vnto euery one of vs. Excepte ye renounce all that ye haue, and take vp your crosse, and follow me, ye can not be my disciples: and vnlesse you lose your soules ye can not possesse them. After this sorte must we frame our selues.
The aunswers of Ciprian. Ciprian (as Augustine declareth) when he was led to execution, the president beyng desirous that he might escape, sayd vnto hym. Now I geue thee space to deliberate, to chose whiche thou wilte, whether thou wilte thus miserably be slayne, or obey, and so let go free. The man of God aunswered, In a thing so holy, deliberation hath no place. They whiche are not affected with this mynd, but are wonderfull carefull, Their punishmentes which cōtaminate thē selues with superstitions. lest their lyfe or goodes should perishe, those men do easely pollute them selues with Masses and vnpure superstitions, and for the same cause do suffre most grieuous punishementes. First truely their conscience miserably afflicteth them. Secondly the light of the truth whiche before was kindled in their myndes, is by litle and litle extinguished. Thirdly very oftentymes they exceadyngly delyte them selues in that dissimulation, so farre of are they, to repente them of it. Yea and they go about to persuade the same vnto [Page 49] others, and those whiche will not obeie admonitions, they begyn to hate, and lastly as muche as lyeth in them, they stirre vp agaynst them, the anger, force and might of Tyrannes and worldly princes. Such a most vnhappy end of many of them haue I my selfe sene.
And in this their dissimulation; thus they vse to defend them selues: Outward workes are certain shewes of confession. we do not this (saye they) from our hearte: we so behaue our selues onely in bodye and outwarde gesture. But why do no they consider, outwarde actions to be a certayne shewe of confession: and euen as in the profession of fayth and Religion the tongue ought not to disagree from the hearte, so also what soeuer is outwardly done in deuyne ceremonyes, ought with the same profession to agree. Adde also thereunto thys sayeng of Paul, with the hearte we beleue vnto ryghteousnesse, with the mouth is confession made to saluation. It is no true fayth whiche bursteth not out into Acte. Christe lykewyse sayde: Who soeuer shalbe ashamed of me before men, I will also be ashamed of hym before my Father. Furthermore I woulde haue those men to vnderstand, that that is not pure and true fayth, whiche bursteth not forth into actions agreable vnto it. Moreouer our sauiour (who most earnestly sought the glorye of hys Father) when he had purged the Temple from Marchantes, sayde: The zeale of thy house hath eaten me vp. But these our men shewe forth no followyng of that godlynesse and fayth, whiche they crake to be closed in their heart.
Neither do they remember, An inwarde & outwarde worshipping. that euen as the inwarde worshyppyng of God is founde to be it, whereby we iudge of him truely and honorably: so also the outwarde worshyppyng is, Idolatry is of two sortes. whereby we worshyppe hym ryghtly and as he hath appointed. And that Idolatrye lykewise is of two sortes, for one is, whereby we fayne vnto our selues in our hearte by euill doctrines such a GOD as we lyst our selues. An other is, whereby we transferre the outwarde worshyppyng not onely to creatures and Idoles, but we vitiate the same also with our owne inuentions and lyes.
We retayne (say they) in our heart the right opinion. Graunt it be so, but ye abandone your bodyes to Idoles and to the deuill. And Paul affirmeth, that your body is the mēber of Christ, why do ye then take it and geue it to an harlotte? But Paul (saye they) wrote that of fornication. I knowe that. But the Prophetes in the meane tyme teache vs that Idolatrye is the greatest fornication of all. For Ieremy, Ezechiell, Idolatrye is the greatest of all fornicatiōs. and other holy Prophetes fo inueyghe against the Iewes and their Churche, that they saye the same Churche is lyke vnto an harlotte whiche vnder euery greene tree hath abandoned her selfe to Idoles and prophane worshippynges. Moreouer howe vayne the excuse of these men is, the oracle of GOD playnely declareth, whereby GOD aunswered thus vnto Elias the Prophete. I haue left me 7000. men, whiche haue not bowed their knees before Baal: he sayth not whiche thincke ryghtlye in theyr harte, and whiche in their mynde beleue vpryghtly, but on the contrary setteth forth a signe of outwarde worshyppyng, namely of bowyng the knee. God hath created the whole man and wyll haue him whole And he whiche created the whole man is not content with the halfe of him, neither will he haue his creature parted with the deuill. To me (sayth God) to me onely I say shall euery knee bowe. Furthermore if this their reason had bene of any valew, the Corinthians might also by it haue excused their doing. For they might haue said vnto Paul, what, art thou so vehement agaynst vs? We our selues know also, that an Idole is nothyng, and we kepe the right opinion in our heart, Let God be content with that. Other mennes faultes are not layde to oure charge but that we cōmunicate with them. Yt is lawfull for vs in the meane tyme with the body and outwarde presence to serue our owne commoditie.
Furthermore they saye: These thynges we do nothyng at all vitiate, yea we would haue them vncorrupte and perfecte. Wherfore what synne soeuer is here committed, it ought not to be ascribed vnto vs. Whereunto I aunswere. That [Page] that is true in dede, that an other mans synne is imputed to no man, but yet whilest ye are present at prophane rites, that is blamed in you, and iustely imputed vnto you, in that you communicate with an other mans vngodlynesse. The Apostle in hys firste Epistle to the Corinthians sayde: do ye not knowe that they whiche do eate of the sacrifice, are made also partakers of the Temple? What saye I than? That the Image is any thyng? or that it whiche is offred vnto Images is any thyng? Nay. But this I say: that the thyngs which the Gentiles offre, they offre vnto deuilles. But I woulde not that you shoulde be partakers of deuilles, ye can not drynke of the Cup of the Lorde, and of the Cup of the deuilles, ye can not be partakers of the Lordes table, and of the table of deuilles. &c. Wherefore, thoughe the corruption of the Sacrifices is not to be imputed to the communicantes, yet for all that the communicatyng it selfe, from whiche they ought to haue kepte them selues, maketh them blameworthy. And vnlesse the thyng were so, why would not the holy Martyrs communicate with the rites of the Ethnikes? why did Paul so reproue the Corinthians? But here they returne agayne to this, to saye, That the Masse is not to be compared with the Idolatrye of the Ethnikes. For (saye they) thoughe it somewhat straye from the institution of Christe, The Masse hath nothyng common with the institution of the Lord. yet ought it not to be counted a prophane and an Idolatrous thyng. But I affirme it to be so muche peruerted, that almost it nothyng at all agreeth with the institution of Christ, yea it is most vtterly contrarye vnto it. Whiche is very easye for me to declare.
Firste the Supper of the Lorde, as it was instituted by Christe, was a common or publique worke: A contrarietye betwen the supper of the Lord & the Masse. but nowe commeth forth the sacrificer adorned with monstrous garmentes, and doth all thynges alone, the rest stand by & onely see and heare. Wherefore if Paul did iustly and worthily rebuke the Corinthians, which taryed not one for an other, & sayd that they could not eate y e Lordes Supper: how can they worthily call the Papisticall Masse, by the name of the Supper of the Lorde, whereas onely one sacrificer eateth and drinketh? Vndoubtedly by no meanes. Wherefore let them rather call it by any other name, than the Supper of the Lord.
Furthermore they saye, that they do there offre the sonne of GOD vnto the eternall Father. And that is by expresse wordes denyed in the Epistle to the Hebrues. For it teacheth that all thynges were fynished by the onely one oblation of Christe. Whiche beyng perfect, we maye not renewe the same agayne. They wyll offre vp Christ euery daye. The worde of GOD affirmeth, that it was to be offred but once. I confesse in dede, that the Fathers (as I haue before sayde) did sometymes in suche sorte speake as thoughe the body and bloude of Christe were either offred or sacrificed in the celebration of the Sacramentes. How in the supper the body & bloud of Christ is offred vnto God. But they very oftentymes interpreted them selues, that those oblations or Sacrifices, were onely thankes geuyng, or a memory and figure of that oblation and sacrifice, which Christ dyeng vpon the crosse made.
They affirme also, that the bread and wyne, are chaunged into the substaunce of the bodye and bloud of Christe, when as the holy Scripture doth teache vs farre otherwyse. Moreouer they lyftyng vp the bread and wyne, do set forth to the people creatures to be worshypped in steade of GOD. For what is more filthy, than religiously to worshyppe a piece of bread, and a Cup of wyne? It is true in dede, that they are made partakers of the bodye and bloude of the Lorde, namely in hearte and mynde, whiche eate and drinke the signes of thankes geuyng, with syncere fayth, & as the Lorde hath instituted. But yf a man do onely beholde and worshyppe them, then are they nothyng vnto him, but a piece of breade and a Cup of wyne.
Moreouer the ministers of the Churche, when as their duety is to go about all that in them lyeth to lift vp the myndes of the people vnto heauen, that they [Page 50] mought not seke Christ in the world, nor looke for any carnall or earthly thing in the supper of the Lord, they miserably holde the people geuyng head to the visible signes. The Apostle in the first Epistle to the Corinthians commaunded that they should not vse a straunge tongue in holy assemblyes, bycause euery one must aunswere Amen. And bycause aboue all thinges the edifieng of the hearers is to be sought for. But in the Masse all thinges are done in the Latine tongue. And those wordes whiche should be to the great comfort of the standers by, when as to them the participation of the body & bloud of the Lord is promised, those wordes do they speake softely, yea they mumble them vp so darkelye, that though a man vnderstande the Latine, yet can he not vnderstande those wordes. They do for this cause so softely mumble them vp, as thoughe the members of Christ were not worthy to heare them: The Greke Churche. when as neuerthelesse the Lord hym selfe spake them openly, and the Greke Churche, euen to thys daye pronounceth them with a moste loude voyce. Yea and in the olde tyme, it was a custome vsed (as Ambrose and Augustine among other do testifye) that at those wordes the people aunswered Amen. But as I thinke, Ambrose. Augustine. these men do therefore mumble vp those wordes, bycause they are affeard lest their lyes shoulde be founde out. For there they saye, Take ye and eate: and also, The Papistes in the Masse make many Lyes. As often as ye shall do these thynges, ye shall do them in remembraunce of me. When as neuerthelesse they haue appoynted to eate and drinke it alone. And vndoubtedly very many other thynges speake they secretly and openly in the Masse, as thoughe many did communicate or should communicate, when as the sacrificer alone doth it in dede. A lye is euer fylthy, but then most filthy of all, when it is admitted in holy thinges, and before the Lord.
But what shall we saye of their applications? They affirme that they can as they luste them selues applye the sacrifices whiche they make vnto the quicke and the dead. Euery man is iustified by his owne faith and lyueth & dyeth in hys owne righteousnesse. But the Scripture teacheth that euery man is iustifyed by hys owne fayth, and that all men shall either dye or lyue in their owne ryghteousnesse or vnryghteousnesse: but they saye otherwyse, for they can as they saye, helpe both the quicke and the dead by their Masses. If they woulde attribute that vnto prayers, namely that they taught that by prayers they mought helpe the necessityes of others, it myght be borne with all. By praiers we he [...]pe other. But when they affirme, that the worke it selfe, namely of the Masse, hath in it so muche power and vertue, that it can helpe all kynde of men, that maye by no meanes be suffred. Besides this Masses are very oftentymes celebrated in the honour of certayne Sainctes: whiche vndoubtedly is moste farre from the truthe: for as muche as Christe hath for thys purpose instituted hys Supper, that it shoulde be a memorie of hys death, and not of other Saynctes. I will not speake howe that it is moste commonly sene, that there is nothyng founde certaine of those Sainctes whome they there worshyppe: The lyues of many sainctes are Apochripha and full of Fables. the lyues of them are Apochripha, and very often also full of fables, and Poetes faynenyngs. There are also in it, certayne, yea very many straunge rites, signes to be laughed at, gestures in a manner foolyshe, and garmentes not vsed: the significations of whiche thynges are vtterly vnknowen, not onelye of them whiche stande by, but euen the sacrificers them selues, Significatiōs of Ceremonies in the Masse are not knowē if they shoulde be demaunded what they meant, they coulde not aunswere. Wherefore either they aunswere nothyng, or if they go aboute to saye any thyng, they bryng forth not one thyng, but thyngs moste disagreyng: whereby thou mayste easely gather that there is no truth in their wordes. Wherefore fayth can haue no place in these thinges whiche they do in theyr Masse, when as it onely there hath place, where the worde of God offreth it selfe vnto vs.
And that they can not defend them selues from the detestable synne of Idolatry, [Page] the ymages do testifye, Images are worshipped in the masse. vnto the whiche they turnyng them selues do celebrate their most vnpure seruices. For they can not be content in the Masses to looke vpon them, but they cense them, and kneele before them, and finally they do vnto them all kynde of worshippyng, whiche is to be done onely to God. And bycause (as I haue before mencioned) they dare affirme that the Masse hath affinitie (I can not tell what) with the institution of Christ: it shall not be from the purpose, Sacrifices of the Ethnikes are more agreable with sacrifices appointed by God, thā is y e Masse with the holy supper and it is easy to be done, to declare, that (if we marke the tokens) the olde Ethnikes may with much more likelyhode excuse and defend their sacrifices, than these can defend the Masses. For the sacrifices of the gentiles did not differ from the maner of sacrificyng whiche the fathers had before the lawe, and whiche God allowed in his lawe, when as these men in their Masse differ from that supper whiche Christ prescribed, and as the Euāgelistes and the Apostle Paul haue deliuered. There on euery syde was inuocation of God, a temple, an alter, Sacrifices, Priestes, Killing, sheding of Bloud, Salte, Wyne, Oyle, Meale, a holy banket, religious garmentes, washynges, fumigations, continuall fyer, singing, oracles and such lyke, whiche would be to long to rehearse. Let the Popishe sacrificers shewe as many thinges, if they can, in their Masse, whiche do agree with those thinges whiche Christ did in the supper. But if so be they can not, let them then thinke that their Masse doth no more agree with the godly celebration of the holy Supper, than do the rites of the Idolatrers agree with the legall sacrifices. Wherfore let them cease of so to kysse their littel daughter, and to preache that it ought to be counted the institution of Christ and of the Apostles. I will not speake of the yearely Obites, and Funerals of the dead whiche are oftentymes vsed there, of whiche thinges the Lord hath nothing commaunded. By it they stablishe Purgatory, wherof the holy scriptures write nothyng. That furthermore is most farre from pietie, bycause in their Masse they poure out prayers vnto sainctes, whiche are already departed out of this lyfe. In hearyng of Masses the anger of God is not pacified, but prouoked. Finally all the thynges whiche they there do, they make a market of them, sell, bargayne and set them out to most filthy gayne. Wherfore we must diligentlye take hede, that whilest we desyre to worshyp GOD and to haue hym mercifull vnto vs, we do not in hearyng of Masses exceadyngly prouoke hys anger agaynst vs.
What is to be answerd to the exāple of Naaman the SiriāThese superstitious men go forwarde, and by the example of Naaman the Sirian will proue that it is permitted them, to be present at the most fylthy Masses. Naaman prayed Elizeus the Prophet, that if he bowed his knee in y e tēple of the Idoll Rimnon, when the kyng, whiche leaned his hand on his shoulder, should so do, he would implore for hym mercy and forgeuenesse of GOD. To whom Elizeus aunswered only, go in peace. These our men ought to consider with thē selues whether they onely haue sene and read this diuine history. I thinke not: For the holy Martyrs in the olde Churche were studious day and nyght in the holy Scriptures. Wherfore this history of Naaman was not hidden from them. And what cause was there then, that they would not followe such an example, and that with the losse of their lyfe? These auncient noble men and pillers of our fayth sawe that, whiche our aduersaryes recken not with them selues, namely that that Naaman whiche is set before vs, was newly conuerted vnto the true God, and was yet a weake souldiour, who was not also yet ready, to deny both hys owne and hym selfe for Gods cause, but desyred after a sorte to kepe hys olde place and dignitie with hys kynge. The whiche thyng to attayne vnto, he sawe that it myght easely come to passe that he should fal into y e sinne, whiche he declared vnto the holy Prophete. Naaman the Syrian knewe that his deede was culpable & nought. And when he knewe ryght well that the same agreed not with true godlynesse, he required the prayers and intercession of the man of GOD, whereby he fallyng of weakenesse, hys faulte myght be forgeuen hym. Otherwyse there is none whiche nedeth to aske [Page 51] pardon for that which he thynketh is lawfull for hym to doe. We make intercessions for sinnes, and not for thinges permitted vs. Wherefore thys place maketh much agaynst our aduersaries, and that that is sinne which they moste earnestly goe aboute to excuse, is manyfestly proued by thys historye. I would to God they woulde diligentlye marke in that action, that which theyr Naaman selfe: And if they shoulde fall (as thys man feared that he shoulde fall) they woulde not cloke it with a vayne defence, but woulde emplore the mercye of God, and prayers of holy men, that that maye gentlye be forgeuen them, Elizeus gaue not Naamā libertie to go vnto Idols. whiche they naughtely haue committed. Neyther did Elizeus (as they persuade themselues) geue Naaman the Sirian liberty to go vnto Idoles, he sayde onely: Go in peace. Which was also an accustomed kinde of salutation at y e time. Neither may we gather any other thing out of these words, then y t the Prophet promised to do that which he was requested to do. Namely, to pray vnto God for y e saluation of y e man. Fyrst to strengthen him y t he should not fal. Secondly that if he sinned, his fault might be forgeuen him.
They vse to obiecte also certayne woordes out of the Epistle of Ieremye the Prophet, which are written aboute the end of a litle booke entituled of Baruch. An answer to a place of Baruch And these are the wordes. In Babilon ye shall see Gods of golde and Siluer borne vppon mens shoulders, to caste oute a fearefulnesse before the Heathen: Take heede ye followe not the Gentiles, when ye see the multitude of people worshipping behynde and before. But saye in your hartes. O Lorde it is thou that oughtest onely to be worshipped. &c. By these wordes do our Nicodemites thinke it to be sufficient, that they which are presente at Idolatrous worshippings, do say in their hartes: O Lord it is thou that oughtest onely to be worshipped. But they shoulde more attentyuely consider, that the Prophet (if he were a Prophet which spake these woordes: which I therefore speake, bycause the little booke of Baruch is Apochriphus, The boke of Baruch is Apochriphus. and is not founde in the Hebrewe) gaue not the Iewes libertye to goe into the Temples of the Idols, and to bee there present at prophane and Idolatrous rites, and there to speake with the true God in themselues in theyr hart onely. But he speaketh of those Images which were caryed about the citye: for that was the manner among the Babilonians as the historie of Daniell testifyeth, Images amōg the Babilonians wer crried about the citye. which maketh mencion that an image set vp by Nabuchadnezar was openly caried about, with great pompe, and with Musicall instrumentes and sundry songes. At the hearing whereof, al men were commaunded to worship the Image which they beheld, which the felowes of Daniel would not do. Of those images I say, it is writtē in y e Epistle and y e Godly are faythfully admonished that they should not, as the Ethnykes did, who were behinde and before thē, reuerence or worship those images. Yea rather in detesting their wicked worshipping they should say, or at the least way in their hart: O Lord it is thou only that oughtest to be worshipped. These metings comming by chaunce through the citie could not be auoyded, the Godly therefore were to be admonished, how in suche metinges they shoulde behaue them selues.
But with great importunitye, as they be shamelesse, Why Daniell was not cast i [...] to the fornace with his fellowes. they yet go farther and demaund, how chaunce Daniell was not cast into the burning fornace with his fellowes, when as the punishment was a like appointed vnto thē, which would not worship y e image of Nabuchadnezar? Wherfore these mē fayne with thēselues, that Daniell dyd make as though he worshipped it, and for that cause the Chaldeians medled not with him. And they saye also, that they may lawfullye do that which they thinke thys holy Prophet of God dyd. They consider not that they openly fal into a false kynde of reason, which commonly is called Non causa vt causa, which is, when that which is not a cause, is put for a cause. Paralogismos. For there might be very many other causes, why Daniell was not then punyshed. [Page] Peraduenture he mette not y e image which was caryed about, or if at any time he met it, the Chaldeians marked not what he dyd. Or being founde faultye in it and marked, he was not accused, bycause the Kyng loued him excedinglye. But we must not beleue, Daniel dissimuled not the worshipping of the image. that the man of god for feare of punyshment or death, would dissemble the worshippyng of the image agaynst the lawe and pietie: whē as it is afterwarde declared how for piety sake he was caste to y e Lyons. Wherefore forasmuche as there myghte be diuerse causes that he was not deliuered to be burnt in the fyre with his fellowes, Why do these men thē snatch vnto thē only one cause, and y t such a cause, as was vnworthy and ful of reproche to such a holy man, and specially seing in the holy scriptures, there is not so much as a suspition of so detestable an acte any way geuen vs?
Of Paule who toke on hym a vowe & clensed hymself after the manner of the Iewes.They seeme to themselues to speake much to the purpose, and trimlye to defende theyr doing, when as they bryng that whiche is written in the Actes of the Apostles the xxi. Chapter where it is declared that Paul, by the Counsell of the Elders of the Churche of Ierusalem tooke vppon hym a vowe and foure other men with hym, and purifyed themselues after the manner of the Iewes. If the Apostle of God, saye they, woulde vse the ceremonyes of the lawe alreadye abolyshed, we maye also be suffred sometymes to admitte and to be present at rites and ceremonyes so long tyme receaued. The sūme of the Preaching of Paule. But y t thys may the playnlyer be vnderstande, we muste knowe, that thys was the summe of the Preachyng of Paule. We thynke that a man is iustifyed by fayth without workes. As many as are vnder the law, the same are vnder the curse. The iuste man shall lyue by hys fayth. How far legall ceremonies were graunted or condemned in the primatiue church. Wherefore the Apostle in that fyrst tyme of the Preachyng of the Gospel dyd not condemne the ceremonyes and obseruations of the lawe towarde the Hebrues, vnlesse they were retayned with that fayth and mynde as thoughe iustification shoulde come by them. And thys hys sentence hath he moste manyfestly set forth in hys Epystle to the Galathians, where he sayth: ye whiche are circumcised, haue fallen both from Christ and from grace. For Christ is made of none effecte vnto you, if ye shoulde be iustifyed by the lawe. As thoughe he woulde say. These thynges of Moyses do not alienate you from Christ, excepte ye exercyse them with thys mynde and purpose, that therby ye myght be iustified, Take awaye thys opinion and the Apostle commended good woorkes, and as for ciuile and accustomed institutions, so that they were iuste and not Idolatrous, he suffred still in their owne place, neyther dyd he let but that the legall ceremonyes myghte bee still vsed. Wherefore he writeth. In the Lord there is neyther Iewe nor Greeke, nor seruaunte, nor free man. And that circumcision also and cuttyng of the foreskynne, are nothyng, but only the obseruyng of the commaundementes of God and a newe creature. Agayne he that is circumcised let hym not desire to haue hys foreskynne which is cut of: if thou be called when thy foreskin is cut of, be not then circumcised. Let euery man abide in that wherin he is called.
Indifferent thynges may sometimes be kept & sometimes left.And that suche thynges as were ciuile and indifferent, myghte sometymes be obserued, and sometymes lefte out, as serued for edification, the same Apostle declareth by that which he speaketh of hymselfe. I am made all thynges to all men, to win very many: to the Iewes I am made a Iewe, and to those which are without a lawe, I am as without a lawe. Neyther did he no lesse confyrme his sentence by examples, than by doctrine. For when he was requyred, that he woulde as the manner was circumcise Timothe, he graunted vnto it. But when they would haue compelled hym for the ouerthrowing of the Christian libertye, to circumcise Titus likewise, he declared that he woulde not geue place not for an houre: bicause sayth he false brethren are therefore entred in among vs to searche out our libertye. He obserued therefore the Mosaicall ceremonyes, when the same myghte be done without any ill purpose and hurte of the church. [Page 52] And by this meanes be auoyded the offence of the Iewes, The ceremonies of the law are not to be cō pared with the inuentions of men. least they shoulde be alienated from the Christian religion which they had receaued. Neyther ought the Nicodemites to conferre the ceremonyes of the olde law, with the inuentions of men. For they were brought in by the woorde of God, but these were thrust into the Church by the pollicye of the deuill and of deceatfull men. They were not forbidden by and by after the Ascention of Christ into heauen, but might be so long obserued, Howe long the old ceremonies were lawful in the church. as the temple and publique wealthe of Israel remayned, and vntil the Gospell of the Sonne of God were reuealed and Preached, and vntill the Church were well augmented both of the Iewes and also of the Gentilles.
Neyther was it mete (as Augustine Godlye and learnedlye writeth vnto Ierome that those ceremonyes, Augustine. of the auncient Sinagoge should strayghtwaye without honour be reiected. But Idolatrous and superstitious thinges alwaies were, are, and shall be prohibited. Wherfore for a tyme it was lawfull to obserue them, so that by them were not sought the true ryghteousnesse. Wherfore Paule the Apostle, though thou shoulde looke vppon the actions themselues, which by the law he obserued can not be iustely reprehended, and much lesse can he be blamed if thou consider hys mynde, purpose, and (as they terme it) hys entent. But to the supporters of the Masse both these thynges wante. Fyrst they defend a thyng, which is contrary to the woorde of God, Thei which by dissimilatiō do go vnto y e masse seke not God but their own. and (as I haue declared) is wonderfully agaynst it. Moreouer in that theyr dissimulation, they studye only for themselues, namely to kepe still theyr riches, degree, place, dignitye, and estimation, when as Paul for this cause only sometimes obserued the legall ceremonies, least the Iewes should fal from Christ and that he myght the better and easiyer allure them to the Gospel.
They obiecte also, that by their dissimulation they woulde auoyde offences. Whether we should go to messes to auoid offence. For say they: If we shoulde be vtterly agaynst Masses, we shoulde be counted wicked and vngodly men, and we shoulde be a great offence to our countrey. I beleue in dede, that these men do auoyde offences, but yet offences of the world: they will not geue an offence, but it is vnto myghtie men, tirannes, and Antichristes, namely least they shoulde prouoke their weapons, anger & madnesse agaynst them. But these are not those offences which Christ taught to be auoyded, whē he sayd of y e Scribes & Pharisees. Let them alone, they are blynd & leaders of the blynde. What offences therfore are to be auoyded? What offences ar to be auoided Those namely which hinder the spreading abroade of the Gospell of the sonne of God, & which kepe backe men frō comming to the pure doctrine, & which do call backe men already beleuing from Christian religion which they haue receaued. Now let thē consider I pray you, whether by their dissimulation, they do not offende the superstious and Idolatrers? Vndoubtedly yes. For those namely the superstitious and Idolatrers saye with themselues: The vngodly by that dissimulation are more confyrmed. See those men whiche knowe the truth of the Gospell, and haue embraced it, doe come also vnto oure Masses. Surely if they were so vngodly, as they are sayd to be, these men also woulde abhorre them. Wherfore being confirmed by these mens example, they oftentymes are setled to perseuer in their purpose. The weake ones by y e dissimulation goe backe frō theyr purpose lately receaued. Yea & the weaker brethren newly conuerted vnto the Gospell, when they perceaue these learneder sorte, and as it were the ringleaders to dissemble, they dare also do the like, and they suspecte that they were deceaued: and they which ought to haue gone farther in religion, do then go backeward.
But we must (say they) beare with the weake ones, and sometymes to frame our selues vnto them. For we haue very many, whiche are not yet persuaded y t the Masse is an euill thyng: and if they shoulde perceaue that we came not vnto it, they would not heare of other chiefe poyntes of religion. Wherfore we must beare somewhat with their weaknesse, as Paule faythfully hath counsayled in his Epistle to the Romanes. We graunt that we must somewhat beare with [Page] such as be so weake, Somwhat is to be borne with the weake ones only in thinges indifferent. but with Paule we may not suffer that to be done but in things indifferent. But thinges which by themselues are euill, and by God forbidden we may for no mans fauor counsel to be done. For this is a most firme & sure rule (as I haue oftē before said) y t no man is permitted to cōmit euil things, y t therby good things might ensue. Yea we must not alwayes bear w t the weake ones in those indifferent things, The imbecillitie of the weake ones is not to be mainteyned. but til such time as they be better & perfectlier taught. But when they once vnderstand y t thing, & do for all y t still sticke, theyr weakenesse is not to be norished. Moreouer we must not so much beare with thē that by our example, we shoulde hurt other mēbers of Christ, and that many.
Whether we shoulde dissemble for the preseruation of the churches.Againe they obiect vnto vs: If we should do so, as ye would haue vs to doe, eyther we must flye, or els we shal strayght way be put to death. Which thing if it should happē, our churches should be vtterly forsakē, & there should be no more there to teach vs. Wherunto I answere, euery one of vs seeth that also. And y t more is, it is not hidden from God him self, whose cōmaundement neuerthelesse we must obey. Let vs commit the end vnto him, to whom the church belongeth: Let vs not doubt but that he wil louingly, & that in time prouide for his spouse. Christ said vnto Peter when he called him, and he taryed, and demaunded what should become of Iohn: If I will that he tary till I come, what is y t to thee? Follow thou me. We are taught therefore to follow the word of god, whether so euer it call vs, and let vs cōmit to the caller the care of other things, which seme to hinder vs. Doctrine which is sealed with flight and with death edifieth. Furthermore this is not to be ouerpassed, that that doctrine oftentimes is of more value and more edifieth which is sealed by flight and by death, then that which is set forth only by words. Let vs not be affeard though one of vs fall or flye. But let vs hope that god in his place wil rayse vp very many moe. But if we contemne and long dissemble the light of the truth, and flambe of charitie whiche is kindled in the hartes of men, will by little and little be extinguished.
They bring examples of the Prophets, of Zachary, of Iohn Baptiste, and of Mary the Virgin, Whether in the corrupted church of the Iewes it were lawful to cōmunicate with the legal rites. and of Ioseph, who in those corrupt & defiled times went vnto the cōmon seruices, and to the temple of y e Iewes. And therfore they thinke thei may also be permitted to do in like sort. But they ought to consider with themselues, that at that time there were many pernitious doctrines and euill opinions among the Scribes and Phariseyes. But yet the manner of sacrificyng was not chaunged, for the same beastes and oblations were stil offred which the law had cōmaunded: the same daies and ceremonies were obserued. Wherfore holy mē might vse thē, for as much as they had the word of god ioyned with thē. But as for the corrupt doctrines, opinions and manners of certaine priests, bishops and Scribes, were no let vnto holy men, especially seing they were pure and farre from them, and in all thinges: both iudged and also liued according to the word of god. And the corruptions of doctrine, and vices when opportunitye serued, they reprehended and sharpely reproued. This doth Augustine testifye as it is writtē in the .xxiii. Augustine. Question the fourth Chap. Recedite, and in certaine other Chapters, also which are there writtē. Let the papists do so in these dayes with vs, let them so setforth the Lordes Supper and other rites as they are appointed by the woorde of god, and we will not refuse to vse them, so that they compell vs not to the confession of wicked opinions, and preache not heresyes vnto vs, but deliuer vnto vs the pure and vncorrupte woorde of God. If they them selues thincke euill, and if they liue fylthilye, we will bee sorye for them, we will admonyshe, rebuke, and accuse them, and put them if we maye from the holye administration, when as they are paste amendemente, althoughe we abstayne not from the Sacramentes.
That vndoubtedly y e Lord ment when he said: The Scribes & Phariseis sit [Page 53] on the chaire of Moyses, and what they say, doo ye: but what they do, do ye not. It was lawful therfore for the blessed Virgin, after she was deliuered of our sauiour, to offer a paire of turtle Doues, or two yong Pigeons, The Virgin mari might after her delyueri offer the oblations required by the lawe. bicause it was so commaunded in the law. Wherfore let them shew vnto vs that their Masse by them corrupted is commaunded by the woorde of God, and not forbidden, and then wil we nothing contend with them in that matter.
Last of al, when they ar confuted in these obiections, they come to this point, to say: Although it be sinne to be present at Masse, yet it is but a light sinne, and not to be so seuerely reproued by vs. But when they thus say, why doo they not remember, that al synnes haue their weight, not by the nature of the workers, From whens [...] synnes haue their weighte. which are prohibited, but by the woord of God, and the law whereby they were forbidden? Here hence do synnes get al their heauines and waight. Whereunto Iames the Apostle seemeth to haue had a respect, when as he saith in his seconde chapter. He which obserueth the whole law, & offendeth in one of them, A place of Iames expoūded. is made guilty of them all. Neither do I speake so, as though I woulde haue all synnes by al meanes alyke, which thing Augustine in his. 29. Sinnes are not equal. Augustine. How philosophers proue y e vertues are knit together. Epistle to Ierome aptlye and manifestlye denieth. He confesseth in deede that the Philosophers went about to proue it, when they affirme that al vertues are so knyt together, that he which hath one vertue, hath al, and he which wanteth one, doth want them all. For as much as prudence is not feareful, neither vntemperate, nor yet vniust. Wherefore it hath al the other vertues with it. And againe Iustice, Strength, Temperance and the other vertues, ar not without wisdome, and therfore they are al had being knit together. These thinges (saith he) agree not with the holye scriptures. For there it is written: In manye thinges we al offende. And if we say we haue no synne, we deceaue our selues, and the truth is not in vs. Wherfore seing we synne in many things, we can not in synning haue vertue which is opposite vnto sinne which we commit. Oftē tymes he whiche slideth in one is constante in an other. And neuerthelesse it often chaunceth that hee whiche falleth in one thing, maye be constant in other thinges. Peraduenture hee whiche is angrye, or eateth or dryncketh excessiuelye, rendreth for all that to euerye man his owne, and is readye in Gods cause valiantlye to lose his life, and therfore though he be somewhat angry or vntemperate, he may for al that be called iust, liberal and strong. A similitude of the Stoikes. Moreouer the same father confuteth the similitude of the Stoikes, wherin they say, that he is as wel drowned in water, ouer whose head the water is but an hand bredth, as he which hath the water tenne or twentye cubites ouer his head. This similitude (saith hee) is not aptly brought. Wherefore wee must bring in an other more fyt to the purpose, namely a similitude of light and darknes. Vndoubtedly the more a man departeth from darkenes, and commeth nearer to the light, hee beginneth then somewhat to see. Wherefore it commeth to passe, that although he be couered wyth darkenes, yet for al that after a sort, he is somewhat partaker of the light. But he which is desirous to know more of this thing, let him reade ouer that .29. Epistle. And these thinges haue I to this end brought, to confirme that all synnes are not equal, as the Stoikes iudged.
Let vs returne therefore to the place of Iames, which I before brought. The obseruation of the law is not to be receaued with an exception. Hee which offendeth in one, is therfore made guyltye of all, bicause the obseruing of the law, is not to be receaued with an exception, so that we shoulde chuse vnto vs any certaine part of it to keepe, and lay away and neglect an other part for a tyme as we wil and lyst our selues. God hath ioyned together the commaundementes of the law. And it is not our part to seperat them as we lyst. Seing the cō mandemētes of the law are ioyned together, it is not our part to seperate thē. We must looke vpon the authority of the lawgeuer, which ought to be of force as well in one commaundement as in al. This interpretation Iames hym selfe seemeth to confirme, when he saith: He which said: Thou shalt not commit adulterye, The same saith: Thou shalt not kyl: as though he would say: God is as muche resisted in breaking one of these commaundementes as in an other. But it maye be [Page] proued also by an other reason, that he which synneth in one, is guilty of al. For if as we should be driuen by temptation, lust or occasion, whereby we shoulde be styrred to any certain transgression of the law, so if by the same or lyke violence we wer driuen into any other transgression, we shoulde as well breake the one as the other. Augustine also teacheth in the place now alledged, that the sentēce of Iames is for an other cause true, bicause sinne which is committed is vndoubtedly contrary vnto charity, wherin the obseruation of the whole lawe dependeth. In sūme, to this end haue I rehersed al these things, to declare that sinnes which are committed, are not for that cause to be diminished or extenuated, bycause they are counted light, for so much as the transgressions of the law ar not to be waighed onely by the waight and woorthines of their actions, but rather by the strength of Gods woord, and authority of the lawe of God, who hath forbidden to synne.
The ryght obseruing of y e sacramentes perteyne vnto the first table.But least in this thing I should seeme to rough, I am cōtent that they haue some consideration, euen of the acte wherin the synne is committed. And surely, as touching that, I cannot see how to sinne against the sacramentes can be iudged a light fault, when as that kinde of sinne pertaineth to the first table, wherin vndoubtedly the worshipping of God is set forth. Which worshipping alone kept whole and sound, other thinges are easely corrected. And on the contrarye, that being corrupted and defiled, all other thinges whatsoeuer we doo, become most vnthankeful vnto God. Furthermore they thinke that the fault, whereof we entreate, maye therefore be extenuated, bicause they affirme that they slide not of minde and purpose, but onely by constraint. Whom if thou shouldest demaund, what maner of compulsory that is which they pretende? They cannot vndoubtedly geue any other answer, but bicause they would not incur the losse of their goodes, Aristotell. Shipmen suffer wise wyth their willes, & not bi cōstraint their fame and their lyfe. But these thinges make not but that the action is voluntarye. For as Aristotle hath taught in his Ethikes, when as shipmen in daunger do hurle their goods in to the sea, to auoyde the daunger of shipwracke, they are said commonly to be compelled, when as in dede they willingly throw them in. For they take deliberation, and with knowledge they determine rather to lose their goodes than their life. And as they in that worke do wisely, so do our men for the loue of lyfe and body, & couetousnes of the goodes of this world, vnwisely choose the losse of eternall life, when as with a wycked dissimulation they go vnto detestable Masses. Wherefore the excuse which they bring, cannot be receaued as iust. The Corrinthians also mought by this reason when they were reproued of Paule, haue defended them selues. If wee go vnto the feastes dedicated to idols, we go not thether of our own affection, as though we would allow such sacrifices, but by iust reasons we are compelled to go thether: For if we should flye from such feastes, we should be coūted seditious, euyl Citizens and without humanity: we should lose pleasant amities, and most profitable defences, and also peraduenture our riches and country. If thei had said these thinges to Paule, would he haue heard them? No trulye. For he was not ignoraunt, but that they might haue said so, and yet for al that (as it is wrytten in his Epistle) he vehementlye and most sharpelye reproued them. Aaron also might according to these mens opinion iustly and rightly haue defended himself in that he made a Calfe vnto the Israelites. For he mought haue said, I dyd it not from the hart, but I was compelled so to do: bicause the people, except I had obeyed them, would haue stoned me. In dede so be answered: but Moyses which knew right well that that necessitye or compulsion was not iust, but came of a naughty condition or ground, which neither Iustice woulde suffer to be receaued, Masse is a certain to [...]ē wherby the [...]ythful at [...] [...]en frō y e superstitious nor God would by any meanes admyt, therfore dyd Moyses I say sharpely reproue him.
They ought also to be most assured of this, that the Masse is a pledge, an earnest peny, a token and signe, whereby Papistes knowe theirs from others. For [Page 54] whether a man geue almes or no: whether he pray or not pray, whether he lyue chastly or vnpurely, and such like things they neglect, they onely haue a regarde to this, whither he come to Masse: which if they perceaue that he doo, by and by they count him for one of their own. And againe to detest the Masse, Masse is a certaine profession of popery. and not to heare it, they take it for a most certaine signe of falling awaye from Antichrist. Wherfore we may commonly cal Masse a publike profession of Popery. Wyth what colour therefore, or with what countenaunce can they extenuate so great a crime? They ar grieuous euils (say they) which hang ouer vs: and we put our selues in most great daungers, vnlesse we communicate with the Papists in hearing of Masses, I confesse that: but let them remember that God also foresaw al these thinges, and declared that they should come to passe, who for al that wyll not suffer, that his lawes shoulde bee chaunged. Wherefore as touching these chaunces, let vs cast our care vpon hym which hath cōmaunded these thinges, & is not ignoraunt that these euils are ioyned with the obseruing of his cōmaundementes. Persecutions abrogate not y e lawes of God. We maye not part our selues betwene God & the deuil. The nature therfore and strength of troubles and daungers is not such, to be able to abrogate the lawes of God. They abide, yea and for euer shal abide, and therefore let vs not desire to haue them broken by our daungers or miseries. And men are healthfully and rightlye counselled, not to part them selues betwene God and the deuil, to deliuer vnto God their affection or hart, and graunt vnto the deuil their body and outward partes.
For so much as by the partes of the distinction before put, Of princes and maiestrats how they oughte to behaue them selues wyth infydels. A distinctiō of powers. we haue sufficientlye spoken of priuate men as touching their dwelling together with Infidels, now resteth to declare of Princes or Magistrates. And they are either principal, as they which depende of no other, neither haue anye power aboue them, or els they are inferiour powers, which lawfully as of right are subiect vnto Superiours, either bicause they are their Deputies or Ministers, that is, Officiales or Vicars, as they are commonly called. Let vs fyrst therfore speake of suche as be absolute and mere higher powers, asking whether they in their dominiōs may suffer the faithful to be conuersant with Infidels? I thinke it be lawful, It is lawfull for princes to suffer y e couersation of y e faythfull with the vnfaythfull with certayne cautions. so that ther be certain conditions or cautions put. For when the Romane Empire receiued the Christian religion, euery one which wer vnder that Empire beleued not by and by in Christ, who wer for al that suffred both to lyue, and also peaceably to dwel there. Yea in the tyme of Ambrosius, Symmachus who was wythout Christ, was not ashamed to require of the Emperours that the rites of the Ethnikes might be restored, which he obtained not. And nowe when as kyngdomes and dominions haue admitted the preaching of the Gospell, ther are many stil suffered, which are wonderfully affected towarde the Pope and his wyckednes. Which cannot without great perturbation of things be seperated from them which are of the Gospel. Wherfore Princes are compelled to suffer suche conuersations, neither is that to be ascribed a fault in them, The first caution. so that they departe not from these iust cautions. The first of those cautions is, that they constrayne the faithful to no vngodly woorshippinges: for then should they not execute the offices of the Ministers of God, but rather of the deuil and of Antichrist, by good woorkes they shoulde not be a terrour vnto the wicked, neither shoulde they aduaunce Caution. 2 the woord of God, but the tyranny of Sathan. Secondlye, let them beware, that they permit not vnto the Infidels wicked rites, and vngodly ceremonies in their dominions. Of this crime was Solomon guilty, not that he compelled the Iewes to worship Idoles, but for bicause to his wyues and Concubines which wer straungers, he permitted temples in Iewry, wherin they might worship Astartes and Chamos and other straunge Gods. Salomon was for his sinne punished by the law of the lyke called Lex talionis. But that God was grieuously angry with him, the holy historye declareth. He was iustlye punished by the law of the like. That as he had deuided the holy worshipping in graunting part of it to God, and part vnto Idoles: so was his kingdome deuided, and part of it was graunted to his sonne, and part was geuen vnto Ieroboam the Sonne [Page] of Nebath. But his fault spred abroad into his posterity. For Achas, Manasses, and many other vngodly kinges had wicked and detestable woorshippinges at Ierusalem. Wherfore they were by the Prophetes grieuouslye and sharpelye reproued. The magistrat ought to reuenge idolatrye. And vndoubtedly a Magistrate cannot but be blamed, when he nourisheth idolatry, when as he beareth the sword to reuenge wicked actes. Wherefore he must either thinke that idolatry is no wicked acte, or that it is by the Magistrate and other to be aduenged. Augustine. Augustine often times excellentlye well entreateth of this place of Dauid: Be wise now therfore O ye Kinges, be learned ye that are Iudges of the earth, serue the Lorde in feare. &c. He sayth also, it is mete that kinges serue the Lorde. Neither entreated Dauid of them, in that respect that they are men: for so are they wyth other bounde to obserue common lawes. Howe and in what sort Kinges ought to serue God. Wherfore for so much as they are kinges, they are admonished, namely to vse the power and sword geuen them by God, to defend the verity of the tru faith, and to put downe the vngodly, that the catholike truth and churche of the sonne of God, as far as their dominions extend be not assaulted. Wherefore it is not lawful for Princes to graunt vnto the vngodly vnpure worshippinges, yea it is their part, chiefely to vrge sound doctrine, ceremonies and rites, which agree with the woord of God.
We maye not vrge to keepe the externall rites alyke euery where.And yet for al that (to speake a woord or two of that by the waye) I doo not thinke that we should to much contend, that rites and ceremonies may be al alike, and obserued euery where, after one maner. But this is to be prouided for, that they be not against the word of God, yea rather let them drawe vnto it as much as may be, and as farre as they are able, let them set forth edification, and a decent order. For otherwise it skilleth not whether we receauethe sacrament of the Lordes Supper, standing, or sitting, or kneeling, so that the institution of the Lorde be kept, and occasion of superstition be cut of. Neither is it any matter when the brethren communicate, Diuersity of ceremonies is profitable. whither some one place of the holye scriptures be red, or Psalmes and thankesgeuings be song of the people. Yea I think that this variety in rites much profiteth to bring in a true opiniō of ceremonies, namely that al men may vnderstande, that those ceremonies which are not set forth in the holy scriptures, Augustine. are not necessary vnto saluation, but may be chaunged for edification sake as time shall serue. And Augustine to Ianuarius and to Cassulanus was also of this opinion.
Caution. 3 The thirde condition or caution that is to be added, is that Princes take heede that those infidels whom they suffer in their dominions, be continuallye with diligence instructed. And not (as the maner commonlye is) neglect them in those thinges which pertaine vnto godlines: otherwise the glory of God cannot be looked for, by their suffering, if without teaching they may be suffered continually Caution. 4 to abide in their vngodly opinion. For in processe of time they becom nothing the better, but farre worse then they were before. Moreouer they must beware that by that mutual conuersation they infect not the people committed to Caution. 5 their charge with the scab of infidelity and errours. They must be cōpelled at the last to the soūde and pure outward worshippinges of God. And finallye, when they are wel instructed and taught, they must compel them to sound and pure woorshyppings, which are prescribed by the holy scriptures. For the Magistrate maye not suffer his Citizens to liue without exercises of godlines. For the ende of ciuyll rule, is that the Citizens should lyue both vertuously & happely. And who seeth not but that godlines & the worshipping of God is the chiefe of all vertues?
Whether a prince ought at the length to compell his subiectes to the right vse of the sacramentes.But peraduenture some wyll say: If a Prince shoulde compell those vnto the right vse of the sacramentes, which are not yet persuaded of the truth, he should driue them hedlong into synne: so farre is it of from setting forwarde their saluation. For there they should do against their conscience: and what so euer they so do (euen as the Apostle witnesseth) is synne. Wherefore I thyncke it good to make a distinction betwene that whiche is of or by it selfe, and that which is at [Page 55] aduenture and by hap, or (as they are wont to speake in Schooles) that whiche commeth per accidens, that is by chaunce. The Magistrate in this thing which we haue now in hande, setteth foorth to his subiectes that thing which is of it selfe right, good and iust, but in that, synne therby commeth that happeneth nothing at al by his default, but rather by those mens incredulitye or misbeliefe, whereof he is not to be accused, when as he hath diligentlye laboured to haue his Citizens wel instructed. Neither the Papistes, which at this daye are suffered of Christian Magistrates are ignoraunt that wee oughte to haue in vse the Sacramentes instituted by the Lord. Wherfore they cannot iustlye complaine of their Magistrates, if they wil haue them vprightlye, and in due order ministred vnto them.
Moreouer they which obiect these thinges vnto vs, must diligently marke this, that by the same waye wee maye cauill againste God. For hee hath sette foorth vnto menne his lawe whiche is most perfecte to bee kept of them. Shall we say vnto him, we are weake and of a corrupt and vitious nature, neither can we perfourme thy commaundementes, as thou commaundest: wherefore whether we do against that which thou hast commaunded, or whether we endeuour our selues to perfourme that which thou hast bydden, wee shall euer synne, bycause we shall fainte, neither can we obey as we should doo. Wherefore what soeuer we do we shall not auoide synne?
If anye manne brawlinglye shoulde speake these thinges againste God, myghte not hee by good ryghte aunswere? They bee iust and ryght which I haue sette foorth vnto you to bee obserued. But in that ye are feable and weake, it oughte not to bee counted a fault in mee. For I haue excellentlye holpen your weakenes, whyche for your sakes haue geuen my Sonne vnto the death. If ye shall beleue onelye in hym, what so euer ye shall not accomplish in perfourming my preceptes, it shal not be imputed to you to euerlasting death.
So also may a good Prince aunswer: I require of you those thinges whych are written in the woord of God, and which are decent and do edefye. Wherefore if your opinion or conscience bee againste it, that is not to bee ascribed vnto me, which haue diligently laboured that ye might not be ignorant of the truth and miserably perish. For I haue diligently sene vnto, that ye should be taught and instructed in the truth, & so wyll I styl go forward in exhorting, admonishing and commaunding you: but reade ye the holy Scriptures, heare your Teachers, and pray vnto God to open the eyes of your mynde. These thinges if the Prince shall say vnto those men which doo so cauil against him, I do not see by what right, or by what meanes he can be reprehended.
And I thynke thys is not to be omitted that Augustine sayde, Augustine chā ged his sētence for compellinge of heretikes. that hee was once of that opinion, that nothing should be done by violence against heretiks, but onely they should be instructed by admonitions and doctrine. But hee confesseth that hee was admonished by certayne Byshoppes of more experience, whych shewed hym of certayne Cities, whyche before were in a manner vtterlye destroyed by the errour of the Donatistes, and were by violence and lawes of the Emperours compelled to come vnto the Catholyque Churche, whyche Cities beyng thus at the length syncerely couerted vnto the truthe, rendered thankes vnto GOD, neyther woulde they, if by anye meanes they mought haue retourned agayne to so pernicious opinions. Wherefore a godly Prince shall nothyng hurt suche men, yea he shall proffyt them muche, if after he haue instructed them, he compell them to receaue the Sacramentes duelye, as they be delyuered by the woorde of God.
But this is to bee vnderstande as touching his owne Citizens, hys natiue [Page] countrey men and Denizens, whiche enioye the ryght of the Citye or prouince. Otherwyse I do not thinke that he ought to vse any violence towarde straungers that passe to and fro, and whiche doo occupye the trade of Marchaundize, either inwarde or outwarde. Althoughe also as touching those men, I thynke that he must diligently beware that they infect not the people with wycked doctrine. An example of the Israelites which is to be obserued. Wherefore I suppose that the steppes of the Israelites are to be followed, who made none a Iewe or a Proselite, neyther endewed any with the right of their people, except first he circumcised hymselfe, receaued the lawe of Moyses, and communicated with their sacrifices. And seing that that was so diligently obserued of them, there is no cause, why our Princes ought not to doo the lyke, namely to suffer none to be of their City, or as one of them, or a straū ger to be made free, but first they shoulde constrayne hym to seruices and ceremonies agreing with the woord of God.
What is to be sayd of magistrates which are subiect to a superior power A distinction.But now let vs go on and speake of those Magistrates or Lordts whyche are subiect to a superiour power. These seeme after thys manner to be deuided, some to haue iurisdiction eyther proper, or by heritage, or els committed vnto them by Emperours, Kynges, and publique wealthes. Or els they are wythout iurisdiction and are counted noble onely for nobilitye of bloude, or for ryches heaped together.
And assuredly for so much as those latter sortes differ nothing almost from priuate menne, in myne opinion wee muste so iudge of them, as before I haue taught of priuate men. But the first which are Rulers of Prouinces, Cities and places, eyther by inheritaunce, or by office committed vnto them, they ought not otherwyse to doo in the thyng whereof we now entreate, than wee haue before prescribed for those which are mere and full Magistrates. For by the commaundement of the superiour Princes, it is not lawfull for them to compell the Subiectes whom they gouerne, vnto vngodly religion, neyther to permyt the same to those Infidels whych inhabite in their dominions. But if thou wilt say, we must obey the hygher power: I graunt that, but vsque ad aras, that is, An answeare of the Lacedemonians. as farre as religion suffereth. When they whych ouercame the Lacedemonians commaunded suche thynges as were against their lawes and institutions, they sayde: We woulde rather dye, yea, than ye shoulde commaunde vs thinges harder than death. Wherefore suche kynde of Magistrates must in all other thynges be subiect to the superiour power: but in those thynges whyche are agaynste the woorde of God, they muste not in anye sorte followe theyr affection.
An example of y e Machabites.The Machabites when the Iewes then lyued vnder the Macedonians, Antiochus, Demetrius, and Alexander, who wythdrewe the Iewes from the true woorshypping of God, would not be obedient vnto them. And when that that house of priesthoode was chiefest next to the kynges house, least the syncere and auncient religion should be destroyed, it fell from these kynges.
The bookes of the Machabits conteyne not so do argumēts wherby the doctrin of the faithful cā be prouedNeyther in alledging these thynges count I not the bookes of the Machabites to be suche, from whence I woulde iudge any strong argumentes of doctrine maye be taken, but that I counte that storye true, as a storye whyche is not onelye contayned in theese bookes, but also hathe beene wrytten of other authours.
An example of Ezechias.I wyll adde also the acte of Ezechias the kyng, who as it is wrytten in the seconde booke of Kynges the .xviii. Chapter, was bounde to the kyng of the Assirians. For as it is mencioned in the same booke the .xvi. chapter, Achas had yelded hym selfe vnto the kyng of the Assirians, to whom hee dydde not onelye paye tribute, but to please him with all, he chaunged the woorshyppyng of the true God. For he goyng to Damascus to meete the kyng, commaunded an [Page 56] aultar to bee made at Ierusalem, accordyng to the example whiche hee had there seene, and followed the religion and woorshyppynge of the Sirians. But Ezechias his Sonne beyng verye godlye, perceauing that those thinges which his Father had done were against the woord of God, vtterly fel from the king of the Assirians, who then ruled ouer him as a superiour power. But first he assayed to pacifye him with giftes and money: but when he saw that woulde take no place, We must beware as muche as is possible of sedicions. he defended both his people and him selfe against him with al his power. We must take heede neuerthelesse that in those thinges wee beware of seditions, as much as may be, and we must most diligentlye prouide, that suche Magistrates vnder pretence of religion seeke not their own.
These thinges if they obserue, and resist their superiour Magistrates, onely for godlynesse sake, let them not suspect, that they commit anye vniust thyng. Moreouer the holy Scriptures commaunde, that euery soule shoulde bee subiect to the higher powers. But that must be vnderstande as muche as shall be lawfull by the woord of God. For in the same scriptures it is written: That a Magistrate is a feare not to good woorkers, but to euyll. Wherefore if the inferiours doo not set forward euell workes but good, they do not then resiste theyr powers. Wilt thou not feare the power, sayth the apostle? do good and for that thou shalt be praysed. Wherfore if they defend godlynes, they shall deserue rather prayse than blame. But if thou do euyll, feare the power: for he beareth not the sweard in vayne: for he is the minister of God, and a reuenger to anger against him which doth euyll. Al these sentences do confirme the courages of the inferiour powers, that they should be nothing afearde of the superiour power, when they in defending of religion obey it not.
But thou wilt say: by what lawe doo inferiour Princes resist either the Emperour or Kynges, or elles publique wealthes, when as they defend the syncere religion and true faith? I aunswer by the law of the Emperour, or by the lawe of the King, or by the law of the publique wealth. For they are chosen of Emperours, Kinges, and publique wealthes, as helpers to rule, whereby Iustice may more and more florishe. And therfore were they ordeyned according to the office committed vnto them, rightly, iustly, and godly to gouerne the publyke wealthe. Wherefore they doo according to their duty, when in cause of religion they resist the higher power. Neither can that superiour power iustly complain, if in that case the inferiour power fal from it.
The Emperour testifieth in the Code, Iustinian. that his mynde is not that any of hys decrees shoulde take place in iudgementes agaynste right, but that they ought to bee made voyde and of no force, if that peraduenture they bee knowen to declyne from Iustice. Wherefore Traian is not vnworthily commended, A goodly sentēce of Traian. whych when he delyuered the sweard and the gyrdle vnto the Lieuetenant of the Pretorshyppe, sayd: If I rule iustlye, vse it on my syde: but if I rule vniustlye, vse it agaynst me.
Gregory a Byshoppe of Rome can not bee excused, An errour of Gregory Bishop of Rome. whyche knowing that the lawe made by Mauritius was vniust (for he had decreed that no manne beyng occupyed wyth busynes of the publique wealthe, or appoynted for warrefare should be made a Clarke or a Monke) wrote in deede to the Emperour, that when hee had seene hys lawe, he was wonderfullye affrayde, and therefore desyred hym, eyther to remytte somewhat of the rigour thereof, or els vtterlye to alter it. Howe beit he added, that he woulde (nowe that hee hadde done hys dutye in admonishing hym) bycause of that obedience and seruice whych he oughte vnto hym) publyshe the lawe at Rome as he was commaunded. Vndoubtedlye thys act of Gregory cannot but be reproued, bycause he ought not to haue obeied the superiour power in that thing, whych he iudged to be vniuste or wycked. [Page] When we do after this sorte write of these thinges, we do nothing at all open a way vnto seditions, but onely this is our care, that those things which belōg to God may be geuen, yea rather restored vnto God, and those thinges whyche pertaine vnto Caesar, may be rendred to Caesar. If the hygher power woulde require, either goodes or thinges of this worlde, for the vse of the publike wealth, my counsel is that they should be geuen, but not when those thinges are required to bee subuerted and destroyed, whiche belong to the woorshipping of God. And vndoubtedly by this meanes we maye easelye excuse iust Naboth, Naboth is excused. whyche woulde not graunt vnto his King his vyneyarde. For hee dyd not that of couetousnes or of pride, but bycause he sawe thereby the lawe of God to be violated, whereby it was ordayned, that landes and possessions among the people of Israel should remaine distributed by iust diuision. This law of god the king went about to violate, and to the performaunce thereof hee sought the consent of that man, which he with a good conscience could not performe.
Whether y e inferior powers ought in those cases to forsake their offices.Some thinke that when superiour powers go aboute to driue the inferiour powers to wicked thinges, it were good and meete, that they whiche exercise the inferiour office should resigne and departe from their office. But I thynke not so, for this were to fall from his vocation, which ought not to be done, especially, when as we see that we must geue ouer to the vngodly, which eyther resyst or oppresse the kingdome of God. I iudge therfore that they ought to continew, vntyl they be by force cast out by the superiour powers, that they maye in keeping their office valiauntly defend the glory of God. But (alas) we see verye manye Dukes, Earles and Princes which if the Kyng or Emperour woulde take away frō thē their dominions, they would not leaue a stone vnmoued, to defend & keepe their own. There would they with al their force resist the higher powers for this cause and vnder this title, bicause they would vniustly depriue them of their thinges. But when the kingdome of god, godlines, and pure religion are assayled of them, and these inferiour powers are required as Ministers to be at hand, and to helpe to ouerthrowe them, they dare not speake or resistany thing at all. Wherfore wee can thinke nothing els, but that they haue lytle regarde of the kingdome of Christ, and of true godlynes.
Answears to y e argumētes put in y e beginning. To the first. Christ did well in being conuersant with the vngodly.Now resteth to answer to those argumentes, which were put foorth in the beginning by which seemed to be proued, that conuersation together wyth Infidels is lawfull. Christ was alledged who was conuersaunt with Phariseys, Synners, and Publicanes. But he was not onely strong and wyse, but also the chiefe of all wyse and strong men, and he could so profit the euyll, that the malice of others could nothing at al hurt him. Wherefore they which are constant and learned, may lawfully (as we haue taught) be conuersaunt with Infidels, to the end therby to profyt them to saluation.
Secondly was brought foorth a place of Paule, who prohibited, that a faythfull husband or wyfe should not departe from an Infidell, To the second. How farre the vnfaythfull mā or wyfe oughte to bee borne with all. so that he or she were content to dwell together. We declared also that natural and ciuyl necessities, especially suche as are instituted of god should be obserued. And yet for all that, that which is there sayde by the Apostle, must not be vnderstand so symply as it is pretended: bycause if an vnfaythfull housband should entise hys wyfe beyng a Christian vnto vngodlynes, or woulde not cease to blaspheme Christ, suche a matrimonye ought not to continue.
To the third. Why Paul cō maūded not the infidelles but euyll bretheren to be auoyded.Thirdly there was declared a sentence of the same Apostle to the Corrinthians, which is that all couetous persons, euyll speakers, drunkardes, and whoremongers are not to be auoyded, for otherwyse wee must go out of the worlde, but he sayd that those onely were to be eschewed which were counted brethren. As touching this purpose of Paule, we must diligently marke, fyrst that he sawe ryght well, that the necessities of lyfe could not suffer, that all those which beleued [Page 57] not at that time in Christ, shoulde be auoyded: for the greatest parte of men at the beginning were farre from Christ, neyther coulde the infideles haue bene made better, if our men had seperated themselues altogether from them.
But by the sentence of Paule the corrupte brethren were driuen both to griefe and shame, whilest they sawe that for their sinnes they were eschewed of those, to whom before they had bene familiar and deere, and were ioyned vnto them as members of one body. Furthermore when this discipline floryshed, the Churche was not euill spoken of for the sinnes of the brethren, which woulde otherwyse haue happened, if they had wincked at wicked actes. To the fourth. Therefore these sentences are nothing agaynst those thinges, which we before determined. And much lesse that which was alledged of Abraham how he iourneyed as a straunger among Ethnikes and Idolatrers. The peregrination of Abrahā among y t Ethnikes is defended. Fyrst bicause he did it by the calling of God. Secondly bicause he was of so greate constancye and wisedome that he coulde be conuersaunte with the vngodly withoute any hurte to hymselfe, and to theyr greate profite. For whether so euer he went, he caried aboute with him the name of God and the worshipping of him. To the fyfth. Of Loth. We may aunswere the same also of Loth: If he went vnto the fyue cities with a good mynde, namely to teache the Sodomites godlinesse and the right waye. But if he wente thither being moued onely with the commoditie of the place, he dyd not well. And assuredly his going thyther had but ill successe. For he was ledde awaye captyue, and Abraham was fayne to redeeme hym. And when afterwarde those places were by the power of God burnte, he was compelled whether he would or no, to remoue from thence. I neede not to speake muche at thys presente of Naaman the Sirian, for I haue before entreated inoughe of hym. Moreouer I thinke it be manifeste inough what was the cause, why some of them that were healed by Christe were sente backe to theyr owne, namelye to Preache and faythfully to declare vnto them, what had happened vnto themselues.
Now resteth somewhat to speake peculiarly of Iewes and Heretikes. Of the Iewes. For these kynde of men are suffred almost in all cities, prouinces and kyngdomes to dwel together with Christians. Why the Iewes should be suffred. Augustine. Augustine among other bringeth forth certayne reasons. He in his .iiii. and .xviii. bookes de ciuitate Dei, and also vppon the .lviii. Psalme, and in other places, writeth, that they ought therefore to be suffred, bicause they before other kynde of men had the promise of saluation, neither are they paste all hope, when as daylye some of them, although but a fewe, retourne vnto Christ. Blindnesse (sayeth Paule to the Romanes) fell partly on Israel: as though he woulde say, not on al. Moreouer the same Apostle addeth, when the fulnesse of the Gentiles is entred, then all Israell shall be saued. And least thou shouldest peraduenture thinke, that these wordes are to bee vnderstand allegorically, Paule writeth them as a miserye, and to confyrme his sentence he bryngeth the Prophecye of Esay the Prophet: namely that iniquitie shal be then taken away from Iacob.
Furthermore they are now called enemyes vnto God, for our sakes: but called frends, bycause of their fathers. The same Augustine in hys Questions vppon the Gospell, the second boke and xxxiii. Question (if that these bookes be of Augustine his writing) when he interpreteth the parable of the prodigal sonne, he sayeth that that sonne signifyeth the Gentiles. For it is written, that he departed into a farre countrey, bycause the Ethnikes were so farre departed from God, that they openly worshipped Idoles, and with open profession.
But the elder sonne, by whome was shadowed the people of the Hebrewes, went not so farre. And although he were not in hys Fathers house, whiche is the Churche, he dwelled for all that in the fielde. For the Iewes are exercised in the holy Scriptures whiche they doe not ryghtlye vnderstande, nor yet [Page] with that spirituall sense wherein the Churche of Christe taketh them, but in an earthlye and carnall sense. Wherefore they are not vnaptelye sayde to bee in the fielde. Thys Elder sonne entreth not at the begynnyng into the house of hys Father, but in the latter dayes he shall also bee called and come.
The same Father also bringeth for thys sentence that which is written in the 58. Psalme, as he readeth it, Do not kil them least they forget thy law, but in thy power disperse them. The Sonne of God (sayth he) prayeth vnto the father, that that nation might not be destroyed, but might wander euery where throughout the worlde.
Other prouinces when they were ouercome of the Romanes, followed the lawes and rites of the Romanes, The Iewes receaued not the lawes and customes of the Romanes. so that at the length they were made Romanes: but the Iewes, although they were ouercome by the Romanes yet woulde they neuer followe their lawes, rites and ceremonies, they yet obserue theyr owne as muche as they maye, and being dispersed they wander abroade. Neither haue they vtterly forgotten the lawe of GOD: not that they Godlye applye themselues to obserue it, but only reade it, and kepe certayne signes and institutions wherby they are discerned from other Nations. Moreouer it semeth that God hath put a signe vppon them as he dyd vppon Caine, bycause he had killed his brother Abell, namely that euery man shoulde not kill them.
The dispersing of the Iewes is profitable to Christians.Neyther is thys theyr dispersion through oute the worlde vnprofitable to the Christians, bycause (as it is written to the Romanes) they are shewed vnto vs as broken bowes. And for so much as we were grafted in their place, when as we 1 see that they were so miserably cut of, we acknowledge the grace of god toward vs, and by beholding of them we are taught to take heede that we also bee not 2 likewyse cut of for infidelitie sake, for which self cause they are broken of. There is also an other commoditie, whiche commeth vnto vs by theyr dispersing, bycause our bookes are saued by them, I meane the holy Byble, whiche they euery where carye aboute with them and reade: And althoughe, bycause they are blynded, Against those whiche burne the Bibles in Hebrewe they beleue not, yet they confesse that those writynges are moste true. They are in harte deadly enemyes agaynst vs, but by these bookes which they haue and reuerence, they are a testimonye to our religion. Wherefore I can not inough meruaile at those, whiche doe so much hate the Iewes tongue, and Bibles in Hebrewe, Augustine. that they desire to haue them destroyed and burnte, when as Augustine de doctrina Christiana thinketh that if we chaunce somtymes to doubt of the Greke or Latin translation, we must fly vnto the truth of the Hebrue, And Ierome in many places writeth the same.
Whether the Hebrues haue corrupted the bokes of holy scriptures. Ierome.But they say that the holy bookes were vitiated and corrupted, by the Hebrues. To thys Ierome vpon Esaye the .vi. Chapter towarde the ende aunswereth thus. Eyther they dyd thys before the comming of Christ and Preachyng of the Apostles, or els afterwarde. If a man will saye that it was done of them before, then seing Christ and his Apostles reprehended the moste greuous wicked actes of the Iewes. I maruaile why they would speake nothing of that sacrilege, and so detestable a wicked acte. Vndoubtedly they woulde haue reproued them for viciating and corrupting the Scriptures. But if thou wilt contend y t there were afterward faultes brought in by them, then will I say y t they ought chiefly to haue corrupted those places which do testifye of Christ and his religiō, and which were alledged by the Lord himself, and of the Apostles in the newe Testament. But they remaine vncorrupt, and the same sentence remaineth stil in the Hebrue Bibles which they put. For they wer not so carefull for y e words. Wherfore it is not likely that they as touching other places haue corrupted the holy scriptures. Yea if a man diligently reade ouer their bookes, he shall finde in [Page 58] them a great many more testimonyes and those more plaine and manifest, than our common traslatiō hath. Do not they read in the second Psalme: Kysse ye the sonne, which ours haue translated, Take ye hold of discipline? Which woordes vndoubtedly are referred vnto Christ. But I meane not at this present to bring all such testimonies. It is sufficient if with Ierome I proue that y e bokes of holy Scriptures are not corrupted by the Hebrues, neither assuredly if they woulde they should haue missed of their purpose. For there are found many most auncient & handwritten bookes, which haue bene of a long time most diligently kept by Christians, which came neuer in their hands to corrupt.
But let vs retourne to treate of that commoditye which Augustine hath declared. 3 There are very many (sayeth he) that would peraduenture thinke, that those things, which we declare of the auncient people, and of the Prophets are vayne and fayned of vs, vnlesse they saw y e Iewes yet remaining on liue, The Hebrues & their bokes ar most plaine witnesses of our fayth. which with their bookes maintaine our sentence euē against their will. Wherfore although the Hebrues be blinded in hart, & are against vs as much as they maye, yet are they with their bokes most plaine witnesses of our fayth. And vndoubtedly of al testimonies, y t testimony is most of value, God wil haue a church euen by the testimonies of his aduersaryes. which is witnessed by our enemies. And god hath wonderfully prouided for this kinde of testimonies for his church, For we haue not only the bokes of the Hebrewes witnessing with vs, but also Verses of the Sibillas, which were borne in sundry countreyes. Neither is it to be supposed that our elders fayned those Verses of themselues. Verses of the Sibillas. For in the time of Lactantius, Eusebius of Cesaria, & Augustine, which alledged those Verses, the bokes of the Sibillas were rife in euery mans hand. Wherfore if our elders should haue adioyned vnto them any counterfayte Verses, the Ethnykes which were then many in number, and were full of eloquence, and deadly enemies to our religion, would haue reproued them as vaine and liars. What then remaineth, but that god would wonderfully defend his church euen by the testimonies of our aduersaries? Therfore y e Iewes are now suffred among Christians, partly for the promise sake, which they haue that saluation should be geuē to their kinred: partly bicause of the commodities, which I haue now rehearsed out of Augustine. Wherfore they are not only suffred but also thei haue Sinagoges, wherin they openly read the bokes of the holy scriptures, and also cal vpon the god of their fathers. In which thing neuerthelesse the diligence of y e Magistrates and bishops is much to be required, who ought to prouide that they do there no other thing, and by al meanes to beware that in their commō prayers, exhortations, and Sermons, they curse not nor blaspheme Christ our God. If the Magistrates and bishops haue not a care ouer these things, they can not but be most iustly accused. The Turkes ought not to haue any Sinagoges graūted them. But it is not lawful to graunt vnto the Turkes any holy assemblies for that they haue not a peculiar promise of their saluation, neither would they there read either the old Testament or the newe, but only their most detestable boke called Alcoran.
Furthermore the Iewes muste be forbidden that they exercise not false bargayning and Vsurye among Christians, The Iewes must be prohibited from false bargaining and vsurie. therby to vexe and afflict the poore Christians before our face, which can not be done but with great horror. But our princes exacte of them a very great tribute and receaue at their handes a great pray by their handes by vsury and false bargayning. So farre are they of from prohibityng them from these euill artes. Furthermore (which is more hurtfull) they prouyde not to haue them taughte, when as they oughte to compell them, to come often to the holy Sermons of the Christians: Princes ought to care that the Iewes may be taught otherwise, whilest they are so neglected and vnloked vnto, they waxe euery day worse and worse, and more stubborne. So that either very little fruite or ells almoste none at al, can now be looked for by theyr dwelling among Christians.
It is also diligently to be sene vnto, that they corrupte not our men, in seducing [Page] them to their Iewishe religion. The heresie of the Marranes. By reason this thing hath bene neglected, the heresie of the Marranes hath much increased and that chiefly in Spaine. Moreouer it is mete, that they may by some apparail or certain signe be knowen from Christians, least a man vnawares should be as familiarly conuersaunt with thē as with Christians. And as touching this kinde of infidelles these thynges are sufficiente.
What heresye is.Now must we speake of heretikes. The woorde [...], is deriued of thys verbe [...], which is to electe or choose, For those kinde of men chose vnto thē selues some certaine opinions, which are against the holy Scriptures, and doe stubbornly defend the same. The causes of heresye. And the causes of this their choyse, for the most part are either bicause they are ignoraunt of the holy Scriptures, or els if they know them they dispise them, and being driuen by some couetousnesse they applye thē selues to the inuention of some errors. Wherfore Augustine in his booke de vtilitate credendi writeth. Augustine. An heretike is he which for the loue of gayne or rule, eyther bringeth vp, or els followeth new opinions. The definition therfore of heresie is a choyse and stubborne defending of opinions, The definition of heresye. which are against the holy Scriptures, either by reason of ignorance or els contempt of them, to the end the easlier to obtaine their own pleasures and cōmodities. The choyse and stubburne defending is in this definition in stead of the forme. But the opinions disagreing with the holy scriptures serue for the matter. Pride and couetousnesse make heresie. And the obteining of dignities, gayne and pleasures are appoynted as endes of thys so great a mischiefe. By this definition it is manifeste inough (as I thynke) who be heretikes, I minde not at this presente to speake of the kindes & sortes of heresies. I shall as I trust haue better occasiō, & a place more mete to speake therof. This wil I say briefly, as touching this questiō, we must haue none otherwise to do with heretikes, than with infidels and Iewes. And I suppose that these things are sufficient as touching this question, whiche hath bene hitherto discussed, I woulde God so perfectly, as with many woordes. Wherfore I will returne vnto the historye.
The second Chapiter.
1 ANd the Angel of the Lord ascended from Gilgal to Bochim and sayd: I made you to go out of Egipte, and haue brought you vnto the Lande whiche I sware vnto your Fathers: And I sayde, I wil not breake mine appoyntmente that I made with you.
TWo things haue hitherto bene set forth vnto vs. Fyrst the noble victories which the Israelits obteined as long as they obeyed the word of God. Secondly the transgression, wherby contrarye to y e commaundementes of God, they both saued and also made tributaries vnto themselues those nations, whom they ought vtterly to haue destroyed. But nowe is set forth vnto vs, how God of his goodnesse by hys Legate reprehended the Israelites for the wicked acte whiche they had committed, and that not without fruite. For whē they heard the word of God, they repented.
Fyrst the messenger of God maketh mencion of the benefites which god had bestowed on his people. The principall poyntes of the Sermon. Secondly he vpbraydeth thē of their wicked actes, wherwith they being ingrate requited so great giftes. Lastely are set forth the threatninges and punishementes wherewith God woulde punishe them excepte they repented.
But before we come to entreate of the oration of this legate, it were good to declare what he was. The Hebrew worde Melach, It is doubtful what this Legate was. and also the Greke worde [...], are doubtfull, and sometymes they signifie a nature without a body, I meane spirites the ministres of God, and other sometymes they signifie a messanger, what soeuer he be. There are examples of these in many places of the scriptures, which should be superfluous now to declare. Some supposed y t some certayne spirite was sent from God, whiche appeared vnto the people in a visible forme, and reproued them as he was commaunded: And they persuade them selues that he was first sene in Gilgal, and there commaunded the people, to ascend from thence to a place, whiche was afterward called Bochim of weapyng. The Hebrew word Melach is not agaynst this interpretation: and that maketh with it also, bycause he speaketh as God. The aungell speaketh in the person of God. I haue made you (sayth he) to ascend out of Egypt. With whiche selfe same kinde of speache the Aungell in Genesis spake to Abraham, and in Exodus to Moses. Where it is also written, that God put his name in him. But it semed vnto the auncient fathers, That aungell whiche spake vnto y e fathers is thought to haue ben christ that that aungell which in the olde Testament appeared & spake in the name of God, was Christ the sonne of God. For it is writtē in Iohn, No man hath sene God at any tyme: the sonne which in the bosome of the father he hath declared him. These wordes declare vnto vs that what soeuer thinges are sayd to haue ben spoken by God in the olde Testament, the same were made open by Christ. But other suppose that this messanger or legate was a minister of the Churche, y t is either a Priest or a Prophet, whose office was, to reprehend the sinnes of the people. Amonge the Hebrew Rabines, Leui the sonne of Gerson. Leui the sonne of Gerson doth therfore thinke this to be very likely, bycause it is not conuenient, that an aungell should openly speake to so great a multitude. But his reason is very weake. for seing God whē he gaue the lawe spake in the mount Sina to the whole multitude of the Hebrues, what should let, but that he could teache an angell to do the same? But this is of some what more strength, bycause it is declared in the history, that this messanger ascended from Gilgal to Bochim. For if he were an angell, it semeth that it should rather haue ben sayd, that he discended from heauen, & not ascended from Gilgal to Bochim. And surely it appeareth a fayned thing, y t they fayne that he first appeared in Gilgal, and then called the people together to Bochim. For he mought haue in Gilgal expressed vnto the people those thinges whiche he afterward declared in Bochim. Wherfore the Hebrues affirme that this Prophet or Priest receaued in Gilgal the spirite and inspiration of God, wherewith he was stirred vp and appoynted to the assembly of the people, whiche then for certaine causes were assembled in Bochim, Praises of Phineas the priest there to expresse the commaundementes of God to the people, yea they say that that Prophet was Phineas the Priest the nephew of Aaron, I meane the sonne of Eleazar for he was a very seuere man, and most zelous of godlynesse and righteousnesse. In the booke of Numb: it is mencioned how he slew Zamri a prince of the family of Simeon namely for this, bycause he cōmitted open fornicatiō with a Madianitishe harlot. And the father of y e harlot was a prince among the Madianites. And God manifestly allowed the zeale of Phineas. For he promised him the priesthode of his nation, with an euerlastyng couenaunt: and ceassed from destroyeng the people, being mitigated with his noble acte. Phineas therfore was not onely godly, but also of a stoute and valiaunte courage. He feared not for gods cause to entre into grieuous hatreds, and to put himselfe to present daunger. Wherfore Dauid in the 106. Psalme rehearsing this history commendeth him after this sorte: Phineas stode vp and reuenged, and the plague ceassed, and it was coūted vnto him for righteousnesse from generation to generation for euer. Wherfore that acte whiche by his owne nature mought haue semed cruell and horrible, did not onely please God, and was of him allowed for a iust acte: but he also deliuered the people from a most grieuous plague, wherewith they were then vexed. The counte of the yeares if they [Page] be rightly counted is not agaynst this opinion now alleged. Yea and it is found in this selfe same boke, that he was on lyue, when warre was made agaynst the tribe of Beniamin to reuenge the wicked acte perpetrated in Gabaa. R. Salomoh. Rabbi Salomoh also declareth, that the booke which is entituled Sedar Olam, testifieth the same. Kimhi. Likewise Dauid Kimhi & the old Hebrues seme to encline to this opinion. But what soeuer he was, I thinke it skilleth not much. This ought to be most certain and sure, that the thinges declared by him were the wordes of God.
Where Gilgal lyeth. Gilgal, is a citie lyeng in the playne of Iordane, not farre from the citie of Iericho. And it had that name hereof, bycause there Iosuah by the commaundemēt of the Lord prouided that the people of Israel, whiche had wandred vncircumcised thoroughe the wildernesse, celebrated a solēpne circumcision. And when they had so done, God aunswered, y t he had remoued from thē the reproche of Egypt. For Gal signifieth in Hebrew to turne away and to remoue. Moreouer in that place, but not at that tyme, but long before, was y e tabernacle, & the Arke of the couenaunt. Namely in the tyme of Iosuah when the people passed ouer Iordane. And by that meanes that place was counted religious. Wherfore Saul the first king of the Hebrues was annoynted in Gilgal. But Bochim was so called of thē whiche wept as we shall strayght waye heare. And it is called so now by the figure Prolepsis, bycause it was not yet named by that name. And as it appeareth by y e history they goyng from Gilgal ascended to Bochim. Furthermore we must note that the legate speaketh not in hys owne name, but in the name of God & yet he vseth not those kinde of phrases which the other Prophetes did, namely Thus saith the Lord. &c. The word of the Lord came vnto me. &c. And in rehearsing the benefites bestowed on the people. First of all he maketh mencion of the delyuery of their fathers out of Egypte, bycause that had newly happened vnto the Hebrues. The benefites of God are like wordes which testifie of hys nature & goodnesse. And God, to the end the knowledge of him should not be blotted out, vseth to put men in mynde of those benefites that he hath bestowed on thē, and will haue thē to be as certain wordes, expressing his nature and goodnesse vnto vs. And he alwayes begynneth his rehearsall at thinges that are latest done, and of them he claymeth vnto him selfe titles or names attributed vnto him, God taketh surnames by hys benefites. by whiche he would be both called vpon and also knowen, for at the beginning God was called vpon by that that he created heauen and earth, and afterward by that that he was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob. After that as a deliuerer out of Egypte. Then as a deliuerer out of the captiuitie of Babilon.
God beginneth the rehearsall of benefites last geuen.But lastly as the father of our Lord Iesus Christ. But now of the benefite lately bestowed on them, he calleth him selfe the delyuerer out of Egypte. Afterward he adioyneth an other benefite. And I haue brought you into the lande whiche I sware vnto your fathers. It was not sufficiēt y t they wer deliuered out of Egypt, but they had ample & noble places assigned vnto them. Thirdly he saith, This haue I geuē you. That I would haue my couenant made with you to haue cōtinued for euer, if it mought haue ben by your obediēce But ye haue not suffred it. These benefites whiche in this place are rehearsed are playne and manifest ynough. Two principal thynges to be considered in the couenaunt. But as touching the last, namely of the couenaunt, two thinges are to be considered in it, First whiche is also the chief of all good thinges, is the redemption whiche should be made by Christ. Neither could this be hindered by any sinnes of mē. For God is faithful (as Paul testifieth to y e Romanes) neither departeth he from his truth, for our euill desertes. The second is, the successe of outwarde good thinges and ciuill ornamentes. Whiche kinde of couenaunte or promesse, bycause it was conditionally it myght therefore sometymes be altered, and vndoubtedly of this doth our preacher at this present speake. And what conditions God required of the Israelites, here he declareth in this sermon.
2 And ye also shall make no couenaunte with the inhabiters [Page 60] of this lande, but shal breake downe their altares: Neuerthelesse ye haue not obeyed my voyce, why haue ye this done?
3 Wherefore I haue also determined, I will not cast them out before your face, but they shalbe as prickes in your sydes, and theyr Gods shalbe a snare vnto you.
God by couenaunt had prescribed two thynges in especiall, What god prescribed the Israelites in the couenaunt. first that they should make no league with the Chananites: secondly that they should plucke downe their altares and temples. These are euery where written in the law especially in Exodus the 13. and 20. In the booke of Numb: 33. In Deut. 7.
Now after these conditions required of God is set forth the transgression of the Israelites. But ye (sayth he) haue not hearkened vnto my voyce. The Iewes were not yet fallen so farre that they committed Idolatry, they are onely reproued for violating the couenaunt, bycause they had saued the Idoles and altares of the Chananites. The wonderfull goodnesse of God surely is shewed by these wordes: VVhy haue ye this done? A vehemente maner of amplifieng of synne. He demaūdeth the cause as being ready to heare their excuse, if they could bring any that were iust and lawfull. And by this meanes also the grieuousnesse of the sinne is amplified, as being so grieuous y t it could by coulour be defended. And vndoubtedlye thus it is. God is not afeard in iudgement to contēd with synners. Gods cause agaynste vs is so good, that he is not affeard in Iudgement to reason with synners, as the Prophetes Esay and Micheas haue playnely taught. The preacher goeth forwarde, and sheweth what punishement they shoulde haue for thys faulte.
For so much as ye haue not stande by your couenaunt, I wyll also go from my promises. I will not expell the Chananites out of this region as I had promised: & if so be that I do not expell them, ye are so weake and feble that by your owne power, ye can not cast them out. They shal remayne therfore as ye would haue it, but yet to your great discōmodity. For they shalbe as prickes in your sides, namely as thornes, where with ye shalbe oftentymes sharply pricked. The Hebrew worde is Letsdim. And in dede Tsad signifieth a side. Althoughe some thinke that worde to be deriued of this verbe Tsud, whiche is to hunte or to fishe and bycause the hookes of fishermen are very sharpe, therfore the worde is by a certaine Metaphore transferred to signifie thornes. And after the same sorte we might say they signified nettes, vsing the same Metaphore whiche we may deriue of hunters. But the firste reason of the interpretation, to signifye sides, I sets both simple & also more allowed by the commentaryes of the Hebrues.
And theyr Idoles shalbe a snare vnto you. Namely wherewith ye shalbe taken, and when ye shalbe geuen to their Idolatry, ye shalbe punished with most grieuous punishementes and discommodities. Augustine in his 13. Augustine. questiō vpon this booke hath noted, that God threatneth after his accustomed maner, y t at the length it shall come to passe, that he will punishe synnes by synnes. For y e Israelites in not obeyeng the commaundement of God committed synne: and he agayne threatneth that Idoles shalbe a stumblyng blocke vnto them, namely that they should worship them, wherfore afterwarde they should be grieuously punished. By whiche wordes he declareth that the first transgression should be punished and chastised with the wicked crime of Idolatry, as Paul testifieth to the Romanes, that the Idolatry of the Ethnikes was punished with most filthy lustes. But y e punishement of the Israelites (as it is here set forth) hath with out doubt a great emphasys. For what can there happen more grieuous, than to be among thornes, and continuallye to fall among them? Vndoubtedly hereof followe woundes almost thoroughe out al the partes of the body, and new paynes, and those vehement succede one an other. And as thornes if they sticke in the fleshe do sharpely pricke, so to dwell among enemyes, and to haue them ioyned [Page] together with vs, can not be but very full of troubles.
The punishement whiche God here threateneth, is no new punishement, for al that is here written, was forespoken in the boke of Iosua the 23. chap. Namely that it should come to passe, that if they obeyed not the preceptes of the law of God, God would not then performe to destroy those natiōs before them: yea, he sayth, they shalbe vnto you a snare, a stumblyng stocke, a whip for your sides, and thornes to your eyes, vntill ye be destroyed out of this good lande, whiche the Lord your God hath geuen you, &c.
For the Israelites had afterward experience of these miseryes, bycause they were oftentimes brought into bondage by their enemyes among whom they dwelled, and with whom they had vngodly ioyned them selues. And finally for y t they would not ceasse of from Idolatry, they were cast out to the Assirians and Babilonians. This chidyng of God contayneth iust causes, wherfore the Israelites were destitute of his helpe for a tyme. Causes why god forsoke the Israelites for a tyme. And the end of the whole sermon is, that the people might be stirred vp to repentaunce, and that most aptely. For among those thinges whiche do vehemently amplify synne & do set it playnly before our eyes, A vehemente amplyfieng of synne. is the greatnesse of y e benefites of god, which ought to stirre vs vp to y e obseruing of the law. Afterward is set forth y e grieuousnesse of the punishmēts, bycause the waight of the synnes cōmitted, doth euidently declare y e burtheu of thē. Wherfore these two things are worthily alledged in the sermon, to the end the Hebrues might fele the enormity of the wicked acte whiche they had committed, whereas otherwise they would haue thought it but a light faulte.
Two Antitheses to be considered in thys oration.Furthermore we must consider in this oration the contrary positions artificially ioyned together to augment the vehemency. For to that benefite, wherin God had brought them out of Egypt this is layde agaynst, that they draue not the Chananites from the countrey geuen vnto them. And to this benefite, that God had geuen them an aboundant and fertile countrey, this is contrary, that the people suffred Idolatry to be no lesse vsed there than it was before. And this was to rendre euill for good. Wherfore God would not suffer that to be left vnpunished, but caused it to happen otherwise vnto them than they thought. For the nations whiche they for their cōmoditie had saued, did them great hurte, so y t they are cōpared to thornes. And the Gods of those nations, which they had not abolished turned to a snare & greuous stumbling blocke to the Hebrues.
Whether the people wer by this oratiō stirred vp to faith.But this sermon may seme vnperfect enoughe, for so muche as fayth is not set forth in it, wherunto the mynde of the hearers should be erected: onely the synne is declared, and the punishement wherewith they should be punished is expressed. And these thinges, except fayth be mixed with thē breede rather desperation thā saluation: so farre of is it y t they should bryng a iust remedy. To this I aunswere, that that parte whiche semeth to wante, is elegantly contayned in the sermon nowe alledged, so that it be somewhat more diligently considered. For when the benefites bestowed on them by God are expressed, they make vs assured of the goodnesse and mercy of God, whiche benefites also remayne still for the Israelites if they will repente. For god is not chaunged, but is perpetually of the selfe same nature and will. And vnlesse he be resisted by sinnes he is towardes men very fauorable and louyng. Furthermore fayth is stirred vp in the hearers, when it is shewed vnto them, that god would that his couenaunt made with them should abide for euer. Wherefore it is manifest that this was his will, that the impediment of synnes beyng by full repentaunce taken away, his couenaunt whiche he had made might be of force for euer. Wherfore there is no cause why we should complayne that fayth is left out, when as both the promises and the couenaunt are mencioned, whiche can not be conceaued and established but onely by fayth.
There yet remayneth a doubte whether God require the selfe same thyng of Christians, whiche he woulde haue to be done of the Hebrues, Wether it be required of vs that we should breake Idoles namely that they should by violence take awaye and breake in pieces the Idoles and superstitions both of the infidelles, & also of heretikes. If thys should be demaunded as touchying Princes and Magistrates, it is without controuersie that they ought to purge their dominions from such euils, and to that end haue they receaued of God the sword and power. But they which are priuate persons ought to abstayne from violence, for so much as to them is not committed the sworde and power to constrayne. Of thys thyng Augustine in the .x. tome and 6. Augustine. sermon after this manner aunswereth, that the Christians ought so to do as God commaunded the Hebrues in the 7. of Deut: where he expressedly commaunded that these thinges ought then to be done of the Iewes, when the lande was in their owne power. Wherfore Christians ought also to do the same, but yet in those landes, cities and houses whiche they possesse, namely they must there ouerthrowe Idoles and superstitious altars. Howbeit it is not lawfull for them to breake into other mens houses landes and Townes, and with violence to breake and ouerthrowe Idoles and altares. This (sayeth he) is not to heale the synne of Idolatrye, whiche lyeth chiefly in the hearte, it ought chiefly be weyed out of the heartes of our neighbours, by the worde and doctrine, whiche beyng done, as many as we shall wynne vnto Christ, will helpe vs to take awaye outwarde Images, when as they are persuaded by the worde of GOD, and that by our diligence, they haue first shaken away the same thinges out of their own heartes. Cōsilium Eliberinum. And accordyng to this meanyng the Counsell holden at Eliberium did decree in the 60. Canon.
By these thynges we muste note, that this is the will of GOD, that we should abstayne from traffickes, We must haue no felloweshyp with the vngodly. matrimonyes and fellowshippes with infidels and heretikes, as by the lawe it was forbidden, that the Iewes should make no league with the Chananites, but this would I haue so to be vnderstande, as I haue before and that largely declared. Moreouer we are playnely taught, that the commaundementes of GOD are simply to be obeyed, The commaū demēts of god are not to be mitigated by man his inuentions. so that we may not go about either to mollefye or to mitigate them by mannes inuentions. Seyng that GOD punished the Hebrues and that grieuously, whiche peraduenture thought that they had sufficiently fulfilled hys precepte, when they had made the Chananites tributaries. But as touchyng their Idoles and superstitions he required nothyng elles of the Israelites, but that they woulde not worshyppe them. Wherefore suche interpretations are to be taken hede of, whiche do either vtterly take away the worde of GOD, or at the least do make it to be of small force. This did the sonne of GOD sharpely reproue, when he sayed that the Phariseys by their doctrine and humane inuentions did wrest the law of God, as thoughe it had ben made of ware, to their filthy lustes & wicked desires. This sermō is takē out of the holy scriptures We must also marke that this whole sermon is taken out of the holy Scriptures: for there is nothing contayned in it, which is not found in the bookes of Numb: Deut: and Iosuah. Whereby we gather, that preachyng is then of efficacy, when it is drawen out of the worde of GOD, and not of the inuention of man. Sinners ar punished by the same thinges whereby they haue trāsgressed. Neither is it to be passed ouer, that it is a common thyng with the Iustice of God to punishe synners by the same thynges whereby they transgresse. As nowe it is declared that y e Israelites should incurre most great damages, as well by the nations, as also by the Idoles, whiche they contrary to the commaundement of GOD had saued. Furthermore let vs learne hereby, euery man for his owne parte to beare continuall hatred to the wicked affections of the fleshe. For we ought neuer to come into fauour again with them, We must make no league with wicked affections. or to make peace or a league with thē: for so much as God hath appoynted, that we should continually make warre agaynst his enemyes.
What is the office of Princes against heretikes & Papistes.Finally let Christian Princes be taughte, howe they ought to behaue them selues agaynst Papistes and heretikes, namely diligently to persecute, correcte, and amende the errours in them, and at the length to compell them to returne into the right waye: otherwise in permittyng them to take deeper roote, and to lyue at will and idlely, they noryshe thornes for them selues, and do willyngly drawe vnto them blockes, to stumble at.
4 And when the Aungell of the Lorde spake these wordes vnto all the children of Israell, the people lifted vp their voyce & wept.
5 And they called the name of that place Bochim, and offred Sacrifices there vnto the Lorde.
The fruite of the sermon, whiche was preached is by certayn outward sygnes expressed vnto vs, whiche were in a manner apt witnesses of repentaunce, and of a conuerted mynde. Thre apt witnesses of repē taunce. Thre thynges therfore are mencioned. First when the people had heard this sermon they lifted vp their voyce wherby as it is to be beleued, they confessed their synnes, and implored the mercy of God. Secondly it is added that teares were ioyned with the voyces: and lastly that they offred Sacrifices vnto God. What they said when they lifted vp their voyce, the scripture doth not expresse, but I haue expounded what is most likely that they sayd, and therfore I will stande no longer about that thyng: but I will somewhat tary in those thinges, whiche the history hath mencioned of, what thynges they are, namely as touchyng teares and Sacrifices. Wherein we must knowe that true and lawfull repentaunce consisteth chiefly of two principall poyntes, Two principal pointes of repētaūce, which do spryng out of fayth. namely of a sorowe conceaued for the wicked Actes committed, and of a sure confidence to obtayne pardon by Christe. Neither ought we to be ignoraunte, that these two thynges do burgen out of fayth, as out of their propre and naturall roote. And fayth, when it bryngeth forth suche fruites, is occupyed about two thynges. First it assenteth vnto the lawe of GOD, and to the threatnynges there set forth, and confesseth them to be true, whereby we beyng assured of the will of GOD, whiche we vnderstande to be by our synnes violated, and nothyng doubtyng of the threatnynges adioyned, we can not but be grieuously sory. Secondly fayth embraseth the promise of forgeuenesse of punishementes by Christ. And whilest it is occupyed about these two thynges, so many outwarde signes also do follow. Two outward signes followe true repētaūce For of sorow come syghinges & teares, which haue adioyned vnto thē confessiō of the sinnes committed, whiche is sometymes expressed, & sometymes close. And where there is conceaued an assuraunce of forgeuenesse, there followe Sacrifices. And bycause fayth is the mother of these thynges, and it is conceaued by the worde of GOD, therefore the historye declareth that the Israelites did at the length weepe and do Sacrifice after that they had heard the sermon. The worde of god stirreth vp repentaunce. For (as Paule sayeth) fayth commeth of hearyng, and hearyng by the worde of GOD. Wherefore weepyng and sighing followed fayth by whiche weepyng the sorowe then conceaued in the hearte manifestlye appeared, whiche affection of the mynde it is manifest to haue come by reason of the euill whiche then did oppresse them: What is the grief & sorowe of repentaunce and that euill was the anger of GOD, wherewith they felte them selues to be oppressed, and whereunto they knewe by the sermon preached that they were guilty. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that the weepyng of those repenting people was no common or easye weepyng, for so much as of the efficacy and aboundance thereof, the place was called Bochim. Which worde signifieth in the Hebrew tongue, men weepyng.
The Ethnikes do not allowe teares.The teares, whiche the Ethnike wyse men, do either reproue, or contempne as comming from a softe and womanlyke hearte, God, when they burst forth of true repentaunce, doth exceadingly allowe them, and counteth them as most [Page 62] acceptable: Seneca writeth in hys 64. Epistle to Lucillus, Seneca. that sometymes we may let teares come from vs, but we must not weepe. He would not therefore haue weepyng to haue the rayne: howbeit somewhat he permitted it, bycause by the violence of nature they are expressed, and they burste forth euen of them whiche will not, and do restrayne them, as the same authour testifieth in hys [...]00. Epistle. But we ought not to cōsider what they would, but what is allowed of our heauenly Father. God accepteth the teares of such as are repentaunt. And he wonderfull louyngly accepteth a contrite and humble hearte, and the teares of suche as are repentaunt. Then it is sayde that they offer Sacrifices, whiche were certain tokens of fayth conceaued of the forgeuenesse of synnes by Christe. For whilest the Sacrifices were a kyllyng, it was set forth, that synne in a sorte was transferred into them. What the killyng of sacrifices signified. For the Sacrifice bare the punishement, whiche the transgressour ought to haue had. Neither is it to be doubted, but that those Sacrifices whilest they were sacrificed, dyd shadowe the death of Christ. Wherefore those ceremonyes did testifye that the Elders, did constantlye beleue, that by the oblation and death of Christ all their synnes were taken awaye, and already forgeuen them. Neither vndoubtedly can true repentaunce be founde wantyng suche a fayth. Take awaye fayth & repentance is desperation. For take awaye thys fayth, and it may rather be called desperation, than repentaunce. Furthermore in these Sacrifices were thankes geuen vnto God, whiche would so by Christ be reconciled vnto men.
Some man will say, what shall we do therefore when we repente? we may in dede haue teares as witnesses of our inwarde sorrowe: but there remayne no Sacrifices in our tyme, That whiche y e old fathers did by the bloud of beastes, the same do we in the supper of the Lord. whereby we should testifye the fayth of the forgeuenesse of synnes by Christe. To this I aunswere. That whiche they did then by the bloud of beastes, and death of cattell, we do also nowe in celebratyng the Supper of the Lorde. For there we kepe in memorye the death of Christe by outwarde signes, as he hym selfe hath instituted: and thereof it came that the olde Fathers did so often call the administration of that Sacramente, a sacrifice.
Not bycause (as the Papistes falsely beleue) the Sacrifice offreth Christe vnto God the father, Why the Papistes called y e supper of the Lord a sacrifice but bycause the memorye of hym beyng once offred is called to remembraunce. Moreouer we must take heede that we persuade not our selues, that God is pacified, either by teares, or by Sacrifices, or by the receauyng of the Sacramentes whiche are but outwarde thynges. God is not pacified by outward thynges of them selues. For by one onely Sacrifice, by the death I saye of Christ, God is made mercifull vnto vs: the fruite, of whose death euery man applyeth vnto hym selfe by fayth. And of that fayth we haue those outward thynges as witnesses and sygnes. Wherfore if at any tyme we shall heare either the Fathers or the Scriptures them selues to saye that by teares synnes are wyped awaye, or that by Sacrifices, or Sacramentes GOD is made mercyfull vnto men, so ought we to vnderstande their speaches that we referre the Sacrifices, and Sacramentes both to Christ hym selfe, The properties of thinges are oftentimes attributed to the signes of the same thīgs and also to faith in him, for so much as all those are signes of him. Neyther let vs thinke that this is a newe, or an vnaccustomed thing, that the properties, operations, and efficacy of thynges shoulde be transferred to the signes, whiche by the institution of God do note and signife vnto vs the same thinges. But these thinges left a syde let vs speake somewhat particularlye both of teares and syghing, and also of Sacrifice.
¶Of Teares.
TEares are counted as certayne thynges added and ioyned to repentaunce, Teares are adioyned both to repentaunce & also to prayers and also to prayers. For not onely the repentaunte, when they with a grieuous sorowe deteste their synnes, do vse to weepe: but also as many as do earnestly and vehemently contend to obteyne any thyng. Howbeit the tokens of [Page] true repentaunce are not alwayes measured by teares. Weepyng is not alwayes a tokē of true repentaunce. Teares do not alwayes declare y t the praiers are of efficacy. 2. Sam. 12. For we reade both in the booke of Genesis, and also in the Epistle to the Hebrues, that Esau also wepte. Teares also do not alwayes declare, that the prayers are of efficacye to obteyne that whiche is desired. For Dauid after hys aduoutry fasted and wepte whilest he earnestly prayed that lyfe might be spared vnto hys sonne whiche was borne vnto hym by Bethsabe: whiche thyng neuerthelesse he could not obteyne, but that teares in those examples had no good successe, there were diuerse causes thereof. For Esau as we shall strayght waye declare, mourned not of fayth: And Dauid obtayned not that whiche he desired, bycause GOD had ordayned to geue him that, whiche was much better and more noble than that whiche he required. In dede the sonne whiche was conceaued by aduoutry remayned not a lyue. But of the same mother he afterwarde had Salomon, who succeded the Father in a peaceable and moste ample kyngdome after his death, yea and he beyng yet lyuyng. But contrarywyse let vs marke howe in Peter teares were tokens of very true repentaunce. And also in that woman, whiche (as the Euangelistes declare) with her teares washed the feete of the Lorde.
And as touchyng prayers Ezechias was hearde, when with weepyng he prayed, and the death which was threatned hym was differred to an other tyme. Iosias also was hearde, who prayed vnto GOD with many teares. The 126. Psalme speaketh thus of the fruite of prayer, whiche hath sighyng and teares adioyned with it: They wente and wepte, castyng their sedes, but doubtelesse they shall come, & with ioye shall bryng with thē their sheaues. And they which sowe in teares, shall reape in ioye. It is also written in the 7. Psalme: The Lorde hath hearde the voyce of my weepyng. And in the 56. Psalme: The teares of the Sainctes are in a manner put before GOD in a bottle or potte, and faythfully sealed in hys booke. Dauid also in hys 95 Psalme stirreth vs vp by these wordes: Let vs weepe before the Lorde whiche made vs, &c. But muche more are we instigated vnto it by the example of Christe, who (as it is written in the Epistle to the Hebrues) with a loude crye, and with teares prayed for vs. Paul also in the 20. of the Actes sayeth, that he had longe serued the Lorde with an humble hearte and with teares.
What teares ar not allowed of God.Neuerthelesse God alloweth not those teares, whiche are by a certayne naturall nation powred out without any affection of the mynde: as it commonly happeneth vnto those, whose eyes are striken with any stroke, or to those whiche runne either on foote or on horsebacke, and whiche with ouer muche drinke become dronke: for these are naturall accidences, neither pertayne they any thyng to godlynesse. But affections after which teares do followe are these: heauynesse of the mynde, After what affections teares do followe. whiche other call sorrowe, also gladnesse: and that by contrary reasons. For of sorowe spryngeth cold, whereby as the whole bodye is constrayned together, so also are the humors of the hed, whereby it commeth to passe that weapyng by violence bursteth forth. But contrarywyse in gladnesse the pypes, pores, & wayes about the eyes are loosed, wherby there is made a waye open vnto teares. And vndoubtedly of those two affections we haue a testimony in the booke of Esdras. For there it is written, that when the temple was built, the people wept, but not all for one cause. Parte of thē very sory that the new buylding differed muche in dignitie and ornamentes from the fyrst. But contrarywise other reioysed, that the house of GOD, whiche had layen so longe prostrate, was raysed vp agayne. And it is manifest in the holy hystorye, that Ioseph when he sawe hys brother Beniamin whome he loued, wepte for ouer muche ioye. Anger hath sorrowe and pleasure mingled together. Furthermore there are other affections mixed of sorrowe and ioye, whiche make vs to weepe: as is a vehement anger, whiche hath by reason of contempt sorowe myngled with it and also some ioye and pleasure, whilest it goeth aboute reuengement as thoughe it were present. Mercy also [Page 63] shaketh out teares, for that we are troubled and are sory for other mens euils, and are desirous to profite the afflicted. For a vehement desire also casteth out teares. Wherfore the men of God, when in prayeng they earnestly desire to obtayne any thing, easely burst forth into teares.
But what the matter of suche an humour is, The Phisicall matter of teares. we leaue to the consideration of naturall Philosophers: for they do not well agree among them selues as touching it. Some thincke that they do come by reason of the gaule beyng troubled, vnto which opinion agreeth the first booke de mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae, Augustine. the x. chap: whiche booke is entituled to be Augustines wryting. Other suppose them to be a certayne kynde of sweate, whiche Plutarche affirmeth, Plutarche. but some do thinke, that euen as from mylke is seperated whay, so also a watrish humour is separated from bloud, wherof the greater parte turneth into vrine, and that whiche remayneth is thrust forth into teares. Lastly Seneca in his 100. Seneca. Epistle to Lucillus thincketh that with the stroke of grief and sorrowe the whole body is almost shaken, and therwithall the eyes, out of whiche eyes, the humour lyeng nighe vnto them is expressed. But howsoeuer this matter be, it littell pertayneth vnto vs. Wherfore let vs come to the causes, for whiche it besemeth a godly man to weepe.
Augustine in his 4. Augustine. Causes why we shoulde weepe. sermon of the first Sonday in Lente writeth y t there be two causes in true repentaunce that bryng forth weepyng: one is, for bycause we haue thoroughe negligence omitted many thynges whiche we ought to haue done, And by ouer muche boldenesse commytted many thyngs which we ought not to haue done. Synnes of cō mittyng and omittyng. These are cōmonly called synnes of commyttyng and omyttyng, and in the same place he interpreteth thys sentence. (Brynge forth worthy fruictes of repentaunce) after this maner, that we shoulde weepe for the synnes alreadye committed, and we shoulde take hede that we do not the same agayne. Chrisostome also vpon the Epistle to the Collossians, Chrisostome. the 12 Homely cō playneth that the Christians abused teares, and when as otherwyse teares are good creatures of God, The abuse of teares. they diffame them in adioynyng them to those thynges whiche deserue not weepyng. Synnes onely (sayeth he) are to be weeped for, not onely our owne synnes, but other mens also. Whiche Paul performed in very dede, who in the 2. to the Corinthians: sayde that he was affeard, not to come vnto them, but so that he was deiected & compelled to weepe for very many which had fallen and not repented. Oure owne synnes & other mens also are to be wept for. Yea and he exhorted the same Corinthians, to weepe for other mennes synnes, when in hys first Epistle he sayde, ye are puffed vp, and ye haue not mourned, namely for a grieuous cryme of an incestuous man. And Dauid in his 119 Psalme wryteth, Myne eyes haue brought forth riuers of waters, bycause they haue not kepte thy lawe. That most holy Prophete wepte, bycause of the publicque transgressions of the lawe, and when he sawe the same transgressions euery where perpetrated, he aboundantly poured out teares.
And Ezechiell in the 8. chap: Godly men do easelyer weepe than laughe. commended certayn whiche wepte for the wicked Actes of other men. And hereof it commeth that when holy men see horrible spectacles of synnes oftentymes to happen, they easelyer burste forth into teares than into laughter. For so Christ vsed, whom we read to haue oftentimes wepte, but neuer to haue laughed. Whiche selfe same thyng also we must do at thys day, when as so great, and euill an haruest of synnes doth on euery syde offer it selfe vnto vs.
Lastly we muste knowe, that all kynd of mournyng is not allowed of god. That weeping is not allowed which cōmeth onely of the feelyng of the punishmentes. For some there are, which (as I haue before said) are moued only with y e feeling of the punishmētes, neyther are they moued any further. To be sory in dede for cause of paines and punishementes, is a certayne degree of true repentaunce: & for that ende, GOD doth both punyshe and also threaten men whilest they lyue here. Howebeit this sorowe is not sufficient, neyther is it by it selfe allowed [Page] of god: for it spryngeth of selfe loue, & is in a maner a thyng vnprofitable vnlesse it go further: Wherfore the Lorde sayeth in Zacharie the 7. chap: that the Hebrues had fasted for them selues, & not for his glorye: so these wepe for them selues and mourne, not bycause they haue violated the commaundementes of GOD. Furthermore thou mayste see other some somewhat worse than these, whiche beyng moued with the sorowe of troubles do wepe, Their teares are condemned whiche when they weape speake euill of God. and among their teares do speake euill of GOD hymselfe, beyng angry with his Iustice, as thoughe he were to seuere, and a harder Lord than he ought to be, and suche mournyng belongeth not to repentaunce, but rather to desperation. An example therof we haue in the booke of Numb. the 14. chap. Where the people when they heard the bytter relation of the spyes, fell to weepyng, and spake euill both agaynst Moyses and agaynst God, and determined to returne into Egypt.
What mourning pleaseth God most.The thirde kynde of mournyng, is very acceptable vnto god, and that is when we are grieuously sorye, for that we haue violated hys lawe, and bycause we se a great numbre of others to resiste hys moste holy will. To this kynde of Lamentations did Ioel and other holy Prophetes stirre vp the people of the Hebrues. Christe also persuadeth vs vnto them, when he sayeth, that they are blessed whiche mourne, bycause consolation is layed vp for them. The Churche lykewise vseth sometymes to stirre vp the people to these kynde of mournyngs, when as at sometymes it set forth publicque repentaunce, whiche althoughe it ought continually to cleaue in the heartes of Christians, Repētaunce is sometymes openly to be renewed, yet by reason of publicque calamityes, and a certayne sluggishenesse grafted in vs, is sometyme to be renewed by the diligence of the Pastors. Wherfore god in the olde lawe once in a yeare, in the 7. moneth I saye, instituted a fast, whereby that daye the people of Israell myght for the synnes whiche they hadde committed, afflicte them selues before god. And to the ende it myght the oftener be done, he dayely sent hys Prophetes to rebuke the people, as we see in this historye he did, when he commaunded this sermon whiche we nowe expounde to be made vnto the people.
¶Of Sacrifice.
Oure actions are either volū tary, or naturalNOw riseth somewhat to speake of Sacrifice. The definition wherof when we searche out, first we fynde it to be a certayne action; and that voluntary: whiche I therefore saye, bycause there are founde some actions whiche they call naturall: but those for so muche as they depende not of humane election, they can not therfore be called voluntary. Furthermore Sacrifice ought to be referred vnto religion: Some actions are religious & are separated from political & oeconomicall actions. whiche I do for this cause adde, to remoue and seperate it from oeconomicall and ciuill workes. For domesticall workes, are profitable to gouerne a family, and ciuil workes serue for the administration of a publicque wealthe. But sacrifice is a religious action, bycause it pertayneth to the worshipping of god and was by hym instituted, that we should offre our things vnto hym, and that to this ende, that he might be honoured, and therby (as Augustine sayeth in hys 10. Augustine. booke de ciuitate Dei the 7. chap:) to cleaue vnto hym with an holy societye. And hereby may we see in what sorte a Sacrifice (if we speake of it as it is properly) differeth from a Sacrament, The difference betwene a sacrifice and a Sacrament. whiche is also a voluntarye and religious worke, and also instituted by God, that by it the promises and good giftes of God should be sealed and exhibited, bycause ther we offer nothing vnto God, but he offereth signes, and amplifieth his giftes vnto vs, when as those thinges which are offred, ar receaued with a sound saith.
The definition of a Sacrifice.But that the thing may be made more plain, let vs in a summe gather the definition of a sacrifice. And that is thus: A sacrifice is a voluntary and religious action, instituted of God, to offer vnto him our thinges, vnto his glory, and that thereby we may with a strayghter bond be coupled vnto hym in holy societye.
To this definitiō of sacrifices, must be added a participation. A deuision of sacrifices. Certein sacrifices ar propitiatory, & others ar of thankes geuyng. By the first kinde God is made mercifull vnto vs, by the power & iuste merite therof. Sacrifice propitiatory is onely one. But of this sorte we haue but onely one, for as much as onely by the death of Christ the eternall father is reconciled vnto vs, and by the merite of this one only oblation the sinnes of the elect are forgeuen. But in the other kinde of sacrifice we geue thankes vnto God, we celebrate his name, and to our power we obey his will. Agayne, A sacrifice hath an outwarde part and an inward part. wee must know that this kinde of sacrifice consisteth of two partes, whereof the one is an inward part, namely whereby we freely and without compulsion referre vnto God our own wil and our selues wholy, and all that wee haue receaued, and we make them subiect vnto him, and consecrate them vnto his name. The other is an outward part, wherby by some gift, and that visible and sensible, we do as it were by some token and signe, testify what we haue in our hart, and we offer vnto him somwhat of those things, which he himself hath geuen vnto vs. So they in the old time offered first fruites, tenthes, and sacrifices. In whych thinges they dyd not onelye shadowe Christ, The outwarde sacrifice with out y e inwarde pleaseth not god. the most acceptable sacrifice vnto God, but they testified also, what loue they them selues bare vnto God. By these thinges it appeareth, that the outward oblation or sacrifice is nothing acceptable vnto God, except it haue the inward part annexed with it, which maye testefy it to be in vs in very dede, for bicause they which do make any such oblation do most filthyly lye vnto God. For to testifye that which is not so, pertayneth to deceite, and seing that a lye is vituperable in all thinges, & euery wher, much more pernicious & detestable is it, if it be vsed before God. Why y e sacrifices of the Iewes wer some tymes vnacceptable vnto God Hereof it came that god often times said by his Prophets, that the sacrifices of the Iewes wer not acceptable vnto him, and chiefely for this cause, namely bicause they dissembled to honour him with lyps and outward signes, when as they wer farre from him in hart. He requireth therfore the inward part by it selfe, but as for the outward part, he hath no otherwise commaunded, but so that it be offered with the inward part ioyned together with it: otherwise if it be naked & alone, it is both vnacceptable, and also highly displeaseth him.
If thou wilt aske, what be those outward works, The outwarde sacrifices of the Hebrews. wherby we may testify the inward sacrifice? I could rehearse a great many, the killing of beastes, the oblations of first fruites and tenthes, which the fathers had, whilest they were vnder the law. To them are added outward wordes, wherin we geue thankes vnto god, we celebrate his praises, and we make our praiers. To these must be added duties of charity toward our neighbours, Outward kind of sacrifices cō mon to vs & to the fathers. mortification of the affections of the fleshe, and obedience vnto the commaundementes of god. All these latter kinde of sacrifices are as well common vnto vs, as to the fathers. These thinges we geue vnto god, to beare witnes of our faith, and obeysaunce towarde hym. And seing that it is not to be doubted of those first, which wer offred in the time of the law, but that they were in their time sacrifices, least there should be anye ambiguitye had of the other which wee mencioned in the latter place, whether they ought to be counted in the place of sacrifices, we wil confirme it by testimonies of the scriptures. It is written in the .50. psalme: Offer vnto god the sacrifice of praise. And in the .51. psalme: A sacrifice vnto god is a troubled and a broken hart. &c. In the .12. to the Romanes: I desire you for the mercy of god, that ye would set foorth your bodies a liuely sacrifice, holy. &c. Micheas saith in the .vi. chap. I will tell thee O man, what god requireth of thee: Doo iudgement, loue mercy, walke reuerently and modestly before God. Isay also, and the rest of the Prophetes haue in many places confirmed this sentence.
Neither is it to be passed ouer, An order or certayne degres amonge outward sacrifices that among these outward thinges which are offered as sacrifices vnto god, there are certaine degrees and an order appoynted. For god himselfe testifieth, that he farre aboue the other preferreth mercye and charity toward our neighbours. Wherefore in Mathew the .9. is thys place [Page] brought out of the Prophet Hosea: I will mercy and not sacrifice. Moreouer, it is written in the .1. of Samuel: Obedience is better than sacrifices. These words teache vs, that among outward oblations, the kylling of beastes, and tenthes, and fruites in the old time held the last place. But the principall part was geuen to the obedience which was shewed vnto the woord of God, to charity towarde our brethren, to thankes geuing and to praiers.
The end of sacrifices.Neither is the end of sacrifices lightly to be passed ouer, but with diligence to be cōsidered, especially as Augustine hath expressed it, namely that we might with an holy fellowship cleaue vnto God. For without it our workes thoughe they be neuer so excellent, Why the death of Christ so much pleased God. can be no sacrifices. Yea and the death it self of Christ which was the chiefe and onely sacrifice pleased god for this cause especially, bicause Christ to no other end offred himselfe, but to fulfill the will of his father, and to obey him as it was meete. But to these thinges which I haue sayd I will adde an other thing which Augustine writeth in his Epistle ad Deo gratias the 3. Augustine. Two thinges ar required in euery secrifice. question. Namely that in euery sacrifice god requireth twoo certaine thinges. First that our oblations be made vnto the true god: from which intent for as much as Idolatrers do wander fro, whatsoeuer they do in their rites, turneth to their own destruction: The other thing is, that the manner of the oblations consist of the doctrine of the holy scriptures, and come not of our owne inuentions and fayninges.
Whither the selfe same thing may be both a sacrament and a sacrifice.Here ariseth a doubt, bicause we haue put a difference betwene a sacrament and a sacrifice: and yet if the elders in their oblations and sacrifices had the self same thing, that we haue when we celebrate the supper of the Lorde, whych no man doubteth but to be a sacrament: How shall that be true that we said before that there is a difference betwene a sacrifice and a sacrament, seing that of necessity the sacrifices of the Elders must also be Sacraments? To this I answer that the reasons of these thinges ar diuers, and yet that letteth not but that one thing may be both a Sacrament and a Sacrifice. For no man doubteth but that philosophy and strength of the body are diuers thinges, which neuertheles may be sene both in one mā: So also it happeneth here, that one thing may be both a sacrifice & a sacrament, The supper of the lord is both a sacrament & a sacrifice. although the reason of a sacrament and a sacrifice be diuers. When the supper of the Lorde is celebrated, in that the body and bloud of Christ are by faith & spirit geuen vnto vs to be receaued, and the promise of that coniunction which we haue with Christ, is sealed, so that we are the members of his bodye, in this respect I say, it is a sacrament, and also so called, bicause in that action god geueth hys gyftes vnto vs. But in that by the same action we do celebrate the memory of the death of Christ, we render thankes vnto him for the giftes which we haue receaued, we consecrate & offer our selues vnto god, it is, The kylling of sacrifices were both sacramēts and also sacrifices. & may be called a iust sacrifice, wherby we geue most acceptable oblations vnto god himself. This self same thing may we se in the killing of the sacrifices which wer in the old time done before god: for they wer both sacraments, wher in Christ was geuen to the men in the old time to be receaued of them by faith, & by which they cōmunicated before the Lord in eating & drinking together. Al these things I say pertained to the reasō of a sacramēt. And yet the same wer also sacrifices, whē as ther thei did both consecrate theirs & them selues vnto god.
But to retourne to the history, when as very many kinde of sacrifices were commaunded in the law, namely for synnes and for faultes, peaceofferings also and burntofferings, it is vncertain which of these the Israelites vsed at this present: for the history declareth it not. But by as much as maye be coniectured by those thinges which are spoken, he should not erre in my iudgement, whiche should affirme that they sacrificed for synne. For to this ende pertaineth both the sermon that was preached, and also the weeping of the people, namelye to haue forgeuenes of their synnes, and to retourne againe into fauour with god.
But some peraduenture wyl maruayle, why they durst sacrifice there where [Page 65] the tabernacle of God was not fixed, when as in Deuter. it was most manifestly forbidden by a law, that the people should not Sacrifice in anye other place. Whether it were lawfull to sacrifice there where the tabernacle of God was not. But as touching that law we must vnderstand, that it was not of efficacye till such time as the Arke and Tabernacle of the Lord had a fixed and firme place. Which came not to passe before Salomon had built the most noble Temple at Ierusalem. Wherfore before that time, we reade that they sacrificed in wandering and vncertain places, namely whersoeuer any occasion of religion was geuen. Furthermore they which thinke that this man of God which preached this sermon was Phineas, do say that it is not to be maruailed, that sacrifices wer offered here at Bochim as the history teacheth. For it might easely be that the selfe same man which preached the sermon, offered sacrifice in the name of the whole people for synne, for that he exercised the office of priesthoode. For he succeeded Eleazer his parent, according to the promise of God.
And by these things which haue ben intreated of in this place, What thinges ought to be obserued in an holy assembly. we may gather what thinges ought chiefly to be obserued in an holy assembly. The word of god before al thinges must be preached vnto the people, therby to allure the hearers to repentance, namely to acknowledge the sinnes which they haue committed, and to repent them therof. Then must they procede to the administration of the Sacramentes, wher the faithful may be made more assured that their sinnes ar by Christ forgeuen them, they may also geue thankes vnto God, and with many and sundry praises celebrate and cal vpon him.
6 And when Iosua had sent the people away, the children of Israel went euery man into his inheritance, to possesse the lande.
7 And the people serued the Lord al the dayes of Iosuah, and all the daies of the Elders, that outliued Iosua, which had sene al the great woorkes of the Lord, that he dyd for Israel.
This narration is therefore put in, to declare how long the Israelites kept the sincere and true woorshipping of God. And it is sayde, that when they were come into the land of Chanaan, they did their duty wel as long as Iosua lyued, & as long as the Elders wer remaining, which had sene the wonderful workes of God, which he had wrought for the Israelites sake. And vndoubtedlye it had bene vnaptly if this history should haue declared the transgression of the Chyldren of Israel, and should not haue noted the tyme wherein it happened. Aptlye therfore is the death of Iosua and the Elders which lyued in his tyme, repeated in this place, and afterwarde is mencioned that an other age of men succeeded, which knew not God, neither had they sene his workes. Wherefore the Israelites easely fel from the lawful worshipping of God.
We gather by this place that the repentaunce of the Hebrues before declared (which happened after the death of Iosua, The profite of the repentance before mentioned of y e people. when the publike wealth was gouerned by a Senate, and the enemies wer by manye battailes destroyed, & compelled to paye tribute vnto the Israelites whiche had conquered them) brydled and restrained the people a long time, from falling into more grieuous synnes. They had sinned in dede, as we haue now heard, in sparing the Chananites, and not abolishing their wicked idolatry. But afterward when they had desired and obtained pardon of so great a crime, they abstained a long time from the woorshipping of Idols, and the repentaunce now mencioned brought forth his fruit.
Some peraduenture will maruayle, howe chaunce, Why the Isralites after their repentance [...]o not breake the league ma [...]e with the Chananites. that they styll kept the league which was wickedlye made with the Chananites, & ouerthrew not their detestable worshippinges, Temples and Idols. Vndoubtedly if theyr repētance had bene true and perfect, they ought faythfully to haue amended that wherein they synned: for among other thinges those ar counted the iust fruites of repentaunce. I haue nothing els to answer here, but that I thinke they dyd not thys, [Page] bicause they wanted force, God forgeueth sinnes but he doth not by & by restore the good thinges taken away. luckelye to fight against those nations. For God, to punish the transgression and violating of his law, had nowe withdrawen theyr strength and audacity. And although they repented, yet he did not by and by restore vnto them their old strengthes. For he vseth in deede straightwaye to receaue repentaunt synners into fauour, but he doth not by and by restore those thinges which he by his iust iudgement hath for sinnes taken away. This maye we easely see in the fal of our first Parentes. For the euils therby comming vnto mankinde, wer not taken away of God. Yea and those commodities & most quiet state, whiche they had in Paradise, men neuer afterwarde recouered, although God hath reconciled vnto himselfe those that beleue in Christ. For Dauid had woord brought him by Nathan the prophet, that his sinne was forgeuen him, yet he could not escape, but that his sonne which was borne vnto him, perished, and he himselfe fel into grieuous miseries. So God woorketh somtimes, partly to keepe discipline, and partly to make manifest vnto men, how much he detesteth sinnes. Againe more and more to stirre vp repentaunce, and that an earnest repentaunce of wicked actes committed in suche as are renued. But let vs returne vnto the history, wherin certain thinges, which happened vnder Iosua are more fully repeated.
Now (saith he) He had let the people go, and euery man went into his inheritaunce, Iosua sent away the people twice from hym. to possesse the land. The Israelites were twice thus sent away by Iosua. First when the land of Chanaan was deuided by lottes. For at that time euery Tribe went to possesse those places which fel vnto them by lot. Iosua also sent away the people when he should dye. For he had called together vnto him the whole multitude of the Israelites, by his last sermon to admonish and exhort them. Which he preached in such sorte, as it is described in his booke the .24. chap. And as it is most likely, we ought to vnderstande that sending away in this place, to be the same which was done last. Seing that it is written in the place now alledged, that when the people had heard the words of Iosua, & renued the couenante of god, they wer sent awaye, and euerie one went to his owne possession. After that is mencioned the deathe of Iosuah euen with as many wordes, as it is now repeated.
Iosua when he should dye executed the office of a good prince.Here let vs note, that Iosua being almost at the poynt of death executeth the office of a good Prince, in exhorting y e people openly, & that with many words, not to depart from the sincere religion. In which thing he with a godly and holy study imitated Moyses, whom he succeded, who (as we reade toward the end of Deut.) behaued himselfe after the sawe sort. Iacob also the most holye Patriarche, euen now ready to dye, called vnto him al his children, and seriously, and with great holines preached vnto them. And that Princes and Kinges shoulde cōmodiously do the same, it is prescribed vnto them in Deuter. that they should be most studious in the law of God. For by that meanes were they made apt to admonish the people, and to exhort them faithfully to obserue the commaundementes of the Lord. The Israelites when they wer sent away by Iosua, ar sayd to haue gone to possesse the land, bicause as yet ther remained very many places for euery Tribe not yet conquered. Of which places when Iosua was dead, and in the time of the Elders they obtained certain, when as they got the victories in battailes, as we haue heard frō the beginning. After which victories the first transgression folowed, vnto which succeded the repentaunce before mencioned. But they abstained from idolatry as long as Iosua lyued, and all the time of the Elders, which wer equall with him, and ouerlyued him, who also had seene the wonderfull workes of the Lord. For at that time sound doctrine, and the woord of the Lord testified by notable victories, wer of great force.
That good Magistrate by whom the publike wealthe was then gouerned, had had experience of the wonderfull power of the woord of God, and therefore he continually laboured openly to inculcate & vrge it vnto the people of Israel, [Page 66] which thing could not want iust fruit. Experiēce declareth, People frame them selues to the example of their princes that almost in euery age, the people frame them selues to the example of their Magistrates. For if the Princes be zelous both of religion and godlines, their subiectes also wil embrace godlinesse and religion. But cōtrarywise if Princes liue vngodly and dissolutely, the people wil likewyse despise religion and lyue filthily. Moreouer, let the Magistrate as long as he is in authority, chiefly haue a care to thys, that the holy ministery be perfect, and that it teache and administer sound doctrine, and pure rites, and that he suffer not supersticious or wycked opinions to bee thrust into the church. But euen as he prouideth that other Artificers abuse not their sciences: so let him diligently beware y t the Ministers of the church do not either corrupt the godly rites, or falsify y e holy doctrine. We see that somtimes it happeneth, that the ministery in the Church is very laudable and pure. But yf an vngodly, and wicked Magistrate obtaine the chief rule of thinges, It profiteth much to y e Ecclesiasticall ministery to haue the magistrate a helper. that holy ministery is easely despised of the people, Wherfore it is made of lesse efficacy, than it would haue bene if it myght haue had the Magistrate a furtherer of it. Wherfore we must with most feruent praiers desire, that seing the church hath now by the benefit of God in many places recouered godly doctrine and sincere Ministers, that it would please God to geue vnto it Magistrates which may be most zelous of godlines and religion.
If a man should aske whether the people may be good and godly, although the Magistrate and Minister of the Church be corrupt. I answer, that somtyme they may be, as touching some: as we see to happen in the Papacy, where some godly and holy men are euery wher found, which neuertheles lyue vnder wicked, corrupt, and vngodly ciuyl Magistrates and Ministers of the church. Howbeit publike exercises of sound religion and godlynes, can not vniuersally be had wythout them.
8 And Iosua the Sonne of Nun, the seruaunt of the Lorde, dyed, when he was an hundred and ten yeares olde.
9 And they buryed him in the border of hys inheritance, in Thimnath-Heres in mount Ephraim, on the North syde of the hyl Gaas.
10 And euen so also all that generation were put vnto their fathers and ther arose an other generation after them, which neither knew the Lord, nor yet the woorke which he had done for Israel.
Iosua lyued not so long tyme as dyd Moyses, Iosua lyued not so long as Moyses. whom he by the commaundement of the Lord succeded, for Moyses was an .120. yeares old whē he dyed. But the same thinges which we reade in this place concerning the death and buriall of Iosua, are by as many wordes expressed in his own booke the .24. chap. The place wher they buryed him namely in mount Ephraim was his owne possession. For of that Tribe came Iosua. The Elders had sepulchers in theyr owne possessions. And the Elders prouided to haue Funeralles and Sepulchres in their owne possessions. For which cause it is written in the booke of Iosua towarde the ende, that the bones of Ioseph, which the Israelites brought with them out of Egipt, were buryed in Sichem, in that fielde I saye, which Iacob had assigned as proper vnto Ioseph. And it followeth: Eleazer also the sonne of Aaron dyed, whom they buryed in a hyll that pertayned to Phinehes his sonne, which hil was geuen him in mount Ephraim. But as touchyng the name of the Citye, in that it is here called Thimnath-Haeres, R. Selomoh. Why y e figure of the sun was set vpon the sepulchre of Iosua. Rabi Selomoh toward the end of the booke of Iosua wryteth that Thimnath is as much as Temunath, which is an Image. And for so much as Chaeres signifieth the Sunne, it declareth that the Chyldren of Israel placed the Image of the Sunne vpon the Sepulchre of Iosua, that it myghte remayne as a monument of the myracle by hym wrought. For he commaunded the Sunne and the Moone to stande styll, [Page] vntil he had finished the battaile. That therfore so noble a worke might not be had in obliuion, he supposeth that his tombe was adourned with those tokens. That this woord Chaeres signifieth the Sunne, Esay the .19. chap. and Iob the .9. doo testifye. Howbeit, this is to be considered in the booke of Iosua, that the name of this place doth vary. For in the booke of Iosua it is wrytten Timuna Serech, D. Kimhi. which yet R. D. Kimhi thinketh to be al one, the letters beyng somwhat transposed, which is a familiar and a thing much vsed in the hebrewe toung, as they that are learned in the same wel know.
It is lawfull to set foorth the benefites of god by certain tokens and outwarde signes.Neither was it absurdly or wickedly done of the Israelites so to adourne the tombe of Iosua. For it is meete that the benefites of God be set forth by tokens and certain monumentes. They had not at that tyme the aboundaunce and vse of bookes, which we haue. And therfore they vsed certain outwarde Symboles and tokens to helpe and to renewe their memorye. Iacob erected a stone in the place where he had sene God. Moyses dyd set vp twelue pyllers there, where he made a league betwene God and the people. The same was done also, when the people were passed ouer Iordane: for they gathered twelue stones out of the chanell of the riuer, which should be a token to their posteritye, that God had by a great miracle dried vp the waters of Iordan, when they passed ouer it. For by reason of our naturall ingratitude we do easely forgette the benifites of god, wherfore yf the figure of the sunne were set vpon the tombe of Iosua to testifye the miracle, wherin god at the prayers of Iosuah had cōmaunded it to stand that therby the hebrewes might by his conduicte and leading obtayne a perfect and noble victorie, this I say semeth not to be done ether vngodly or absurdely for y e Image of the Sunne was not therfore put ther, to bee worshipped, neither wer there any holly assemblyes in that place, A godly magistrate wonderfully profiteth the safety of the people. wherin yt was. Hereby it appeareth how a good and godly magistrate may wonderfully profite the healthe of the people. For the Israelites departed not frō the worshipping of god, so long as Iosua and the wyse and godly senatours lyued. Aptly therfore is it wrytten in y e Prouerbes the .29. chap: When the vngodly beare rule, the people mourne. And in the same booke .20. chap: a wyse king destroyeth the wicked, And in the 29. a iuste king setteth vp the land. Reason also sheweth that it is so, for the people do therfore endeuour them selues to please their princes, to fynd the more fauour at their handes: and therefore they frame them selues to their maners and fashions. And also bicause the people is by lawes and decrees compelled to obey the will and sentence of the princes.
They which dye ar sayde to be adioyned vnto the fathers. They wer put vnto their fathers. It is a kind of speche much vsed in the scriptures, that they which do dye, ar sayed to be adioyned to their fathers. For as touching the bodye they ar buried with them, and as concerning y e soule they ar adioyned vnto them. For if they haue lyued godly, they lyue with their holy elders, but yf vngodly, they ar tormēted with their wicked progenitours, if thei haue had any suche.
Howe some are sayde not to knowe the lord And there arose an other generation after them, which knew not the lorde. Not vndoubtedlye that any of them wer so rude, that altogether they knew not god. For the constante administration of the world & the vndisturbed order of thynges do testifie & crye that ther is a god. But this knowledge, wherof the history now speaketh, is vnderstand to be that which hath annexed with it allowing, Augustine. fayth and obedience. And they are thus sayd to be ignorant of god, bycause they obeyed him not, they did not put their hope and confidence in hym, nether wer they zelouse to worshippe hym purelye and sincerely. Augustine in his questions vpon this booke the 15. question affirmeth that it is playnely expressed in what sort the Israelites knew not god, namely in those excellent and wonderful workes, by which their elders came vnto the knowledge of the lord. We rede also of Pharao, y t he (as it is writtē in Exodus) answered vnto Moyses, [Page 67] that he knewe not the God of the Hebrues and the Lord, eyther bicause he was not minded to hearken vnto his commaundements, or els, though after a sorte he knewe him, yet he knewe not by certaine proofe that he was the God of the Hebrewes.
11 And the children of Israel dyd euyll in the syght of the Lorde, and serued Baalim.
12 And they forsooke the Lorde, the God of their Fathers, whych brought them out of the land of Egipt: & followed straunge Gods, euen the Gods of the nations that wer round about them, & bowed them selues vnto them. Wherefore they angred the Lord.
13 They forsooke, I say, the Lorde, and serued Baal & Astharoth.
Vnder those vngodlye Princes which succeeded the good, the people grieuously fell. Not bicause that they before had not also transgressed: for that (as we haue shewed) they grieuously synned in sparing of the Chananites, but nowe they began to contaminate and defile them selues with the superstitions and idolatry of those Nations.
R. Leui demaundeth in this place, how it could be, that none of those should be on lyue, which had sene the woorkes of God which hee hadde done for Israel, when as from their comming out of Egipt to this present time there were but 67. yeares passed. He answereth, that there might easely be some found, which had sene those woorkes: yea all men confesse that Phinches lyued at that tyme, but there were but fewe suche, and there were not many wise men, and whych could rightly and with authority instruct the young of those things, All y e Israelites became not idolatrers. which they had sene. And it might be that the scripture spake not these woordes of al y e people, but onely of the new Magistrates which succeded. Neither ought we hereby to vnderstand that all the Israelites were become Idolatrers, but the moste part of them, and which was more haynous, they openly professed wicked worshippinges, when as neuerthelesse some, although but few, and peraduenture secretly, claue vnto the true God.
Neither maye wee gather hereby, Miracles are not sufficient to persuade godlines. that myracles of them selues haue the power to be sufficient, either to bring in, or to retaine godlynes. For Chore, Dathan, and Abiram, Zimri, Achan, and the ten spies were without dout at the doing of the myracles which were done as well in Egipt as in the wildernes: and yet neuerthelesse they fell from God, and defiled them selues wyth moste grieuous wicked actes. Moreouer they whiche when Moyses was absent, woorshypped the golden Calfe, and were consecrated to Baal-Peor the God of the Moabites, they I say vndoubtedly beheld the wonders, whereby God defended the people from their enemies, and helped them in diuers necessities, and yet for al that they became Idolatrers, & committed wicked worshippings. Euen so came it to passe of the Scribes and Phariseys: for the history of the gospell declareth that they saw the wonderful workes of Christ, They which sawe not y e miracles in the old tyme, are not therfore excused from infidelitie. and yet they wonderfullye contemned and maliciouslye despised him. Wherefore we must thinke that this is not now rehersed of our history as a lawful excuse of the transgressiō which afterward happened. For if by that meanes the act of the Hebrewes coulde be defended, then might the superstitious & Idolatrers of our time defend their cause: for they might say, miracles haue now ceased, and those thinges which Christe or his Apostels did, are not in our time sene.
But we in this sort answer to them which doo thus excuse their infidelitye, The miracles which wer don in the old tyme profite vs also. namely that the miracles of Christ & the Apostles which were done once, ought also to suffice vs: for for our sakes were they put in writing, that wee readyng them, myght receaue fruite by them, beyng assured that they were ministred, not onely to them which lyued at that tyme, but also vnto vs.
So might it be aunswered to the Hebrewes, of whom we nowe entreate: what though ye haue not sene the miracles which wer done in the time of your Fathers? Haue not Moyses and Iosua faithfullye written all those thinges whych God hath done for your nations sake? Yea, and your Fathers which were present and saw them, haue trulye declared them vnto you, when ye were yet lytle ones. The scripture therfore doth not so speake at this presēt, to excuse that new generation. But to declare what pretence they made, when they departed from the woorshipping of the God of their Fathers, and what occasion they tooke, and also to set foorth that they were of a corrupt and naughtye nature, which when their good Maisters and Magistrates were dead, became vnmindfull of all true godlynes. For it is very likely, that they as they were impudent so also openly they boasted abroade those or such lyke woordes. We ar in doubt neither do we easely beleue that the Lord did so many miracles as our Fathers haue both written and also shewed vs. Who can tell whether they were so or no? we vndoubtedlye know not whether the Lorde or anye other God hath for our saluation sake caused such or so great thinges to be done. And so they leauing faith and forsaking the true God dyd euyll in the syght of the Lorde. How thinges in the scripture ar called good or euell in the sight of the lord By this hebrewe phrase it is declared that God was maruellouslye offended wyth thys their transgression. As contrarywise they are called good thinges in the sight of the Lord which doo excedingly please him. This is the common and receaued exposition.
Howbeit if we more narrowly marke this kinde of speeche, we shall easylye perceaue that it declareth some other thing vnto vs. Namely that those thinges which the Iewes dyd, were allowed by mans iudgement, and peraduenture had a goodly shew, but yet in Gods iudgement, they were most detestable. And withoute doubte that people synned a great deale more haynouslye in thys last transgression, than they did in the first. For there they onelye omitted the ouerthrowing of ymages and aultares, but here they woorship straunge Gods. Neither durst they do this onely, but they forsooke also the worshipping of the true God. Wherein vndoubtedly they were to be counted muche more corrupt than were the Samaritanes. For they although they woorshipped their Idoles, yet therwithall they ioyned the worshipping of the true God as it is declared in the second booke of Kinges. And in how euyll part God taketh it thus to bee reiected, he hath expressed by Ieremy the Prophet in the .2. chapter: Where hee commaunded the Hebrewes to go and looke vpon other Nations, An amplifieng of the idolatrye of y e Hebrewes and see whether they haue so vnconstantly chaunged the Gods of their Fathers. Whiche Nations if they were knowen constantlye to haue retayned their old woorshippings although they were vngodly, Israel might thereby learne not to abiect their old rites and customes of their Fathers. This wycked acte moreouer was for thys cause much more detestable, bicause they had newly receaued the benefit of their deliuery out of Egipt, and had also made a couenaunt with god, first by Moses, and afterward by Iosua, when he was euen at the point of death. Furthermore bicause they began to worship the gods of those nations, which they had nowe eyther driuen oute of the lande of Chanaan, or els made tributaries vnto them selues. What a diuelish madnes was this to count those gods for true goddes, which could not vndoubtedly against the Lord, helpe euen those whyche woorshypped them.
An outwarde signe of worshipping.And in this hebrew woord Veiischtechou is properly noted, that they threwe them selues to the ground, & prostrated them selues before those idoles: by which outward signe is declared the adoration. For as the bodye prostrateth it selfe, so also the soule is declared to be subiect vnto the Idole. And this woorde Bealim is expressed in the plurall nomber. But the Hebrewes sometymes take it for the syngular number. And althoughe by the strengthe of the woorde it shoulde bee translated Lordes, yet wee muste in many places tourne it Lord. For thys [Page 68] woorde Baal signifieth a Lorde, a Husbande, a Patrone, and suche like. What Baal & Bealim signifi. Astharoth. Thys woord Astharoth is lykewise spoken in the plurall number. And the Idole is so called, bicause it stoode to be woorshipped in fourme of a Sheepe, for a Sheepe in hebrew is called Aschtor. And as it appeareth by the first booke of Kynges, it was an Idole of the Zidonians, Iupiter Ammō was expressed by the figure of a Ramme. Augustine. wherunto Salomon by the instigation of his wyues buylded sometimes a Chappell. But what God the Ethnikes woorshypped in the fourme of a Sheepe, I do not very well knowe. How be it this I am sure of, that Iupiter Ammon was figured like a Ramme. And Augustine who being of Affrica, had the Affricke speche perfectly, which (as we haue taught in an other place) differeth not much from the hebrew toung, Virgil. What Baal & Astharoth wer with the Affricians. for they of Affricke are Phenitians, for they came from Tyre and Sydon. Wherefore Virgil called Dido a Sidonian. Augustine (I say) writeth that the Affricians called Iupiter by the name of Baal, as the Lord of all. And by this name Astharoth are signified Iunos, bicause that Asther in that toung signifieth Iuno. But why that woorde was spoken in the plurall number, he thincketh it was therefore done, bicause there were very many ymages of that Goddesse. And I wyll adde, bicause those gods had obtayned sundry properties and reasons, as well by their offices appointed vnto them, as by the places where they woorshypped. For Iupiter was called Ammon, Stator, Pheretrius, and Hospitalis, Iuno also was called Lucina, Argiua, Samia. &c.
I thinke we may gather by this history, Religiō nedeth continually to be purged. that the nature of man is so frayle and weake, that it can not long abyde in the sincere and pure woorshipping of God. Wherby it commeth, that religion hath continually nede of repairing and purging. For the Israelites, as soone as their good Prince and godlye Magistrate was dead, fell straight way from true godlynes. Moreouer, the same oftentimes happened vnder their kinges: yea and in our Churche it happeneth after the same sort. For we haue seene, and we haue with great griefe had experience, that the Apostles being taken away, yea, and when they were yet lyuyng, ther sprang foorth many and sundry errours. Which vndoubtedlye is no maruaile, when as Christ hath foretolde vs, that after the good seede was sowen, straight way the enuious man came, which sowed tares therwithall.
¶Of Idolatry.
BVt bycause we haue now heard of the transgression of the Hebrewes how they polluted them selues with Idolatry, I thinke it good to speake a fewe wordes of thys detestable synne.
The woord is a greeke woord, and is compounded of [...] and [...] and it is nothing els but the worshipping of Idoles. The Etimologye of Idolatry. What an Idol is And [...] is deriued of this woord [...], which signifieth a fourme, or as you woulde saye a shape. But an Idole is (as wee nowe speake of it) euerye fourme or shape whyche menne haue inuented vnto them selues to signifye or expresse God. And as there are found many and sundry matters of these fourmes, so also are ther diuers kindes of Idoles. Wherfore whether they be stones, wood, or mettals, A diuision of Idoles by matters. by which God is outwardly expressed there to be worshipped, these are grosse and most manyfest Idoles. There may be also a spiritual matter: which then happeneth, when those formes and images are nothing els but the conceauinges of the hart and minde, which men make for them selues to represent God, An Idole visible & inuisible. not as the Scripture declareth him, but rashly, and according to their own fantasy. Wherfore according to the conditions of the matter an Idole is deuided into two kindes, Two partes of religious worshipping. y e one is outward & visible, which runneth into the senses of man, and the other is inward, that is, wrought in the inward partes of the mynde. There are also twoo partes of religious woorshipping. The one is inwarde, Of what thinges inwarde woorshipping consisteth. wherein wee beleue in God hymselfe, wee put our confidence in him, wee geue him thankes, wee submyt our selues and ours vnto hym, and religiouslye by prayers call vpon hym. Of these actions vndoubtedly the inwarde adoration consisteth.
Of what thinges outward worshipping cō sisteth.But the other part hath outward notes, whereby we expresse our hart, in prostrating the body, in bowing the knee, in vncouering the head, in speaking and in exercising rites and ceremonies instituted by God. And this is an outwarde woorshipping or adoration. Outward sygnes of adoratiō are also geuen vnto Princes But wee must note that suche outwarde signes of bowing the body or knees, and suche other lyke are also geuen vnto creatures, to Princes I saye and Kinges which doo in earth represent vnto men the authority of God, and are his Vicars in the administration of thinges. And without doubt they are then to bee esteemed nothing els, but certaine sure testimonies, by which as many as are Subiectes, doo trulye and from the hart confesse, that they in the name of God wyll be subiect and obey such powers, as much as shalbe by godlynes and the woord of God lawfull.
But we must there take heede, least in our inward iudgement we attribute more vnto them than is meete, What we must beware of whē we geue vnto Princes signes of adoration. or looke for greater thinges at theyr handes than their power and might is able to perfourme. Otherwise we should not auoyde idolatrye. Wherefore if a man in bowing him selfe to his Prince, would testifye that his Prince coulde not erre, and that it were lawfull for him to doo any thing, and as he lust him selfe to commaunde whatsoeuer pleased him, that man vodoubtedly should be counted an Idolatrer, and should commit the same both inwardly and outwardlye. The Papistes commit Idolatrye towarde their Pope. And whether the hirelinges of the Pope vse this, we may hereby easely gather, bicause they do so throw them selues downe at his feete, that there testify that they wyll be subiect vnto him as to the onely Vicar of Christ in earth, as to the vniuersall Bishoppe of the Church, as to him which cannot erre in decreing doctrine of fayth, and finally, to whom onelye it is lawfull to discerne as hee lyst him selfe of religion and Christian discipline. Wherefore let this be euery where a sure and firme rule, Note a certain sure rule. that these outwarde submissions of the body doo then pertayne vnto Idolatry, when as they are testimonies of the mynd, attributing more vnto a creature than is mete, or which are onely proper vnto God. For they are not referred vnto God him selfe, or to the obedience of his commaundementes, but to vayne formes & shewes, which we haue fayned vnto our selues, and conceaued in our mynde.
Hereby may we also gather, that the inuocations of Saintes which the Papistes vse, Inuocatiōs of the dead pertayne to idolatry. are Idolatrous. For they geue vnto sayntes that which longeth onely vnto God, namelye that they being absent shoulde heare our praiers, or that they can be present at one time, either euery wher, or els in many places, therby to succour those which call vpon their names in diuers partes of the worlde. Augustine in his Epistle to Dardanus durst not affirme that, Augustine. A creature can not be in many places at one tyme. no not euen of the soule of Christ, namely that at one time it might be in many places Wherfore that which Christ said vnto the theefe: This daye shalt thou be with me in Paradise, he expoundeth the same to be vnderstand as touching his diuine nature, for that the bodye of Christ should the same daye be layde in the sepulchre, and his soule should be in hell. Basilius. Didimus. Neither coulde that soule be both in Paradise and in hell at one time Basilius also de spiritu sancto, & also Didimus would not graunt this vnto the Angels, that they can at one time be in diuers places, affirming that that soly is to be graunted vnto the onely nature of God. But they which do cal vpon saintes, they beleue that they doo heare them, and that they are present with them, which without doubt is to attribute more vnto them than the strength and order of a nature created can suffer.
But here they trifle and say, that they doo not thinke so, but that God hym selfe which heareth their prayers doth open vnto the Sayntes, what is required of them. But thus I aunswer, that they deceaue both them selues, and also others. For they knowe not whether God wyll shewe vnto the Sayntes their vowes or prayers. Wherfore the praiers which they poure out cannot leane vnto faith, which ought to be certaine and without doubt.
They bryng also a fayned lye of the glasse (as they say) of the deuine essense, [Page 69] wherein the Sainctes beholde all thynges. A fayned lie of the papists of a glasse of the deuine essence. But this theyr fayning hath no foundation in the holy Scriptures. Furthermore, seing they will needes haue it so, admitte it were as they fayne it to bee. Yet shoulde they bee compelled to graunte that that theyr glasse hath not a naturall representyng but a voluntarye, so that there the Sainctes can see that onely which GOD will haue sene: Otherwise withoute any exception the Sainctes myghte there see all thynges: whiche is both false, and also moste manifestlye resisteth the holy Scriptures. Bycause, of that daye (sayeth the Lorde) neyther doe the Aungelles knowe, whiche yet doe see the face of the Father. Moreouer the Papistes doe not after thys manner call vppon Sainctes: for if they did they shoulde saye thus, Cause O God that thys or that Saincte maye knowe those thinges whiche I desire of hym, and that he maye bee with me, and graunte me that whiche I desire. But they doe cleane contrarilye, O Saincte Peter (saye they) Sainct Paule pray for me, bryng thys or that to passe for me. Wherfore they thinke that the saincts do altogether heare & vnderstand their voyces, whiche thing if they thoughte not, then were their doinges vtterly folyshe.
They declare also by their titles & additions which they ascribe vnto y e blessed virgine, to the crosse, and other creatures, The Papistes attribute more vnto creatures than is conuenient. how far more worthy they esteme and iudge of them, than their nature can suffer. Neither are they affeard (as I haue before declared, when I entreated of the heresyes of the Papistes) to lyghte vp lyghtes, Waxe tapers and Lampes vnto creatures, to cense them, and to doe other thyngs, which the Ethnikes, An alter is not to be erected but only vnto God. and also the Iewes in the olde law were wont to geue vnto God only. What more? Do they not builde alters vnto Images of Sainctes? But vnto whom alters are builte, the same are confyrmed by a sure testimonye to be powers of God, or ells Gods. Augustine in hys x. Tome & .vi. Sermon writeth thus: An alter is, Augustine. which testifyeth y t to be counted for God to whom it is erected. For they, namely the Ethnikes, what GOD they haue, and y t they take that Image for a god the alter doth testifie. What should the alter do there if they counted not y t for a god? Let no mā say vnto me: It is not y e power of god, it is not god. But I haue already sayd: I would to god they knew this so wel as all we know it. But what they count it, or what they make of it, that alter testifyeth.
But say the aduersaries: we therfore do these things, Of miracles which are done at the alters of saintes. bicause we haue by experience proued y t they please god: for as much as he there worketh miracles. I know in dede that god hath sometimes wrought miracles by sainctes, and such as were dead. God hath some times wrought miracles by dead bodyes & corpses of dead saintes. For the bones of Elizeus by the touche of them restoreh one being dead to lyfe. And the same Elizeus vsed the cloke of Elias to deuide the waters of the riuers, that he myght make the more expedition on his iourney. But god doeth therefore woorke these thinges sometymes, that the doctrine of the Prophetes and the Apostles whiche was the very woorde of god might bee confyrmed. And yet the Scripture declareth not that there was any inuocation made eyther vnto Elias or Elizeus when those miracles were done. But for as muche as the Papistes by these their inuocations seeke not the confyrmation of the doctrine of the Gospell, Miracles which are done at the inuocations of the dead are to be referred vnto Sathan. but rather are diligente aboute this, to establyshe superstitions, those miracles whiche they boaste of, are to be referred rather vnto the deuill than to God. For Sathan seeketh for nothyng so much, as to leade men awaye from the sincere worshippyng of GOD. This vndoubtedlye was assayed by the enchaunters of Pharao, and that suche thinges shoulde sometime happen vnto vs by Antichriste, Why God suffreth such miracles to be wrought by the deuill. Paule hath faythfully admonished the Thessalonians. But thou wilte saye that the deuill can not doe these thynges vnlesse God will and permitte. I graunte that. And why it is hys will so, there are two causes sette forthe in the Scriptures.
Of the which the one is gathered out of Deutr. namely bicause he would tempt vs, wherby might euidently appeare how much we esteme his word, and whether we will suffer our selues to be plucked from him by suche illusions: the seconde cause is to punyshe the vnbeleuers. For so doth Paule teache vs to the Thessalonians bycause (sayeth he) they haue not receaued the loue of the truth therefore they are deliuered to be deluded with inchantementes and deuelishe miracles.
But there are two places in the Scriptures whiche are diligentlye to bee weyghed and considered, that the doctrine now in hande may bee the more confyrmed. The fyrste is written in the Actes of the Apostles the tenth Chapiter. Of Cornelius the Centurion, Cornelius caste himself down at the feete of Peter. to whom when Peter came he caste himselfe at his feete. But Peter woulde not suffer that, yea he reprehended hym, and aunswered in thys manner. Doe not so, ryse vp, for I also am a man. We read also in the Apocalipse, Iohn fel downe at the feete of the Angell. that Iohn fell downe before the Aungell, but he admonished hym that he shoulde not so doe: I am (sayeth he) thy fellowe seruaunt. These two places maye thus bee vnderstande, that Peter and the Aungell condemned these actes, as in a manner Idolatrous, as thoughe the Centurion and Iohn shoulde attribute any deuine nature, Neither Cornelius nor Iohn would worship creatures. the one to Peter, the other to the Aungell, and shoulde haue geuen vnto them more honoure than was conueniente for creatures. But it seemeth that thys can not be easelye thoughte of eyther of these. The Scripture testifyeth that the Centurion feared and worshipped God. How should we therefore beleue that he coulde be led, to beleue that Peter was God or at the leaste to attribute deuine honoures vnto a creature? And it is not very likely that Iohn whiche was either an Apostle or ells a notable deuine (as some call hym) coulde not discerne an Aungell from God. If so bee that neyther of these woulde worship a creature in stead of the Creator, thys remaineth, that it is not lawfull to geue vnto creatures this kind of outward reuerence. Wherfore we shall seme not to haue sayd well before, in saying that these thynges may be geuen vnto Princes and Kinges. To thys I aunswere, there muste be a difference obserued betwene a ciuile and a worldelye honoure and a deuine and religious woorshipping, as we haue before expounded. The Centuriō & Iohn sinned in excesse but they can not be accused of Idolatrye. Furthermore we muste knowe that these two men, Cornelius I say and Iohn intended not by thys their worshipping to transferre the honour of God vnto creatures. Howbeit it may easely bee, that they fell to an vnmeasurable signe of reuerence, and so in that excesse they somewhat committed sinne.
But as touching Kinges and Princes, we are in much lesse daunger of falling, than toward Angels or ministers of Christ. For these bycause they exercise the spiritual office, the honor which is geuen vnto thē draweth nighe to a religious adoration. Wherfore in those places eyther the bowing of the knee or of the bodye are not by themselues condemned. But in as muche as they are geuen for Religion sake. Moderate honoures therefore maye bee geuen especially when they are geuen for Religion sake. And thus muche at this presente as concerning thys thyng. But let vs remember that whiche I haue also before admonyshed, that thys also belongeth to Idolatrye, when we woorship the true God by other wayes and rytes, They which worship God otherwise thā he hath instituted, are Idolatrers. than he hath willed vs, and prescribed vnto vs. If we shall doe otherwyse, we shall woorship an Idole accordyng to that seconde forme before described, in fayning to oure selues in oure mynde or harte any God, whiche delighteth in a woorshippyng inuented by men: and there is none suche. Wherfore we shall not honoure and worship the true God, but an Idole whiche we haue conceaued in our mynde.
And vndoubtedlye so oughte we to vnderstande Paule, when he sayeth to the Corrinthians in the fyrste Epistle: we knowe that an Idole is nothyng in the worlde. Paule teacheth not that an Idole is nothyng as touchyng the [Page 70] shape and outwarde forme. For no man doubteth but that those Idoles haue place either in the outwarde matter or ells in oure hartes. By an Idole there fore he vnderstoode not the signe it selfe, but the thing whereunto it is referred. And he meant that the thing it selfe whiche is signified by Idoles, is nothing, for as much as there is no where a God which may be represented, or els deliteth in such Images.
14 And the wrathe of the Lorde waxed hotte agaynste Israell, and he deliuered them into the handes of raueners, that spoyled them and solde them into the handes of theyr enemyes round about them: Neither had they any power any longer to stande before their enemyes.
15 Whether so euer they went, the hand of the Lord was agaynst them with euil lucke, euen as the Lord promised them, and euen as the Lord sware vnto them. And he punyshed them sore.
The punishment imposed by God for Idolatry is now set forth to be diligently considered by vs. There are two thinges, which are declared.
Fyrst is described that the anger of God was kindled agaynst the Israelites. How we shuld vnderstand god to be angry and to repent. Secondly how he punished the guiltye. God therefore bycause of so grieuous a wicked crime of the Hebrewes waxed hotte agaynst them: which is not so to be vnderstande, as though God had any affections, for that pertaineth only vnto men. But according to the common and receaued exposition of these places, we fele that god is like vnto men that are angry, after which selfe same reason it is written that he sometime repenteth. Wherfore, God eyther to repent or to be angry, is nothing ells, but that he doth those thinges, which men repenting and men angrye vse to do. For the one do eyther alter or ells ouerthrowe that which before they had done: and the other take vengeaunce of iniuries done vnto thē. Ambrose in his booke of Noe and the Arke, the fourth Chapter, Ambrose. speaketh otherwise of the anger of God. For neither doth God (sayth he) thinke as men do, as though some contrary sentence should come vnto him, neither is he angrye, as though he were mutable, but therfore these thinges are beleued, to expresse the bitternesse of our sinnes, which hath deserued the wrath of God, and to declare that the faulte hath so much and so farre encreased, that euen God also (whiche naturally is not moued eyther by anger, or hatred, or any passion) semeth to be prouoked vnto wrath, &c. And aptely is there mencion made of the anger, before the punishment is rehearsed. For mē vse fyrst to be angry, before they reuenge: What anger is. Neyther is anger any other thyng ells (if we may beleue Aristotell in hys Rhetorikes) but a desire of reuengement bicause of contentempte. For they which perceaue themselues to be despised and contemned, do straightway thinke, how they may be reuenged, and they diligently meditate howe by some punishment they may requite the iniurye or despite done vnto them.
Two kindes of punyshments are mencioned in thys place, Two kynds of punishmentes. the taking away of goodes and seruitude: of the which the one is grieuouser than the other. For it is far more grieuous to be brought into bondage, than to be spoyled of goods. But God vseth so to do to punyshe by certayne degrees, those which haue deserued euill. For he doth not by and by punyshe most greuously. And as touching the woordes we must note that Schis and Schisch signifye one thing, for Shin and Samech haue great affinitie the one with the other, which D. Kimhi hath also noted in thys place. Moreouer where it is sayd, whether soeuer they wente oute, the same interpreter addeth, to fyghte: And in deede it is very lykely, although I am not ignoraunte that that sentence may be more largely taken, [Page] namely to vnderstande that whatsoeuer they tooke in hande to do, or to what thinges so euer they applyed themselues vnto, all those thynges happened vnluckely vnto them.
By this place is gathered, that no mans goodes are taken awaye, neyther are any brought into bondage, excepte God himselfe both will and also bryng to passe the same. For it is sayd here that he gaue them into the handes of raueners, and sold them into the handes of their enemyes round aboute them. Dauid in hys .xliiii. Psalme grieuously complayneth of this plague, and saith that God had solde hys withoute any price: Augustine. which place Augustine consideryng, he sayeth that at the fyrst sighte it semeth absurde, that any shoulde be solde, when no price is geuen. But thus he aunswereth, as touching the enemies, which solde the Israelites, there was a price geuen by the byers. But as touching God, which was the principall cause of the selling, he tooke no price. For what could those Idolatrous, violent, and rauenous men, vnto whom y e Iewes were deliuered to be sold, geue vnto him? Vndoubtedly they neither bought nor deserued those commodities with any reward. Or ells we may thynke, that the price of the Hebrewe bondmen, was so small and vile, that it was counted for nothyng, The wicked sell themselues to sinnes without any price. and so by thys figure of speach they were sayd to be sold without any price. Wherefore Esaye in hys .lii. Chapter, writeth: Ye are solde for nought.
And this phrase serueth very well for those, which do binde thēselues to sinnes and wickednesse, when as therby, they shall get no commoditie at all. And how hard this bondage was which the Hebrewes serued when they were so solde by their enemies, it is manifestly expressed in Deuteronomye, for there it is sayde: Thou shalt serue thine enemye, whom the Lord shall send vppon thee, in Hunger, in thurst, and in nakednesse, and also in al penurye, and he shal put an yron yoke vppon thy necke, till he shall destroye thee. Moreouer by these examples we are also taughte, what Christians euery where deserue for their daylye transgressions and innumerable superstitions and also Idolatrous woorshippynges. Neyther is it to bee doubted but that a heape of euelles are at hande excepte Christ by fayth deliuer vs from those curses of the lawe.
The hand of y e Lord is alwayes present in all our actions. VVhether soeuer they went, the hand of the Lord was agaynst thē with euell lucke. In all our actions the hande of the Lorde is continually presente, for withoute hys myghte and power, we can not so muche as moue oure selues. Wherefore both good successes and euell are to bee ascribed vnto hym.
Neyther had they any power any longer to stande before theyr enemyes. And no meruayle, for by reason their goods were spoyled, and their number diminished, bicause of those which wer brought into bondage they wer so impayred and weakened, that they could by no meanes match with their aduersaries. Vndoubtedly, if we diligently consider the histories from that time, wherin superstition began to reygne in y e church, we shal fynde that our princes haue had either no good successe at al, or els very smalin their expeditiōs against y e enemies of y e fayth. The cause of the vnluckye battels against the Turkes. We haue fought and y e oftentimes against y e Turkes and Sarazens, but for the moste part vnluckely: Neither do the gouernours both of the publicque wealth and also of the Churche feele that the hand of the Lord is agaynst them with euill lucke, and that that is the cause why they can not stand before their enemyes.
Agayne let vs note, that the Scripture doth here most manifestly testifye, that God him selfe deliuered the Israelites into the handes of rauenors, & solde them into bondage, for that that thinges were done by hys motion. And this doth Ezechiel the Prophete euidentlye shewe, where he describeth, how Nabuchad-nezar standyng in the ende of two wayes, and in a maner determining to directe his host one way, was of God chaunged, and after a sorte forced to turne [Page 71] his armye agaynst Ierusalem. And yet must we not vnderstand these thinges so, How god may be sayde to worke euyll workes in the wicked. as thoughe we should thinke that God doth instille a new malice into y e heartes of the wicked. For they nede it not. For of what sorte soeuer they be, they are framed of malice and synnes, but GOD, seyng he is a strength and workyng of most efficacy, driueth them as he doth all other thyngs to be moued & to worke. Wherfore they whiche are altogether corrupte, and voyde, and destitute of the grace and fauour of God, can do nothyng but onely worke euill. But God, God vseth the sinnes of the wicked. by whose motion they are stirred vp to worke, directeth their euill doynges, cruelties, spoylinges, lustes and tyrannies, to what end so euer it shall seme good to his iustice and most highe prouidence. Moreouer let vs here consider, It is most vnhappy to haue God angrye. how miserable and wretched a thing it is for a man to haue God angry. Wherfore let vs most diligently take hede, that in all our affayres that we take in hande, we first of all reconcile him vnto vs, by an vpright faith in Christ: for he beyng angry & agaynst vs, nothyng can prosperously go forward.
These thynges did the Lorde as he had spoken and sworne. Threatninges are set forth here and there in the lawe of GOD and especially in Deut. But we neuer read (that I can tell of) that an othe was in that place ioyned with the threatnyngs. Howbeit we must beleue, Whether an othe be ioyned to the threatninges put in the scriptures. that God when he made lawes did somtymes also adde to an othe. For the Scripture in this place testifieth vnto vs that he sware, whiche is sufficient, thoughe it be not found in any other place. Moreouer let vs call to memory, that the latter causes, The secōd causes are not to be so much cō sidered as the first cause. whiche commonly are called the second causes are much to be considered in the successe of thynges, as well prosperous as vnfortunate: but yet we must much more haue a regarde vnto the first and chiefe cause, namely vnto God hym selfe. So that then when thynges prosper not with vs, we must be angry with our selues, bycause we are alienated from God. And that this is true, this place manifestly proueth. For the Israelites were the same men which they were before, and their enemyes also the same men whiche they were before. Wherfore if the Iewes had had God now as fauorable vnto them as they had before, vndoubtedly they should haue obteyned the selfe same victoryes. Therfore they ought to ascribe all that vnluckynesse vnto them selues. For vnlesse god had bene angry with them, for the Idolatry whiche they had committed, they should with as good lucke haue ouer comed their enemyes now as they did before. Therfore the Prophetes whē they lamented for the miseries of their people, testified that iustice, honour, and also goodnesse are to be ascribed vnto GOD, but confusion and ignominye vnto them selues.
16 Neuerthelesse the Lord raysed vp iudges, whiche deliuered thē out of the handes of their oppressors.
17 And yet for all that they would not harcken vnto their iudges but went a whoryng after straunge Gods, and bowed them selues vnto them. They turned quickly out of the waye, whiche their Fathers walked in, obeying the commaundementes of the Lord, But they did not so.
Now is briefly declared vnto y e readers, what conditiōs & alteratiōs y e Israelites had in al y e tyme, which was betwene y e paines & punishmētes now described, wherwith they were for their Idolatry punished, & y e first king, whom they chose vnto thē selues, reiecting Samuel. When they were grieuously oppressed, they sighed & groned, & repenting thē selues, turned vnto god, & desired ayde of him. And God as he is gentle & merciful, despised not their mournings & inuocations but sent them some one iudge, by whose leadyng and conduicte they were deliuered from their oppressors. But they when they were deliuered, and set at libertie, they lyued at pleasure & fell agayne into their olde wickednesse. Wherfore [Page] God accordyng to his iustice punished them agayne, and they agayne when they were grieuously oppressed, groned, & continually prayed vnto god, whiche yet agayne by an other iudge deliuered them from misery and calamitie.
The whole tyme of the iudges is deuided into three differences.Wherfore the whole time of the iudges may be aptely distributed into thre differences. First he Hebrues were iustly punished for their synnes and wickednesse. Secondly they beyng oppressed, wept, prayed, and implored helpe at gods hande. Lastly god by some iudge deliuered them. Moreouer this is to be marked, The people lyued better vnder the iudges than they dyd whē they were dead. that the Iewes, althoughe they did not wholly obey the iudges, yet for all that they lyued somewhat better as longe as those iudges remayned on lyue.
Wherfore as touchyng outward thinges that publicque wealth had somewhat better successe vnder iudges, and the people myght as long as they lyued, be at rest from oppressions, and liue at liberty. But they were no soner deade, but they returned to their old fashions. Whiche thyng euidently declareth, how they did in vayne before pretend, that they had not sene the workes, which god had done in deliuering their elders out of Egypt. As thoughe they should haue sayd, if so be that we were sure of those so noble workes, we would not now haue forsakē the ceremonies of our fathers and chosen new rites. These alterations & chaungynges (I say) manifestly testifye that that pretence was vayne. For euery age sawe the wonderfull workes of god, when as oftentymes he did by iudges set at liberty the people beyng oppressed. And yet thoughe they had sene these thinges they could not kepe them selues, but that whē their iudge was deade they fell agayne into the same wicked crimes.
The fruicte of y e punishmētes whiche GOD imposed.This is also to be noted, that it is here written that god vsed to be moued at the sighyng and teares of the Israelites. For this was the fruite of the paynes & punishmentes, namely that they might repente, & beyng admonished by miseries might vnderstand whether they should flye vnto. And god in hearing of thē when they cried, had onely a respecte vnto hys promises, goodnesse and name. Furthermore let those whiche delyghte in oppressyng and doyng iniury to the poore, note here that the tyme will come at the lengthe, that god will take in hand the causes of the afflicted. For althoughe they be euill, and haue worthily fallen into calamities and miseries: yet bycause he hath promised that he will reuenge the violence and cruelty done agaynst the poore, therfore he will one day deliuer and reuenge them, euen for this cause, namely, bycause he neyther can nor will fayle his office and promise. God hath also sometymes cō passion of euill men whē they are oppressed. And in delyuering those whiche were euill from present miseryes, he graunteth vnto them occasion and tyme of repenting that except they truly and vnfainedly repent, they may be altogether in excusable. Moreouer this goodnesse of God, whiche he vseth also towardes the euill, beareth most manifest witnesse of the most perfect fayth and truth of god. For althoughe men do filthyly fall from that couenaunt which they haue made with god, yet he forgetteth not his goodnesse and promises.
18 And when the Lord raysed vp vnto thē Iudges, the Lord was with the Iudge, and deliuered them out of the handes of their enemyes, all the dayes of the Iudge. For the Lorde repented at theyr sorrowinges whiche they had, by reason of them, that oppressed and vexed them.
The iudges were before of the cōmon sort and vulgare estate.Still is declared after what sorte God behaued himself toward the Israelits in the tyme of the Iudges. Neither doth this speche, when he saith. And God raysed vp Iudges, want an emphasis. For it is expressed that they wer before of the common sorte and vulgare state but god so chaunged them by his spirite, that he inspired them with couragious hartes, strength, and moste wyse Counsels. This vndoubtedly was that stirring vp, which is now declared. For God vseth, when he appoynteth any man to any office, to geue him strength & [Page 72] abilitie to performe the same. Whiche thing we read did come to passe in Saul & also in Dauid, and before them in Moses, who beyng before shepheardes & horsekepers, when they came to beare rule, did by the power of the spirite of GOD worke maruelous thinges, and proued noble men. For GOD (as the scripture now speaketh) raysed them vp. And not cōtent with this, but he fully persuaded them, and with inwarde feelyng made them assured, that they were now elected by God, to deliuer the Israelites and to set them at libertie. And without doubt vnlesse they had ben fully persuaded of this, it had not ben lawfull for them to haue fought agaynst their Lordes, or to rebelle: for so much as it is not the office of priuate men to fight with his enemies. Wherfore Cato, An example of Cato. whose ciuile iustice is meruelously commended, gaue his sonne charge, y t when he was dismissed from warre, and no more bounde by an othe of warre, he should not fight against the enemyes of the publicque wealth. Knowyng this right well, that it is lawful for no man, to drawe weapon against any, excepte it be by publicque authoritie, I haue now expounded what this meaneth that God raysed vp Iugdes: Now let vs see for what cause God did the same.
Bicause (sayeth the historye) he repented. God is not reconciled vnto vs by the outward workes whiche we do. What is the receaued exposition of these kindes of speache we haue before declared. But now we must marke what this meaneth whiche followeth: At their sorowinges. We may not thincke that God was reconciled or made fauorable vnto them by the strength and dignitye of the worke. For that do men obteyne onely by fayth in our mediatour Iesus Christ, to whiche fayth in these and such lyke kynde of speaches we must continually haue a respect vnto, therby to loke vpon the roote from whence y e fruites of true repentaunce, and also sighinges and teares are deriued. Neither do we for all that denye, God rewardeth good workes. but that good workes springyng from faith are so acceptable vnto GOD, that he rewardeth them with excellent giftes, as well outward, as also spirituall, whiche commeth of his goodnesse. So sayd Daniel vnto the kyng of Babilon: By almes redeme thy sinnes. That is, dryue awaye the paynes and punishementes, wherewith otherwise thou shalt be punished.
But if thou shalt demaunde what is to be thought, Of morall workes done without faith. of those ciuill and morall good workes, whiche are done without fayth. I aunswere, that for so much as they procede from a viciate and corrupt nature, they are therfore sinnes. And for that cause they deserue dampnation and hell fyre. Howbeit God, to the end that the ordre and iust disposition of thinges in the worlde might be kept, and to defend assemblyes of humane kinde, fellowshippes and publicque wealthes, causeth that such actions haue many rewardes, not for the worthynes and dignitie of those actiōs, but by reason of a certain connexion, wherwith god would these thinges to be knitte together. Wherfore it commeth to passe, that when as hypocrites do worke outward workes, sometymes goodly to the shew, therby they obtayne notable prayse. And they whiche are rulers as longe as they honestly behaue them selues, in doyng iustice, either in warlike affaires, or elles in honest conuersation (as the Romanes in the olde tyme did) may obteyne a moste large Empyre. For so would god haue discipline kept, the world and publicque wealthes preserued. God did therfore repēt at the sorrowyngs of the Israelites, bycause thorough the faith, from whence sorrowinges and groninges proceded, he was made mercifull and fauorable vnto them.
But peraduenture some man will doubte, whether god, when he repented, God doth not so repente that he is chaunged were in any poynt chaunged? All the godly confesse in a maner with one mouth, that god can by no meanes be chaunged, for as much as that is a certaine signe both of imperfection and also of inconstancy. But this variety which here happeneth is not to be ascribed vnto god, but vnto vs. Of this thing I haue spokē som what before, but this semeth to be added at this presente. If a man will say, that god without controuersy ceassed to fauour the Chananites agaynst y e Israelites, whom he had before so strengthened, that he would haue them to oppresse the Iewes: and agayne afterward to helpe the Hebrues, whom before he semed that [Page] hys will was to haue them oppressed by the Chananites. No man can deny, but that these thinges haue variety. How can we therfore defend the will of god frō chaunging? Variety is the effectes, & not in God. I answere, that by the 28. chap: of Ieremy, it manifestly appeareth, y e there is a diuersitie in the effectes, when as for all y e god in very dede, continually retayneth the selfe same will. For it is thus written there in his name: When as I shall speake agaynst a kyngdome or nation, to destroye, roote out, and ouer throwe it, if they shall repente, I will also repente. And contrarywise when as I shal speake good of a kingdome or nation, to builde and to plant, and that nation or kingdome shall do euill in my sight, I will then also repente me of the good, that I had decreed to bestowe on them. These wordes declare, that god in these kindes of threatninges and promises is therfore not chaunged, bycause he speaketh not absolutely & simply, but vpon condition. But the accomplishing or makyng voyde of the conditions, is to be considered toward vs. And therfore the chaunge is not to be attributed vnto him, but vnto vs. But if thou shalt aske me, whether god doth before know and decree, what shall come to passe as touching these conditions? I will graunt that he doth. For he euen from without begynnyng doth not only know of thyngs that shal come to passe, but also hath decreed what shallbe. But bycause the hid priuitye of his will as touching these thinges, is not opened vnto vs in the holy Scriptures, therfore ought we to follow that rule, whiche (as we haue declared) is pronounced by Ieremy. This rule did the Niniuites and also Ezechias the kyng consider and beholde beyng, not yet set forth. God when he threateneth things whyche come not passe, lyeth not. For although destruction was threatned them in the name of god, yet for al that by repentaunce and prayers they escaped it. Neither is there any cause why we should suspect that god doth lye in any thyng, when he so threatneth or promiseth any thinges, whiche afterwarde come not to passe. For as touching Ezechias, he could no way escape death, if we should looke vpon the natural causes, whiche are commonly called the second causes. Wherfore the sentēce beyng pronounced accordyng to those causes, he coulde not be accused of a lye. And the Niniuites, if god had done vnto them, as their sinnes deserued, they should vtterly haue perished. And god commaunded Ionas to preache according to their merites. Furthermore a lye can not be so takē, in an oration which hath a supposition or condition ioyned with it, as it may be in absolute and simple sentences, when as the successe depēdeth of the kepyng or violatyng of the condition. More ouer in these wordes of the history is expressed the cause why the Israelites sorowed and sighed, namely bycause they were oppressed and afflicted, and that with those kindes of calamityes whiche are before mencioned, namely bycause they were spoyled, sold, and losyng their liberty and goods, they were no longer able to stande before their enemyes.
19 Yet for all that as soone as the Iudge was dead, they turned and did worse than their fathers, in following straunge gods, and in seruing them and bowing them selues vnto them, and ceased not from the Actes of them, and from their hard waye.
When the Hebrues in the tyme of the Iudge that was raysed vp had a restyng tyme, and came to a tollerable estate, that iudge beyng dead, they fell agayne worse than they did before, and committed much more grieuous things than did their elders. Whereby is founde true, that whiche we before haue sayde, namely that the infirmitye of our nature is so great, that we can not longe abyde in pure religion and sincere worshipping of God. And in that it is sayde that they whiche came after were a great deale worse than their fathers, is declared that GOD not without reason and iuste cause was the more prouoked vnto anger so that wheras he had longe tyme spared their elders, nowe at the last he would not forgeue those that came after. And this is it whiche is [Page 73] often sayde, Howe the iniquities of the fathers are visited in the children & childrēs children. that he doth visite the iniquities of the fathers vpon the children euen to the third and fourth generation, whiche is not so to be vnderstand, as thoughe he should punishe the posteritie more than they haue deserued. But bycause God, as he hath spared the fathers, would so also haue forgeuen the children, vnlesse they had so much followed the iniquities of their fathers, that also they went farther in those mischieuous Actes, then did their fathers. God is patient, and before the poureth out hys wrath and punishementes, he vseth to tary for the thirde or fourth generation. But howe these of whom we intreate were more corrupt than their fathers, the history manifestly declareth: for they committed more wicked Actes than did their fathers, And of all those, whiche their fathers perpetrated, they forsooke none, or left none vndone.
But of this kynde of speache, wherein it is sayde: It is not in mans power to auoyde sinne. Neither ceased they from their endeuours, we may not conclude that it lyeth in our strength & power to auoyde synnes, or to wrappe our selues out of them. Wherfore they greatly erre, which of the preceptes of the law of GOD do gather the strength and power of our free will. For by the commaundementes the Scripture testifyeth, what thynges they he whiche are required of men. The power of free will is not to be gathered of the commaū dementes. But the same Scripture manifestlye in an other place admonisheth, that it lieth not in our power to fulfill them. As Paul also writeth in hys latter Epistle to Timothe: that there are in a great house not onely vesselles of golde and siluer, but also vesselles of wood and vesselles of claye. And he whiche shall purge hym selfe from them, shalbe a vessell sanctified to honour, profitable to the Lorde and prepared to all good workes. Neither for all that can we therby conclude, that it is in our owne strength, to purge our selues from synnes, althoughe the same be required at our handes, for as much as that is to be looked for onely of God. Wherefore the same Apostle in the same Epistle, when he had admonished the Minister of the Churche so be gentle, ready to teache, pacient to suffre euilles, It is GOD whiche geueth repentaunce & amendement. but so for all that to confute them whiche resiste, addeth. If peraduenture God shall geue them repentaunce to the knowledge of hys truth. By these wordes we are taughte, that repentaunce from synnes, whiche is commaunded commeth not of our selues, but is louyngly and gently geuen of God.
The waye of synners is rightlye and worthily called harde, The waye of sinners is hard and it is a metaphor elegantly taken of roughe and stonye places, for stones and rockes for that they haue thicke and vnequall partes, they hurte, pricke and rente the tendre fleshe of theyr feete whiche trauayle vpon them. So are the manners of the wicked, they wounde theyr consciences, and at the laste bryng them into extreme miseries, which happeneth not without the great goodnesse of God for y e god at the length by that meanes calleth vnto him very many sinners. And the sawe hath Hoseas the Prophete very well described in hys ii. chap: when he sayeth: And she sayde, I will go after my louers whiche haue geuen me golde, siluer, wooll, flaxe, &c. But I will hedge in thy wayes with thornes, and will take awaye my gold, my siluer, my wooll and my flaxe. And she shall say: I will returne vnto my first husband, for then was it better with me, than it is now.
20 Wherfore the wrath of the Lorde was kyndled agaynst Israel, and he sayd: Bycause thys people hath transgressed myne appoyntment, whiche I commaunded their Fathers, and haue not hearkened vnto my voyce.
21 I also will hence forth not cast out before them one man of the nations whiche Iosua left when he dyed.
22 That thoroughe them I maye proue Israell, whether they wyll kepe the waye of the Lorde, and walke therein, as their Fathers dyd, or not.
[Page]23 And so the Lord left those nations, and droue them not out immediatly, neither deliuered them into the handes of Iosua.
The cause being before declared, namely the contempte, wherby the Israelites contempned GOD, now is set forth the effect thereof whiche is the kindlyng of the wrath of GOD. For this worde Chara in the Hebrue tongue, is to waxe hotte, or to be kyndeled with anger. Whereby the property and nature of angry is properly and elegantely expressed. For if angry should be defyned accordyng to the matter thereof, it is a certayne inflamation of bloud about the hearte. What is the matter of āger Neither do I speake it as thoughe that can be applied vnto GOD, who vtterly is without heate and bloud. But all these thynges (as I haue allready oftentymes sayde) are by a certaine translation applied vnto hym.
¶Of a League.
BVt bycause God complayneth for that the league was broken, whiche he had made with them, I thincke it good somewhat to speake briefly of a league whiche is in Latine called Faedus. And that worde is deriued of the verbe Ferio, whiche is to staye bycause that the ambassadours of eche partie kylled a hogge: from whiche Etimologye peraduenture the Hebrue worde Berith, differeth not much, with whiche outwarde signe also they wished by prayer the destruction to that parte whiche should violate the league, as we may gather out of Lyui the first booke Ab vrbe condita. Thre kyndes of leagues. And as the same authour writteth in his iiii. booke de bello Macedonico, there are thre kyndes of leagues. The first kynde is, when 1 the conquerours set lawes to those whom they haue conquered, in punishyng them and commaundyng them, what they will haue them afterwarde to do. 2 The second kinde is when thinges being yet sound and neither part ouercome, they commen together, that thynges taken from eche partie may be restored and couenauntes of peace may be established. The thirde kinde is when there is no 3 warre betwene the parties and certayne princes or cities are ioyned together by some couenauntes either to lyue the more peaceably, or elles to take in hande some common affaires. And nowe that we haue thus declared these thinges let vs shewe what a league is.
A league is that bonde betwen men, wherby enterchaungeably they testifye both by wordes & signes, What a league is. that they are boūde to performe certayn things, so that they handle together with good fayth. And if that it be a bonde, and pertayneth to relation, it is grounded vpon humane actions, & is referred to those thinges whiche the partyes confederated ought to performe the one to the other. It is expressed by wordes, Leagues are expressed both by wordes and signes. and for the most parte signes are added. God when after the floud he made a league with mankynd, he did not onely declare the forme of the obligation by wordes, but also he put the raynebowe in the cloudes as a witnesse. And in the league whiche he made with Abraham he put the signe of circumcision. Furthermore in that whiche was made by Moses at the mount Sinay, there were twelue pillers erected, & the people was sprinckled with bloud. Iosua also when he should dye, erected vp a very great stone, therby to seale the league renewed betwene the people and God.
What thinges are promised in the league of god made with men.And what the promises were which should be kept of eche partyes the Scripture oftentymes teacheth. For God promised, that he would be the god of hys people, namely whiche would be with them to helpe them, to deliuer them, and by all meanes as touching all kind of good thinges to adorne them. Christe is the mediatour in makyng the league. The people agayne promised that they would counte the Lord Iehouah for their God in beleuing, worshipping, and obeyng him. And Christ was in the league as the mediatour betwene eche partye. This is the exposition and nature of the league made betwene god and men. Howe a league is deuided into a new league & an olde.
A league is deuided into the new league and the olde, whiche deuision is not of a generall thing into speciall thinges, but of the subiecte into accidences, for [Page 74] so much as in either league the thing it selfe and substaunce was vtterly one and the selfe same & onely certain qualities did vary. For the olde league was made with one onely nation of the Iewes, and had certayn additions, the possession (I say) of the lande of Chanaan, the kingdome of the Iewes, and the priesthode of Aaron, & also the promise of the Messias, accordyng to the natiuitie of the fleshe, and the ministery of his owne person. Moreouer it had very many signes of ceremonyes and sacrifices very mete for that age. There wer also in it misteries of saluation, and promises of eternall life althoughe farre more obscure, than they were afterwarde geuen vnto vs. And contrarywise in the new league, there are proprietyes in a manner contrary. For it pertayneth not to any one certayn nation, but to all nations, how farre soeuer the worlde extende. Neither is there any peculiar ciuile administration adioyned vnto it. Furthermore there are but very fewe ceremonies & outward signes (and they very plaine and simple) added vnto it. And lastely all thinges are contayned more openly, playnely & manifestly in the new testamēt, than they are in the old. The thing and substaunce of the olde league and newe is all one. By these qualities doth the new league and the old differ one from an other, howbeit the thyng it selfe and the substaunce abydeth one and the same. For as the Lord would then be the God of the Hebrues, so now hath he decreed to be the god of the Christians. And that also whiche they at that tyme promised, namely y t they would beleue in the true god, & obey and worshyp him as he hath prescribed, we also ought to performe: Christ cōmeth betwen both parties as a mediatour, and forgeuenesse of sinnes, and also eternall lyfe is by hym promised. And the lawes of manners remayne the same now whiche then were.
Paul in the xi. chap: to the Romanes hath very wel declared that the league of the elders & ours is all one, when he compareth the Church with the tree, which hath Christ as the roote. Then he addeth that from such a tree certayne brāches were cut of, namely the Hebrues whiche beleued not. And we whiche were gē tils were planted in their place: that is put in the same league wherin they were comprehended. The same tree he affirmeth to remayne, into whiche some are by fayth grafted in, and from the whiche other some bycause of incredulitie are cut of. Wherfore eche league contayneth both the law and the gospel. In either of y e testamētes are the selfe same sacramentes. And there are in either of the Testamentes the selfe same Sacramentes as it is declared in the first Epistle to the Cor. the x. chap: For the fathers were al vnder the cloude, and were baptized in the sea, and did eate the same spiritual meate, and dranke of the spirituall rocke followyng them, and the rocke was Christ. Farther we graunt, that as touching outward signes, there is some variety in their Sacramētes and ours, which yet as concerning the things signified by the Sacramentes is found to be nothing at al. Otherwise the argument of Paul should not haue persuaded the Corin. that they should be subiect vnto the same punishmentes that the Hebrues were. For they might haue sayd, that they had farre better sacramētes thā had the Hebrues, & therfore they nede not so much to be affeard lest they should suffre the like: for as much as the excellency of the sacraments may auoyde those misfortunes, from whiche the Hebrues could not be deliuered by the sacramētes of the law. Wherfore the Apostle tooke away from them this shift, and maketh our sacramentes and theirs equall and a like as touching the thinges. He writeth also to the Rom. the first chap: of the gospel, that it was in the old tyme promised by the Prophetes in the holy scriptures. And in the third chap: he speaketh after this sorte: but now is the righteousnesse of god made manifest, being testified by the lawe and the Prophetes.
Neither canst thou say vnto me, that these in dede were promysed in the holy Scriptures of the olde Testament, but not that they were performed vnto the men whiche lyued at that tyme. Bycause the Apostle doth moste warely aunswere to this obiection, when he sayeth that euerye lawe doth speake to those men whiche do lyue vnder it. And it is not to be doubted, but that the [Page] fathers were iustified after the same sorte that we are now at this present. The fathers were iustified onely by fayth, as we are. For they were no lesse iustified onely by fayth in Christ, than we. Wherefore it is written in the booke of Genesis of Abraham, that he beleued, and it was counted vnto hym for righteousnesse. Iohn also testifieth that Christ sayde of Abraham that he had sene his day, and therfore reioysed. The Epistle to the Hebrues the xiii. chap: affirmeth that Christ was yesterdaye, and to daye, and remayneth for euer. Wherfore euen as we are sayd now to be saued, not by workes, but by the true mercy of GOD by fayth in Christ, so was it with the fathers at that tyme: For they were iustified by no merites, but onely by fayth in Christ. Furthermore what obedience soeuer the fathers had towarde the commaundementes of God, and also fayth in the promises, they were not deriued from their owne strengthe and power, but (euen as it also happeneth vnto vs) they came vnto them by the grace of God and Christ.
A place of Ieremi & of the epistle to the Hebrues is expoū ded.It is true in dede that Ieremy in the 31. chap: writeth, as it is also alleged to the Hebrues the viii. chap. that there muste be another league made in the name of GOD, not as it was made in the olde tyme with the fathers. And among other thynges he sayeth, that GOD woulde geue hys lawes in the heartes and bowelles of men, so that none should nede any more to teache hys neyghboure, bycause all, from the least to the greatest should haue the knowledge of GOD. And farther it is sayde in the persone of God, I wyll be mercifull vnto their synnes, and will no more remember their iniquities, &c. As touching these wordes both of Ieremye, and also of the Epistle to the Hebrues, we must vnderstande, that those wordes proue not that there is any difference betwene the testamentes as touchyng the thyng and substaunce it selfe, but as concernyng the propertyes and qualities, as we haue before sayde. Neither muste we thincke that the olde fathers whiche in obeyeng the commaundementes of God, and in right fayth worshypped hym purely, coulde performe these thynges of theyr owne strengthe or naturall powre. For vnlesse they had had the lawes and promises of God written in their heartes and myndes by the holy Ghost, and also a will by the grace of God ready to obey hys commaundement they had neuer ben able to haue performed such things. They wanted not therfore the lyght of God which shined before them to cause thē to beleue. Yea and their synnes wer forgeuen them by Christ. Wherfore they also had the fruition of those thynges, whiche God promised to geue in the newe league. The difference was onely in this thyng as touchyng largenesse and perspicuitye for at that tyme those gyftes were distributed to very few, The error of them which in the olde league acknowledge onely temporal thynges. but now they are euery where communicated to the gentiles. They were somewhat darke at that age, but to vs they are made euidēt and cleare, so that we haue no more nede of the old discipline. Hereby it manifestly appeareth, howe they erre from the truth, whiche will haue the old league to haue had promises onely for possessing of the lande of Chanaan and for worldly felicity. And that the people of the Hebrues were bounde onely to an outward obseruation of certayne rites and workes, and not to shewe forth good and ryght motions of the minde toward God. The Prophetes declare not the thyng after that sorte, yea rather they denye that GOD any thyng estemeth outwarde workes without inwarde godlynesse. And they euery where cry out, that ceremonyes without fayth, and voyde of the feare of GOD are a moste grieuous burthen and so troublesome that GOD can not suffre them. Yea and the lawe it selfe maketh mencion expressedly of the circumcision of the hearte: and GOD euery where requireth, that we should heare hys voyce, whiche vndoubtedly is nothyng elles, God would not fully those chynges that are chaunged. than by fayth to haue to do with hym. Wherefore fayth of the promises and commaundementes of GOD, ought alwayes to be counted as the roote and foundation, whiche alwayes abydeth, when as outwarde Sacrifices and visible rites should at the length be chaunged. [Page 75] Wherfore it is very manifest, that god would not haue them for their own sakes. Howbeit they endured so long as men were endewed with a childish spirite (as Paule speaketh to the Galathians) whilest they liued yet vnder tutors, & differed yet very litle frō seruaunts. But when they receaued a more ful growē spirite, then were the sacramentes and childyshe rites (as Augustine sayeth) taken awaye. It is manifest therefore that the difference betweene the two leagues is not to bee taken of the thing or substaunce, but of the qualityes and proprieties.
Let them therfore cease so much to erre, which thinke that god in the old lawe promised only earthly thinges, as though at that time he prouided onely for the bodyes and not for the soules, as doe Shepeheardes, Plowmen, and Swyneherdes, whiche haue a care onely for the bodyes and carkases of theyr Sheepe, Swine and Oxen, neyther laboure they for any other thyng, but to make those beastes strong and fat. We must not so imagine of God, who so made a league with the Elders, that he promised them the chiefe felicitie, God promised the old fathers the chiefest felicitie. which cheiflye pertayneth vnto the soule. Wherefore it is written in the 144 Psalme. Blessed are the people which haue the Lorde for their God. In Deutronomye also God toke vpon him to bring to passe, that they should walke in his cōmaundements. But what more? Our sauiour, out of y e words of the old league hath most aptely taught the resurrection of the dead. For when the Lorde sayd that he was the God of Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, and they were then dead, Christ inferred that they were not dead but that they still liued, and that their bodyes should be receaued, namely in the blessed resurrection. Hitherto pertayneth that that God affirmed to Abraham, that he himselfe woulde be his rewarde, whiche thyng plainely teacheth vs, The end of political gouernement. that in that couenaunte were not promised onely carnall and earthly good thyngs. Vndoubtedly it were a great shame euen for Kyngs and Princes, whiche being compared with GOD are but fleshe and bloud, if they shoulde bee counted to gouerne the publicque wealthes, onely as touching the bodyes of the subiectes: for as muche as they professe that therefore they prouide for their Citizens outwarde commodityes, quietnesse and peace namely that they might liue happily and vertuouslye. Wherefore if Princes seeke for goodes of the minde for their Citizens, The worshipping of god consisteth not only in outward. rites. is it not meete that God hymselfe prouided farre more noble thinges for the publicque wealthe of the Israelites whiche he faythfully gouerned. Furthermore I do not speake, howe foolyshe it is to beleue that the old fathers by the league bound themselues only to outward rites and visible ceremonies, whereby to worship God: when as euen the Ethnikes were not ignoraunt, yea they haue most manifestly testifyed, Plautus. that the worshipping of God consisteth not in those things. For Plautus in Rudente writeth thus: They thinke that they please God with giftes and sacrifices: but they lose both their laboure and coste. I will not declare those thinges whiche Plato in his Alchibiade hath written as concerning this thing. Plato. Yea (as I haue now before taught) the lawe it self and the Prophets declare that the thing was farre otherwise.
But now at the length to returne to the woordes of the historye, God complayneth that the Hebrues had broken their couenant which he had made with their fathers. For they wer departed from the true fayth and inward godlynesse Neither ceassed they only dulye and rightly to sacrifice vnto the true God, but they most filthily turned aside to straunge Gods & worshipping of Idoles. And for these things was God angry with them, and especially for this, The rote of falling from god. bicause they harkened not vnto his voyce. This vndoubtedly was the roote and the fyrst beginning of falling, namely not to beleue in god. The elders made a league with god for their posteritie.
Let vs here also note that the Fathers made a league with GOD not onely for themselues, but also for their posteritie. As God agayne for hys parte promised them, that he woulde bee the GOD not onely of them, but [Page] also of their sede and posteritie. The elders made a league with God for their posteritye It was lawfull to circumcise y e litle ones in the old time, & it is lawfull at thys day to baptise them. Wherfore it was lawfull for them to circumcise their children, being yet infantes. And in like manner it is lawfull for vs to baptise oure little ones being yet infantes, for as muche as they also are comprehended in the league. For they which haue now the thyng it selfe, there is nothing can let, but that they may receaue the signe. It is manifestlye written in the .xxix. Chapiter of Deutronomye that the league was made not only with them which were present, but also with them which were absent, and not yet borne.
But some doubte, whyther the posteritie may be bounde by their Elders. We aunswere, Whether they which come after may be bound by theyr elders. wee muste looke whyther the thinges whiche were promised by oure Elders were iuste and honeste. Then muste we consider whyther those promyses pertayne to ciuill thynges, or to Godlynesse. When they are made for ciuill matters, the bonde is sure, bycause it is not lawfull for the posteritye to infrindge the contractes of their Elders, as are byinges, sellinges, bargaynes and such like, prouided that they contayne nothyng, that is filthy, vnhonest and vniuste. But if the couenauntes and obligations belong to godlinesse or to true fayth, the obligation is then strong, for that we are all bounde to true godlinesse and a perfecte fayth, although there were no league therunto. But if the Elders haue bound themselues and their posteritye to filthy and vngodly thinges, it is no bonde. But for God to abase himselfe to make a league with men, it commeth of his mere beneuolence and mercy, wherby we might be more and more stirred vp to performe those things which we ought otherwise to do of dutye.
I also will not caste them oute. When he sayeth, that he will not hence forth caste oute any one of those Nations, whiche remayned in the Lande of Chanaan after the time of the death of Iosua, he declareth the punishemente, wherewith he woulde nowe punyshe the Hebrewes. And this must we vnderstand condicionally, that is, excepte they repented: or bycause God was so offended by reason of theyr Idolatrye, that he woulde not so soone caste forth those Nations, as he would otherwise haue done, if they had faythfully continued in their office. And the very woordes of the historye doe strayghtwaies expresse thys latter interpretation. But bycause a man myghte doubte why he expelled not the Chananites, Why all the Chananites were not expelled in the time of Iosua. while Iosua was yet aliue (who vprightlye behaued hymselfe towarde God) in this place he aunswereth vnto it and sayeth that he had therefore suffered those Nations to remaine, that by them he myght proue the Israelites, whyther they woulde woorship him purely and sincerely as their Fathers had done vnder Iosua or not. For as much as I haue at large before spoken of this kinde of temptation, I will now speake thereof no more. This onely I shall admonyshe you, that where as there is mencion made in this place of the Fathers, the same is to bee vnderstande onely of those which were good and godlye: otherwise euen in the tyme of Moyses there wanted no vngodly ones and rebelles, which fell from the true God. Furthermore we must considre that these thinges were spoken, when the Hebrewes after the death of the Iudges tell to vngodlynesse. For the thinges which are here mencioned of the fallinges and conuersions of the Hebrewes whiche followed one after an other, are spoken generally and summarilie. Otherwise God (as we shall heare) expelled some of the enemyes oute of the lande of Chanaan vnder euery Iudge. Wherefore in that now he being angrye sayeth that he will not caste forth the reste of the Nations, we muste vnderstande it, that he will not so quickely doe it, and vnlesse they tourne agayne vnto the ryghte waye. After which manner Ieremye hath taught vs that the threatnynges of God are to be vnderstand.
The thyrde Chapter.
THese are the Nations, which the Lorde left, that he myghte proue Israell by them euen as many of Israell as had not knowen all the warres of Chanaan.
2 Only for the learning of the generation of the children of Israell that he also might teach them warre, in as much as they which wer before them knewe nothing thereof.
THis is a very common and receaued exposition of this place, that God in leauing diuerse Nations in the land which was promised to the Israelites, did it not only to trie the Israelites, but also bycause he woulde haue them exercised in warlike artes, leaste they should become slouthfull. For if the enemyes should straightway at the beginnyng haue bene expelled, that people would easely haue bene loste with idlenesse and slouth. Which interpretation if we allow, therby will plainly followe, that iuste warres are altogether lawfull. War is a thing lawfull. For if GOD would teache the Israelites the arte of warrefare, then iudged he not that arte vnlawfull. And to thys purpose serueth that which Dauid sayd: Blessed be god which teacheth my handes to warre, and my fyngers to battayle. But thys question, whyther it be lawfull to make iuste warres, is not nowe to be entreated of: for as muche as it is most euident, and that by the holy Scriptures, that it is lawfull. And we shall haue occasion in an other place, to speake at large of that matter. Wherfore I will declare what the Hebrewe expositours iudge of thys place. R. Salamon, R. Dauid Kimhi, and also R. Leui ben Gerson write, that God, when he had tempted the Hebrewes and detected theyr vngodlinesse and Idolatrye, withdrewe from them their strength and ayde. Wherby when they attempted to make warres by their owne power and to fight by their owne strength they learned what it was to make warre. When God fought for the Israelits, they knew not what it was to make warre. Whereas before when God himselfe fought for them, they were ignoraunt of it. For he endued them with strength, he draue a feare into their enemyes, dissolued their strength, and gaue the Hebrewes a prosperous successe in theyr enterprises. One dyd then pursue a thousand, and two ten thousand. It is therfore aptlye sayd that the Israelites, when he had not yet broken the league, and god fought for them, were ignoraunte of warlyke feates. How our fyrste parentes after sinne knew both good and euell. Euen as the fyrst parentes of mankinde when they had eaten of the forbidden tree, beganne to know both good and euill. For before when they were nourished with the grace of GOD, they were touched with the feeling of no euil. And we commonlye say of children, when their parentes are taken from them, that they shall nowe fele what it is to gette theyr own liuyng, which before they had not learned, when they had their parentes liuing. Christe also vsed the same kinde of speche, when he sayd vnto the Apostles: When I sent you without bagge or scrippe, vndoubtedly you wanted nothyng. But now bicause I shall be taken from you, let him which hath no sweard, bye him one: for hereafter the times shall be harde and paynefull vnto you, so that ye shall proue and haue experience of those thinges which hitherto ye haue not felte. And this is the meaning at this present, that the Hebrewes were brought of necessitye now at the length to knowe and feele, God commaū ded nothing in the lawe for the learning of the art of warfare. what it was to make warre with enemyes stronger than themselues. They had not experience of that, before GOD taught them it in taking awaye their strength and ayde. Neither is it founde in the whole lawe that he ordained any thyng for the learning of the arte of warrefare. In Deutronomye the xx. Chapiter: he [Page] made certaine lawes for making of warre, but they pertayne nothing to the attayning of knowledge in the arte of warrefare. And I, in my iudgemente, doe allowe the interpretation of the Hebrewes, rather than that which was fyrst assigned.
3 Of those whom he left, there were fyue Lordes of the Philistians and all the Chananites, and Sidonites, and the Heuites that dwelled in Mount Libanon, euen from Mount Baal Hermon vnto the entrance of Hamath.
4 Those (I say) remayned to proue Israell by, and to wete whether they would obey the preceptes of the Lord, which he commaunded their fathers by the hand of Moyses.
5 The children of Israell therefore dwelt among the Chananites, Hethites, Amorites, Pherezites, Heuites, and Iebusites.
That which is in the Hebrewe Sirni, Ierome sometimes translateth rulers, and sometimes Lordes. And we may call them Princes, or Presidentes, or ells Gouernours. Satrapes. Those woordes the Grecians call, [...] But yet they are deriued of the Persians, yea & the Latines sometimes vsed thē. Terence in his comedie Heautontim: Terence. writeth. If Satrapes (y t is a Lord) be a louer, he shal not be able to abide the charge. Dauid Kimhi. Dauid Kimhi thinketh these words in the text, Fyue lords of the Philistians, to be a figuratiue kinde of speche, y t by the fyue Lords, The names of the Lordships of Palestine. we might vnderstand those fiue places, which they were lords ouer, that is fiue Lordships of the Philistians. And those places be named in the booke of Iosua the 13 chap. Gaza, Asdod, Ascalon, Ackron & Geth. Of euery one of these cities they toke vnto thē the name of the lordship. And vndoubtedly there is manifest mencion made of them in the fyrst booke of Samuell, for of ech of thē there were gifts gathered wherwith the arke of the couenaunt was adorned to be sent agayne to the Israelites.
Howbeit this may seme to be strange how these cities should now be sayd not to be conquered by the Israelits. When as in this booke the first chap. Gaza, Ascalon, & Aekron are declared to be wonne in that battaile, which was made by the tribes of Iuda and Simeon. Whereunto we aunswere, y t in dede those cities were taken at y e time, when as for all that they were not fully conquered by the leading and conduct of Iosua, as it is written in his boke. Howbeit at this time. as the history now testifyeth, they were not in the power of the Iewes. For by reason of the sinnes of the Hebrues, the strength of the Philistians was confyrmed, & other nations of y e land of Chanaan waxed euery day strōger & stronger, but the Israelites on the contrary side were feabled. Wherfore it was an easye matter for these places to fall againe into the power of the Philistians. For they were very skilful in feates of warre, and they had yron and hooked Chariottes. Neither did God fight for the Israelites. Wherefore they might without any great trauaile (by reason of the sinnes of the Iewes) recouer againe the places which they had loste.
In that it is written And al the Chananites we must not vnderstand it absolutely and simplie, but only of those which inhabited y e places here mencioned. Farther we must note, that in the boke of Iosua there were also Chananites and Zidonites rehearsed which were not at that time destroyed. And as touching the Mount Libanon, The Mounte Libanon. some write, y t it was so called of frankencense which the Grecians call [...]. Yea and the Hebrues call frankencense Libona. And Mount Hermon (as the boke of Deut. teacheth) was called of the Amorrites, Naschir, & of the Sirians Scherion. Wherof peraduēture the prouince of Siria had his name.
6 And they tooke the Daughters of them to be their wyues, and gaue their own daughters to their sonnes: and serued their Gods.
7 Wherefore the children of Israel did wickedly in the sight of the Lord, and forgot the Lorde their God, & serued Baalim, & groues.
The Israelites synned three times against God. First, bicause (as it is already 1 shewed) they dwelled peaceably and quietly among the Chananites, Thre synnes of the Hebrues. and contrary to the commaundement of God made those nations tributaries vnto them. Secondly bicause they contracted matrimonies with that people. And 2 that had God prohibited to be done, as the law in many places witnesseth. Yea and in the booke of Esdras the last chap. we reade of a grieuous complaynt bycause the Iewes in their captiustye in Babilon had taken straungers to wyues. And Esdras there decreed that such wiues should be put away, God forbyddeth vnlyke maryages. & that those matrimonies should be counted voide, which wer contracted betwene persons prohibited by God. And why God would not haue matrimonies so contracted, this reason is chiefly alledged, bicause by such vnlike matrimonies the worshipping of God is wonderfully empaired. For godly husbandes or wiues are by the vngodly parties oftentimes alienated from the true god. Neither doth the Scripture onely teache vs this, but also experience both in the olde time, and also in our time testifieth it. For as much as Salomon (as it is written in the first boke of the kinges the .xi. chap.) was both corrupted, and also builded Temples for Idoles, by the entisement of straunge women, whom he most inordinatelye loued, and more than was cōuenient. Wherfore he miserably incurred the wrath of god. The Iewes also (as our historye nowe declareth) had experience of the same. And we in our time see great hinderaunce to come vnto the beleuers, bycause very many of them contract matrimony with Papistes. The third synne 3 of the Hebrewes was, bicause they worshipped Idoles: and that was most of all against the league which they had long before made with god, for they sayd: we will serue the Lord our god.
Further it is added: And they woorshipped trees or groues. Thys woorde Aschera with the Hebrues is a tree, and being in the plural number Ascheroth as it is in this place, it signifieth trees, and of some it is translated groues. For it is a most common maner among the Idolatrers, Gods wer worshipped in groues. to woorship their goddes in groues. In Oken groues they sacrificed vnto Iupiter, and the Oke of Dodome, was in the old time most famous, by reason of the answers which it gaue. In woods of bay trees was Apollo woorshipped. Daphne also is notable wher the Temple of Apollo was built. Minerua also was wont to haue a temple among Oliue trees. And lastly we may marke both in the Poetes, and also in histories, that shadowy woods, most large riuers, & mountaines of exceding great height wer counted of the men in the old time places most apt for sacrifices to be done vnto Idoles. Bicause such places driue into men no smal admiration. Wherefore they thought that such notable places had the power of god present. Yea, and Abraham also, Isaac and Iacob, and the old Fathers, From whence the maner of sacrificing in hy [...] moūtains came offered sacrifices vnto the true god vpon the high mountaines, which custome was tyll such time vsed as god by a law ordained that they should not do sacrifice euerye where, but in that place onely which he himselfe had chosen.
8 Therfore the Lord was angry with Israel, and sold them into the handes of Chusan Riseathaim Kyng of Aram-Naharaim: & the children of Israel serued Chusan Riseathaim eyght yeares.
Now is particularly mencioned the punishment wherwith god being angry punished the Hebrewes. For when they so fel from him, that they forgot hym, he deliuered them to Chusan King of Mesopotamia. And this is the first bondage [Page] that the children of Israel were in. And that which the Grecians cal [...], Mesopotamia. the Hebrues name Aram-naharaim. Nahar signifieth with them a Ryuer. It is therfore put in the dual number, bicause that part Siria, or Aram is enclosed with two riuers Euphrates (I say) and Tigris. Of y e surname of Chusan. Wherfore as touching the signification of the woord the Grecians haue followed the Hebrues. But why Chusan was called Riseathaim, it is darke. Although D. Kimhi thinketh that y e surname was geuen him of some certain place, as we se to chaūce to Princes of our time, which receiue their surname of y t places, frō whēce their Elders had their beginning. But other some thinke that this king was therefore so called, bicause he was very wicked and vngodly. For with the Hebrues Resehaha signifieth wickednes and vngodlines. Wherfore they wil haue it to be as much as if one should say, Chusan of vngodlines, or vngodly Chusan. It is the dual number, to declare that he was corrupted not with any simple wickednes or vngodlines, but with a doubt, that is with a principal and absolute wyckednes or vngodlines. And ther wer some of the Hebrues which went about to expresse the double vngodlines of the kings of Mesopotamia. For they say that Balaam was hired from thence to curse the Israelites. Farther, and this (say they) was the other wickednes, wherwith this Chusan oppressed the Iewes, which by no right pertained to his dominion or Lordship. But these ought rather to be called diuinations and coniectures, than iust interpretations.
They serued hym eyght yeares. Vndoubtedly a very long time, which I suppose was so much the painfuller vnto them, Why the Chaldeans and Sirians went about to gouern the Iewes. bicause from their commyng out of Egipt hitherto, they had serued none. But vnder what pretence this Kyng subdued vnto him the Hebrues it is not declared. Peraduenture he thought that the Iewes wer a part of his people sent abroade to inhabite. For Abraham was called out of Chaldea, and came first into Mesopotamia. From whence by the commaundement of God he went into the land of Chanaan. Furthermore in that place Iacobs children were borne, which wer the Princes of the twelue Tribes. This peraduenture wer the titles, wherby the Chaldeans and Sirians endeuoured them selues often times to be Lords ouer the Hebrues, which thing yet they did vniustly. For ther wer no people sent from the Chaldeans or from the Sirians by the common wyll and consent of the Princes and Magistrates, whyche should go and inhabite in some place of the land of Chanaan, Wherfore they did wrongfullye oppresse the Iewes and were styrred vp thereunto by couetousnes and ambition to enlarge their dominions. This is also vncertayn whether this Chusan did together with the Iewes oppresse the Chananites. And it maye be, that he was not troublesome to the Chananites as to his friendes, but onely afflicted the Hebrues. Neither wer it absurde to thinke, that this king was called by the Chananites to oppresse the Hebrues their common enemies.
9 And the children of Israel cryed vnto the Lord: and the Lord styrred vp a Sauiour to the children of Israel, and saued them, one Othoniel the sonne of Chenez, Calebs yonger sonne.
10 And the spirit of the Lord was vpon him, and he iudged Israel, and he went out to warre, and the Lord deliuered Chusan Riseathaim kyng of Aram into his hande: and hys hande preuayled agaynst Chusan Riseathaun.
11 And the lande had rest .40. yeares: And Othoniel the Sonne of Chenez dyed.
Israel cryed vnto the Lord, bicause they wer euil vexed, and most grieuously oppressed of the Sirians. They acknowledged now after their great hurt that straunge Gods profited them nothing, yea rather they brought vpon them the [Page 78] miseries wherwith they were vrged. When they vnderstoode that mans helpe was on euery side cut of, they conuerting them selues vnto the true God, called vpon him. This is the fruite of miseries as touching the elect, or rather the fruit of the goodnes of God, which by troubles calleth againe vnto him, those which are hys. Of Othoniel we haue spoken inough before. Now he is called a Sauiour, bicause he brought health vnto the Israelites as y e other Iudges dyd, Othoniel was called a sauiour and a redemer. which wer also called Sauiours, he was a shadow of Christ. But the Chaldey paraphrast calleth him Porken, that is a Redemer. Which surname also rightly agreeth with Othoniel: bicause before it is sayd that God sold the Israelites: and when bondmen are sold, they haue nede of one to redeme them.
For as much as before it was said y e God raised vp Iudges, After what maner God raised vp Iudges. now is declared the maner & forme how he raysed them vp. For it is written: And the spirite of the Lord was vpon hym. For by the holy ghost wer not onelye geuen vnto hym strength, political wisdome and warlyke artes, but also he was made the more certain of his calling. The Chaldey paraphrast vnderstandeth by the Spirit of God the power of prophecy. Dauid Kimhi. But Dauid Kimhi interpreteth it the gift of force & strength. But I thinke that either interpretacion is to be allowed. For besydes the strength and power which was geuen the Iudges, they had also the iudgement and feeling of the wil of God, which pertained vnto prophecy.
He iudged Israel. That is, he set them at liberty and was their Gouernour as touching ciuil thinges, and restored the pure worshipping of God. In that it is aboue written that God sold Israel to the king of Mesopotamia. And nowe again it is declared y t he deliuered the same king vnto Othoniel, we may gather y t victories ar geuē at y e pleasure of God, which also we haue often noted before.
R. Leui ben gerson thinketh that in that supputation of .40. R. Leui ben gerischon. yeares wherein the Iewes lyued peaceably vnder Othoniel were comprehended also the eyght yeares of seruitude which went before. But of this thing we wil speake aboundantly in the history of Iiphtah. God is also to be called vpon of synners. This place teacheth that men must call vpon God, though they haue synned: which I therfore thought good to note, bycause sinnes vse much to feare away men from the inuocation of the name of God for this is the nature of synnes to alienate vs frō God, vnto whom we yet by praiers come againe. Wherfore seing these thinges are contrary, namely to be alienated from God, and to come vnto him, it is wonder how they can be applyed to one, and the selfe same man. Augustine. And this maketh with it also which is written in the gospel: God heareth not sinners. Although Augustine wryte of that sentēce, that it is found in dede in the holy scriptures, but it was spoken by hym whych was borne blynde, when his hart was not yet illustrate. Wherefore he iudgeth that that sentence is not to be taken as a firme and certaine rule. A distinction of synners. But I would rather make a distinction betwene synners, for there are some, which when they cry vnto the Lord, do repent, and from their hartes are sory, for the euils which they haue committed. But ther are other which continue stil in their mynd and purpose to synne, and haue a very great delite therin. Farther I am not afeard to affirme, that god heareth those synners which being repentant cry vnto him with faith: wher as those are repulsed which being hardened in their sinnes and wāting faith do call vpon god. Wherfore it appeareth that those sinners which come to god, and those that depart from god are not sinners of one sort, bicause they which after they haue synned cal vpon god by faith, & repent them of theyr synnes, are deuided from those which stubbornly without repentaunce perseuer in their synnes. For they although by wordes they cry vnto god, yet in hart and mynde they are farre from him, so farre are they for to be ioyned vnto him, or to come vnto him by fayth and prayers.
¶ Whether God be the cause of synne.
BVt in these thinges which are sayd, there ariseth a question which is not to be left vnspoken of. For it is writtē that god sold the Israelites to the king [Page] of Mesopotamia. Wherfore it semeth that he holpe a wicked man, & aided hym to satisfy his tyranny and ambition. For he had neither a iust cause, nor yet an honest title, to clayme vnto him the dominion of the Hebrues. What shall wee saye therefore? Shall we affirme that God is the cause of this sinne? Ther happeneth in this booke and in other places of the holye Scriptures suche kynde of speeche, and that often times very plaine, and therefore it semeth good to be expounded once for all.
Whether by y e word permissiō this question may be dissolued.Some, yea and that with no euyl minde labour to excuse God, and say that he doth not these euyl thinges, but onely permitteth them, And they thinke that in doubtful places, that interpretation is to be applied, which altogether wanteth fault and daunger of vngodlines. Vndoubtedly this their saying wer to be 1 praised, if that we could se their exposition to be allowed in the scriptures. But there it is farre otherwise sayd, It is proued by good reasons that besides permission god worketh somewhat whē sins ar cōmitted. namely that God doth stirre vp wycked men to their wicked actes, that he seduceth, delyuereth, commaundeth, hardeneth, and deceaueth them, and bringeth to passe those sinnes which are grieuous. Suche kindes of speeche do manifestly teach vs, that God after a sorte woorketh euyll thinges, not onely in permitting, but also in doing in vs. Without doubt al we are said both to haue our being, and also our mouing in him: For he is in suche sort the first cause of all thinges, that without him we can do nothing. For how should we moue our selues, vnlesse by his power we wer both moued and also 2 driuen? Farther, how farre his gouernment extendeth, we may reade in the .xi. chap. of Mathew: for two Sparowes (saith the Lord) are sold for a farthing, and yet one of them falleth not to the ground without the wyll of the father. And 3 that was as much to say as without the counsell of God nothing be it neuer so 4 smal is done in the world. Moreouer that permission wherby certaine go about to make plaine this question, at the length is called againe to the will. For who soeuer can let and prohibite any thing that is euil, and doth it not, it is manyfest that after a sort he is willing therunto. Besides that, he permitteth it not against his wyll, God doth not idlelye beholde those thinges whych are done o [...] men, but worketh together with them Esay. 5. but willinglye. Wherefore a wyll without doubt is contayned in that permission.
But now must we shew, that God, when sinnes are committed, doth not ydely looke on, yea he woorketh somwhat there. For Esay in the .v. chap. saythe, that God would geue a token, and with his hissing cal a nation from the vtmost partes of the earth, which should ouerthrow the kingdome of the Hebrues, as their synnes had deserued. By which it manifestly appeareth, that God stirreth vp Tyrannes and outward nations to these vniust warres. Esay. 10. Also in the .x. chap. the same Prophet pronounceth that king to be wicked, which in that expedition was in the hand of God as a saw, a staffe, and an axe. There is no man ignoraunt but that al these thinges do so woorke and moue, that they be first moued. Yea and that proud king is therfore reprehended, bicause he so exalted himselfe as though he wer God, who had by him brought such and so great thinges to passe. Gen: 45. Ioseph also in the booke of Genesis said vnto his brethren which had by a wicked cōspiracy sold him: It was not you but god that sent me into Egipt. In the first booke of the kinges also, 1. kinges. 22. and the .xxii. chap: Sathan, who was readye to deceaue Achab, was commaunded by God to do it, & to preuaile. Which words declare that God himselfe commaundeth and also stirreth vp to deceaue. Further it is written in the Prouerbes the .xxi. chap. Prouerbes. 21. The hart of the king is in the hand of God, he shal incline it whether soeuer he wyl. The scripture saith also of Pharao, Exodus 9.10.11 Rom. 9. kinges seme free from humayne lawes, but God boweth them whether he wyll, (which place Paul alledgeth) that his hart was hardened by God. Neither maketh this anye thing against it, Pharao was hardened both of god & of hym self. if thou shalt say that it is written in the .viii. chap. of Exodus, that Pharao hardened himselfe, for as muche as bothe sayinges are true. For God doth no violence to the wyll of man, seing that nothing is more contrarye vnto it than to make it to doo any thing vnwillingly, [Page 79] or by compulsion. Howbeit it is chaunged and bowed of God so softly and pleasantly, that it willinglye & without violence inclineth to whatsoeuer pleaseth God. Augustine. And it often times happeneth (as Augustine in diuers places hath taught) that God punisheth former sinnes by latter synnes. And the holye scriptures before Augustines time testified the same, & especiallye Paule, in his Epistle to the Roma. the first chap. Wherfore God hath in his hand the affections of our hart, which he loseth or restraineth as shal seeme good to his most wise prouidence, & turneth them whithersoeuer it shal please him. And so great is his power, God worketh more as touching sinnes than is expressed by the worde permission. 2. Thess 2. y t we must beleue that he worketh much more, than may be expressed by the woord of permission. For Paul feared not thus to write vnto the Thessalonians: bycause they haue not receaued the loue of the truth, therfore shal God send on them an error, so that they shal beleue lyes, & al they shalbe iudged which haue not beleued the truth, but allowed vnrighteousnes. These wordes manifestly testifye, y t God did cast error vpon them, to punish their former sinne, namelye vpon those which despised the truth offered them. Dauid also semeth to tend to this, when in the .2. booke of Samuel the .16. chap. he said of Simeck: Suffer him, 2. Sam: 16. for God hath cōmaunded him to curse me. Also in the same booke the .12. chap. God by Nathan the Prophet saith of Dauid which had grieuously fallen: 2. Sam: 12. behold I wyll stirre vp euil against thee, & wil take thy wiues, & geue them vnto thy neighbour, who shal sleepe with them: this diddest thou secretly, but I wil do this thing openly, in the eyes of the Sunne and of all Israel.
If the matter be so (thou wilt say) they which sinne shall easily be excused: The sinnes of men are not excused by the working of god for they may sone say, y t they wer by God moued & stirred vp to sin. Not so. For mē ar not so deliuered by God vnto sins, as though they wer them selues pure & innocent. For they which ar so stirred vp to naughtines, haue worthily deserued the same. And the same men are not driuen against their wil, but they wonderfully delite themselues in those transgressions and sinnes. Wherefore their excuse is foolishe, or rather none.
But this semeth to be agaynst the things before said, Whither God do together both hate & wil sinnes. bicause in the Psalmes it is wrytten that God is such a one, as willeth no iniquity, and hateth synnes. And vndoubtedly he is so in dede: For vnles he hated sinnes, why should he punish them? for thinges that are allowed, are not wont to be punished. Farther, he hath most seuerely prohibited them by his lawes. But as touching this, A distinction of y e wyll of God. thus must we decree of the wil of god, that it is in nature and very dede one, whych yet may be deuided for diuers and sundry respectes. For as it is set foorth in the scriptures & the law, he condemneth sinnes, he prohibiteth them, and threatneth most grieuous punishments vnto them. Howbeit bicause he directeth the same sinnes whithersoeuer he wil, & vseth them to his counsels and decrees, neyther when he may, letteth them, it is therfore sayd that after a sort he wylleth them. Neither is it meete to deny that such sundry respectes are in the wyl of god. For god would before al beginninges, haue his sonne sacrificed vnto him for a most swete sacrifice: who yet himself said in the law: Thou shalt not kil, & thou shalt not shed innocent bloud. God also forbad, that any shoulde be deceaued, who for all that would haue Achab to be deceaued of Sathan, Christ was killed by the will of God. as we haue a lyttle before mencioned. And least any man should doubt that Christ was put to death by the wyl of God, we may se in the actes of the Apostles that it is most manifestly said that the Iewes did those things which God by his counsel had before ordained.
What then? Shal we say that god is the cause of synne? Not so, God if we speake properli is not the cause of sinne. for if we wil speake properly: and that it may the more manifestly appeare, we must marke, that one selfe acte as it is deriued from vs, is verye synne: but in respecte that it commeth from God, it is both good, iust, and holy. For punishment is by God imposed to wycked men. And to punishe synnes, no man is ignoraunt but that it partayneth to iustice. Wherfore God in withdrawing his grace from the vngodly, and ministring some occasions, which might moue to good things, if they [Page] happened to right & iust mindes, and which he knoweth the wicked wyll turne to euil, may after a sort, although not properly, be said to be the cause of sinne. And vndoubtedly that act, A [...]militude. in that it passeth through vs, is sinne, but not as it cō meth from God. For in that it cōmeth frō God, it is most perfect iustice. It happeneth somtimes, that the self same wine being poured into a corrupt vessell, is lost, and made paide: which wine as it was brought by the husbandmā & put into the vessel is both swete and good. Neither is it hard to vnderstand how one & the selfe same act may as touching one, be vicious: & in respect of an other, iust. For when a murtherer & hangman do kill a man, the act as touching the matter or subiect, without doubt is al one, namelye the death of a man. And yet the murtherer doth it most vniustly, & the hangman by law and iustice. Iob also did wel vnderstand that when he said: The Lord gaue, & the Lord hath taken away as it hath pleased him, so is it done. He did not by those wordes praise the Chaldians, Sabines, & the Deuil, which wer vessels of iniquity, & most vicious: but he with great godlines allowed those euils, as they were gouerned & ruled by the prouidence of God, namely for this cause, bicause they pleased God. It is also written in the .2. booke of Samuel the .24. chap. of Dauid, who vnaduisedly wold haue the people numbred, & how God was angry with Israel, & therfore he styrred vp Dauid to do that. And in the booke of Paral. it is writtē that Sathan was the doer of it. For God doth those thinges which he wil haue done by Angels, as wel good as euil. Wherfore that numbring of the people as it proceeded of Dauid or the Deuil, was in dede vicious; but in that it came from God, who intended to punish the Israelites, it pertayned excedingly to the setting foorth of hys iustice.
Howbeit Iames sayth, that God tempteth none to euyll, but euery one of vs is allured by our own concupiscence. Augustine. Whyther God tempt or no. Augustine wryting of thys thyng in hys booke de consensa Euangelistarum, saith that there are two kyndes of temptacion, the one of trial, the other of deceite. And in dede as touching tryal he denyeth not but that God tempteth, for that the scriptures do confesse it. But with that kinde of temptation which deceaueth, whereof Iames wrote, he sayth that God tempteth no man. But the scriptures teache not so, as we haue declared a litle before of Dauid, and before him of Achab. Yea, and in Ezechiel the .14. chap. god saith that he had deceaued the Prophet. And the same Augustine writeth not after the same maner in other places, as it manifestly appeareth in hys bookes de Praedest. Sanctorum de Cerrept. & Gratia ad Valent. and in hys .5. booke and .3. chap. contra Iulianum. Wherfore the true interpretatiō of this place is, that euery man is therfore tempted of his own concupiscence, bicause al men haue their natural disease, which is corruption, and vicious lusts, which ar together borne with them, & do also grow and increase in them. Wherefore God instylleth no malice of his, for we haue inough at home. Therefore he cannot bee accused, for as much as the beginning of vngodlines & wickednes commeth not from hym, God when he wyl bringeth to lyght our frowaconesse of mynde. but lieth hid in vs. He ought not therefore to bee counted to geue the cause and fault, who yet when it semeth good vnto him, wil for iust causes haue our lusts & wickednes brought to light, and rule & gouerne our wicked acts, therby more and more to illustrate his iustice and glorye, & to aduaunce the saluation of the godly. Wherfore his singular goodnes and prouidence is very much to be praised, which can so iustly and wisely vse so wycked meanes.
Whence the variety of pronenesse to synne commeth.But if a man wil aske, how it happeneth, that some are more prone to sinnes than others, if (as it is sayd) malice & wyckednes ar rooted into vs al from our byrth, neither is it nede that any new or latter malice should be instilled in vs frō God. And seyng that we ar al brought forth of one & the selfe same lumpe, and that lumpe likewise is altogether viciated, it shoulde seeme that all also ought to be of a like disposition and inclination to wickednes. But thys is diligently to be weighed, that besides thys disposition ther happen naturall malices, [Page 80] maners, customes, wicked qualities, fellowshippes, temperatures of bodies, sundry parentes, diuers countries, and manifold causes, wherby some are made more or lesse prone vnto sins, which pronenesse of ours God according to his iustice, goodnes, and wisdome vseth and stirreth it vp, gouerneth and ruleth it. And this is not to be forgotten, that none of vs haue so in our selues the beginninges of good actes, which truely please God, as wee euen from the verye birth haue within vs the beginninges of sins. For they ar inspired in vs by the holy ghost, and we continuallye receaue them of God, neither burst they foorth out of the corrupt beginninges of our nature.
Now resteth to see from whence after the synne of Adam, that frowardnes and corruption came, Whether the first corruption after the synne of Adam were deriued frō god or no. and whither it wer deriued from God to punish the wicked act which was committed. I answer, that we maye not so thynke: for man was for the fault which he had committed allenated from god, wherfore he iustly withrew from him his giftes, fauour and grace. And our nature being left vnto it self, falleth and declineth to woorse and woorse, yea it cōmeth to nothyng, from whence it was brought forth at the beginning. Wherefore we must seke for no other efficiēt cause of that corruption. Wherefore by that wythdrawing of giftes and grace, and departure from God, which is the fountain of al good thinges, nature is by it self throwen headlong into vice and corruption. But now let vs returne to the history.
12 Againe the children of Israel dyd euill in the syght of the Lord. And the Lord strengthened Eglon king of Moab, against Israel: bicause that they had done euyl in the sight of the Lord.
13 And this (Eglon) gathered vnto him the Chyldren of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel: and they possessed the city of Palme trees.
14 And the childrē of Israel serued Eglon king of Moab .18. yeres
The history declareth first the sinne which the Israelites committed: then it sheweth the punishment wherwith for the same they wer punished. As soone as their good Prince was dead, the people fel againe to their olde wyckednes, neyther did they onely commit those sinnes which before they had committed, but to them they added some sinnes more grieuous. The last fallinges wer for the most parte more grieuous than the first. Seruitude is against the nature of man. For the last falinges were for the most part greuouser than they which wer past: for at the least thei added this, in that they more & more became ingrate for the benefites past, when they againe fel from God, with whom they were before reconciled into fauour. Their punishment was bondage, wherin they wer bound & serued the Moabites. Without doubt a grieuous kinde of punishment: bicause it is marueylouslye agaynst the state and nature of man. For al men by nature ar borne free. And bondage, as euen the Lawyers also do confesse, Seruitude was brought in by cause of sinne. was brought in by a commō law among men agreing to natural reason. But it may more truly be said y t it was brought in bicause of sinne. Enemies when they wer ouercome in warre, wer somtimes saued, & compelled to serue them which ouercame them: and ther can be no iust warres taken in hand, vnles it be to reuenge some facinorous acte. Wherefore we said wel, that seruitude was deriued of sinne: & is therfore a grieuous punishment, bicause it is against the nature of man. Certaine subiections are natural. I graunt in deede that this is natural, for the children to be obedient vnto the parentes, the subiect vnto the Magistrates, the vnlearned & vnskilful vnto the wiser, & the weake ones must apply themselues to the mightier. But this kinde of obedience and seruice, namely toward them whych are fauourable vnto vs, and seeke for our profyt, is voluntary. Wherefore it very much differeth from the seruitude, wherof we now intreate. For that voluntarye kynde of obedience myght haue bene vsed when men were in perfecte state: but thys whyche was brought in for synne coulde not bee there. And bondmen are compelled to serue not suche as are their friendes, but straungers and enemyes, and that in thynges vnprofitable vnto [Page] them, Which is the more greuous bondage. yea and often tymes thynges hurtfull and vnhonest.
Seruitude also is then far more grieuous, when people are subiect vnto those enemies which once wer ouercome by them, and whom before they ruled. These euyls happened vnto the Israelites. The Moabits were enemyes to the Iewes from the begining. For the Moabites were enemies vnto the Hebrues, euen from the beginning, and they hired Balaam to curse them, and in the wildernes they abandoned their women vnto them, for the which the people was afterward grieuously plagued. Farther, the Iewes ouercame the Moabites by warre, and punished them sore, as we reade in the booke of Numbers. Besides that, the Moabites wer a filthy and an infamed people: for their father was Moab, the sonne of Loth, who begat him by incest. Nether would God suffer, that they should be admitted into his church. For these causes therfore, was this bondage most hard, and especially vnto the Hebrues, which were alreadye before by god set at liberty both from the Egiptians and also from the Sirians, and by wonderfull woorkes from them redeemed.
God strengthned Aeglon, namely in geuing him courage and strength, making him prompt, and styrring him vp also by some certaine occasions. And adioyned vnto hym Ammon and Amalek. This may be vnderstand twoo wayes, either that Eglon adioyned vnto him selfe such confederates, or that god caused this league to be made betwene these nations. And vndoubtedlye both significations are true: for that which they dyd, they coulde not haue executed without the wyll and ayde of god.
Let vs note in this place, that the vngodly, which otherwise agree not verye wel among them selues, The vngodly do easilye conspire agaynst the people of god. do easely conspire against the people of god. Wherfore these three nations being ioyned together, did easely ouercome the Israelites, which wer forsaken of god. And they possessed the city of Palme trees, which is Iericho, as it appeareth in Deut. and as it is before declared. But in that it is said that they tooke possession of it, it signifieth that they did not spoyle it, and leaue it voyde: for they claimed it vnto them selues, making the landes and possessions therof proper vnto them selues. Neither is it vnlykelye, but that they put in it a garison of soldiors, for to oppresse the Hebrues more grieuously. And yet I do not thinke, that they restored again the city vnto them, for that came to passe afterward in the time of Achab, as it is declared in the booke of Kynges.
Why god punisheth his people by vngodly ones.But this peraduenture may seeme maruellous vnto some, that god vsed to punish his people by other nations farre woorse than they wer: for as muche as the Ammonites, Amalekites, and Moabites wer Idolatrers, & nations that were ouerwhelmed in all kinde of wickednes. To this I wil answer, that it was the prouidence of god, which (as I haue before declared) doth in y e sorte punish syns with synnes, and in such maner chasten the vngodly, by others that are vngodly. Whi god soner punisheth his owne than he doth strangers. Farther, by it he declareth, that these things though they be euyll, yet they can not escape, but that some way they shal serue his wil. But whi he differeth to punysh nations, which otherwise are wicked, and his own he straight ways punisheth, this is the cause: bicause they pertaining to god, do synne against his law which they know. Wherfore ther is no cause why the Turkes and Papists though they somtimes preuayle against vs, to punish our sinnes, should flatter them selues therby, God wyll not easeli suffer his worde beynge knowen & receiued to be despised. as though they were much better than we are, or as though their supersticions were better than our religion. For if the Moabites, Chananites, and Assirians were not counted better than the Iewes, whom they ouercame: no more shall the Turkes or Papistes obtayne the same, thoughe sometymes by the wyl of God they afflict the Gospellers. Wherfore god doth quickly punish his, for his woord sake, which is among them published: hee wyll not easely suffer, that his woord being receaued and knowen should be despised and escape vnpunished. There were vndoubtedly very many lyers and false men at Ierusalem, and yet god suffered them, where as he strayght waye destroyed Ananias and Saphira. For he would adorne & set forth y e gospel & holy ministery. [Page 81] And now that the Ethnikes do see, how seuerely God punisheth vs, they maye easelye coniecture what hangeth ouer their heades, according to the saying of Christ: If this be done in the grene tree, what shall be done in the drye tree. And if by reason of their blindnesse they vnderstand not this, we ought diligently to remember it to our great consolation. We rede in Ieremye the .xlix. Chapiter that the people of God dranke of the cup of the Lord, which semed not so muche to deserue it: Wherfore the Edomites ought much more to loke, to be one day punished with punishmentes appointed for them. In Ezechiel also the .ix. Chap. god exhorteth nations against the Hebrues, to kil and spare none, but fyrst they should begyn at his sanctuary. Peter also in his .i. Epistle the .4. chap. The time is (saith he) that iudgement must begin at the house of God. But why he sayth that nowe is the tyme, I thinke this is the cause, bicause he sawe that all those thinges which the Prophetes had forespoken of the chastising of the people of Israell before other nations, should chieflye of al take place among the Christians. For those thinges which happened vnto the Iewes in a figure or shadowe, do chiefly belong vnto vs. Wherefore Christ being made manifeste, & his fayth being spred abroade throughout the worlde, Peter thought that it shoulde be very soone accomplished, that iudgement should beginne at the Christians whiche are the house of God.
Furthermore there are in the fellowship of the people of god alwaies some holy men still founde, which when sharpe affliction cōmeth are proued, & as golde in fyer are made more bright, which the heauenly father will chieflye and spedely to be done. The electe also, which haue fallen, being admonished by chastisementes and aduersities, do vse to returne againe into the right way. And that the same may come to passe, God, who loueth them excedingly, doth of his louing care prouide. But such as are vncureable, his wil is that they should quickly be broken, least they might longer than is mete, hurt and with their contagiousnesse destroy other. These vndoubtedly are the causes, why God doth sooner correcte his own than straungers. It is not to be attributed to hatred but to most feruent loue. For the deuine oracles declare vnder the person of God. Whom I loue I correct and chastise. Also a good housholder not regarding straungers, beginneth seuere discipline at his own, when they sinne.
The Israelites serued the Kyng of Moab .xviii. yeares. Thys with out doubt was a long tyme of bondage. And not without desert, bicause y e Hebrewes had augmented their sinne, either in y t they cōmitted thinges more greuous, or els bycause when they were reprehended and deliuered, they fel agayne to their old wickednesse. This latter seruitude was twice so long as was that wherein they serued the king of Mesopotamia.
15 And the children of Israell cryed vnto the Lorde: and the Lord stirred them vp a Sauioure Ehud the sonne of Gera, the sonne of Iemini, a man hauing an impedimente in hys ryght hande, and by hym the children of Israell sente a presente vnto Eglon the Kyng of Moab.
The kindnesse and mercy of God is farre greater than the kindnesse and mercy of men. For if any through their own default fal into any miseryes, The kindnesse of God is farre greater thā the mercye of men. men for the moste parte haue no compassion on them. Which manifestly appeareth in y e Romane lawes, in the Digestes de deposito vel contra. In the lawe, bona fides, it is ordayned that a pledge shoulde not bee restored, but shoulde bee geuen to the treasorye, when he whiche owed the pledge doth so offende, that he deserueth banishemente, bycause that he suffred it thorough hys owne default, and therefore is it meete that he shoulde bee punyshed with pouertye. A woman also, if she committe aduoutrye, dyd not only loose her dowery, but also she cā clayme none of her husbands goods, bicause through her own default [Page] she falleth into that misery: which is also written in Decretalibus, title de consuetudine, chap. Ex parte. But god is so merciful and long suffring that he saith in Ieremy: I will do that, which none of you wil do. No husband would receaue againe a wife which he hath repudiated, especially for adultery sake. But I, so that thou wilte returne, will take thee againe, although thou hast most filthilye played the harlot with thy louers. This goodnesse of god ought we also to follow not only to haue cōpassion on those, It is not lawful by violence to deliuer those which ar alredy fallen into the power of the Magistrate. which w tout their own fault are thrust into miseries but of those also which for their faults are chastised. Wherefore we ought to be gentle towardes them, but yet so farre as good lawes wil suffer: which I therfore adde, lest hereupon any should thinke that such as are condemned to death or are captiues for wicked actes whiche they haue committed might be deliuered against the wil of the Magistrates. Christ commaunded, that we should forgeue the repentant sinner, not once nor seuen tymes, but seuenty times seuen times: this doth he himself toward his people: thei fal in dede oftentimes, and most filthily sinne, and yet when they retourne the heauenly Father both receaueth and also deliuereth them.
He raysed them vp a Iudge, Ehud the sonne of Gera. The cōmon translation hath Aioth. Why the Latin & Greke translation haue corrupted propre names. But that is meruaile, for both in the Greeke and also the Latin translation, very many propre names are corrupted. As Isaac, Ezechiell, Ezechias, Nabuchodonosor, &c, for both those Nations abhorring from hard kinde of speaking haue leuifyed and mitigated the Hebrue woordes after the forme of their own speche. And this man of whom we entreate, came (as the holy history declareth) of the tribe of Beniamin. For the familye of Iemini, whereof he was borne, belonged vnto the tribe of Beniamin.
Hauing an impediment in hys ryght hand. The common Latine edition hath turned it Ambidextrum, that is, one which vseth both handes a like, which interpretation the Hebrewe phrase suffreth not, whiche is thus: Ater iad lamino, Why some are lefthanded. that is, shut or taken in his right hande. And in the Latin also we saye claudum, quasi clausum, that is, lame. And there are two causes alledged, why some are lefthanded. For eyther it commeth of custome from their childhode, or ells by some impediment in the right part. But I would thinke that y e custome of vsing the left hand from a childe commeth of some impediment, bycause peraduenture some pores of y e body are shut or stopped, by which y e spirites whiche are instrumentes of mouing, can not easlye haue their course to the sinowes and to the brawnes of the right hand. Otherwise children should of their own accord be prone to vse the right hand, for as much as in creatures, by order of nature, y e right part is much stronger thā y e left. Neither do Iat this present speake of those which do of purpose practise to vse the left hand, that therby whē nede requireth they may haue both handes ready. For that serueth little to oure matter, for the history by expresse wordes declareth that this Ehud had an impedimente in hys right hand. Yet let vs remember, y t god for the executing of noble dedes & enterprises for the most part choseth the weake & vnapt ones, as the first epistle to the Corin. testifieth: Brethren, see to your calling: how y t not many noble men, not many wise men, not many mighty men, are chosen, but God hath chosen the folishe things of the world, to put to shame the wise, & he hath chosen the weake things, to ouerthrow things y t are mighty, & also vile things, and thinges of no reputation hath God chosē to confound things of reputation, y t no flesh should be glorified in his sight, &c. For as much as the glorye of God shoulde easlye bee darkened by the power & wisedome of men. Wherfore y t that glory might excel, he hath elected the folyshenesse of preaching, he hath also chosen vnto himselfe rude Apostles, and weake and feable men, by whom he myghte shewe forth hys wonderfull workes. Howbeit bycause that which was now done by Ehud seemeth to be done by crafte, subtilitye and guile, it is declared what occasion God gaue of this noble dede.
And by him the children of Israell sent a present vnto Eglon. God would therfore haue this messanger chosē, that he might the easlier come to the presence of the King. And I suppose that the present which they sent vnto Eglon was not the ordinary tribute which they payd, but some honorable gift, ther by to make the King more fauourable towards thē, or els to obtayne somewhat at his hands. For tribute is called by an other woord of the Hebrewes than by this word Minchah. For that word is deriued of this verbe Nachah, Minchah. which is to bring, or to offre. Wherfore Minchah signified not only an oblation, which was appointed for sacrifices, but also a present, and gift presented vnto noble men. And for that cause in the booke of Genesis, those thinges whiche Iacob as a gifte sent vnto his brother Esau, before he came vnto him, are called by y e same name. And when Ehud saw, that he was called to a weighty and perilous enterpryse, although he nothing doubted of the successe thereof, yet he diligentlye weyghed with himselfe the daungers to the end he myght the more prudently auoyde them. The callyng of GOD causeth vs to haue a sure confidence, but yet it nothyng letteth, but that we maye meditate howe we maye warely, and wysely execute it. Ehud therefore reuoluing with himselfe the thynges that were to be done, caused that thyng to bee made for him, whiche the holy historye by these wordes declareth.
16 And Ehud made him a sword with two edges, of a cubite lēgth, and he girded it vnder his raymente, vpon his right thigh.
17 He presented the present vnto Eglon King of Moab. And Eglon was a very fatte man.
18 And when he had presented the presente, he sent away the people that bare the present.
19 But he himself returned agayne from the quarry of stones that was in Gilgal, and sayd: I haue a secret errand vnto thee O King: whoe aunswered: Kepe silence. And all they that stoode neere went forth.
Ehud made him a two edged sworde, whiche hauing a most sharpe edge on both sides, mighte both easlye pearse and cutte, and also quickely strike through the bodye. He caused it also to be made but a Cubite in length that he might the easlier hide it. What is the stature of Pigmeians. Neyther is this woorde Gamar any other thing with the Hebrewes than Amah. Wherefore the Pigmeians in Ezechiell the .xxvii. Chapiter are called Gamerim, and therfore so called, bicause they are but a Cubite in stature. And such a short sworde the Latines call Sica that is, a scayne. He hidde it vnder his garments: for if he had worne hys sworde openlye, eyther he shoulde haue bene compelled to laye awaye his sworde, or elles he shoulde haue had no accesse vnto the Kyng. For Tirannes will not easely admitte armed men priuately to talke with them. Furthermore if it had bene marked that at hys departure when he had killed the King, he caryed not hys sworde with hym as he broughte it, hys enterprise woulde easelye haue beene suspected. He gyrded the shorte sworde vppon hys ryghte thye, that he myght handsomly take it with his left hand, which only he was able to vse.
Eglon was a very grosse man It is no straunge thing that Princes are troubled with ouermuch fatnesse. For they liue delicately, they eate and drinke aboundauntly, and very litle exercise theyr minde and bodye. Agag the Kyng of Amalek, is in the fyrste booke of Samuell described to haue beene suche an other.
And he sent the people awaye, namely those whiche broughte the gifte [Page] And returned from the place of grauen Images which were by Gilgall. Those men which Ehud sent away, were eyther fellowes of the message or they which bare the gift that should be offred vnto the king. By good aduise he sent those away frō him, bicause he would talke with the king alone & without any arbiterers. And he saw that whē he had finished his purpose he should by flying away a great deale better saue himself being alone, thā he shuld do if he had many ioyned with him, Conspiracies cōmunicated to many haue seldome good successe. bycause then he should not haue bene carefull onely howe to saue himself, but also how to saue others. Farther conspiracies whē they are communicated to many, haue very seldome good successe. Peraduenture also he woulde endaunger but himselfe only, and not bring others into daunger with him. Wherefore he sent them awaye that if any daunger shoulde peraduenture happen, they might be in safetye. And the place fro whence he retourned is called Pesilim of this verbe Pasall, which is to cut or graue, bycause peraduenture there were in that place eyther a quarrey of stones, or elles some Idoles of late set vp by Eglon. For Gilgal was among the Iewes counted a religious place.
For the arke of the couenaunt remayned there a while, and we read that the Israelites after they were passed ouer Iordane rested first in that place, and celebrated a general circumcision there. Wherfore it might easlye come to passe y e Eglon in contempte of the Hebrewes, had there placed images and idoles.
Ehud when he had there sent away his fellowes, returned againe alone vnto the king, to whom he sayd, I haue a secret businesse to tell thee O Kyng. As touching the propre signification of his talke, he tolde the truth as it was. For Dabar signifieth with the Hebrewes not only a word, but also a thing and businesse. But bicause Eglon was thereby deceaued, and he spake these thinges to deceaue, he made a lye also. The King when he heard thys answered, Holde thy peace. Beckening vnto him to tell it him secretly & not to speake it before all them which stoode then by.
20 And Ehud came vnto him, and he sat in a sommer parler alone, and Ehud said: I haue a message vnto thee from God. And he arose out of his seate.
21 Then Ehud put forth his left hand, and toke the sworde frō hys right side, and thrust it into his bellye.
22 And the haft went after the blade, and the fat closed the hafte, so y t he could not draw the sword out of hys belly, & the dirte came out.
As soone as they vnderstoode the will of the King they went all forth, and Ehud was lefte alone with the King. And he satte in a colde parler, that is, as they translate it, in a sommer parler. The Hebrew interpreters do say that that place was therfore the colder, bicause it had very many windowes, so that the ayre did the eassier come into it. When Ehud sayd: I haue a message vnto the from God, he sayde not a message from Iehouah but from Elohim whiche is a general name and is also attributed vnto idoles, he lieth againe although he depart not from the signification of the wordes. He deceaued the king, and that he might the better beguile him he spake after this sorte. Eglon when mentiō was made of the worde of God, he rose vp & honoured it. And as it is to be thoughte, the manner was so at that time in those regions. And in oure daies we see oftentymes, that very many Princes whiche otherwyse are farre from religion, yet to fayne themselues most religious, will vncouer their hed at the name of God and of Christ, and come to holy seruices shewing greate reuerence vnto suche rites rather of hipocrisye, thereby to deceaue the common people and where as they are vngodlye they woulde bee counted verye Godlye. Thys dyd Eglon as farre as I suppose: althoughe I knowe that the Hebrew Rabines haue far otherwise fayned. For they say that bycause of this honor which [Page 83] he gaue vnto the name of God, it came afterwardes to passe, A lye of [...] bin [...]. that the daughter of Eglon Ruth I say, was conuerted to the Iewishe religion, and was the great grandmother of Dauid. That is altogether a fayned thing, bycause it hath no testimony out of the holy Scriptures. And yet I speake not this, God bes [...]oweth benefi [...] s vpon men for kep [...]g outw [...]rd [...] pline. as though I knewe not that God geueth vnto men aboundant benefites for obseruyng of outward discipline. Farther I marke y t Ehud got thre cōmodityes by y e things whiche he thus did. First, as a Prophet he spake vnto the king standyng, wheras otherwise he ought to haue spoken with him either prostrate or elles knelyng. Secondly the kyng myght easelyer be striken to death standyng than syttyng. Lastly whilest he was rysing he could not so well marke Ehud plucking out his shorte sworde. And the stroken was so vehement that not onely the sworde, but also the haft persed into the body of the kyng. Yea & the whole skayn was so closed in with fat or greace that he was not able to plucke it out. And the king was killed with the selfe same stroke. It is added also that dyrte came frō him, which thinges is wont to happen to those whiche dye violently.
23 And Ehud got him out thorough the porche, and shut the dores of the parler about him, and locked them.
24 When he was gone out, his seruauntes came, and looked and beholde the dores of the parler were locked. Then they sayd: Surely he couereth his feete in his sommer chamber.
25 And they taryed till they were ashamed, and beholde he opened not the doores of the parler. Wherefore they toke a kay and opened thē. And behold their Lord was fallen down dead on the earth.
Ehud when he went forth plucked the doores after hym and locked them: for there is a certayn kynd of lockes made in such sort, y t w tout a kay, of a mā plucke the dores after him, they wil straightway locke. Augustine. And Augustine writyng of this place, sayth that they are in Affrike euery where called Verudata. The seruaunts of Egl n when Ehud was come forth, suspected no euill, bycause as it is most lykely, he neuer chaunged his countenance when he went forth but went hys way fayre and softly as thoughe he had committed no wicked acte. And they thought that the king had shut Thedores, bycause peraduenture he would ease him selfe. And that is ment by the Hebrew phrase wherin they say. He peraduē ture couereth his feete. For in that worke men vsed to couer their feete with garmentes like a tabernacle or tente. And whilest the seruauntes of Eglon taryed and wayted, Ehud had good leasure to flye. But at the length when they were ashamed, they tooke a kay and opened the doores. They vse in courtes to haue many kayes of the kinges chamber, whiche the chamberlaynes diligently kepe: and that is it whiche is here sayde that they tooke a kaye. But when they sawe their king so vily and miserably slayne, we must beleue that they were amased, so that they could not well tell what was to be doone. The thing was so straūge whiche had happened. Peraduenture also they a while mourned and lamented or elles prouided to saue them selues by flyght, bycause they had not well kepte the kyng.
26 And Ehud escaped whilest they taryed, and was passed ouer the quarrey of stones (or place of grauen images) and escaped into Seirath.
27 And when he was come to hys, he blewe a trompet in mount Ephraim. And the children of Israell went downe with him from the hill and he went before them.
28 And he sayd vnto them: Follow me, for the Lord hath deliuered [Page] your enemies the Moabites into your handes: and they descended after him and tooke the passages of Iordan towarde Moab, and suffred not a man to passe ouer.
This place Seirath, whiche is here mencioned, is not the mount Seir in Idumea, but is a place not farre from mount Ephraim, as the wordes which follow do manifestly declare. And Ehud beyng of a noble courage when he had slayne the tyranne, left not his matters halfe done and halfe vndone, as did Brutus and Cassius long sins when they had slayne Cesar, with a trumpet he called together the Ephraites, whiche were men very expert in warres, and those by his authoritie he exhorted to battayle, makyng them assured y e God had graunted him the victory. They therfore stopped y e passages of Iordane, that y e Moabites, which were in the kyngdome of y e Israelites, & had gotten part of it as it is already declared, should not flye away. And lest others of the coūtrey of Moab should passe ouer the riuer, to succor their owne men, whiche were among the Hebrues.
29 And they slewe of the Moabites the same tyme, aboute a ten thousande men whiche were all fat, and all strong men, and there escaped not a man.
30 So Moab was subdued that day vnder the hande of Israell: and the land had rest lxxx. yeares.
Whē they had stopped the passages of y e riuer of Iordane, they slew x. thousād Moabites, which at y e tyme dwelt in y e dominiōs of the Hebrues. And they which were slayne were no common men, but in our history, are called Fattemen, not that they were fat in body but in richesse. For they were riche and very strōg. For by their myght and warlike power the Israelites were brought into bondage. Wherfore it is very aptly a litle afterward sayd, that y e Hebrues when they had gotten this victory, were in quiet a very lōg tyme after: for the Moabites wer so cōsumed and worne away, by reason their notable and excellent captaynes wer lost, Augustine. What peace of the Romanes was lōger thē other. that they were not able to renew warre agayne. And therfore it is sayde, That Moab was subdued vnder the hand of Israell. Augustine diligently consideryng, that the lād was at rest lxxx. yeares, hath learnedly noted, y t the Romanes had neuer peace aboue the space of xl. yeares, which they had in y e tyme of Numa Pompilius. For y e king setting aside the study of making warre, applied himself wholy to institute ceremonies. Wherfore therby he concludeth y t the affaires of the Israelites were longer in quiet, thā were y e affaires of y e Romanes. Howbeit the Hebrues thinke, that in that sūme of lxxx. yeres are cōprehended those xviii yeares, wherin the Hebrues serued the kyng of Moab, that the supputation of the tyme might agree more iustly.
There are two thinges whiche are to be marked in this place. First y e Ehud was of a valeant, strong, & noble courage, whereunto was adioyned a singular prudēce. And of those giftes, faith was the principall foūdatiō, for vnlesse he had effectually beleued god whē he called him & also his promise he wold neuer haue put his life & goods into so great ieopardies. The second thing is, y t all thinges had therfore happy successe, bycause god neuer faileth those, which obey him, followyng their vocation, wherby they feele that by him they are called to accomplishe any thyng.
But now that we haue briefly touched y e history, there are thre places or questiōs offred vnto vs whiche may not by any meanes be left vnspokē of. For foras much as Ehud (as we haue heard) vsed guile, & y e euill guile, made also a lye, & drew hys sworde agaynst hys prince, me thinketh it is worthy to be declared, whether it be lawfull for Christiā & godly mē to vse guile. Secondly whether it be lawful to lye, lastly, whether y e subiectes may inuade their prīce for any cause.
¶Of Guile.
NOw let vs speake of the first. That whiche the Latines call Dolus (that is guile) the Grecians call [...], so that their worde and the Latines, is almost all one. But the Hebrues call it Mirmah or Rimiah. Then we must know this, that guile is there vsed, where any thing lyeth secret whiche is hidden, Plautus. lest the guile should appeare or easely be sene. Wherfore Plautus sayd, Guiles vnlesse they be couered by craft, they are no guiles. Thus much as touching the name. Now let vs come to the definition.
In the digestes de dolo malo lege. 1. The definition of guile. Seruius. Seruius an interpreter of the lawe hath thus defined euil guile, namely to be a subtile inuention or deuise for to deceaue another by, when as one thing is done and an other thing dissembled. Wheresoeuer therfore is guile, there is deceate by some dissimulation. Labeo. It is true in dede y t Labeo an interpretor of the law reproued the definitiō which Seruius brought and that by two argumentes. Whereof the one is, that some may be beguiled without dissimulation or euill guile. Wherefore the difinition is more strayte and narrowe than that whiche is defined, whiche all men counte to be an error. The other argument is, bycause some sometymes by dissimulation do saue and defend their owne, or elles other mens thinges, and yet thereby they beguyle no man, neither do they hurte any man. Wherfore the definition is applyed vnto other thinges besides that whiche is defined: An other definition of guile. Vlpianu [...]. whiche thing also is reproued as a faulte. Wherfore he thus defineth it: Noughty guile, is all craft, disceate and subtility inuented to beguile, delude, and deceaue an other. Vlpianus in the same place alloweth the opinion of Labeo. Sauyng the authoritie of suche a man I would say that Labeo did not well in remouing dissimulation from the definitiō of deceate. And as touching the first argument whiche he hath, I deny, namely that men may be beguiled without dissimulation, bycause vnlesse they should be together without sense, they would not easely, be brought to receaue & to take that which they manifestly see wilbe hurtefull vnto them. Wherfore it is necessary, that there be some shewe and colour added, whiche can by no meanes be done without dissimulation. Then, where as he saith that there are very many, whiche by dissimulation may defend either their owne thinges or elles thynges of other mens: I graunt that, but yet I affirme that the same is guile, although it be good guile, as afterward we shal more manifestly shew. Wherfore as touching the definition of guile, it semeth that fayning or dissimulation is alwayes to be added. And for that cause the definitiō of Seruius pleaseth me better, which definition for all that I my selfe would rather apply vnto guile in generall, thā vnto euill guile as he did. Beyng by this meanes peraduenture moued, bycause he vnderstode by deceate that deceate whiche should be hurtefull.
Cicero in his first booke of offices affirmeth that dissimulation or fayning, Cicero. pertayne chiefly vnto the nature of guile. For he writeth that Aquilius his familiar frende beyng demaunded what guile was, he answered, where one thyng is doone and an other thyng dissembled. To this sentence Augustine assenteth, Augustine. who (in his 7. treatise vpon Iohn expoundyng these wordes whiche Christ pronounced of Nathaniel, Beholde a true Israelite in whō is no guile) sayth: Thē it is guile, whē one thing is done and an other thing fayned, &c. And to speake this by the waye, by this place is easely gathered, Augustine pre [...] ched vnto the people in [...] ti [...]e. that Augustine preached his Sermons vnto y e people in Latine, bicause y e Affricians vsed the Romane tongue, although it were not pure, but in some wordes corrupt. For there Augustine admonished the people, that Dolus which is guile, signified not Dolor that is pain as many corruptly spake, saying Dolus illū torquet, that is as they meant. He is troubled with payne, when as in that place they should haue said Dolor and not Dolus: to take awaye therfore the ambiguitie of the worde, he sayeth, that Dolus whiche is guile, signifieth fayning and dissimulation. And in the same place, to expresse what fayning beguilyng signifieth, he addeth, Guile cōmeth of doublenesse of heart. that it commeth of doublenesse of the hearte. He allegeth th [...] 12. Psalme, where when mention is made of guilefull men, Dauid sayth that they speake in hart and in harts, that is, as hee [Page] interpreteth, in one parte of their heart they do se the truth, & perceaue how the thing is: & in the other part they go about dissimulation & disceate. But in those (saith he) is no guile, which whē they se thēselues to be sinners, do also coūt thē selues for such, nether do they dissēble or boast of righteousnesse, as did y e Pharisey, whē he prayed by y e publican, & as other hipocrites also do. Nathaniel had no guile in him, but not vniuersally, bycause euery mā is a lyer: & as Paul writeth, there dwelleth no good thing in our flesh, for as much as it is altogether guilefull and disceatfull. It could be onely sayd of Christ in vniuersall, that he wanted guile. But yet they are blessed (as Dauid sayth) to whom the Lord hath not imputed sinne, and in whose spirite there is no guile. For in as much as they are regenerate especially as touching the spirite that whiche they do they do it vprightly and simply: and such a one Christ affirmeth Nathaniell to haue ben.
Augustine.The same Augustine in the 10 Tome and his booke of 50. Homelies the first Homely, expoundeth this, whiche is writtē in the 33. Psalme of Dauid what mā is he, which would lyue, & loueth to se good dayes? Refrayne thy tōgue frō euil, and thy lippes that they speake no guile, then (saith he) it is guile, when nothing is close and secret in the heart, and an other thing is expressed, either in word or dede, Flatterers. as flatterers vse to do, which cōmēd some contrary to y e which they think, therby either to eat their meat & drinke their drinke, or els to get some other benefite at their hāds. And y t which he speaketh of flatterers, may also be vnderstād of enemies & backbyters. But y t it is conueniēt y t men should do y t which they do vprightly & simply, [...]omere. y e very Ethnikes saw. Wherfore Achilles in Homere saith, that he doth no lesse thā death, hate those mē, which speake otherwise than they thinke. Wherfore we thinke y t it is not ill to affirme a subtile inuention to deceaue a mā, when as one thing is done and an other thyng dissembled is set for the generall worde in the definition of guile.
Good guile & euill guile.But after this definition we must adde a distinctiō. For some guile is good & other some is euill, we call y e good, which is not hurtfull: & when as it hurteth none, but somtimes profiteth. But euil guile is hurtful, & euer hurteth somebody. These mēbres may easely be made playne by exāples. Nurces do cōtinually vse good guile toward their litle ones, therby to please & still thē: for with them they dissēble & fayne very many thinges. Phisitiās also do after y e same sorte deceaue them y t are sicke, bycause they would heale them. Yea and Chrisostome in his first boke de Sacerdotio, writeth, y t a certaine Phisitiā so beguiled one y t was sicke of an agew, y t in drinking water, he thought he dronke wine. And the same Chrisostome in the same place affirmeth, Chrisostome. y t he himselfe vsed a good guile, to beguile Basilius to take vpō him a bishopricke, whē y t he in no case was minded that way. Dauid by this kind of guile, escaped the handes of the king of the Philistiās. For he fayned himself to be a foole, so y t the king iudged him vnworthy to be punished. But of euil guile there are very many exāples in y e holy scriptures amō gest which this act of Ehud which we now interpret, is one. And y t is an other also which y e Hebrues did, whē they wēt forth of Egipt, who desired to borow both of their neighbours & also of their frendes precious garmētes, goldē & siluer vessels, & yet they minded vtterly to robbe thē of thē. To this kind also belongeth, that whiche Chusai the Arachite did in deceauing Absolon. This acte also may be counted among them, which Simeō and Leui perpetrated against Emor & the Sichemites. I could bryng a great many mo exāples, if I would nedelesse stande longe about a thing that is manifest.
Of y e first kind of guile, which is called good & vnhurtful, no mā wil cōtēd, but y t it is lawfull to vse it. But of y e other kind there is a doubt. Wherof if I shuld be demāded, Euill guile is not prohibited to be vsed against enemies I wold thinke this answere shuld be made. That we may not vse euil guile wyth our frendes, but agaynst our enemies it is not prohibited, bycause it is as it were armor. Wherfore if it be lawfull to make warres against thē iustly with armor, guiles also are to be admitted according to the saying of the Poete: VVhether it be guile or power, who can require in an enemy?
Howbeit this is to be obserued, Who bee the true enemyes. that we speake only of those enemyes which either God him selfe, or the publicque wealth, or a iust Magistrate declareth to be enemyes, and not those whiche euery priuate man hateth. Farther I doubt not, but that seyng it is lawfull to repell violence by violence, when there is no other waye to escape, it is also lawfull to vse guiles agaynst guiles. For he whiche repelleth violence by violence, as the lawes do permitte, the same man is not to be counted a priuate man, for as muche as he is armed by the Magistrate. Wherfore it is manifest that he doth not agaynst the lawe, but with the lawe. So he that is sodenly oppressed, may lawfully escape by euill guile if he can. Moreouer the Scriptures teache that this kinde of guile is iust. Ierome. For Ierome sayth, and it is written in the decrees .22. question 2. chap: Vtilem. That Iehu did very well dissemble with the Priestes of Baal, bycause he could not haue kylled them all, if he had begon to put some of them to death. Wherfore to gather them all together, he fayned hymselfe to be much more studious to worship Baal than was Achab, and by that meane he slewe euery one of them.
But this is to be taken heede of, that they whiche are so destroyed by guile, An acte of the king of Denmarke.. be very worthy of punishment, & as they are cōmonly called, notorious offenders, & such as can not be punished by an ordinary waye. For whiche cause the kyng of Dēmarke of some is cōmēded, which by guile destroyed most pernicious thieues, which he could not take. For he fayned a warre, and made a proclamation that as many as would come should receaue wages of hym, and promised vnto the thieues pardon for their wicked actes whiche they had hitherto committed. But I (as I shall afterward declare) do not so fully allowe such examples.
Augustine (as it is found in the 14. question the 5. chap: Dixit, Augustine. & it is a place in his questions vpō Exodus) sheweth that the Israelites deceaued y e Egyptians, when they borowed of thē golden & siluer vessels, & yet it was not to be counted a faulte in thē, when as for al y e no man doubted, but y t they did it by euill guile. The same 23. question .2. Dominus which is takē out of his questiōs vpon y e boke of Iosua, rehearseth y e place, wherin it is sayd y e God cōmaūded the Hebrues, to fight against the citie of Hay by wiles, which without doubt belong to guile. Ierome vpon the 17. chap: of Ezechiel, bringeth this sentence as a worldly sentēce: Ierome. namely, VVhether it be guile or power, who can require in an enemy?
Howbeit he assenteth vnto it, althoughe he denieth y t it can take place where an othe is made. But I will strayt waye expounde that. Ambrose in the 14. Ambrose. question the 4. permitteth guile, or gainefull fraud against enemies, & after this maner he interpreteth a place of Deut. where God gaue the Iewes liberty to put their money to vsury to straungers, namely, y t where the warre is iust, there also may vsury take place. For the goods of the enemies ar ours, & they may lawfully be taken away from them. And it skill not, whither it be done either by violence or by guile. There are which alledge that which is written in the latter Epistle to y e Corinthians the xii. chap: When I was crafty, I tooke you by guile. But y t maketh nothing to the purpose, when as it is most manifest y t he spake it in mockage. For hee fayned, as though he had receaued money of the Corinthians by other mē, which by himself he refused to receaue, which thing he strait way putteth away. But those examples which we brought firste, do manifestly proue that it is lawfull to vse guile, yea & euill guile against enemyes, namely in keping close our Counsels & doinges, & vsyng coulorable workes & wordes. The ciuile lawes permite guile against enemies. Nether do y e ciuil lawes otherwise teach. In y e Code de cōmerciis et mercatoribus Lege. Non solū. The emperor decreed not only y e no gold should be caried vnto y e barbarous nacions y t were enemies of y e pub. wealth, but also y t by subtile guile or pollicy y e gold which they had, shuld be taken frō thē. Also in y e digestes de captiuis postliminio reuersis. Lege. Nihil interest, it is decreed, y e captiues howe soeuer they returned into their coūtrey againe, should recouer agayne their owne goods, & old state, whether they were sent home againe, or whether they escaped by violēce, or by guile. Although afterward in Lege postliminio Paragrapho captiuis, [Page] y t be restrained, if y t they returne w t a mind to tary at home. For if they shuld either promise or sweare vnto their enemies to returne, they should not enioy y e right of returnīg. Attilius Regulus. Wherfore Attiliꝰ Regulꝰ enioyed not y e benefit, bicause he was sēt to Rome to persuade y e senate for y e chāgīg of captiues. Wherfore for as much as he promised & was minded to returne, he might not by y e lawes vse euill guile.
A diuisiō of an other.By this also appeareth y t to be true, whiche a litle before was said, namely y t we may not vse euil guile against our enemy, if ther be an othe made. And y t this may the playnlyer be vnderstand, we must deuide an othe as y e lawyers do, so y t one kinde of othe is called an approuing or an affirming of a thing, & an other a promising of a thing, or as thei speake, y e one affectiue, & y e other promissory. For whē we swere, either we do affirme or els deny some thing to be or to haue ben, which we ought neuer to do with euil guile, if we adde therunto an othe. Or els we promise to performe somthing, & for as much as faith is to be kept euē with our enemy, y e same faith also is not to be broken with euill guile. Wherefore if those things which we haue sworne vnto our enemy to kepe & obserue, are temporal goods, as are money, honours, & life of the body, for these things the name of God is not to be prophaned. Wherfore Dauid in his .15. Psal. sayth: He y t sweareth to do euill, & changeth not. In Hebrew it is thus written Nischoah Leharah Velo Iamid, Kimhi. which place I know Kimhi expoundeth of those, which vowe vnto God certaine hard & sharpe things, which serue to y e subduyng of the fleshe, neyther do ther chaūge y e which they haue promised. But y e sentence me thinketh semeth more simple, if it haue a larger sense, namely of an othe hurtful vnto vs, which a good & godly man will not abrogate or chaunge. Ierome. Ierome also vpon Ezechiell the 17. chap. is of this opinion. For there y e Lord saith y t he was very angry against Zedechias, bycause he had broken y e othe which he had made vnto Nebuchad-nezar king of Babilon. For although the Iewes counted him as an enemy, yet as Ierome teacheth, he was now as a frende, when he had by an othe promised his faith vnto Zedechias. For y e belōgeth vnto friends one to be faithful vnto the other. Ambrose. Wherfore euil guile ought there to take no place. And Augustine in y e 33. questiō y e 1. chap: Noli existimare, writing vnto Bonifacius admonisheth him to kepe faith w t his enemy also. Augustine. Ambrose also in y e 28. questiō y e 4. chap. Innocēs, admonisheth the same, & hath y e same sentence in his boke de officiis, where he bringeth the example of Iosua toward the Gabaonites, who althoughe he might haue made the othe voyde & of no force, yet by y e consent of God he caused it to be kept & ratified. Neither suffered be the Gabaonites to be slayne, whō for all y t he punished bicause of y e guile which they vsed. An othe for an vniust thing is to be broken. But if y e othe be geuē for an vniust or vngodly thing, it is vtterly to be made frustrate, bycause an othe ought not to be a bond of iniquitie. Neither is it of necessitie, y t a mā to be absolued of these kindes othes should come before some iudge. Which I therfore speake, bycause y e Pope claimeth this right vnto himself, namely to release a bond in such kind of othes, & as they commōly say, to dispense with them, as it appeareth in the 15. question the 6. The Pope dissolued both lawfull & vnlawful wher Nicholaus absolueth one Treuerensis. And his pride & arrogācy hath so farre now at the length extended his ryght or power, that he absolueth not onely vnlawful othes, but he abrogateth also iust and lawful othes when it semeth good vnto himselfe. So Zacharias losed the frenche men of an othe, wherein they were bound vnto their kyng, and he put the kyng from his kyngdome, and substituted Peppine in his place. But that is not to be meruayled at, when as it is a common saying in the courte of Rome at this daye: A prouerbe of the courte of Rome. Non est regum & magnatū, sed mercatorum stare iuramentis, that is: It is not mete for kynges and noble men, but for merchantes to keepe their othes.
Wherefore if there be an othe made, guile is not to be vsed vnles peraduenture the one partye to whom the othe is made, shall go from the condicions and couenauntes, for then the common saying muste take place, he that breaketh faith, Ierome. let faith also be brokē vnto him. Wherfore Ierome ad Nepotianū [Page 86] cōmendeth this saying of Domitius y e Orator vnto Phillip, when thou countest not me for a senator, I also wil not count thee for a Consul. But hereof we haue testimonies also in the holy scriptures: for Paul in y e first to the Corinth: the .7. chap: writeth, as touching faith geuē in matrimony, If y e vnfaithfull depart let him depart. A brother or a sister is not in subiection vnto such, but God hath called vs in peace. And those thinges which are alledged of an othe, I vnderstād also to be of the same efficacy in promises & couenants. In which promises & couenants I affirme, y e godly & iust men ought both to vse playne & simple wordes, & also faithfully to fulfil them. Sophisticall reasons of the Thracians. Wherfore y e Thrasians are iustly & worthily condemned who after y e truce was made for 30. dayes, robbed & spoiled by night, excusing their act, for y t their truce was made for y e day & not for y e night. Neither did y e legat of y e Romaines vprightly, yea he Sophostically dealt with Antiochus, The guile of the Legate of the Romanes against Anthiochus. who when he had decreed y t the one halfe of the ships should be geuen vnto the Romaines & the other halfe to y e kyng, cōmaunded them al to be deuided & cut in sonder in very dede. But he did it that the king should be vtterly destitute of a warrelike Nauy. Wherfore what soeuer a godly man shall promise, he ought before deepely to weygh with hym selfe, whether he be able to stande by hys wordes and promises. Wherefore Ierome hath written vnto Celautia: Ierome. thynges whiche thou shalt say, thinke thou swearest them.
As touching the ende of the question, y t the thing may be the more manifest, ther remaine certain doubts to be examined. First if a mā promise vnto any mā armor and helpe & that for the space of thre or foure yeares: & in the meane tyme y e same man becōmeth a traitor to hys contrey, & maketh warre against it, whether in this case he ought to performe his fayth, or els by euill guile to breake it? I answere, y t neither in this case, nor in the like, is faith to be kept: bycause, When an othe is made of a lawfull othe an vnlawfull othe is not to be kept. as it is manifest, a mischieuous acte hapeneth in y e meane time whiche with a safe cōscience we may not helpe. Neither in very dede is either euill guile or els periury here cōmitted. For he which hath sworne is not changed, but he to whom the othe was made. For othes can plucke awaye or diminishe nothing of those bondes which went before. An othe dissolueth not former bondes. Wherfore for as much as euery man is bound vnto the word of god & to y e health of his cōtrey, before he swereth any thing, y e which is afterward sworne must be vnderstād, so y t the first bondes be kept vnbroken. The same also must take place in vowes which are vowed. For although a man vow sole life, for somuch as he before was bound vnto y e word of God, wherein it is sayd, y t it is better to mary thā to burne, & they which cā not kepe thē selues chast let thē mary: No othe or vow taketh away the bonde vnto the commaundements of God. he doth not by reason of the vow which followed take away the first bond. Wherfore if he can not kepe hym selfe chaste, or if he burne, he ought by the commaundement of God to mary: neither can any othe or vowe that is made, take away the power & strength of the commaundement of God.
There ariseth also an other doubt, of those princes, which haue geuē their publique faith or safeconduict vnto heretikes for to come vnto Coūsels or to communications, whether they ought to stande by their promise, Whether faith is to be kepte with heretikes or violating theyr othe to kepe still the heretikes and to punish them. I aunswere, that they ought to kepe whole and pure the promise made vnto them.
But say they, we will easly graūt y t it is then sinne, when we geue promise of a naughty thing. But if after we haue promised, we kepe & stand to our promises, we fall into an other grieuous sinne. For we execute not the office cōmitted vnto vs, neither do we obey God. For it is our part accordyng as God hath cō maunded, to punishe and to correcte Heretikes, that they wast not the Church, and go forwarde to defende theyr pestiferous doctrine amonge the godly. Neither doth any man doubt but that Magistrates ought to defende the Churches. Wherefore it semeth that Heretikes are not to be let goo, when we haue them once in our handes. I aunswere, that this in dede is the office of kynges, to punish and to correct heretikes, but yet then when they haue them in their power. [Page] But if they geue them a saueconduct to come vnto them, They whiche by a saueconduct come vnto kinges & princes, are not in their power. Of Iehu. then can they not say that they haue them in their power. For they came vnder a promise & an othe to go & come harmeles, otherwise they would not haue come. Wherfore if there be a promise made, it is not lawful to breake it. And this is the cause, why I before said, y t I cā not easly allow y e acte of the king of Denmarke. Neither also would I iudge Iehu to be without sinne, when he promised y t he would worship Baal, therby to get all Baalites together: except peraduenture he manifestly knew, that he was by God stirred vp to do it. But of thys thing we will intreat in an other place. Let them therfore, which defend the Counsayle of Constantia, cease to lay for their pretence, that Iohn Husse with a safe conscience could not be let go, bicause it is a heinous sinne in all princes, if they suffre heretikes to wandre at liberty: for bycause that which they say is so farforth true, as they shalbe in their power. But when they come by a saueconducte geuen them, then are they at liberty, neither are they sayd to be in the power of the princes, which call them.
Whether faith is to be kepte with thieues.Other are in doubt, whether it be lawfull to vse euill guile against thieues, so that if a man fall into their handes, & by an othe be made vnto them, is suffred to go home vpon this condicion, there to gather money to redeme himselfe, whether (I say) he ought to returne vnto thē with the money, or w tout it, if he cā not get it, as he hoped to haue done, especially if in a manner he were assured, either to liue in perpetual seruitude, or els to be put to a most cruel death. I aunswere, that in my iudgemēt he ought to returne vnto them, for as much as in this case there is no daunger, but as touching goods of this world, of money (I say) liberty, & life of the body, whiche are not so muche to be estemed, that for their sakes an othe, or the name of GOD should be violated. And the verse of Dauid before brought serueth aptly for this purpose. And this sentence is so firme & true that euen an Ethnike, Attilius Regulus. Marcus Attilius Regulus I say, knew it. For he returned to Carthago, where he knew certaynly, that either he should be in perpetual seruitude, or els lose his life, and that most cruelly. Neither canst thou aunswere me, that he did foolishly therin: bycause the Romayne lawes (as we haue before said) de captiuis, & postliminio reuersis, in lege postliminiū Paragrapho Captiuus, do ordeyne and holyly decree that he should not be counted to enioy the benefite of the law postliminius, which had promised to returne agayn. Farther the nature of man persuadeth the selfe same thing, for it is ciuile & delighteth in society.
Wherefore next to God and godlines towarde him, there is nothing whiche ought more to esteme, then fayth, whiche wonderfully helpeth humane fellowship. For without it, it is not possible for men to liue together. Farther who will not say, that the money, liberty, and life of one man is rather to be lost, then the money, libertyes, and liues of innumerable men? For if couenantes and promyses be not kept with those thieues, henceforth they will geue credet to no man that they shall take, they would sende home none to their owne house to fetche their raunsome, but as many as they take, either they will kill them, or els kepe them with them in miserable and perpetuall bondage.
Lastly, this I thinke good to admonishe you of, that in othes let signes of vniuersality trouble no man. As, if a man promise and swere vnto hys frende that he wil be an helper vnto him in all thinges, or if a man promise and sweare vnto a Scoole or vnto the Churche, that he will do and obserue all thynges whiche it shall decree. How it is lawfull to sweare certain thyngs vniuersally. For all suche kynde of speaches (as it appeareth by that whiche we haue sayde) are to be vnderstande, so that the obedience of the worde of God be kepte. And vndoutedly, althoughe that clause be by the nature of another vnderstād alwayes to be added, yet for al y t it is the duty of godly mē to expresse it, when they are receaued into any vniuersity, College, office, corporatiō, or felowship, & according to the custome are cōpelled to sweare for to obserue statutes, lawes & decrees. It is the sure way (I say) by expresse wordes to testifie, y t they wil obserue all those things, vnles they shal finde y t any of y e same ar against [Page 87] y e word of god. And as touching this matter I think I haue spokē sufficiēt now. Our Ehud vsed euill guile. I graunt: but yet agaynst hys enemy. Neither doth the scripture make mencion of any othe that was made betwene him & Eglon y e kyng. And though there had ben an othe, yet he had ben quitte of it, for as much as y e stirring vp of god, wherby god opened vnto him his will, had abrogated it.
¶Of Truth and of a Lye.
NOw resteth to intreate of the second question, namely. Of Truth. Whether it be lawfull for a good & godly mā to lye. But first before I entreat of a lye. I thinke it good somwhat to speake of truth, whiche vndoubtedly is an excellent vertue.
Truth (as saith Tullius de Inuentione) is, wherby things which are, Tullius. whiche haue ben, & which shalbe are spoken vnaltered. Wherin we first note, that it cō sisteth in wordes: for (saith he) they are spokē, not y t I am ignoraūt, y t both dumbe men, & also other mē speake somtime by signes, Augustine. but bycause (as saith Augustine in his first boke de doctrina Christiana) wordes among other signes are y e principall & most playne. Farther we are hereby taught, that truth is not only to be considered as touching one difference of time, but as concerning thre differēces, for he saith, both those thinges which are, and whiche haue ben, & which shalbe. These things vndoubtedly are then spoken truly, when they are set forth vnaltered, that is, euen as they are, & by speaking made neither more ample nor lesse than they are. Augustine. This selfe same thing almost hath Augustine sayd in his booke de vera Religione chap: 36. where he writeth, that the truth is, whereby y e whiche is, is signified. Truth is a vertue. And it is a vertue bycause by it men are made prone & redy to speake that which is true. The generall worde of it is equalitie, The generall of vertue is equalitie. wherunto is ioyned in steade of difference, this voyce, namely, of wordes, to the thinges which are signified. And as it is well knowen of all men, all vertues leuel vnto the middest, & flye frō extremities. Two faultes in speaches. Wherfore in kinde of speches thou shalt find two faultes namely if thou shalt speake more than the thing is, or els lesse than the thing is. Neyther is vertue content with the middest only: for we must adde also circumstances, which vse continually to followe it. Wherfore the truth is not alway to be spokē to euery man, neither at all times, nor yet of euery thing, & yet we must not lye: but it is wisedome sometimes to kepe close those thinges which we wil not for iust occasiō haue knowen. He which should vaunt abrode euery where & vnto all mē the gifts of God geuen him, he should be counted foolish & vnwise: as cōtrary, he which should boast of a crime, What truth requireth. wherinto by humane weaknesse he hath fallen, should rightly, and worthely be reproued. Truth therfore requireth this, that those things which we haue within vs as touching our sense or wil, be signified of vs as it is, prudētly & rarely. Farther the vertue, wherof we speake, hath chiefly simplicitie ioyned vnto it, & it is very much contrary vnto doublenesse. Besides this it is a part of iustice. For it rēdreth vnto things their wordes and to a neighbour the truth which of duty longeth vnto him, without whiche truth humane fellowship can not consiste. For if a mā should cōtinually suspect him selfe to be deceaued by any man, he would neuer beleue him in any thyng. Aristotle. Whē an Irony is lawfull. Wherby amongest men al trades and societies perishe. Aristotle in his Ethikes affirmeth that truth declineth sometimes to defection: especially when any man speaketh of himselfe. For y e wisedome requireth, that a mā boast not of himselfe. Wherfore Paul in his second Epistle to the Corinthians the 12: chap. writeth: If I will boast of my selfe, I shall not be vnwise: but I will not, any man shoulde thynke of me, more than he seeth in me, or that he heareth of me. By these wordes, he reproueth those as foolishe and vnwise whiche do boast & glory euen of those good things which they haue. And he saith that he wil abstaine from it. He which speaketh lesse of hī selfe than it is, lyeth not. Neither (sayth he) do I require, y t any mā should thinke more of me, thā he either seeth in me or heareth of me. Neither is he which speaketh lesse of him selfe than it is, straightway to be accused as a lyer. For y t whiche is more cōprehēdeth and [Page] containeth in it selfe y t which is lesse. For whosoeuer hath fifty, he may say truly y t he hath twenty, althoughe he speaketh not all that he hath. Howbeit the same man, We may not lye for humilicyes sake. if he should affirme that he had but onely .xx. or els should deny that he had any thing, without doubt he should lye: which is not to be committed, either for modesty sake, or els (as they say) bycause of humilitie.
And as for testimonies of the holy scriptures which do stirre vs vp to speake y e truth, I could vndoubtedly bring a great many: but a few shal suffice. It is written in y e x. cōmaundements: Thou shalt not beare false witnesse, which cōmaū dement is not only to be obserued in iudgement, but in all things whiche in our talke we testifie to be either true or false. Farther, God is set before vs of vs to be followed, whom the scriptures euery where pronounce to be true. Wherfore we also ought to be most feruent louers of the truth. And for that cause in Exodus the 18. chap: Iethro counselled Moises, y t he shuld make rulers ouer y e people, such men as feared god, strong men, louers of the truth, & which hated couetousnesse. Dauid saith also: Behold thou hast loued truth, & therfore thou hast made me to vnderstand wisedome in the inward & secret partes of my minde. These wordes sufficiently declare, y t we are for y e cause taught of god both by inwarde inspiraciō, & also by outward doctrine: bycause he is a louer of the truth, neither doth he easely suffre, y t his children should either erre, or be deceaued by lyes. In Zacharie the viii. chap. it is writtē: Speake ye the truth euery man to his neyghbour, which selfe same sentence Paul vseth to the Ephesians & he cōmaundeth the same vnto the Collos. But to y e Corinth. the latter Epistle he saith of himselfe & of the other Apostles, y t they cā haue nothing against y e truth. Yea & the Scribes & Phariseys beyng ioyned with the Herodians, after this sorte flattered Christ, whom they went about to entrappe in his speache. Master, we knowe y t thou acceptest no persons, yea thou teachest y e way of god in truth. Hereby they declared y t it is a singular vertue for a noble & notable mā, to preferre the truth before all things. But let these testimonies of the holy scriptures be sufficiēt at this time. Now resteth to intreat of a lye. Of a lye. Augustine. Augustine (who wrot of it to Cosētius) affirmeth a lye to be a false significatiō of a word. And vndoubtedly all those things which before are declared of truth, we may by the contrarity affirme of this vice. And chiefly it is cōtrary to y t that Marcus Tullius affirmed of truth, namely that to be truth, wherby things which are, which haue ben, & which shalbe, are spokē vnaltered. And a lye is y t, wherby is y e signified which is not: for Augustine cōtrarywise spake of y e truth. This vice is so hurtful, y t it maketh a mā which is infected with it, In equally is the generall worde of a lye. to reioyce & to be glad in false thinges. The generall word of truth was equalitie, & of the vice y e generall worde shalbe inequalitie. And as y e vertue was very nye ioyned w t simplicity: so belōgeth a lye to doublenes. Truth is a part of iustice. But a lye is a part of vniustice. By truth humane fellowship is kept, but by a lye it is hurte & ouerthrowen. Augustine. But to returne to Augustine who writeth, y t he is sayd to lye, which w t a wil to deceaue speaketh y t which is false, & that to lye is nothing els, than to speake against the minde: for liers speake otherwise than they haue in their heart. But the desire to deceaue, is vtterly against iustice, loue & amitie, Three thinges ioyned with a lye. which we mutually owe one vnto an other. There are thre things therfore in a lye: first to speake that which is false: secondly his will in speaking: and thirdly a desire to deceaue. The first parte longeth to the matter of a lye: the other two partes pertayne vnto the forme.
A diuision of a lye.A lye is deuided into a Seruiceable lye, a Sportfull lye, & a Pernitious lye. And this deuision commeth of no other thyng but of the effectes, or of the endes. For this is euermore true, that the endes them selues, may haue the nature both of the cause and of the effecte. For lyes do either profyte, or delyte, or elles hurte. The ende of a pernitious lye, is to hurte. The ende of a Sportefull lye is to delyte: and the ende of a Seruiseable lye is to profyte. But Aristotle, bycause in vertue he chiefly considereth the meane, Aristotle. therefore if in speakyng thou [Page 88] excede that meane, he calleth that boasting: but if thou want of the meane, he nameth it Irony. And in that euyl this is chiefly hurtful, bicause an euyl or false opinion is ingendred in the minde of our neighbour. A lye is both euyll and also to be auoyded. For the which cause the same Aristotle semeth to haue sayd wel, that a lye is both euyll, and also it is to be auoyded. Which thing we may also proue by testimonies of the holy Scriptures. For to this belong al those thinges which we before brought to styrre vs vp to speake the truth. And very many places are here and there set forth, which detest lyes. Dauid saith: Thou wilt destroy al those which speake lyes. In a lye is an abuse of signes. Ther are reasons also which persuade vs the same: whereof one is, in a lye is an abuse of signes. And for as muche as it is not lawful to abuse the giftes of God, a lye is vnderstand also to be prohibited. Farther (as it is before said) a lye is contrarye vnto humane fellowship, for in lying the conceauinges of the minde ar not cō municated vnto our brethren, but lyes. Wherfore seing man is by nature made vnto fellowship, and communication, when he speaketh false thinges, he fyghteth with his own nature. And as Augustine saith: Faith is therin hurt, Augustine. for hee which heareth, beleueth those thinges which are spoken. Wherfore that fayth, which he geueth vnto other mens woordes, is made frustrate. And so great a thing cannot be hurt without blame. And lastly euery man by lying, leeseth hys own credite: for being taken in a lye, he shal euer after be suspected. Wherefore though he would, he shall not bee able by admonition or correction to helpe hys neighbour. For the which cause the fault which is in a lye, pertaineth not onely to the hurt and losse of our neighbour, but it is in it by the general woord, as by that which we haue already said manifestly appeareth. But among lies, What kinde of lye is most grieuous. that lye semeth to be most grieuous, which is cōmitted in religion, doctrine, and godlynes, bicause in no other thing can guile be more hurtful & pernicious. For there if we shal erre, we are thrust from the eternal felicity. Augustine. Wherefore Augustine in his Encheridion the .18. chap. hath very wel wrytten that they in dede doo synne grieuously, which deceaue trauelyng men, shewing them a contrary waye: but they are much more detestable, which as touching godlynes by lying, doo bryng men into errours.
If the three kinde of lyes should be compared together, I meane a pernitious lye, a sportefull lye, and a seruiceable lye: A pernitious lye, Two euyls in a pernitious lie should rightfullye be counted more detestable, bicause in it are two euyls. One is the abuse of signes: the other is, the hurt of our neighbour. And that both of the minde which deceiueth (which thing is common vnto all lyes) and also of the thing whych is lost. But as for other lyes, although they are not without fault, yet is that not a litle diminished by the good added vnto it, either of delectacion, or of helpe. And in dede a sportefull lye, hath in it but a smal and sclender nature of a lye: A sporteful lye. for as much as the falsehood is straightway founde out, neither can it be long hydden from the hearers. Augustine. Yea Augustine wryteth that suche lyes are not to be counted for lyes. But as touching a seruiceable lye, the iudgement of it is more darke & hard. For some deny it to be synne: for they say it hath a consideration to thys, Whyther a seruiceable lye bee synne. to helpe our neighbour, whom we ought in woordes and dedes to relieue as much as we can. Wherfore they thinke, that therby commeth no abuse of signes, for as much as al our thinges ought to haue a respect to the commodity of our brethren. Neither do they thinke that in it is sinne committed against humane societie, when as by this kinde of lye men are made safe, and kept harmlesse. Farther, they say, that where as it is in the holy scriptures written, that God wyll destroy al those which speake lyes: the same is not to be vnderstand of euery kind of lye, but onely of a pernicious lye. Which thing Augustine also in hys Encheridion the .18. chap. seemeth to graunt. Plato. They bryng also the opinion of Plato in his booke de Repub, who although he feared away the people from lyes, yet he gaue Magistrates libertye to lye, especiallye in making of lawes. But in my iudgement, the thing is farre otherwyse, neither wyl I easily graunt that a seruiceable [Page] lye wanteth the abuse of signes. Aristotle. For Aristotle in his booke [...], defining woordes, saith that they are notes of those affections which we haue in our minde. Wherby it followeth, that al they abuse wordes, which signify thinges to be otherwise, than they thinke in their minde. Farther, that reason which they bring of loue, is a very weake reason. For we ought to help our neighbours: but yet by iust and honest meanes, otherwise let vs permit thefts, to be bestowed in almes geuing. But the sentence of the Apostle must abyde firme and stable, which is, that euil thinges must not be done, that therby good thinges may come to passe. Neither do I thinke that true, that by those kinde of lyes humane fellowship is not hurt, for as much as take awaye fayth, and there remaineth almost no trafficke among men.
But as touching that sentence of the holy scriptures, wherin it is said: Thou shalt destroy al them that speake lyes. We graunt with Augustine, that that sentence is not vniuersally spoken, for as long as the power and coniunction of faith abideth with Christ, so long those sinnes ar not imputed, which otherwise of their own nature should be our destruction. And this also wil I easily graunt of seruiceable and sportful lyes, bicause they are not so much against charity, as are pernicious lyes. But this can no man deny, that in making a lye, we doo against faith. And we must vtterly graunt, that he which lyeth, looseth thereby his own credite, so that afterward he cannot profitably admonishe, reprooue, or with fruite geue counsel, as he ought to do. For they which heare him, will easily beleue that he seruiceably lyeth, to cal them againe into the way, & not that the thing is so in very dede. A contentiō betwene Ierome & Augustine. This vndoubtedlye was the cause that Augustine was against Ierome, who in a maner attributed a seruiceable lye vnto the holy scriptures. If this (saith he) should be so, the authority of the holy scriptures wold soone decay. For the Readers of them would easily say, that the thing is not so, but that it is so written, An error of Plato. to keepe men in doing their duty. Nether ought the authority of Plato much to moue vs, for as much as in that place he very much erred, graunting that in thinges pertayning vnto God, they might fayne fables, which might serue to bring foorth and keepe a good opinion of them. Wythout doubt we may not mocke in matters touching God. Farther, the law of God is equal, and the selfe same, as it wyl not haue the people to lye: so also it prohibiteth the same vnto the Magistrates.
Who are to bee excused of a lie.Howbeit they cannot iustly be accused of a lye, which in their talke, ar farre from doublenes. For somtimes it cōmeth to passe that some speake that whych is false, and yet they thought the same to be true. With which men they also ar excused, which haue geuen their promise to do a thing, which afterward they are not able to performe. Bicause at the beginning when they promised it, they wer fully mynded to doo that which they had promised: and therefore they haue not lyed. If so be that afterward they doo not accomplish those thinges whiche they haue said, the same happeneth by some other meanes. And sometimes it happeneth, that he which deliuereth his sword to some man to kepe, falleth afterward mad: wherfore he ought not to restore the swoorde vnto him, which hath left it with him: bicause a new case (as the Lawyers say) requireth a new helpe. After which selfe same sort Paule is excused, who sayd that he would go into Spaine, when as for al that he went not thither. Paule also promised the Corrinthians to come vnto them, which he perfourmed not: but yet he lyed not: bicause when he spake those wordes, he was determined so to do, but God had otherwise appointed the thing, as Gelasius hath wel wrytten, as it is found in the .22. question the 2. chap. Beatus. Vndoubtedly the disposition of God dissolueth and breaketh all bondes, as it is written in the .19. question, the .2. chap. duae sunt.
Hiperbole per [...]ne [...] not al [...]yes [...].But what shal we say to Hiperbolical places which are in the holye Scriptures, which at the first sight seeme lyes? I answer, although there the sentēces in signifieng, hold not the meane, as touching quantitye, yet as touching the [Page 89] substaunce it keepeth it. For those Hiperbolis or excessiue speches amplifye a thing, for their nature is not onely to set forth the thing, but also to bryng men into admiration of them, which thing by that maner of speche is most aptly attriued vnto. Neither haue lyes there any place, forasmuch as they breede not in the myndes of the hearers and readers any froward or false sence. A meane therfore is there to be kept, not vndoubtedly of the thing, but of the substance. The Euangelistes also are not to be accused of a lye, when as they setting foorth the actes of Christ, do not al vse the selfe same woordes. For vnto the truth it is sufficient that a thing be set forth as it was: but it is not required that it be expressed by the selfe same woordes. Yea it is often times done through the goodnes of the holye ghost, that the forme of the narration shoulde varye. For by that meanes those thinges which are not sufficientlye expressed in the one, are more amply declared by an other.
But they vse to obiect the Midwiues of the Hebrues, Of the mydwyfes of y e Hebrewes and of Rahab. Augustine. which although they lyed, yet God rewarded them: The same also happened to Rahab the Harlot, or a table keeper. Augustine answereth, that in the Midwiues the lye pleased not the Lord, but the faith and feare which they had towards God, and the mercy which they shewed vnto the Israelites. And the same doth the holy history by expresse wordes testify. And no otherwyse must we thinke of Rahab. Gregory. But Gregories opinion I neuer like, who saith, that for the lye which they made, their eternall reward was turned into a temporal reward, bicause for the celestial blessednes it is said that God builded them houses. But I iudge, that by reason of the true faith, which was strong in them, so that it brought foorth loue and the feare of God, which are iust and lawful fruites thereof, although of infirmity they lyed, yet were not they therefore bereued of eternal felicity.
Abraham also is obiected, who said y t Sara was hys syster. Augustine. Whether Abraham made a lye of Sara. But therin (as Augustine teacheth) he lyed not: he told that which was true, but yet he spake not al the truth. And that is of no man required, to vtter all that is true, which he knoweth. He did not tel that she was his wife: yet bicause she was his kinswomā, he might according to the maner of the Hebrues truly say that she was hys syster. But he seemeth not to be vtterly excused: for although he lied not in calling her sister, yet it seemeth that therein he fel, bicause in not opening that she was hys wife, he put her in daunger of leesing her chastity. For he left her naked of that ayde, whereby onely she might haue bene defended from comming into straunge loues. Neither is it necessary that I should labour vtterly to defende Abraham: Augustine. For he was a man, and by ouer much feare he might easily fall. Howbeit Augustine mencioneth, that Abraham was then in daunger two maner of waies: one was least he should be kylled himselfe, the other was the adulterye of his wyfe. The first daunger he might auoyde by calling her sister: but the other, namelye, least she should be defiled, he was not able to repell, for althoughe he had sayde that he was her husband, that woulde not haue serued to haue deliuered her frō the filthy lustes of the Egiptians. Wherefore hee committed vnto God that, which he himselfe could not turne from hym. And in that which hee had in hys own power he woulde not tempt God. This seemeth to be Augustines iudgement. But what I iudge, I haue before declared.
But did not the same Abraham lye, when he said vnto his seruauntes: Tary here, and we wyl returne vnto you: when as for al that he was mynded to sacrifice hys sonne: which if he had done, he shoulde not then haue returned together with his sonne, but alone? Iacob also by expresse woordes lyed, when he said vnto his father: I am Esau thy sonne. Paule likewise (as it is written in the Actes) sayth that he knew not that he was the chiefe priest, which commaunded him to be stricken: when as yet (as Augustine testifieth in his Sermon de puero Centurionis, and as it is wrytten in the .23. Question the .1. chap. Paratus) he knew him well ynoughe. Paule (sayth he) was brought vp among the Iewes, he had learned [Page] the law at the feete of Gamaliel, wherfore he knew very wel the chief priest from other men. Iehu also manifestly lyed, when he said that he would worship Baal. Augustine. Two kindes of men. Augustine writeth that there are two kindes of men mencioned in the holye scriptures. For hereby it is manifest that some wer by God made so perfect, that although they were not without synne, yet we may not rashly iudge euyl of them, but rather see how we may defend those thinges, which in their works haue a shew of synne. They oftentimes were so moued by the holye ghost, that God by their wordes and actes would make open certaine secretes. Wherefore we must beleue that oftentimes they both spake and also dyd certaine thinges by prophecy. So Abraham, when he saide: we wyl returne vnto you, prophesied vnwares, that which should be. For with Isaac in safetye he returned from the mountaine. And Iacob in saying: I am Esau thy sonne, woulde declare nothyng els, but that hee was the man, to whom the degree, blessing and dignitye was due, which thinges semed to pertaine vnto Esau that was first borne. Paule also prophecied what should at the length become of the high Priest, namelye thys, that he should be destroied like a wall that is plucked downe and as a thyng altogether fained and hipocritical. Farther (saith Augustine) there wer other men not so perfect, but wicked, which in the olde Testament are mencioned either to haue lyed, or els to haue done somthing which semeth synne. Of those men hee thinketh, we may not so labour for to defend a good fame and opinion of them. Of this sorte of men was Iehu: for although that murther pleased God, whiche he executed vpon Achab and his familye, and also his weeding out of Baal, and the worshippers therof, yet for al that he was a wycked king, neyther departed he from the woorshipping of golden Calues. Wherefore it is lawfull for vs to graunt, that in lying he synned.
A distinctiō to be noted.And (as I thinke, and before admonished) by this onely distinction, we maye easily dissolue this doubt. Namely, that those men were styrred vp to lye, either by the spirite of man, or by the motion of God. When they dyd it as men, wee will not denye but that they synned: but when they spake so by the inspiration God, we will maruaile at their sayinges and doinges, but let vs not take example by them, or follow them.
¶Of dissimulation.
Dissimulacion is of two kindes.BVt what shal we affirme of dissimulatiō? I answer, that it is of two kindes. One is, which hath a respect onely to deceaue. And that forasmuch as it differeth not much from a lye, it is vndoubtedlye synne. If one being wicked, doo fayne himselfe to be good and holy, the same man without doubt is an hipocrite: and in that he dissembleth, he haynously sinneth. Whosoeuer also hauing a malitious and enuious hart against anye man, doth flatter the same man, and dissembleth to be his friend, he is not without synne, yea he is infected with a detestable dissimulation. But ther is an other kinde of dissimulation, which tendeth not to deceaue any man, but serueth onely to kepe counsels secrete that they bee not hindred. And this dissimulation is not to be repudiated, or to be condemned as a syn, forasmuch (as we haue alredy declared) that it is not alwaies required, that we shoulde open what soeuer truth wee knowe. What Christ mēt by his dissimulation. So Christe being most innocent, tooke vpon him the flesh of syn, & hid his innocency & diuine nature. And that not to deceiue mortal men, but that he might suffer for the saluatiō of mēt For if he had bene knowen to haue bene the Lord of glory, thei would neuer (as saith the Apostle) haue crucified him. The same Christ fained also before two of his Disciples that he would go farther. He did not that to deceiue them, but hee therfore a while opened not himself vnto them, to reprooue them of their incredulity, and to instruct them by testimonies of the scriptures. Therewithall also he signified how farre he was from their hartes. Or as Augustine interprereth it, he shaddowed vnto them his departure into heauen. Wherefore it manifestly [Page 90] appeareth, that in those dissimulations there was no lye, seing his woordes did well agree wyth the thyng signified.
And Dauid when hee fell into a most great daunger before Achin Kyng of Geth, chaunged his countenaunce and fained himselfe a foole, Of the dissimulatiō of Dauid. and for that hee seemed suche a one, he escaped. Here some say that he cōmitted no dissimulation, but that God, to deliuer him, strake such a feare in him, that his senses might be taken from him, and so did these thinges whych are rehearsed of him in the fyrst booke of Samuel. Wherefore in his Psalme which beginneth: Psal. 34. I wyl alway geue thankes vnto the Lorde, he gaue thankes vnto God for so great a benefite. And therwithal in his act by the inspiratiō of God, he shadowed what Christ should suffer for our sakes, namely that he should be counted as a foole and a mad mā. Either els we answer, that Dauid is not altogether to be excused of synne, if as a man being more afeard than was mete, he sought for this kinde of helpe. But if he by the mocion of God did it wittingly and with knowledge, we wil not accuse him of synne, although we may not follow his example. Neither is it lawful, that any man should fayne himselfe to haue committed any crime, which he hath not perpetrated, Gregory. Augustine. although Gregory saith that good myndes wyll there acknowledge a fault wher none is. Augustine writeth more truly and soundly of that thing in his .29. Sermon de verbis Apostoli. For he writeth: In so faining, if before thou wast not a sinner, thou shalt be made a sinner, namely in saying y t thou hast cōmitted that yl which thou hast not perpetrated. It is lawful in dede for euery man to confesse himself to be a synner in vniuersall. But this or that crime in special no man ought to receaue in himself, which he hath not in verye deede committed. Farther, we must note, that this is true, that it is not required of vs, that we should open the truth euery where, and in all places to speake al that we know: but yet in iudgement the same is not to bee permitted. For when two of vs are examined as witnesses, there we are bounde to testifye that whych we know serueth for the thing, whereof at that time we be demaunded.
¶Whither it be lawful to lye to preserue the lyfe of our Neyghbours.
BVt there ariseth a more hard doubt, namely, whether it be lawfull to lye for to preserue the life of our neighbour. Augustine of a lye to Consentius saith: Augustine. If a man should be in verye great daunger of death, & the same man also should know that his sonne also wer in the like extreme daunger, which happeneth to dye, and thou knowest of his death: when the Parent shal aske thee, lyueth my sonne or no? and thou art sure that he also wil dye, if thou shalt tel him that hys sonne is deceased: what wouldest thou do in this case? whyther thou sayest, he liueth: or whither thou saiest, I cannot tel, thou lyest. But if thou shall answer, that he is dead, al men wyll cry out vpon thee, as though thou haddest cōmitted manslaughter, and as though by thy heauy newes thou haddest bene the occasiō of the death of this father being sycke and lying at the poynt of death. Augustine graunteth that it is a hard case, neither denieth he but that as a man he shoulde be moued, & peraduenture it might so happen, that affections woulde not suffer him to speake that which is iust & right. But al the length he concludeth that he should not lye. And he addeth moreouer, A similitude. that if thou knowest that any vnchaste woman loueth thee inordinately, which also threateneth to kyl her selfe, yea and wil do it in very dede, vnles thou wylt graunt to her wicked lust, whether therfore thou oughtest to be entised to commit any filthye thing against chastitye? I think not. So also saith he, thou oughtest not for y e sauing of thy neighbours life to offend against the truth. And moreouer what a window shuld be made open to lyes, if we shoulde otherwise iudge of thys. For that which one shall thincke to be lawful for life, an other wil iudge that he may do the same for money, an other for estimation, or for defending of lands & possessions. And so shal it come [Page] to passe that there wil be no measure or end of lyes. We maye not suffer (sayth Augustine) that any man should kil his own soule, for the corporall lyfe of an oother man. Yea and he affirmeth that we must not lye for the saluation of anye mans soule. Euery lye (sayth Iohn) is not of God: but wee ought not to speake those thinges which are not of God.
What if murtherers should persecute a man to kil him, & thou knowest y t he lyeth ther hiddē wher thou presently art, & they demaūd of thee if thou knowest whither he be there or no? He answereth, that if thou be of a valiant courage, & as it becōmeth a Christiā, y u must say: wher he is I know, but I wil not vtter it, do ye what ye wil. But whē the matter cōmeth to this point, y t for the safety of any mans life thou must make a lie, know thou that thou oughtest to cōmit the thing vnto God, & that thou hast nothing there more to doo. Either thou must answer, that thou wilt not betray him, or els thou must hold thy peace. But by thy silence the murtherer wil suspect that he is in thy house, and then thou shalt seme to haue geuen occasion of his taking. But in verye deede thou hast not so done. For thou canst not let him to thinke what he wil. Wherfore the matter is rather to be cōmitted vnto God, than that thou shouldest make a lye. Howbeit thou must very wel weigh with thy self, namely, to speake so, that thou say not al, and yet speake not falsly. For in these cases I thyncke it is not forbidden, yea I iudge it is most lawful to speake doubtfullye. And as touching this question, thys is sufficient.
As I deny not but that our Ehud manifestly lied, so wil I also say that he was stirred vp of God so to speake. Those wordes vndoubtedly, although they deceiued Eglon, yet without controuersy they declared that, which was in very deede true, namely the word of God, & that he had a secret thing to do with the kyng.
¶Whither it be lawful for Subiectes to ryse agaynst their Princes.
BVt leauing these thinges, let vs come vnto the third question, wherof for as much as I haue somwhat before spoken, I thinke not to speake of it aboundantly in this place, least I should be more ful of wordes than is needeful.
Let vs deuide subiects, as we haue before deuided them, so that some of them are mere priuate men, & others are in such sort inferiors, that the superiour power in a maner dependeth of them, as among the Lacedemonians wer the [...], and at Rome the Tribunes of the people. Those which onely are subiect, & counted altogether priuate, ought not to rise against their Princes & Lordes, to dysplace them of their dignity or degree. The two Apostles Peter & Paul haue commaunded the same, namely that seruants should obey their Lordes, how rough & hard soeuer they be. Farther, the sword (as it is written to the Romanes) is geuen onely to the powers. And they which resist the power, are sayde to resist the ordinance of god. God would that the Iewes should obey Nabuchad-nezar, & he was angry with Zedechias the king, bicause he fell from hym. Yea, & Ieremy by the cōmaundement of God admonished and exhorted the people to pray for the health of the king of Babilon. Dauid also would not stretch forth his hād against the anointed of the Lord: when he might haue done it with out any difficulty, & to his great cōmodity. The godly soldiours of Iulianus the Apostata, obeyed the same Iulianus in fighting and pitching their campes: nether did they at any time (being also armed) rebel against that most cruel tyran. Phocas whē he had slaine Mauricius, possessed the Empire by great violence & vniustice, & wrote to Rome to Gregory, who obeyed him as his Prince, and gaue vnto him great reuerence.
But ther are in publike weales other, which in place & dignity are lower than Princes, & yet in very dede they elect the superior power, & by certaine lawes do gouern the publike wealth, as at this day we see in done by the Electors of the Empire, and peraduenture the same also is done in other kingdomes. To these [Page 91] vndoubtedly (if the Prince performe not his couenants & promises) it is lawfull to constrain & to bring him into order, & by force to compel him to fulfil the conditions & couenants whiche he had promised, and that by warre when it cā not otherwise be done. By this meanes the Romanes somtimes compelled the Consul, whom they themselues had created, to go out of their offices. The Danes in our time did put down their king, & held him long in prison. Polidorus. Virgilius. Polidorus Virgilius writeth, y t the Englishmen somtimes cōpelled their kings to render accompt of the mony which they had noughtely consumed. Neither are we ignoraunt that Tarquinius the proud, Of Brutus and Cassius. was by the Romanes for his ouermuch cruelty & arrogancy put out of his kingdome. I wil not speake of Brutus & Cassius, which slew Caesar: but whether they did it iustly or otherwise, most graue mē vary in the opinions. And I in examining their enterprise by the rule of the scriptures, do not allow it. Bicause they gaue not vnto him the tyranny or Empire of Rome, but he vsurped it himself by violence and power. And God (as Daniel testifieth) transferreth Empires & kingdoms. And although it be lawful to resist tirānes which inuade a kingdome, yet when they haue obtayned the Empire, and that they do gouerne, it semeth not to belong to priuate men to put them downe. Wherfore forasmuch as the kingdome of the Iewes was suche a kingdome, that in it al men depended of the king (for they were not chosen by the noble men, but by succession the posterity of that family gouerned, which God had also cōmaūded) & therfore in the lawes in Deut. & in the .1. booke of Sam. wherein the ryght of a king is constituted, ther is no liberty graunted to any to resist them. Yea & somtimes it happeneth that some of them wer killed. But yet we neuer reade y e god allowed the murther of them: yea he punished the murtherers. When God at any time would trouble the kings of Iuda: he did it by the Babilonians, Assirians, & Egiptians, but not the Iewes. He onely armed Iehu against his Lorde: whyche thing as it was peculiar, so also must not wee take example by it. Hee destroyed Saul also by the handes of the Philistians, and not by Dauid.
Neither am I ignorant how manye thinges are decreed of this matter in the Code, & in the digest in y e law Iuliā maiestatis. But I studieng to be brief do of purpose ouerpasse these things. And although I know right wel y t the Ethniks in the old time appointed rewardes for such as killed Tirannes, yet I haue answered that godlines & the holy scriptures do not allow the same. Vndoubtedly if it be lawful for the people to put down kings that raigne vniustly, no kinges or Princes should at any time be in safety. For although they raygne iustly and holily, yet they cannot satisfy the people. And so much of this question.
31 After him was Sangar the sonne of Anath: and he smote of the Philistians .600. men w t the goade of an oxe: & he also saued Israel.
What this Sangar was, or of what tribe or family, the holy scripture doth not declare. But this coniecture is very likely, y t when the Hebrues had a long tyme liued in peace vnder Ehud, as sone as he was dead, the Philistiās began to vexe them. Wherfore Sangar being stirred vp by God, defended the people from cō ming again into subiection vnder the Philistians. And among other victories, of the which I think ther wer very many, this is chiefly mēcioned as a miraculous & wonderful victory. The Hebrues think that this notable act of this Sangar happened in the time of the oppression vnder Iabin. But thei bring no reasons why they should so thinke. Farther, Iosephus. by the holy scriptures it appeareth not how many yeres the Hebrues wer kept by this Iudge: yet by Iosephus we may know, y t he fought for the Israelites but onely one yere. That which we translate wyth the goade of an Oxe, the Grecians cal [...], that is, with the foote or staffe of a plow. The comon translation in latin hath with the plow share. Augustine. Augustine (as it appeareth by his questions on this place) redeth, beside calues of the kyne. Which clause semeth to haue no sense in it. And he iudgeth y t this Sangar in this murther of y e Philistians slew peraduēture many oxen, which ar called calues. [Page] And he addeth that y e Egiptians vsed in his time to call all kind of oxen of what age soeuer they wer, by y e name of calues. As we (saith he) cal Chickens, all vniuersally as many as ar cōprehended vnder the kind of hens, with out any difference of yeares and age. In the meane time he confesseth that it is not so in the Hebrue, & he hath saide truly: for in y e Hebrue bibles we read Melamed. Which woord is deriued of this verbe Lamad. And that verbe, in the cōiugation Kal, is to learn, but in the cōiugation Pihel, it is to teach. Wherfore Melamed might be turned a teacher of Oxen, Kimhi. namely to be y t instrumēt wherby Oxen in plowing ar guided. And least we should doubt what it is, Kimhi writeth y t it is a rod or a staffe, in y e end or top wherof ther is fastened a prick. And y e Chaldey paraphrast testifieth the same, which in steede of y e word hath put this word Perasch: & that word signifieth to prick. Wherfore it is an instrumēt whereby oxen in plowing ar pricked. Wherfore the word Peraschim signifieth horsmen, of spurres, wherby horses are by the riders vpon them, pricked. And thus much by the way.
The old writers thinke that in this place is vsed the figure Synechdoche, as though Sangar did not alone kil so great a number of Philistians, but that hee wyth other rusticall men fought agaynste them, whyche rusticall men were armed with no other kinde of weapons than with goades of Oxen. In deede I know that the holy scriptures many times do admit chaūge of numbers, which whither in this place it be to be receaued, I do very much doubt. Yea (if I should speake the truth as it is) I thinke the contrary: forasmuch as in this present hystory me thinketh no vulgare acte is set foorth, but rather a wonder or myracle. But howsoeuer it be, this I thinke is godlily and profitablye to be noted: That any thing may serue vs for weapons, when the woord of God is added. A slyng and stones of a ryuer furnished Dauid nobly. The iaw bone also of an Asse was a weapon to Samson, and a naile to Iahel, wherwith she slew Sisera. And contrariwise, what kind of weapōs of fence so euer we deuise, vnles it be strengthened by the word of God, it shalbe vtterly vnprofitable and serue to no purpose. The walles of Iericho, which otherwise were wel fenced, fell downe of their own accord: Psal. xxxiii. and the great sword of Goliah the Giant was made to cut the throte of hys own maister. Wherfore it is most truly said in the Psalmes: A king is not saued by much strength, and a horse is a vayne thing to saue a man. But what doo we speake of weapons, when as the same happeneth vnto al creatures? For so long euery one of them is and abideth, as the woorde of God caryeth and vpholdeth them. For althings whatsoeuer they be, do by y t onely both abide & consist. Yea and the Sacramentes themselues, taking away the woord of God, are vtterlye nothing. For what do we thinke bread, wyne, or water to haue by themselues, which may be profitable for our saluation, Augustine. or serue to stirre vp or to strengthen faith? Vndoubtedly nothing. Wherefore Augustine hath right well sayde: The word cōmeth vnto the element, & it is made a sacrament. Wherfore in that .vi. hundred Philistians were kylled with an Oxe goade, wee must beleue that the same came to passe by the cōmaundement of God, & by the power of his woord.
¶The .iiii. Chapter.
1. ANd the children of Israel began againe to do wickedly in the sight of the Lord, when Ehud was dead.
2 And the Lord sold them into the hand of Iabin king of Chanaan, which raygned in Hazor, whose captain of warre was called Sisera, which dwelt in Hazoreth of the Gentyles.
The cause of the oppression of the Israelites is mencioned, namely, bicause when Ehud was dead, they began to do euil, that is, to sinne. They abused therfore the quietnes and tranquillity of the foure score yeares, in which they lyued [Page 92] peaceably, vnder their Iudge, neither declined they onely from the right waye, but also they increased in syn. This is the nature of carnal men, that by prosperytie they are not made the better, but farrs woorser.
VVhen Ehud was dead. It cannot be told how easily the people fal from the right way, when as holy Princes are also remoued from the same. Wherefore that is not vnworthely to be counted a most grieuous plague when the pyllers both of the Church and also of the publike wealth are taken awaye. There is no mention made of the death of Sanger. But what should be the cause, why there is no mention made of the death of Sangar, wee cannot easily tel. The Hebrue interpreters saye, that it therefore happened, bycause he continued but a litle time, and for that cause is scarcely coūted among the Iudges: nether was the deliuery which by him happened, perfect, which is in the next chapter by expresse wordes declared. Farther, it is in dede sayd of hym, that he saued Israel: but it is not added as it is of Othoniel and Ehud, that the land was any yeares at rest vnder hym.
And God sold them. When al thinges seme vnto the vngodly to be in quiet and at rest, and that they thinke that on no syde anye hurt or euyll can happen vnto them, God euen then vseth by a certayne wonderfull manner to styrre vp great miseries and calamities out of ashes and sparckels, which wer thought to haue bene long time quenched. Iabin the king of Chanaan was kylled by Iosua (as it is written in his booke the .xi. chap.) and Hazor his kingly City destroied and burnt with fire. Wherfore none would haue looked that war shoulde haue bene renued againe on that part. But an other Iabin, the sonne or sonnes sonne of him that was killed, tooke courage againe, and inuaded and oppressed the Israelites. But least al that should be ascribed vnto his strength, it is added that God intermedled in the matter, when hee solde the Hebrues vnto him, that is, graunted vnto him to vse them as he thought good hymselfe, euen to all most vile seruices, and that as most abiect bondslaues. And this calamity is amplified by many names. First, by the longnesse of the tyme: for it continued .xx. yeares, when as before Othoniels time they were afflicted onely .viii. yeares. And before Ehud was stirred vp, they serued .xviii. yeares. It is declared that this seruitude was very cruell, bicause Iabin oppressed the Hebrues by strength and violence. And Iosephus writeth that it was in such sort, that they durst not so much as to lift vp their head. And the cause of his so great crueltye was, Why Iabin was so cruel vnto y e Hebrues. bicause he remembred that the Iewes in the time of Iosua had killed his Father or Grandfather. And had ouerthrowen the kingly City Hazor, in wasting and burning it wyth sword and fyre. Farther, the violence and power of his tyranny is by this declared, in that he had so great a number of yron or hooked chariots, and (if we may beleue Iosephus) he went a warfare with three hundred thousand footemen, Iosephus. ten thousand horsemen, and three thousand chariotes, among which .ix. hundred of them were of yron. Neither for al his great host had he ben able to haue brought the Hebrues vnder subiection, vnles God (as we haue before said) had solde thē. And vndoubtedly, it is to be thought that Iabin vsed these .ix. hundred chariots, which the history speaketh of by name, to afflict the region of the Iewes, which he had now conquered, and to the end they should not fal from him.
And he dwelt in Hazoreth. Howe raigned this man in Hazor, whē as in the time of Iosua y e City was ouerthrowen? To this we answer, first y t after y e ouerthrow which happened vnder Iosua, y e rest of y e Chananites fled into a very huge wood which is called Of the Gentiles, & ther bi litle & litle they so increased their power, y t thei set ouer thēselues a king, which was of y e surname of y e first king, namely his sonne, or els his sonnes sōne, which is therfore said to haue raigned in Hazor, bicause he stil retained y e title of y e place, as very many kings do at this day, which keping y e title of certain places do cal thēselues kings of the same places, wherin in very dede they haue no possessiō at all. But the Hebrue interpreters think y e Hazoreth was a large & huge wood, which cōtained in it many cities [Page] & Castels. Vnto which sense the Chaldey paraphrast leaneth, which turneth that worde, munition of Castels. This day also in Germany, there is the wood of Hercinia, wherin are both Cities and very many Castels. And it is called, Of the Gentiles, either bicause a great number of diuers people resorted thither, or bicause those places were built and fenced by the labour of manye Gentiles. We might otherwise also answer, & that much more likely to be true: namely, y t the citi of Hazor was after Iosua, recouered & reedefied by the Chananites, so that it was the kingly city agayne, wher ( Iabin either the sonne or els y e sonnes sōne of y e first Iabin) raigned. And to this reedefieng the times serued very aptly. For from the burning of Hazor there wer passed .150. yeares more or lesse, y t is, eight yeares of bondage, which happened vnder the king of Mesopotamia .40. yeares of Othoniel .18. yeres of seruitude vnder Eglon king of Mesopotamia .80. yeres, wherin Ehud peaceably iudged the Israelites, and .20. yeres this Iabin afflicted the Hebrues. Wherfore he might easily reigne in Hazor being againe reedified, and this maketh with it, bicause it is not writtē of this Iabin that he dwelled in the wood, but that Sisara his captayne dwelt there. For kinges vse not to kepe an house in their kingly citye, but rather to haue them in their borders or in the fieldes, wher they may be prompt and redy to accomplysh thinges to be done.
3 And the children of Israel cried vnto the Lord, for he had .900. chariottes of yron, and .20. yeares he opressed Israel very sore.
4 And Deborha, a Prophetesse, the wife of Lappidoth, iudged Israel the same tyme.
Both by the thinges before declared, & also by these which are now spoken of, we may vnderstand the frowardnes of mans nature: for vnles it be by troubles and aduersities brused and broken, Men in desperate thinges call vpon God. it regardeth not God, yea as long as there is any hope of other helpes, it neglecteth God and vseth them. But whē thinges ar past all hope and do seperat, then god is required, as a certayne holy ankerhold. Wherfore it is no maruayle, though the Hebrues deferred their repētance 20. yeares long. Surely I am persuaded, that they did oftentimes grone and cry. But bicause they lamented not that they had offended god, and wickedly committed sinnes, but only desired him to take a way the payne & long punishment, and paraduenture murmured against God, therfore wer not their praiers heard. But now at the last at the .20. yeares ende, when with fayth and godlynes they prayed vnto God, Though God deferre his help yet wee muste not dispaire. he heard their prayer, and graunted them their requestes. By this example let vs learne y t we must neuer dispaire of the help of god, although it be deferred. We all in deede desire to be strayghtwaye deliuered of our troubles: but god in his counsel thinketh not good so soone to take away his punishments. Wherfore that which he hath decreed we also must pacientlye suffer.
Deborah a Prophetesse. God which before to deliuer Israel had chosen Ehud, which had an impediment in his right hande: and then Sangar, a husbandman armed onely with the goade of an Oxe: nowe choseth a woman, by whose conduct the Iewes might be deliuered from a most grieuous enemy. God vseth both stronge and weake a lyke. Wherefore by these examples he aboundantly sheweth that his power is not bounde vnto noble men and to strong men, but hee can easilye vse the weake and feable ones. Yea and he sheweth forth his power rather in these, than in the other. Howbeit to declare, that it is all one vnto him, as touching both kynde of instrumentes, sometimes he vseth the strong ones, and other sometimes the weake ones. And when hee taketh the weake ones, he straight waye endueth and adorneth them with his grace and gyftes. For as muche therefore as he had vnto thys ministerye chosen Deborah, beyng weake in kynde, hee strayght waye endewed and adorned her wyth the spirite of prophecye. By whyche grace, and peraduenture manye other moe myracles, she was by God constituted, and by myracles confirmed, as she that was elected vnto so great an office.
Neyther onely this woman was endewed with the sprite of prophesy: We comen prophetesses did openly instruct the people. for in the holy scriptures we reade of other women which were likewise inspired by the holy Ghost, Mary the sister of Moses, Hanna the Mother of Samuel, Holda in the time of Iosias the king were Prophetesses. And in the new testament Marye the Virgin, Elizabeth the mother of Iohn, and Anna the wife of Phanuel, the daughters also of Phillip the Deacon (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) were prophetesses. Neyther do I thinke that we maye denye, that some of those weomen endewed with the sprite of prophesy, did openly teach the people, in declarynge those thynges vnto them whiche God had shewed vnto them. Forasmuch as the giftes of God are not therfore geuen, that they shoulde lye hidden, but to aduaunce the common edifying of the church.
And yet hereby it followeth not, that that which God doth by some peculiar priuiledge, we should by and by draw it for an example, because according to the rule of the Apostle we are bound vnto an ordinary law, whereby both in the Epistle to Timothy, and in the first Epistle to the Corrinthians, Why wemen are commounded to kepe silence in the church. he commaundeth that a woman should kepe silence in the church. And he assigneth causes of this silence so commaunded, namely because they ought to be subiect vnto theyr husbandes. But the office of a teacher hath a certayne authority ouer those whiche are taught, which is not to be attributed vnto a womā ouer men. For she was made for the man, whome she ought alwayes to haue a regarde to obey, whiche thing is also appoynted her by the sentence of God, wherby after synne committed he sayd vnto the woman: Thy lust shal pertayne vnto thy husband. Farther the Apostle geueth an other reason, drawne from the fyrste faute, bicause, as he sayth, Eua was seduced, and not Adam, wherfore if women should ordinarily be admitted vnto the holy ministery of the Church, men might easely suspecte, that the deuill by his accustomed instrument would deceaue the people, and for that cause they would the lesse regard the Ecclesiasticall function, if women should be beleued. It ought therfore to be committed onely to men, & that by ordinary right and the Apostles rule. And though God do sometimes otherwyse, yet can he not be iustly accused, forasmuch as all lawes are in his power. Wherefore if sometimes he send any prophetesse, and adorne her with heauenly giftes, if the same woman speake in the church, vndoubtedly she is to be hearde: but in suche sort, that she forgette not her owne estate. Twoo places of Paule conceliated. Wherefore these two testimonies of Paule which seme to be contrary one to an other, may easelye be conciliated. To Timothe the fyrst Epistle he writeth, that a woman ought in the church to kepe silence: which thinge toward the ende of the first Epistle to the Corinth. he most manifestly confirmeth. And in the same epistle he commaundeth, that a man prophesieng or praying should haue his hed vncouered, but a woman when she prophesieth should haue it couered: whereby vndoubtedly he teacheth that it is lawfull for a woman both to speak and also to prophesy in the church. For he would not haue commaūded, that in this doing she should couer her head, if she should vtterly kepe silence in the holy assembly. The thinge is in this manner to be taken, that we should vnderstande the precept of silence to be a generall precepte, but the other which is for the couering of the head when they pray or prophesy, pertained onely to those which wer prophetesses. They vndoubtedly are not forbidden to prophesy, for the common edification of the church, Why women prophetesses were commaū ded to haue theyr heds couered. but to the ende by reason of theyr office extraordinarely committed vnto them, they should not forget theyr owne estate and waxe proude, they are commaūded to haue their head couered: whereby they myght vnderstande that yet they haue the power of man aboue them. Farther whereas to Titus the ii. chap. it is commaunded that the elder women should admonish the yonger women of temperance, and that they should loue theyr husbandes and children, and diligently looke to theyr famely, this is not to be vnderstand of publike doctrine or ecclesiasticall sermons, but of priuate exhortacions, which it is meete, that the elders haue to the yongers.
5 And the same Deborah dwelt vnder a Palme tree, betwene Ramath and Bethell, in mount Ephraim. And the children of Israell ascended vp to her for iudgement.
How Deborah iudged the people.The word of iudging (as we haue admonished) in this booke oftentimes signifieth to reuenge, and to set at liberty. Which signification if we now follow, we shall se that Deborah was appoynted vnto the same, namelye to deliuer the Israelites. And as soone as they by the inspiraciō of God vnderstode that, they ascēded to her, to heare of her what they should do, to attayne vnto liberty. But if any man wil haue the word of iudgemēt to signify to set lawes, or to geue sentence of controuersies. I wil not be much against it. For so great peraduenture was the oppression of Iabin, that now the Israelites could not vse ordinary iudges. They therfore being taken away, whē they saw that Deborah was endewed with the spirite of God, they had rather be iudged by her, than by the Chananites. Iosephus. But Iosephus inclineth more vnto the first interpretation, and he saythe that they beinge oppressed by their enemies came vnto Deborah, whome they knew to be a most holy woman and endewed with the sprite of god, and desired her to pray vnto God for them, which she both did and was heard.
As touching the ministery of the churche, how women may be preferred, & in what sort they are not apt, we haue before declared. And this we ad now, y t whē churches, ar newly planted, when ther want men to preach the Gospel, a womā may at the beginning be admitted to teach, but in such sorte, that when she hath taught a while, some one mā of y e faithful to be ordeyned, which afterward may minister the sacramēts, teach & faithfully execute y e office of a pastor. But bicause Deborah was not onely a Prophetesse, but also in setting at liberty, gouerned ciuil things, I might therfore demaund, whether a womā may be appoynted to gouern a pub: wealth. But I haue determined to entreat of this question in an other place, namely whē I come to y e history of Athalia in the bokes of the kings.
The wife of Lappidoth. What this man was we can not by the holy scripture certainly know. The Hebrewes thinke that he was Barak: but this is onelye the reason why they thinke so, bicause the signification of these names haue great affinity one with an other. For Barac signifieth lightninge, and Lapidh is a lampe, A fained tale the Rabbines. whose plurall number is aswell Lapidim as Lapidoth. And lampes or torches and lightninges are very lyke. Other thinke that thys woman was so called of her handye crafte, for that shee made matches for the candles of the sanctuarye. But that the Rabbines fayned as thoughe God doth neuer bestowe freely hys grace or giftes. For they signify by their fable that she by desert became a prophetesse and a iudge, bicause her woorkes serued for the tabernacle & that very religiously. Others also write that she was so called, bicause in that howre, wherin she was endewed with the sprite of prophecy, her face was made shininge, casting forth beames, as the holy history writeth of the countenaunce of Moses. But all these thinges are trifles, and leane onely vnto the interpretacion of the words, neither ar they by any meanes proued by the holye scriptures. But there is a certayn coniecture that Barac was not the husband of Deborah, bycause she dwelled in mount Ephraim and he in Kades of Nepthalim. And it is not agreable that the wife and the husband did dwell one so far distant from the other. Vnles y u wilt say y t Deborah went thē onely to mount Ephraim when the people should come vnto her. And if we graūt this, thē wil it be meruelous, why her husband went not thither together with the other Israelits. Wherfore that way semeth to be the plainer, namely to say y t she was the wife of Lappidoth: but therfore she gaue not thys gouernance vnto her husband. For that thing should be gouerned by mans reason, but she did folow the counsel of God as she ought.
Of the mariage of ministers.
God despyseth not those which are maried.THis is also very worthye to be noted, that maried folkes are not contemned of God. For of them certain hath he chosen to be Prophetes and those notable [Page 94] prophetes. For Esay is cōmaunded to go vnto a Prophetesse, which both conceiued & also bare to him childrē. Ezechiel also was maried. Wherfore that Romane Sircius & his like ar not to be herd, Sircius is not to be heard. whē they forbid the vse of the ministration of holy things to such which are maried: & this godly reason forsooth bring they for it, namely bicause Paule writeth, that they which are in the flesh cannot please God, and in the old law it is in this manner commaunded, be ye holy, for I am holy: and agayn sayth Paule, ye are the temple of God, or of the holy ghost. But these testimonies now alleged, if they should serue any thinge to theyr sentence, then vndoubtedly should they declare, that no men whiche are maried can please god, neither that anye are to be counted holye, excepte they be chaste. The temple also of God or of the holy Ghoste shoulde be drawne onely to the clergye. But howe vayne these thinges are, all men so well vnderstande, that they neede none of my labour to expresse them. For who seeth not that the sentences nowe alleged are not spoken vnto this man or to that man alone, The manner of the Ethnykes as touching virginity or sole lyfe. but preached vnto all the faythful? It was the manner of the Ethnickes, to haue theyr prophetesses eyther Virgines or such as were of sole life, as it is written of the Sibils. They also appoynted certayne priesthodes vnto womē, but yet only to virgines, namely the holy thinges of Vesta, and also of her that was called Bona dea.
Neyther must we beleue, those maried folkes, They which were maried & called to the holye ministerye, did not forsake theyr wyues. which were by God taken to the office of prophecying or to the holy ministery, did streightway forsake theyr wyues, for neyther God nor yet Christ were authors that any man shoulde deuource himselfe from his wife. We know in deede that Paule permitteth them which are maried sometimes to be a sunder, whereby they mighte more expediently geue them selues to fastinges and prayers: but he permitteth not that vnles they be both agreed therunto, and that for a short time, and he commaundeth them to returne to their old estate, lest by the temptacion of Sathan they should be ouerthrowne. Wherfore this sentence which they bryng, is not sufficient to proue the necessitye of sole life for ministers, forasmuche as the aduersaries gather more out of it than can be gathered. For the Apostle sayth that sometimes it is lawfull to abstaine from accompanieng. But these men take it to be a commaundement to all sortes of ministers, euer to be vnmaried. Which argument is both weake and vnprofitable, as the art of Logike manifestly sheweth. For we graunt, that it is mete for ministers sometimes to conteyne themselues, and that oftner than other men, but not continually. This they obiect, if other men moderate themselues, makinge their prayers but sometimes, what shoulde they do, whose duty is alwayes to apply themselues vnto prayers & to the administration of the sacramentes? I aunswere. First, that we much marueile at those which allege these thinges, when as the clergy for the most part neuer almost teach, & distribute the sacraments very seldom, & celebrate that their most fylthy & abhominable masse scarce once or twise in a whole yeare. But in y e mean time play y e whoremōgers & pollute thēselues with adulteries. And they cauile that they cānot mary, bicause of y e ecclesiastical degree which they haue takē vpō thē. Vndoubtedly the reasons which they bring do nothing defend this kind of men.
Farther we must marke, that the wordes which Paul there speaketh, A distinction of prayers and fastinges. Sometimes fastinges & publike prayers ar commaunded. belong not to cōmon fasting, or to cōmon & vsual prayers: otherwise it were lauful for none ether to mary or to haue a wyfe, for as much as al mē ar cōmaūded to pray with out ceassing. And there ar sometime certayn solemne praiers and fastings appointed, ether for y e auoyding of iminente calamities, or for the chosing of ministers of the Churche, and for such lyke necessytyes, in whiche wee muste with the prophet & the Apostle councel & exhorte the husband not to depart out of the bedchāber, & the bride out of her bed. Howbeit I would gladly hear of these new masters & most seuere cēsors, what they did in y e old time in the church of Rome, At Rome they did cōmunicate dayly. which they so much alow aboue all other worship, what I say was done when christians did cōmunicate as Ierome & Augustine write was done in their time. [Page] They indeede communicated, and yet had they wiues. Of the highe priest of the old Testament. Moreouer what did the high priest Aaron and his successors in the old testament, whose office was both morning and euening perpetually to minister at the tabernacle? For as thē wer not the courses of the priests distributed by Dauid, Salomon, and Ezechias. Vsed they not their wiues? Vndoubtedly they broughte forth children. But they say, that then it ought to haue bene done, forasmuch as the successiō of the priest hode was by carnall propagation, neither might the priestes he taken out of any other tribe, then out of the tribe of Leui. But nowe that we are losed from that law, and that we may euery where haue ministers of the church, it is mete that they be without wiues. I wil aske these men, who was the author, that the high priests & the priests in the old time should be continued by carnal propagation? It is meruelous if they graūt not that God was the author. I wil therfore conclude that they make thēselues wiser then god, who is most wise, who also suffred & willed prists to vse matrimony. He might haue taken priests out of euery tribe and commaunded continency. But he would not do it. But these men dare do more then he hath commaunded. Farther let them tel vs whether there were ministers in the primatiue church or no? The ministers of y e primitiue churche had wiues and vsed them. Canons of the Apostles. vndoubtedly there were, yea and those had wyues, & yet for all that they perpetually both taught and ministred. That they had wiues, the histories declare, the Canons do testifye, & these Canons in especiall which ar of the Apostles, whervnto our aduersaries thinke we must so much leane vnto. For there we reade, that he is accursed, which teacheth that a priest ought to despise his wife.
I am not ignoraunt, that there are certayne wily heades, whiche by triflinge wordes do so auoyde the place alledged, as though it were onely to be vnderstād as touching meate and drinke and clothing: for which thinges, they say a prieste ought to prouide for his wife when he is seperated from her. As thoughe a wyfe is not more dyspysed, from whome the due beneuolence is taken awaye, then if she should be neglected as touching meat and drinke and clothing. The councel also of Gangrensis decreed, Concilium Congrente. that he is accursed which putteth difference betwen the oblation of a maried priest from others. Here also (least they should be counted dum) they say that a maried prieste, is taken for him whiche was once before maried, and not he whyche is presentlye maried: whiche they thinke happeneth, when eyther the wife is deade, or elles if they be seperated the one from the other. Who maryed folkes are. But graunt which of these two wayes thou wilt, yet one of the clergy can not be called a maried man. For they are maried folkes, whiche both loue together, and are not seperated one from an other. And that the ministers in the primitiue church had wiues, and vsed them, the history of Nicolaus the Deacon sufficiently declareth. And it is hereby also easely proued, bicause if ministers accō panied not with their wiues, Sircius, Pelagius, and other Romayn Popes should not haue neded to haue made so many prohibicions, that it should not frō thence forth be done, for these tyrans cōplained that it was so done, & therfore to theire power by decrees ordināces, & threatnings they forbad y e vse of matrimony to ecclesiastical mē: which they should not nede to haue don, if such matrimonies had not then bene in vse. At the length they deny not but y t so it was, but they fly to thys, that we must haue a respect vnto the times, & attribute somwhat to necessity. For in the primityue church (as they say) was there a great wāt of ministers, wherfore they wer fayne to chose them out of euery state of men, & therfore ther were very many of them which wer maried at y e time. But now that the church is encreased, we are not vrged with that necessity, wherefore iustly it is decreed that onely vnmaried folkes should be chosen.
The primitiue church had greate aboundance of ministers.But I would haue these mē to remember with themselues, that in that first tyme, when the heat of the holy Ghost did so much abound, there were a greate many mo whych were mete for the ministery, thē now ar, by reason of the great aboundance of grace & spiritual giftes. Besides that the church when it was extended [Page 95] and increased, it then neded many more ministers. Farther an other necessitie oppresseth vs more grieuously, Men are [...] weaker. bycause men at this day are more weake than they were then, which their Popes also deny not. For in the dist. 34. chap: Fraternitatis, Pelagius iudgeth that a certaine Deacon which was to be promoted (whiche had cōmitted whoredome, and yet hauing a wife of his own) should be more gently intreated bycause in these dayes not onely bodies are febled, but also vertue and maners. If they be not ignoraunt of this weakenes of our times, which is farre greater than it was in the olde tyme, they ought not from thence to take away the remedy where they perceaue a greater necessitie. Neither is it mete, that they should dissemble the necessitie of this age, whiche obiecting vnto vs the maner of the old Churche, dare lay against vs the necessitie therof. There is on either side necessitie, and therfore if there be a consideration had of the one let there be also a consideration had of the other.
There are some amongst them, which say, Whether it be lawfull to mary a wife after orders receaued. that ministers in the old tyme had wiues, and somtimes vsed them: but they deny that after they had taken orders it was at any tyme lawfull to mary wiues. Vndoubtedly they erre: For in the sinode of Ancyrana (as it is written in the decrees the 28. dist: chap. Diaconi) it is decreed, that if a Deacon while he is in ordering, Synodus Ancyrana. shal deny when the state of cō tinency is required of him and shall testifie that he wil not lyue without a wife, if the same Deacon after he is ordeyned do contract matrimony, he may not be hindred but may frely execute his ministery. By which place we are manifestly taught, that it was lawfull to cōtract matrimony after orders receaued. ☜ Gratianus. Which Gratianus sawe well ynough, and therfore he writeth, that as touching that Synode a consideration ought to be had both to the time & place. For it is obserued in the east Church, which in promotions of ministers admitte not the promise of continency, but as touching time he addeth, that as yet this continency of Ministers was not then brought into the Churche: but if thou shalt aske, when that counsell was had, we answere, as it also appeareth by y e same decrees vnder Syricius and Innocentius, which liued in the time of Ierome and Augustine.
But it is a wonder to see, how Tyranny hath increased, Howe punishments agaynst y e clergy which mary haue dayly increased. Conciliū Neocaesariensis. and impiety by litle and litle taken depe rootes. At the begynnyng, y e Ministers of the Church which contracted matrimonies, were not altogether so seuerely handled. For the counsell of Neocaesariensis (as it is recited in the dist .28. chap. Presbiter) cōmaūded such to be put onely out of their office, and not from their benefice: for they were still norished, and receaued their stipendes from the Churche. Neither in the meane tyme will I ouerpasse, that y e coūsel did cast out of y e Church such Priests as wer adulterers and whoremongers, namely, in excommunicating them which was very mete and iust, when as our men now a dayes do altogether winke at those sinnes. After that they began not onely to put them out of their offices, but also (as they speake) to remoue them from their benefices, as it is written in the 33. dist. chap. Eos & chap. Decreuerunt yea and those which so maried, they banished either into a monastery, or into some straight place to do penāce, but in our tyme they burne many of them. And afterwarde they raged also against the women, with whom the Ministers had maried, as it is founde in the dist. 81. Concilium Toletanum. out of a certaine counsell holden at Toledo, chap: Quidam, where it is commaunded that the women should be sold. And in the dist. 34. chap. Eos, they are appointed to be seruauntes of that Church, wherin the Priest was, which hath contracted with them into seruitude, and if peraduenture the Byshop could not bring them into seruitude, he should commit it vnto the prince or lay Magistrat. They banished them also sometimes into a monastery to do penance, as it is read in the 34. dist. chap: Fraternitatis. Neither were they content with this cruelty, but the children also whiche were by such matrimonies borne, would they haue to be seruauntes of that Church, wherin their father had ben, & they depriued them of al their fathers inheritaūce. And that is written, in the 15. question the last chap: Cū multae. [Page] They do so not punish their adulterous sacrificers and whoremongers, neither their harlottes, nor yet their bastard children: they onely exercise their cruell tyranny vpon the wifes of Priestes and their lawfull children.
At the laste, when they haue almost no other thyng to bring, they flye vnto theyr vowe as to a holy anchor. They crye out that that must vtterly be kepte, and therefore it is not any more lawfull for Ministers to mary, bycause when they are ordeyned they do vowe sole lyfe. Vow of vniust thinges are of no force. As thoughe it were not both by the holy Scriptures and also by humane lawes commaunded, that a vowe, promise, or othe shoulde be of no force, if it compell vs to an vniust or vnhonest thyng.
And who seeth not, that it is a thyng very filthy, and agaynst the lawe of God that he whiche burneth in filthy luste, yea and so burneth that he dayly defileth hymselfe with harlottes, adulterers and vnlawfull Vsu veneris, should be forbidden matrimonye? Vndoubtedly the holy Ghost hath commaunded matrimony to all such as can not kepe themselues chaste, yea and the fathers (which in this matter are more enemyes to vs than they should) sawe this. Wherefore Ciprian as touchyng holy virgines, Cyprian. whiche had vnchastly behaued themselues, sayeth: If either they will not or can not kepe themselues chast, let them mary.
Ierome. Epiphanius. Ierome also feared not to wryte the same vnto Demetrius, Epiphanius also agaynste the Catharis, sayeth: It is better those whiche can not kepe themselues chast to mary wyues, and sinne onely once, than dayly to wounde their myndes with vnpure actions. But the opinion of this father I do not in this thyng allowe, bycause he affirmeth that those do sinne, whiche when they haue made a vowe of chastitye do contracte matrimonye, for as longe as they do obeye the voyce of GOD, they charge not themselues with sinne. Neither do I allowe that his reason, wherein he sayth, that one sinne is to be committed, to auoyde a greater, onely this I meane to shewe by his wordes, that matrimony is very necessary to suche as can not kepe themselues chaste. But I will entreate no more of this thing at this present for I haue aboundantly spoken of all this question in my booke of Vowes.
And the children of Israel ascended vp to her for iudgement. Some affirme that this was done at certayne appoynted dayes, so that the Israelites shoulde come to her house, as to a certayne oracle, and to an interpretor of the lawes of God. Or els then they ascended vnto her, when he was inspired with the spirite of Prophesye. And vndoutedly it is very lykely, that she then called the people together, when she had any thyng to shewe vnto the Israelites in the name of God. And they are sayd properly to ascende, bycause in passing ouer the mount Ephraim they came vnto her.
6 And she sent, and called Barac, the sonne of Abinoam, out of Cedes Nephthalim: and she sayd vnto hym: Hath not the Lord God of Israel commaunded thee to go, and leade vnto mount Thabor, and take with the ten thousand men of thee childrē of Nephthalim, and of the sonnes of Zebulon.
7 And I wil bring vnto thee, vnto the riuer Kison, Sisera the captayne of the host of Iabin, with his chariots, and his people, and I will deliuer him into thine handes.
8 And Barac sayd vnto her, If thou wilt go with me, I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, I will not go.
9 Who answered, I will surely go with thee, but this iorney that thou takest shall not be for thine honour: for the Lord shall delyuer Sisera into the hand of a woman, So Deborah rose vp, and went with Barac into Cedes.
Deborah vseth the authoritie of a prince, when she citeth Barac vnto her and commaunded him to be called in her owne name. he came from the Citie of Cedes. That was a Citie of the Priestes in the tribe of Nepthalim, and also a Citie of refuge as it is read in Iosuah the 19. chap. Hath not the Lorde God commaunded thee. She vseth an interrogatiue speache: for that very muche profiteth to stirre vp mindes, and earnestly to commaunded any thyng. Some thinke that Deborah had more than once yea often tymes admonished Barac in the name of god to accomplishe this office and he for feare lingered it. Wherefore she at the last openly and before the Israelites reproueth them. And it is as muche, as if she should haue sayde, In very dede it is God whiche hath commaunded thee these thynges. That whiche I speake is not myne inuention, I tell thee this thou must take in hande by the counsell and will of God. To preceptes are ioyned promises. And in these wordes of the Prophetesse may be obserued a maner much vsed in the holy Scriptures, which when they geue any precepte, do straight way ioyne therunto a promise. When children are commaunded to obey their parentes, length of life is straight waye promised. Deborah also declareth, that she exercised y e office of a Prophet amōg the people, when as she Prophecieth what shall become of Sisera, and foretelleth a notable victorye, whiche God had decreed vnto Barac. Mount Thabor, Mount Thabor is called Ithabyrius. whiche is here mencioned, of the Ethnike writers is called Ithabirius: It is nighe vnto the Assirians; Nepthalites and Sabulonites. There the Lorde Iesus Christ, our Sauiour, was transfigured before three of his Disciples, as it is declared in the history of the Gospell. This mount hath by it the riuer Kyson, The riuer Kison. whiche by the destruction of the Baalites is made notable: for there Helias the Prophete slewe the Priestes of Baal.
Drawe, and take with thee ten thousand men. This semeth to be a new kynde of speache: but vnto the thing whiche is in hande it is moste propre. For this Hebrew worde Maschach, is not in this place to drawe by violence to, but (as all the Rabbines almost do interpretate) with presuasion to leade, that is, with faire and pleasaunt wordes to allure them. For without doubt it was a great and perillous worke wherunto they wer called, & for as much as they lyued vnder a Tyraunt, their souldiers could not by publique authority be mustered or gathered together, but must of necessitie by faire meanes be allured, to conspire against a Tyraunt. By this place we are taught that good and eloquent speaches are very profytable in warrelyke affaires; Rethoricke is profitable in warlike affaires. and that the arte of Rethorike by the lawe of God is not forbidden, but may in hys place profitably serue for holy men. Farther this is not to be left vnspoken of, that those two tribes, namely Nepthalim and Zabulon, were not warrelike tribes but the weakest of all the tribes among the Israelites. The tribes of Nepthalim & Zabulon were of lesse estimation thā the other tribes. And yet God commaundeth to chose out souldiers out of them, wherby we learne that it is a lyke to hym to vse either weake souldiers or stronge warriers agaynst his enemies.
Some man peraduenture will doubte, by what argumentes or reasons Barac could be persuaded, to beleue the wordes of Deborah. To whome we aunswere, that he weyghed with hymselfe, that those thinges whiche Deborah promised, did very well agree with the wordes and promises of God. For he, as he had threatened, that the Israelites when they sinned should by his commaundement and will be afflicted by outwarde nations: so agayne had he promised, that he would deliuer them out of the handes of their enemyes, if they faythfully repented them of their wickednes committed, and faythfully from the heart called vpon him. He promised that he would fight for them, neither should their weaknes or fewenesse in nomber be a let, The wordes of Deborah were agreable with the holy Scriptures. but that they shuld get the victory ouer their enemies. Wherfore for as much as Deborah prophecied that those things should come to passe, whiche the Lord had promised vnto the people of the Hebrues, it was conuenient, that Barac should receaue those wordes for true and faythfull
Farther the authoritie of the speaker helped thereunto. For Deborah was by [Page] God constituted in the ministery, not vndoubtedly by an ordinary prerogatiue, but by a certayn singular and principall prerogatiue. And if we should looke vppon the Etimology of her name, Deborah signifieth a bee. we shall thinke that her orations were verye sweete. For Deborah with the Hebrues is a bee, which beast we know is a diligent artificer in makyng of hony. And yet all these thinges had not ben sufficiēt, to make Barac to beleue her, vnles the power of the holy Ghost had persuaded in his mynde those things which were commaunded. For fayth is onely the worke of the holy Ghost, whiche he can worke in the heartes of men without any outward instrument, but he hath decreed for the most part to vse them, I meane the worde and the ministery, not as though he were bound vnto them, but to shew vnto vs, how much we ought to make of these two instrumentes. Neither do I thinke that it is to be doubted, but that this holy woman, was both by miracles, and also by prophesieng of things to come, declared to be the Minister of the true God and the most healthfull Iudge of the Israelites. We therefore ought hereby to learne, that we must altogether heare the Ministers of God, when they set forth vnto vs, his wordes, promises, and also threatninges out of the holy scriptures neither is there any authority in the worlde, whiche ought to be preferred before the ministery of the Church and word of God. They were heard thynges whiche Deborah commaunded. Wherfore iustly ought Barac to beleue the thinges whiche Deborah commaunded, althoughe they semed both greuous and heard. For she commaunded hym, to moue sedition and tumulte, to rebell agaynst his prince, a priuate man to gather an hoste, and that a litle one agaynst a most mighty king.
Whether Barak were without faith. And Barac sayde vnto her, If thou wilte goo with me, I wyll go. In this place it semeth might be demaunded, whether Barac were doubtful, and beleued not at the beginning (as he ought to haue done) the wordes of Deborah. And that semeth to some absurde, when as in the Epistle to the Hebrues the 11. chap: Barac is reckened with Sampson, Gedeon Iephthe and others, which by fayth ouercame kyngdomes. And therefore it semeth that his fayth beyng praysed by the testimony of God, ought not by our iudgement to be empared. Wherfore they affirme that he would haue Deborah to go with him, not bycause he beleued not the promise of God, but that he myght haue a Prophetesse ready and ac hande, whose Counsell he might vse in orderyng his warre, in pitching hys Campes, and other chaunces whiche are wonte to happen in warres. And I am not ignoraunt, Augustine. that Augustine readeth it, after this manner. Bycause I can not tell in what day the Lorde will prosper his aungell with me, &c. As thoughe he should haue sayd, I wyll therefore haue thee with me, bycause thou beyng endewed with the spirite of Prophesy (whiche hath not happened vnto me) shalte easly knowe, in what daye the aungell of the Lorde will luckely fyght for vs.
But I do thinke that Barac did somewhat doubt: for Deborah Prophecied in the name of God that bycause of thys aunswere he should be punished. And more ouer (sayeth she) thy glory shalbe taken awaye from thee, and the Lord will sel Sysara into the hand of a woman. Iosephus. And as Iosephus testifyeth she spake these wordes beyng somewhat moued. And a Prophetesse woulde not haue ben angry, neither would GOD haue diminished the glorye of Barac without a faulte. And it appeareth not that he fell into any other sinne besides infidelity howbeit that incredulitye was afterwarde taken awaye by the spirite and grace of God & when at the length he beleued the wordes of Deborah, Men although they be godly do not straight way beleue. and obeyed her, and by fayth (as it is written to the Hebrues) he obtayned the victorye. And how often that happeneth vnto men, It is profitable for Captaynes to haue ministers of the worde in their Campes. althoughe they be godly, namely, to doubt at the begynnyng, by reason of the dregges of the olde Adam, there is none whiche hath not experience of it in hymselfe. Afterwarde when they are strengthened with the spirite, there succedeth a great assurednes of faith. And I do not deny that which the first interpretation sayeth, namely that it is very expedient for Captaynes, to [Page 97] haue Prophetes and Ministers of the worde of God with them in their warres. For as muche as the lawe of God in Deut. so commaundeth and in the 2. booke of kynges it is written, that Helizeus the Prophete was in the campe, when the kyng of Israell, the kyng of Iudah, and the kyng of Edom went to fight agaynst the kyng of Moab. Wherfore Christian princes, when they take any iust warres in hande, The presēce of Deborah was profitable in y e Campe. do ryghtly and orderly if they haue Preachers and Ministers of the word of God with them in theyr expedition. Farther an other commodity came by the presence of Deborah: for thereby godly men vnderstoode, that it was no rashe warre, or taken in hand by humane reason, but enterprised by the commaundement of God, and Counsell of his Prophetesse.
But in that it is written that the glory should be taken from Barac, and Sisera deliuered into the hande of a woman, it may be expounded two manner of wayes: either, bycause this victory should not nowe be ascribed vnto Barac, but to Deborah, namely, bicause she should haue the prayse to haue iudged Israel, and to haue set them at liberty, and Barac should not be counted amonge the number of the Iudges. Or els bycause Barac should not kyll Sysera with his owne hande, but Iahell the wife of the Kenite should do it, as it shall afterwarde be declared. And in dede this latter interpretacion semeth to me more naturall and propre.
Of these thynges whiche we haue nowe brought forth, are some most worthy to be noted. The first is, that God might haue deliuered this people the Israelites without the helpe or hoste of ten thousand men, whom yet he therefore chosed to teach vs, that he dissaloweth not iust warrefarre. Farther that humane helpes, when they are present, are not to be despised. Moreouer he accordyng to his wisedome vsed the gathering together of these souldiers thereby to prouoke Sisera, that he agayne might gathered an host, and come and ouerthrow Barac.
And in that God sayth he will draw Sisera vnto mount Thabor, The drawyng of God serueth both to good thinges and to euill. he teacheth vs, that his drawyng is of force, not onely to good things, but also to euill, in respect that they are paynes and iust punishementes. No man can doubte, but that Sisera sinned in this, bycause with a great violence he contented to oppresse the Israelites, and that vniustly. And yet GOD promised to drawe him to it. Neuerthelesse we must marke, The maner of the drawing of God is not a like as touchīg good thinges and enui. that the maner of the drawing of GOD is not a like as touching good thyngs and euill: bycause to good thynges we can not be drawen, execept God do heale our vnderstandyng, and geue vs a good mynd. For by nature we are the children of wrath and vtterly corrupte, but when we are induced to euill GOD nedeth not to instill, any new malice in vs, for as much as we alwayes of our selues haue it ready and prompte to do euill: but onely the doyng of GOD, directeth them to what ende he will, and he so gouerneth them, to make open his glory as he hath decreed. After this sorte vndoubtedly was Pharao hardened, and Sisera now drawen to destruction. God drew both the men of Barac and also Sisera but by diuers meanes. God also drewe those ten thousandmen after Barac, for otherwise they would not haue followed him, but this drawyng was after an other maner: for here he vsed the speache of this man, whiche he made to be of efficacy in the heartes of his souldiers: but there to moue and prouoke Sisera he appointed both falling awaye of Barac, and the host gathered by him.
This is also to be considered, that by this place is proued, Glorye maye lawfully be desyred. that glory is a certayne good thing, whiche iuste and good men may desire: otherwise Barac, to be punished for his incredulitie, shuld not haue ben depriued of glory. And glory is certayne noblenesse comming of thynges well done. What glory is For those thynges whiche good men do very excellently of their own accord, do brede a noble name or glory. The matter & end of glory. Wherfore the matter wherin it cōsisteth are opinions & talkes of iust & wise mē. But y e end wherunto glory ought to be directed, is y e settyng forth of y e name of God, & also an exāple which is set forth for our neighbours to follow. And as y e brightnes of y e name of god, & y e edifieng of others, ar very excellēt & good things [Page] so also is it manifest y t the glory which serueth vnto thē is a good thyng. Wherfore although glory for it selfe is not to be desired as the last ende, yet for those thinges whiche we haue mencioned, God can do many thynges whiche he will not do. ought it not to be neglected. Farther we must note that God can bryng certayne thynges to passe, whiche yet he will not performe, excepte thynges be done of vs. For he could (as it appeareth by thys place) haue geuen the glory of this victorye and health of Israell onely vnto Barac: whiche he would not do, bycause he refused to go alone to that expedicion. Helizeus also (as it is written in the 2. booke of kyngs) when he was sore sicke, and commaunded the kyng of Israel which stode by him, to strike the earth with and arrowe, and he did strike it onely three tymes, the Prophete was grieuously angry with hym, and sayde: If thou haddest striken sixe or seuen tymes, thou shouldest vtterly haue destroyed Syria. But nowe thou shalte onely thrice vex [...] and molest it. This maketh agaynst those, whiche thinke that the power of God differeth not from hys will, as thoughe he can not do those thynges, whiche he will not, A destructiō of an absolut power & of an ordinary power. when as for all that Christ sayde, that he could haue xi. legions of aungels of hys Father, to defende hym from the Iewes that they should not take hym. GOD therefore could haue done that whiche he dyd not. Wherfore they seme not to thinke euill, whiche referre thinges to an absolute power and not to an ordinary, or definite power.
But how it is sayde that Sisera should be solde into the hande of a woman, we shal not nede nowe by many wordes to declare, and for as much as we haue before hearde this selfe same worde, and howe ryghtly it agreeth with God is there expounded. This onely will I adde, that he was nowe solde of GOD to him, to whome before God had solde the Israelites, and it is sayd that he shalbe solde into the hande of a woman, whiche should haue power and myght to kyll him: for he was killed by Iael, as a litle afterward shalbe declared.
10 And Barac gathered together Zebulon, and Nepthalim in Kedes, and he went vpon his feete with ten thousand men. Deborah also went vp with him.
11 Nowe Heber the Kenite, whiche was of the children of Hobab the Father in lawe of Moses, was departed from Cain, and pitched hys tente euen to Elon in Zaananuin, whiche is in Kedes.
12 And they shewed Sisera, that Barac y e sonne of Abinoam was gone vp to mount Thabor.
13 And Sisera gathered together all hys chariots, euen nine hundreth chariots of yron, and all the people that were with hym from Harozeth of the gentles, vnto the riuer Kisyn.
It is before shewed by what meanes Barac gathered his men together, namely by an oration of much likelyhood and of muche efficacy whiche was of so great strength with these tribes, The counsels of men are so efficacy as the predestinacion of God hath or deyned. that there came of them ten thousand men vnto him, neither would God (as it appeareth by the wordes of Deborah) haue any more. Hereby we see that the Counsels and wordes of men are so farreforth fruitfull, as the predestination or will of GOD hath before appoynted. Wherefore Luke in the Actes of the Apostles feared not to write: And they beleued as many as were ordeyned to euerlastyng lyfe. Some translate this Hebrew worde Bergeliu, footemen, and others, after hym. But as for that matter we wyll not muche contend: bycause if they followed the feete of Barac, it is a token, that they also were footemen, neyther were the Israelites wonte to be of any great force on horsebacke, for as they were by GOD forbidden to kepe any greate number of Horses. And when they should go vp the mounte, thoughe they [Page 98] had ben horsemen, they could not haue ben so apte in those places. Farther this also maketh with it, for strayght way is vsed the same kynde of speach, when Sisera lept out of his chariot, & would haue fled away on foote. But therof we will speake in his place.
Deborah also went vp with hym. It was before sayde that she went with Barac vnto Kades: but bycause he should lede hys host from Kades to the mount, it is properly sayd that she nowe also went vp together with the Souldiers that were collected. And there was no small fayth both in the Captaynes and also in the Souldiers, whiche durste take suche enterprises in hande, beyng so weake and fewe in number. But fayth seeth those thynges which appeare not to the eyes of the body. Helizeus the Prophete once prayed, that the eyes of the lad whiche was with hym myght be opened, to see the wonderfull number of aungels, whiche very valiantly fought for hym agaynst hys enemyes. And therfore as many of vs as do beleue in Christ, when we are in daungers, ought by constant fayth to take holde of that helpe whiche God hath prepared for vs, althoughe with our eyes we see it not.
The thynges whiche are nowe by a Parenthesis declared of the Kenite, are therefore in the history by anticipation set forth, that those thynges maye the easiyer be vnderstand, which afterward shalbe spoken of Sisara that was killed by Iahell.
This Heber the husband of Iahell was of the posteritie of Hobab the father in lawe of Moses, of whome we haue aboundantly spoken before. Why the family of Iethro were called Kenites. But of this place we learne why they were called Kenites. For Cain was the name of their famely: but thys Heber dwelled a parte from hys kynsemen, neither remayned he any longer amonge them. For the rest (as it is wrytten in the 1. chap: of thys booke) departed from the Citie of Iericho, followed Othoniell, and lyued in the desert together with the children of Israell. Why Heber departed from his kinsfolkes. But Heber of whome it is nowe written, went to the borders of Zabulon and Nepthalim, and pitched his tente nere to Cedes. But what was the cause of hys departure from hys brethren, it is not presently wrytten. But we knowe that Loth and Abraham by reason of the aboundance of cattell and want of Pastor, departed one from an other: and seyng the same myght easly happen vnto the Kenites, it is not vnlykely, but that they were vpon the lyke occasion separated. Thys worde Tseenim, (if we maye beleue the Chaldey Paraprhast) signifieth ditches full of water, The Rechabites were Kenites. with whiche that place peraduenture abounded. It is no meruayle that the family whiche that place peraduenture abounded. It is no meruayle that the family of the Kenites dwelled in tentes: for so muche as the Rechabites whiche came of them, had no where any fyrme abydyng places, and that was wont to be the manner almost of all shepeheardes, to followe Pastors that be plentyfull, in what place so euer they be. And thys worde Acilun signifieth sometymes an oke, and sometymes a playnefielde. The Chaldey Paraphrast turneth, it a playnefielde: but it myght be, that there was some notable oke or groue of okes in it.
It was shewed vnto Sisera onely howe Barac had gathered together an host and tolde hym that Deborah the Prophetesse of God was there, bycause that all men had a respecte vnto them at whiche was the Captayne of the hoste. And though a woman were theyr firste counseller, of this enterprise yet there is nothyng shewed hym of her, for the thynges whiche are done by women, are wont for the moste parte to be referred vnto men. Neither had the Ethnikes peraduenture any regarde to the gyfte of Prophesye wherewith Deborah was endewed. What number of Souldiers Sisera had it is not in thys place expressed: onely there is mention made of nyne hundreth Chariottes of yron. Iosephus. But Iosephus testifyeth (as we haue before sayde) that the Chananites had 300000. footemen. 10000. horsemen, and lastly 3000. Charlottes. And in that the historye [Page] now maketh mencion onely of 900. Augustine. it is to be vnderstande, of hooked and yron chariots, which interpretaciō Augustine in his questiōs on this place followeth. Farther Iosephus addeth that this Sisera by the commaundement of Iabin hys kyng directed this host vnto mount Thabor or Ithabyrius.
14 Thē Deborah said vnto Barac: vp, for this is the day, wherin y e Lord hath deliuered Sisera into thine hand. Is not the Lord gone out before thee? So Barac went downe from mount Thabor, and ten thousand men after hym.
15 And the Lord destroyed Sisera, and all his chariots, and al his host with y e edge of the sworde, before Barac. So that Sisera lighted downe of his chariot, and fled away on his feete.
Barac is made strong by the wordes of Deborah, and forced to ioyne battail with his enemyes. For that is the power of fayth, to strengthen the weakenesse yea if the exhortation of Deborah had not bene, Iosephus. Barak (if we may beleue Iosephus) by the sight of his enemies was so feared and troubled, that he would haue gotten hym to the stronger fensed places of the hill, but she called hym backe agayne, and by her wordes draue hym to fyght. Beyng therefore strengthened, and confirmed, he forsooke the well fensed partes of mount Thabor, and came downe to fight with Sisera. This is (sayeth she) the day. As thoughe she should haue sayd, no humane power, or warlike might can let y e victory, which the predestination of God hath this day decreed vnto thee. But a man will aske howe it is nowe sayd that Sisera should be deliuered into the handes of Barac, when as before it was foretold, that he shoulde be solde into the hande of a woman? I aunswere that it is therfore bycause that the host should be destroyed by Barac, and Sisera should be so made to flye, that the matter was begonne by the conduct of Deborah, and finished by Iahell, but the flyght and slaughter was accomplished by Barac. Wherfore in the hystory there can not iustly be noted any contrariety or diuersitie.
Is not the Lorde? The interrogation whiche the Prophete vseth, doth not onely stirre vp and encourage the heart of Barac, but also vehemently commaundeth hym, as the Latine Poete also hath sayde: Shall not armure dispatche the matter, and shall they not followe me through the whole Citie? But here may somewhat be doubted, in that our text hath, that the Lorde went forth before Barac, when as the Chaldey paraphrast turneth it, an aungell. For it sayeth, Shall not the aungell of the Lorde prosper thee? And vndoubtedly this paraphrasis sheweth, Augustine. what was the cause why Augustine read (as we haue before admonished), that Barac sayde vnto Deborah go with me, bycause I knowe not in what day GOD shall prosper hys aungell & me. Wherfore we must thinke, that the Greke interpretors had these wordes of the Chaldey paraphrast, which afterwarde crepte into the texte, but yet out of place. But as touchyng the matter, Christ was the aungell which defended the Iewes. eyther is true, both that GOD and hys aungell were present and fought on the Hebrues side. And vndoubtedly Christ was that aungell whiche defended the Iewes and fought for them. Of Malachie the Prophete he is called the Aungell: and in Exodus God promised both, that he himselfe woulde come with his people, and also send his aungell, for our Christ both is GOD and also had euer with hym aungels as Ministers defending the Hebrues.
And the Lorde destroyed Sisera. Thys Hebrew worde Ieham maye haue for hys roote or grounde thys worde Hamam, whiche signifieth to make afeard or to trouble. And then shall the sense be, God made him afeard, but the same worde signifieth also, to breake, or to destroy, althoughe as Kimhi writeth, [Page 99] his rote may be this word Hom and Him which almost signifieth the same thinge. And in dede God did both, he terrified the hartes of the Chananites, and stroke and brake their host.
How this slaughter happened, or by what singuler ayde of God the Israelits ouercame, it is not in this place written. But Iosephus affirmeth that a greate violence of tempeste and hayle was caste from heauen into the eyes of the aduersaries, wherewith the Chananites were so hindred in the battayle, Iosephus. that they were not able to defend thēselues, & therefore they were miserablye slayne, whē as yet y e misery nothing at al hurted the Iewes. For y e hayle was onely on their backe, and therfore theyr violence against theyr enemies was in nothing letted.
VVith the edge of the sword. It is sayd that God slew them, for he made them afeard, and wonderfully troubled them with the tempest or hayle. Howbeit the victory was so obteyned, that the Israelits also fought: for it is written y t the enemies perished by y e edge of the sword, by which kind of speach vndoubtedly is declared that they were slayne. This I haue for this cause noted, God somtimes destroyeth hys enemies without the helpe of men. bicause God somtimes so maketh afeard his enemies & graunteth victory ouer them, that his people whome he deliuereth, do nothing at all: as it came to passe in the red sea, when Pharao perished there with his host: and when the host of Senacherib was wonderfully destroyed in one night by the aungell.
16 But Barak pursued after the Chariotes, and after the host euē vnto Harozeth of the gentiles: & al the hoste of Sisera fell vpon the edge of the sword. And there was not a man left.
17 Howbeit Sisera fled away on his fete to the tent of Iahell the wife of Heber the Kenite. For there was peace betwene Iabin the king of Hazor, and the family of Heber the Kenite.
Againe in this place we haue this worde Bergeliu that is, on his feete. And in dede it appereth y t it signifieth nothing els but a footeman. For Sisera thought he could not in that battell be saued in hys chariote: wherfore he determined priuely to flye amonge the raschall souldiours. He now therefore forsaketh and abiecteth his chariot which was prepared vnto him for a defence and ayd. And assuredly whē God taketh away audacity and strength, the things which before wer weapons, are then made burthens and lettes. Miserable Sisara flyeth, but he escapeth not. He made hast vnto the place, wher god had prepared a snare for him. For the other Cananits fled to Hazoreth of the gentils, namely vnto the place from whēce they came. But Sisera turned his iourny an other way from the rest of the souldiers, neither fled he the right way as the other did. He knew the shortest way, & he gat him to the tent of the Kenits: which he knew was nigh home, and not far from the place wher the battayle was fought. And there he hoped to haue lurked, till the rage of the warre should haue bene pacified.
In that they were all destroyed, it is a token of a perfecte victory. But as concerninge the peace betweene Iabin and the Kenites, in what sorte or manner it was, we haue no certainty. Wherfore to affirme any thinge of it for certaine, it should be rashly done. For it mighte be that Hebor payed somewhat vnto Iabin for the pastors which he occupied, and contrariwise that the kinge promised him security and safety for his flockes, cattel, and family. There may be also very many other things thought & those very likely, but not to be affirmed for certaine.
Whither it be lawful for the godly to haue peace wyth the vngodly.
THis questiō is now to be discussed and defined, whether it be lawful for godly mē to make peace & to kepe it with vngodly. And me thinketh we may saye [Page] that it is lawful, especially if it be concluded for y e peaceable defending & keping of the bondes or borders on ether syde. Paul saith, as much as lyeth in you, haue peace with all men. So did the most Christian princes with the barbarous infidles, in making peace somtimes with thē. So Iacob in y e old tyme made a legue with Laban. So also did the children of Israel, with their other neighbours, excepting the seuen nations, for God cōmaunded them not to make war with all those nations that dwelled about them.
But if thou shalte demaunde, whether it be lawfull for the godlye when they take a common expedition in hand, to ioyne their army and power with the vngodly. An example of Iosaphat. That semeth to be denied. For Iosaphat had euill successe whē in making warre against Ramoth Gilead, he ioyned him self with the king of Israel. Neither sped the same king luckely when he sent shippes together with the king of Israels shippes into Tharsis. For there arose a tempest in Aschou-Gaber wherby hapned a shipwracke and so he lost his Nauy. And as it is written in the latter booke of Paralip. God by the mouthe of his prophete reproued Iosaphat, bycause he had ioyned himself with an vngodly king. The Machabites also made league w t the Romaines, An example of y e Machabits. The questiō is confirmed by reasons. & Lacedemoniās, but what displesure they had therby, theyr history declareth. But now that we haue manyfested the thinge by examples, let vs confirme it also by reasōs. This no mā can deny, that in such hosts, namely consisting of the vngodly & the godly together, the sincere religion and idolatry are mingled together: wherbye it easelye commeth to passe (suche is the weaknes of our nature) that the vnpure do infecte the holy ones. And it seldome happeneth but that some impiety cleaueth vnto the childrē of God. Farther whē they come to handy strokes they muste call vpon God, and when the victory is obtayned, they muste also geue thankes vnto God. And in doinge these thinges, what inuocation I pray you, what sacrifices, what thankes geuinge shall there be? The true god shalbe mingled with Belial, idolatrous rites with lawful rites, and true piety with superstition. These things vndoubtedly displease God. For if he would haue thinges after this sort mingled together, why chosed he a peculiar people vnto himself? Vndoubtedlye he did it, that the faythfull mighte liue purely by themselues, and worship the true god sincerely. And seing the matter is so, it is not lawful cōfusedly to haue to do with the vngodly: otherwise the order which god hath appoynted should be troubled.
Of the league of Abraham with the Chananites.A man might peraduenture say, that Abraham made league with Abuer, Eschol, and Mambre, and with theyr ayd toke in hand an expedicion, wherin he deliuered Loth his kinsman, which was led away captiue. But they which obiect this example, where find they that these men wer idolatrers? I vndoubtedly do not see that it can be gathered by the holy scriptures. But rather I suppose that they were worshippers of the true God. For God saide vnto Abraham, that he would not straightway geue vnto him the lande of the Cananites, bicause the sinnes of that nation were not yet full. Wherfore it is not absurde to saye, that these three men were yet there, & did worship the true God simply. For asmuch as we know assuredly that Melchizedech also was in those regions, who blessed Abraham, and was the priest of the most high God. But graunt y t they wer idolatres as these men wil haue them: Shall that which was by a certayn singuler progatiue lawfull vnto Abraham, be strayghtway counted lawful vnto al men to do it iustly and without punishmente, I thinke not. Farthermore we muste mark, y t the common wealth of the Iewes was not yet ordained. And Abraham alone could not dwel among the Cananites without some couenāts or leagues made with them. Wherunto thou maiste adde that God had not yet geuen the law, wherin he peculiarly forbad any thinge as touching this matter.
Whither it be lawful for christians to seeke for helpe of infidels.But if a prince, or Christian pub: wealth (as sometimes it chaunceth) should be in daunger, maye they desire helpe at infidels handes? They cannot. For if Paule will haue vs rather to suffer wronge and hurt, than that we shoulde go [Page 100] to the iudgement seats of the infidels when we are in controuersy with our brethren: How much lesse is it lawfull to vse the helpe of the vngodly, to deliuer vs from other Christianes, which vniustlye oppresse vs.
I know that Asa king of Iudah sente money, golde and siluer, An example of Asa the kinge. vnto Benhadab king of Siria, to make warre against the king of Samaria, that therby he mighte be deliuered from him whiche in a manner oppressed him: Howebeit I doe not thinke that the acte of this kinge (though it had good successe) is to be followed. For he was reproued of God for it. And though it be not expressed in the boke of kinges, yet in Paralip: it is manifestly described. For there we reade that the prophet was purposedly sent of God vnto Asa the king to reproue him greuouslye for this his acte. An example of Amasia. Yea and there is an other notable example of like sorte written in the same boke, namely that Amasia did hier agaynst the Edomits. C. thousād Israelites: which the prophet in the name of God grieuouslye reprehended, and commaunded that he should put away the Israelitish souldiours from his hoste, because that the will and good pleasure of God was vtterly from thē. The kinge aunswered vnto the Prophete: But nowe I haue geuen them an C. talentes for theyr stipend. The man of God aunswered, that the Lord could aptly and easely repay him as many talentes, and that for so small a losse he should not suffer Idolatrers which were hated of god to be in his campes.
I will not tel how often the Iewes were forbidden by the prophets, that they shoulde not require helpe of the Egiptians, or of the Assirians.
But to returne to the matter from which we haue somewhat decreased: This Heber the knighte, if he had peace with Iabin, for his limites or borders, or for some pencion agreed with him for pastor for his cattle, it cannot be discommended. Forasmuch as godly men seke not to dwel out of the world, & they ought according to the Apostles commaundement to haue peace with al men as much as in thē lieth. But if he had peace, to take in hand any cōmō expeditiō, it was vniust, neither ought it to abide ratified. But the thinge whiche we haue in hande was don by Iahel, and not by Hebor her husbād. For he ether was not at home, or elles if he were at he home was sick: Wherfore he could not execute this notable acte.
18 And Iahell went out to mete Sisera, and said vnto him, Turn on my Lorde, turne in to me feare not. And he turned in vnto her tente. And she couered hym with a coueringe.
19 And he sayde vnto her, geue me I praye thee, a little water to drinke for I am thirstye, and she opened a bottle of milke and gaue him drinke and couered him.
20 Agayne he sayd vnto her, stande in the dore of the tent and when anye man doth come and inquire of thee, saying: is anye man here? thou shalt say, nay.
21 Then Iahel Hebers wife toke a nayle of the tente, and toke an hammer in her hād, and went priuely vnto him, and smote the naile into his temples, and fastned it vnto the grounde. For he was faste on slepe and wery: and so he died.
Iahel vsed guile and that euel guile: but agaynst her enemy, not her own enemy, but one alredy reiected of God and an oppressor of the people of God. And in what sorte it is lawful to vse euel guile against such enemies, we haue before declared. The couering wherwith she couered him, it is vncertayne what manner of one it was, and the opinions of the interpretors do muche differ therein. For some affirm that it was of silk and fine, and other some that it was a thick wollen garment full of heares and lockes hanging in both sides. But the matter is [Page] of no greate importance, and consisteth wholy in coniectures.
The cause of the drought of Sisera.That Sisera was oppressed with thirst we ought not to merueile, when as he had traueled so farre on foote, and was pressed with so great grief, for both they which are weary and also they that are heauy for the most parte are wonte to be thirsty. For both labor and the affection of sorow, haue a power of drying. The woman gaue him milke. Paraduenture shee didde it of purpose, to cause him to fall on slepe. Neither was it any hard thing for her to geue him milke to drinke, for she had it in hand, when as she & her whole family excercised the arte of graffinge of cattle. And in that it is said, that she opened a bottle, it declareth that she had no smal store of milke, but greate aboundaunce therof. But Sisera when he had wel dronke, forgat not yet his owne safety, but diligently admonisheth the woman, what she shoulde aunswere, if any body came to aske for him. And that none should haue occasion to entre into the tente, he willeth her to abide at the dore, to aunswere such as should go by, to the ende that if they soughte for him, they should sone departe from thence.
A nayle of the tente I take to be that which they vse to fasten into the ground to cause the tente being bound vnto it to abide spreade abroade. And in that the woman vsed a hammer and a nayle, this I gather thereby, that the Israelites whilest they serued the Chananites, had theyr weapons taken away from them by the Chananites that they should haue neither sword nor dagger mete to kill a man withall. This holy woman vndoubtedly was gouerned by God, whiche durst accomplish so great an enterprise. For the strengthe of wemen is not able to atchiue these thinges. The cause of Sisaras slepe. Sisera being on sleepe, died. The causes of his sleepe are now sufficiently expressed, namely that he was weary by reason of his iourney, he dronke a greate deale of milke, and lay well couered: He was oppressed with heauines: and it is possible, that he slept but a little the night before.
The woman came softly or priuely, to se whither he were throughly on sleepe and when she saw that he was so, with a stout and valiant courage she gaue him a stroke. Sisera died, and that with ignominy. For God for this cause suffred him for a time to flye, that he might not be killed in battayle amonge men, but being on slepe be slayne by the hand of a woman.
22 And behold Barak pursued after Sisara, and Iahell came out to mete him, and sayd vnto him, Come, & I will shew thee the man whome thou seekest. And he came in vnto her. And beholde Sisara lay on the ground deade, and the nayle in his temple.
23 So god brought downe Iabin the kinge of Chanaan that daye before the children of Israell.
24 And the hande of the children of Israell prospered, and preuayled against Iabin the king of Chanaan, vntill they had destroyed the same Iabin king of Chanaan.
Iahel meeteth Barak and shee therefore sheweth him his enemy killed, that he shoulde no more trauayle in seekinge of him. Sisera was not deceaued when he thought that Barak would come to the tent of Iahel, for he came thither in dede, for pursuinge the Chananites euen vnto Hazoreth of the gentiles, he sawe not Sisera among them which fell: wherfore he iudged he lurked somwhere, and suspected that he had without any more a doe fledde vnto the tente of the Leuites, bicause of the league and peace which he had with them. God therfore broughte downe Iabin, yea if ye maye beleue Iosephus, the Israelites destroyed his citye with sword and fire.
Whither Iahel in violating the laws of hospitality did well, or no.But it semeth that Iahel in this her enterprise and notable act did violate the lawes of hospitalitye and league, and therefore nowe resteth, either to condemne her or to quitte her.
But bicause al controuersye, not a litle dependeth [...], What maner of mē the Kenites were. that is of the circumstance of the persons, let vs therfore set her before our eyes, and consider with our selues what maner of men the Kenites wer. They assuredly in bloude wer ioyned with the Israelites. For it is written that they wer the posteritye of Hobab the father in law of Moyses. Farther, in the study of piety and the lawe of God they most purely consented with the Hebrues. Neither was theyr faythe ydle, but of efficacy and working. For they leauing their country, followed the Israelites, and God which was their guide thorowe the deserte places. Wherefore at the length when the landes were distributed, they obtayned inheritance together with them in the lande of Chanaan. For these causes, if Iahel went about to set the Iewes at libertye, she did but her dutye, neyther tooke she vpon her any other mans office.
On the contrary part let vs thus thinke of Sisera. What Sisera was. He was an oppresser of the people of God, and nowe killed by the power of God, and vtterlye confounded, neyther appeared there in him any token of repentance, but rather would therfore hyde himselfe, that escaping this so present a daunger, he might againe gather a new host against the Israelites. In deede after a sorte hee was in league with Heber the Kenite: but (as it is to be thought) not with a pure hart, but onelye to plucke him awaye from the rest of the Iewes, whereby he might haue the fewer enemies, & not be compelled to fight with so many enemies at one tyme. Or els to get of him a great tribute, or some other commoditye which he looked for. Farthermore in this his vnluckye chaunce, he calleth vpon no God, he imploreth not the prayers of others, but onely seketh hiding places, wher he might hide himselfe tyl such time, as the rage and brute of the Conquerers were somewhat staked: and onely trusted in humane aydes and leagues. By these thinges it easilye followeth, that both Iahel dyd her dutye, and that Sisera deserued so to be kylled.
But as touching the lawes of hospitality, Lawes of hospitality ought ordinarilye to bee kepte vnuiolated. we also do iudge that they by them selues and of their own nature ought to be kept sacred and vnuiolated. Thys vnderstoode Loth, when he would haue abandoned his daughters to the fylthy lustes of the wanton Sodomites, to the end they should doo no iniury vnto them which had turned in vnto him. Neither departed that olde man from his example, which receaued the Leuite with his wife as straungers, as it shal be more at large declared in this historye of the Iudges. Whose counsell in betraying hys daughters, although I allow not, yet I do very much commend the defending of the straungers. Yea, and the Gentiles worshipped Iupiter hospitalis, knowing by the light of nature, that God had a singular care ouer straungers and gestes. Pythagoras. Pythagoras also discommendeth the Swallowes, namelye for this, bicause they dayly lodge vnder the couering of mens houses, and yet will neuer be made familiar or tame vnto their hostes. Mischieuous houses. There were also somtime certain mischeuous houses, in which no man might anye more inhabite (as probable authors haue written) and that bicause in them the lawes of hospitalitye had bene violated. And contrarywise wher hospitality hath bene wel and faithfully kept, not onely Angels, but God himselfe also somtimes hath bene an acceptable gest. Christ also at the end of the world wil say: I was a straunger and ye lodged me, commending his in the sight of the whole world, for the vertue of hospitalitye. And it is manifest, that men in the old time decreed that betwene the gest & the host ther should be great frendship. Lastly God in the law commaūded, that the Hebrues should not despise the Egiptians, or vtterly expel them from them, & that namely for this, bicause at the beginning they shewed hospitality vnto their elders. Wherfore we must affirme that by the vniuersal and ordinary lawe, When God cō maundeth, all lawes of friendshyp are to bee broken. the lawes of hospitality ought to be kept inuiolated. And this ought also to he firm, that in lawes, no friendships, are so honest and so iust, but they are to be broken if God commaund otherwise. For al these thinges ought so long to be of force, [Page] as the wil of God shal allow them. Wherfore, forasmuch as God had nowe reiected Sisera and the Chananites, and would haue them destroyed, no couenants could iustlye be kept with them. For we must rather obey God than mans reasons. And of this wil of God Deborah was both a prophecier and an interpreter. She had declared that Sisera was now reiected of God, and had openly foretold that he should be sold into the hand of a woman.
After this maner the Leuites when they had slaine their friendes & kinsfolkes followed Moyses: to whom Moyses in the name of God said, ye haue consecrated your handes, so farre was it of that they were reproued for violating the bondes of kinred. Ieremy also, when by the commaundement of God hee had pronounced that the Moabites shoulde be kylled, he cursed those which had withdrawen themselues from that murther. He is cursed (said he) which doth the woorke of the Lord deceatefully. In the lawe also it is commaunded, that none shoulde be spared which entised any to idolatry, no not the Father, nor the Mother, no nor he or she which sleepeth in thy bosome. Who seeth not here that most strayghte bondes of kinred are to be contemned, if the wil and woord of God be against it [...] Abraham was commaunded to kyl his sonne, and that his onely sonne, as touching whom he had receaued a most large promise. The promise of God and fatherly kindnes seemed to be against his precept, and yet against these thynges, the woord of God vrging him, he ought to haue kylled his sonne. So must we think, that al men, although they be night of kyn vnto vs, ar sacrifices vnto god, as many as he commaundeth to be slayne. Wherefore in Esay the .xxxiiii. chap. it is written: What happeneth vnto them that be preposterously gentle. The Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozra. But they which wyth a preposterous clemency wyl against the woord of God be merciful, let them remember what happened vnto the king of Samaria. He, when he had spared Benadab the king of Siria, contrary to the commaundement of god, he was in this maner reprehended in the name of god by the Prophet. Thy soule shalbe for his soule.
Wherfore Iahel in this place is not to be blamed, forasmuch as she obeyed the counsel of god, and was excellently commended in the song of Deborah, as wee shal straightway see. And vndoubtedly this her worke came of a great fayth and singular obedience. I know that some thinke, that the act of Iahel is to be commended, in that she killed Sisera, and had so ready a mynde to set at libertye the Israelites: but yet they condemne the lye which she made, and the promise wher in she promised that she would hide and defend him. For she said: turn in to me, turne in to me, I pray thee my Lord, be not afeard. By which kinde of spech she seemed to promise him not to betray him to his enemies. I also woulde affirme the same, but that I see that god was the gouernour of this whole enterprise. I haue before taught, that it is lawful to vse guile, and that euil guile against our enemies, and that certaine proditions are iust. But I added, that there shoulde be mingled no promises nor lyes, nor othes with them. But al these thinges are to be vnderstand by the common law. But if god shal styrre vs vp to doo otherwise, there shalbe no blame layde in vs, if we obey him: so that we be very assured that god will haue it so to be done. And this is not to be left out, that some thinke, that Iahel at the beginning, when she called Sisera vnto her, thought of no guile or fraude towardes him: but that she was minded to keepe hym safe, as she had promised: but afterward she chaūged her purpose, bicause god had shewed her, that she should otherwyse woorke.
¶The .v. Chapter.
1. THen sang Deborah, and Barak the sonne of Abimam the same day, saying:
2 Prayse ye the Lorde for the auenging of Israel, and for the people that offred them selues wyllingly.
The ditty or song which is here written, belongeth to a demonstratiue kind of oration: for it comprehendeth both prayses and dispraises. Prayses chiefely of god, which was the principal author of this victory: for in ouercomming Sisera, it is mencioned that he vsed the ayde of the Starres of heauen, and of the tempest. Deborah also and Barak are praysed, lykewyse Iahel, and also these fewe weake and vnarmed men of the tribe of Zabulon and Nephthalim, which obeied the Oracle of god. On the contrary part Sisera is dispraised as a most cruel enemy of the people of god: & they are sharpely rebuked, which beleued not the word of god, but despised the commaundementes of Barak and woordes of Deborah: & hauing a regarde to their own weakenes, and not so much esteeming the goodnes and promises of god as they should haue done, they refused the battayle appoynted them of God.
¶Of Musicke and Songes.
THis song is a song of victory, A song of victorye. such a one as Moyses sang when Pharao was drowned: and as Hanna the mother of Samuel made by the inspiratiō of the holy ghost, when she had brought forth Samuel: and such a one as the Maydens of the Iewes openly sang in companies of players and dauncers after the victory of Dauid against Goliah. And in lyke maner in the newe Testament, Mary, Zacharias, and Simeon gaue thankes to god in their songes. The Ethnikes also when they had obtayned victories, were wont to appoynt supplications for certayne dayes, which in deede was nothing els, than to geue thankes vnto God. Wherefore being moued with the occasion of this place, I thinke it good somewhat to speake of Songes and Musicke, as much as belongeth to piety. Fyrste, from whence they had their beginning, and to what ende they were instituted. Secondlye, whither they may be kept in the Churches. Lastlye, what kinde of songes and measures are profitable and healthful.
As touching the first, we must vnderstand that the men of the olde tyme were wont with common vowes to sing certain solemn ditties, both when they gaue thankes to god, and also when they endeuoured to obtayne anye thyng of hym. Wherefore Orpheus, Linus, Pindatus, and Horace, Poetes vsyng the harpe. Sallij. and such like Poetes which vsed the Harpe, wrote most part of their hymnes for these vses. And in the Romane publike wealth, the Priests of Mars, which wer called Salii, caryed shields, and sang their verses throughe the Citye. Furthermore, it was the maner, that Musicke and verses were had, when the prayses of noble men were celebrated, chiefly at feastes: whereby they which stoode by, might be admonished to to imitate their noble actes, and to detest suche vices, which were contrary vnto theyr vertues. Moreouer, they vsed them to recreate the myndes, and to comfort suche as wer pensiue for the dead. For in burials they sang Epitaphes. Epitaphes. And contrariwise, when anye great cause of ioye happened, it was expressed by Musicke and Songes. Wherefore in weddinges they wer wont to syng wedding songes. [...], Al these thinges, if they be done moderatelye and in due time, maye be both borne withal, and also commended. For Musicke and Songes contayne three kyndes of good thinges, honest (I say) profyte, and pleasantnes. For although synging of it selfe delighteth the myndes of men, yet when woordes are ioyned vnto it, which are of a iust number, and bound by certaine feete (as we see verses are) it is then made much more pleasaunt. And vndoubtedlye Poetry had hereof hys beginning, and I cannot deny but it is a gyft of god: Poetry a gyfte of God. Againste wanton songes. but I woulde wyshe thys that it be kept pure and chaste among men. And that I for this cause say, bicause certayne vncleane and vnpure men haue most filthily defiled it, applying songs and verses to wantonnesse, wicked lusts, and euery filthy thing. Whose verses, although they be eloquent and good latine, yet they are vtterly vnwoorthye for Christian eares, neither ought they by any meanes to be taught vnto yong mē, who being themselues prone inough to vices, neede no new fyres or mocions to [Page] moue and enflame them. Verses of this kinde, may iustly be called the Sirenes of tender mindes: wherwith yong men being infected, it is scarce possible, but that they shal suffer shipwracke.
The godlye much vsed holy songes.But holy songes the people of God muche vsed. For the Hebrues in Moyses time, when they tooke vp the Arke of the couenaunt, in their remouing of theyr tentes, sang this song: Let God arise and destroy his enemies. Neither did they set it downe without some godlye song, as it is wrytten in the booke of Numb. Furthermore, in the Tabernacle & in the Temple which was built by Salomō, the Leuites at houres appointed wer present & sang holy himnes before y e Lorde in the hearing of the people, & whē they gaue thanks vnto God, they most swetelye celebrated certayne notable benefites which he had bestowed on his people, and they adioyned prayers and added sentences to the information of the manners and lyfe of godly men. Householders also, when they sat down in their houses, or rose from a feast, did sing certain himnes, whē they kept solemne daies among their household, according to the cōmaundement of God: & so in geuyng thankes to God, they deliuered ouer in maner by hand, his notable woorkes to their posterity. Which laudable custome our Lord Iesus Christ semeth to haue followed, when after the Paschal supper, in the night wherin he was betrayed, he went out together with his Disciples into the mount Oliuet, when thei had said an himne. An example of Helizeus. And of what force holye musicke is to pacifye the affectes of the mynde, Helizeus testifieth, who being in minde somewhat moued agaynste the king of Israel, cōmaunded one that plaied on an instrument to be brought vnto him. Dauid also in playing before Saul, brideled the violence of the euyll spirite wherewith Saul was oppressed.
But why Musicke seemeth so to rapte men in a maner wholye, the reason is plaine. Musike doth in a maner rauishe y e whole man. For there are certain pleasures, which onely fyl the outward senses, and there are others also, which pertain onely to the minde or reason. But musick is a delectation so put in the myddest, that both by the sweetenes of the soundes it moueth the senses, and by the artificialnes of the number, and proportions, it delighteth reason it selfe. Pithagoras. And that happeneth then chiefly, when such wordes are added vnto it, whose sense is both excellent & learned. Pythagoras opinion was, that they which studied his doctrine, should be brought on sleepe with a Harpe, and by the accordes thereof also wakened, wherby they might quietly enioy the time both of sleeping and waking. Cicero. And it is a common saying (as Cicero affirmeth) that rockes and wildernesses do geue a sound, and cruel beasts by singing are asswaged and made to stand stil. I wyll not speake, howe the Poetes fable, that when the walles of Thebes the Citye were built, the stones of their owne motion came together with the sound of the Harpe. And no man is ignoraunt, what the same Poetes haue written of Arion and Orpheus. And who knoweth not how much Dauid here & ther in his Psalmes praiseth both Musick & songes. Tertulian. And among Christian men Tertulian in his Apology teacheth that the faithfull did very often make suppers, wherin after they had moderatly and honestly refreshed the body, they recreated themselues with godly songes. And in an other place, when he commendeth Matrimony, that is of one and the selfe same religion, he sayth: that Christian couples doo mutually prouoke them selues tosing prayses vnto God.
Whether singinge may be receaued in the Church. The east churche. Plini.But now that we haue sene the nature, beginning and vse of songes and musicke: ther resteth to inquire, whither it may be vsed in Churches. In the East part the holy assemblies, euen from the beginning, vsed singing, which we maye easily vnderstand by a testimony of Plini in a certain Epistle to Traian the Emperor: where he writeth that Christians vsed to syng hymnes before daye vnto their Christ. And this is not to be left out, that these words wer written in that time that Iohn the Euangelist lyued, for he was a liue vnto the time of Traian. Wherfore if a man shal say, that in the time of the Apostles there was syngyng [Page 103] in holy assemblies. He shal not stray from the truth. Paule, who was before these times, vnto the Ephesians saith: Be not filled wyth wyne, wherein is wantonnes, but be ye filled with the spirit, speaking to your selues in Psalmes, Himnes and spiritual songes, singing in your hart, geuing thankes alwaies vnto God, for all thinges, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ. To wyne the Apostle setteth the spirite as contrarye: and forbiddeth the pleasure of the senses, when in steede of wyne he wil haue Christians filled with the spirite. For in wine (as he saith) is wantonnes: but in the spirite is both a true and a perfect ioy. Drounckerdes speake more than inough, but yet foolish and vayne thinges: Speake ye (saith he) but yet spirituall thinges, and that not onely in voyce, but also in hart: for the voyce soundeth in vaine, where the minde is not affected. They which be filled with wine, do speake foolish, filthy, and blasphemous thinges: but geue ye thankes to God, alwaies (I say) and for all thinges.
To this ende vndoubtedly ought Ecclesiastical songes to tend vnto. To the Colossians also are written certaine thinges not disagreing from these. Let the woord of the Lord (sayth the Apostle) abound plentifully in you: teache and admonish ye one another in Psalmes, Hymnes, and spirituall songes, singing in your hartes with grace. By these woordes Paule expresseth two thinges. Fyrst, that our songes be the woord of God, which must abound plentifully in vs, and they must not serue onely to geuing of thankes, but also to teache and to admonish. And then it is added, with grace, which is thus to vnderstand, as though he should haue said, aptly and properly both to the senses, and to measure, and also vnto the voyces. Let them not syng rude and rusticall thinges, neither let it be immoderatly, as doo the Tauernhunters. To the Corrinthians the firste Epistle the .xiiii. chapter where he entreateth of an holy assemblye, the same Apostle writeth after this maner: When ye assemble together, according as euerye one of you hath a Psalme, or hath doctrine, or hath a toung, or hath reuelacion, or hath interpretation, let al thinges be done vnto edifieng. By which woordes is declared that Syngers of songes and Psalmes had their place in the Church. The west Church. Augustine.
But the west Churches more lately receaued the maner of singing: for Augustine, in his .ix. booke of Confessions testifieth that it happened in the tyme of Ambrose. For when that holy man together with the people watched euen in the Church, least he should haue bene betrayed vnto the Arrians, he brought in singing to auoyde tediousnes, and to driue away the time.
But as touching the measure and nature of the song which ought to be retained in Musicke in the Church, these thinges are woorthy to be noted. What maner of measure the ecclesiastical song ought to be. Augustine. Augustine in the same bookes of Confession, both confesseth, and also is sory, that hee had sometimes fallen, bicause he had geuen more attentiue heede vnto the measures and cordes of musicke, than to the woordes whiche were vnder them spoken. Which thing hereby he proueth to be synne, bicause measures and singing were brought in for the wordes sake, and not wordes for Musicke. The manner of the churche of Alexandria. And he so repented him of his fault, that he execeedingly allowed the manner of the Church of Alexandria vsed vnder Athanasius, for hee commaunded the Reader, that when he sang, he should but lytle alter his voyce, so that he shoulde bee lyke rather vnto one that readeth, than vnto one that syngeth. Howbeit on the contrary, when he considered, how at the beginning of his conuersion he was inwardly moued with these songes, namely in suche sorte, that for the zeale of pietye he burst forth into teares, for this cause I say, he consented that Musicke should be retained in the Churche, but yet in suche maner, that hee saide he was readye to chaunge his sentence, if a better reason could be assigned. And he addeth y t those do synne deadly, as they wer wont to speake, which geue greater hede vnto musicke, than vnto the woordes of God: Ierome. Gregory. To which sentence vndoubtedlye Ierome assenteth, as he hath noted vpon the Epistle to the Ephesians. Gregory also of Rome, in the Synode of Rome was of the same opinion. And both their wordes [Page] are wrytten in the Decrees, Dist. 92. in the chap. Cantantes, and in the chapter, In sancta Romana. In which place are read in the glose two verses, not in dede so eloquent, but yet godly.
That is: Not the voice, but the desire: not the plesantnes of musick, but the voyce Not crying, but louing, syngeth in the eare of God.
And in the wordes of Gregory, this is not slightlye to be passed ouer, in that hee saith: Whilest the swetenes of the voyce is sought for, the life is neglected: and when wicked maners prouoke God, the people is rauished by the pleasauntnesse of the voyce.
The abuses of Ecclesiasticall Musicke.But now let vs declare the cautions which are to bee obserued, to the ende we maye lawfully and fruitfully vse singing in the Church. The first is: That 1 in Musicke be not put the whole summe & effect of godlines, and of the worshipping of God. For among the Papists they do almost euery where thinke y t they haue in the churches fully worshipped God, whē they haue long & much soong 2 and bleated. Farther, we must take hede that in it be not put merite or remissiō of synnes. For there are very many Priestes and Monkes, which for this cause do thinke they haue very wel deserued of God, bicause they haue soong very many Psalmes. Yea and the Pope also, Cardinals, Bishops & Abbots, when they haue heard songes of Masses and Euensonges, do oftentimes pronounce vnto 3 the people indulgences of synnes. This vice also is to be taken away, that singing be not so much occupied in the Churche, that there bee no time in a maner left for to preach the woord of God and holy doctrine, as they doo almost euerye wher. For they so chaunt all thinges with synging and piping, that there is no part of the time reserued for preaching. Wherby it cōmeth to passe, that the people depart out of the Church ful of Musick and harmony, but yet hungerstoruen 4 and fasting as touching heauenly doctrine. Moreouer, so riche & large stipendes are appointed for Musicians, that either very litle, or in a maner nothing is prouided for the Ministers which labor in the woord of God. Neither may that broken 5 & quauering Musicke be lawfully retayned, wherewith the standers by are so letted, that they cannot vnderstand the wordes, no though they woulde. We 6 must also take heede, that in the Church nothing be soong without choyse, but onely those thinges which are contained in the holy scriptures, or which are by iust reasons gathered out of them, and do exactly agree with the woord of God. For if there should be a wyndow opened vnto the inuentions of men, it wer to be feared, least Ecclesiastical Musicke should at the last be chaunged into trifles and fables. Yea, we already see, that there are brought into the assemblye verye many foolish Sequences (as they call them) and fayned Hymnes, and manye other thinges also which doo styrre vp vnto the hearers rather a laughter and a wearynes, Hymnes of Ambrose. than a true fayth. Neither doo I speake these thinges as thoughe I would disprayse the Hymnes of Ambrose, and other whiche are of that kynde, forasmuch as by them I iudge that the faythful maye be both instructed, and also admonished. The Symbole of Athanasius. The Psalmes of Augustine. The Psalmes of Chrisostome. The Symbole of Athanasius seemeth also to bee allowed, and the Psalmes of Augustine against the Donatistes: and also the Psalmes of Chrisostome (of which the Ecclesiasticall history of Eusebius maketh mention in the .7. booke) if they were remayning. For whatsoeuer thinges were written in them, we must beleue that they agree with the holy scriptures, and that they doo aduaunce the edification of the faithfull in the Churche. The Psalmes of Valentine. But contrarywyse the Psalmes of Valentine (of which Tertulian maketh mencion) ar aboue al things to be condemned. Psalmes in the honour of Samosatenus. And with them the most corrupt Psalmes whych were soong in the Temple in the honour of Paulus Samosatenus, as the history of Sozomenus declareth.
But now to conclude the matter, I affirme that godly & religious songes maye be retained in the Churche: and yet I confesse that there is no precept geuen in the new Testament of that thing. Wherfore if ther be any Church, Ther is no precepte geuen for the hauing of Musicke in the Churche. which vpon iust causes vseth it not, the same Church cannot iustly be condemned, so that it defend not that the thing it selfe of his own nature, or by the cōmaundement of God is vnlawful, and that it do not for the same cause reproue other Churches, which vse singing & Musicke, or els exclude them from the fellowship of Christ. For the Church of Alexandria (as it is before said) vsed either very litle singing, or els almost none at al. For they saw the infirmity of the people to be so great, that they gaue more heede to the harmony, than they did to the wordes. Wherefore if in these daies we shal perceaue, that the Christian people do runne vnto the Churches as to a stage play, where they may be delighted with piping & singing, in this case we must rather abstaine from a thing not necessarye, than to suffer their pleasures to be cockered with the destruction of their soules. But now I thinke it good to returne vnto the history.
Then sang Deborah and Barak. Who made this song. It seemeth that Deborah alone made thys ditty: for the spirite of prophecy had persed her, and not Barak. Howbeit hee is ioyned with her, bicause euen as in the battayle he was the Captaine, so also among the singers, and those which gaue thankes vnto God, he was the chiefe.
In that day. We may thus enterprise, that in the selfe same day of victorye, this song of victory was both made and also song: which lyketh me verye well, that we might hereby learne straightwaye to geue thankes for the benefites receaued. For to deferre it, as some do, It is vicious to defer thanks geuing. it can scarcely be defended from the vyce of ingratitude. Neither can the maner of certaine men be commended, which to obtayne anye thing at Gods handes cease not wyth moste importunate vowes to pray vnto him, but when they haue obtayned their request, they scarce returne vnto God, to geue him thankes sometymes at the last.
The Ethnikes (as we gather by good authors writers of histories) when they had gotten the victory, did strayghtway syng hymnes in praises of their Gods: Cōquerers did straightwaye syng Hymnes vnto their gods & if they with so great a study gratified their false Gods, howe muche more ought we for the benefites which we haue receaued, without any tarying to offer thankes vnto the true and liuely God, whom we woorship.
Prayse ye the Lord for the auenging of Israel. Bicause thys Hebrue woorde Perag is doubtful, therfore the sense therof may be taken diuers waies. Fyrst, it signifieth to make naked & to spoyle, as it is put in Exodus, when Aaron tooke golden ornamentes of the Israelites, to make the molten Calfe. For he was reproued of Moyses, bicause he had with ignominy made naked the people. Wherfore according to this signification the sense of the dittye is: Geue thankes vnto God, which first made you naked both of strength and of his ayde, when we wer geuen ouer vnto the Chananites. Furthermore, geue hym thankes, bicause he hath afterward made you prompt both to take in hand warre, and also to recouer your liberty. Eche of these actions of God is to bee praysed, To the elect [...] is profitable both to be [...] c [...]st down, & [...] be deliue [...] We must [...] thankes o [...] God for pro [...] rity & aduersit [...] for they turned to good to his people. For the deiection calleth them backe to repentaunce, and the deliuery deliuereth them from a grieuous yoke. Let god therefore be praysed, which both leadeth to hel, and bringeth from hel. Neither must we geue hym thankes onely for prosperous thinges, but also for aduersity. Also thys woorde Perag signifieth to reuenge: and by this meanes forasmuch as reuengemēt may be referred to two thinges, the sense of it also may be taken twoo wayes.
The first is: That god in oppressing the Israelites, and deliuering them to the Chananites, reuenged the iniury that was done vnto himselfe, wherein they dyd grieuously offende hym, when they fel to impietye and Idolatrye. Neyther doth thys latter sentence vary any thyng from the fyrst. Forasmuch as by thys way also Deborah commaundeth to geue thankes vnto god for the former afflictions. For to the godly aduersitye also turneth to good.
For the Saintes when they haue fallen, are wont by scourges wherewith they are punished to be called backe againe to repentaunce, which repentaunce God poureth in them by diuers and many vexations. The third sense is, which is euery where, and almost receaued of al men: That they should geue thankes vnto God, which at the last had reuenged the iniuries of the Israelites. For they were before long time, & that grieuously oppressed by the Chananites. And then by the spirite of God they were made willing and prompt, which before were such abiectes and cowardes. Two thinges therfore are expressed, namely, that God confounded the Chananites, in reuenging the euyls whyche they had done vnto the Iewes, and also that he strengthened them in the battaile. If God reuenged them, We do not ask those things of God whiche ar in our own power. they by them selues coulde not reuenge themselues. If he made them willing, they themselues were not such. Wherfore free wyl is put down, and the goodnes of god commended. For euen as we doo not aske of god those thinges which we haue in our own hands and power: so for these things when they happen vnto vs, we geue him no thankes.
3 Heare ye Kinges, hearken ye Princes: I, euen I wyll syng vnto the Lord, I wyl syng prayse vnto the Lord God of Israel.
Why she calleth Kynges in special, there maye be manye reasons alledged. The first is, bicause all the Iewes were called in a manner Kynges. For God made that nation both a kingdome and a priesthoode vnto himselfe. They were all therefore so called, euen as we of Christ are called Christians, or anoynted, of our onely head Christ, whych was chiefly annoynted wyth the oyle of righteousnes and grace.
An admonitiō to MagistratsFarther, he maketh an Apostrophe to kinges, bycause that shee song these wordes not onelye for her time, but also hauing a regarde to the tyme to come: wherefore by her, all Princes and Magistrates are in especiall admonished, bycause they being puffed vp with pride and ryches, both thinke and also affirme that the people should looke for safety at their handes. But now they ar taught by the woord of God, that it is he which defendeth and keepeth, although sometimes therunto he vseth the helpe of them that are preserued. Lastly, Deborah speaketh to straunge kynges, whiche had determined wyth them selues to destroye the Israelites, and exhorteth them diligently to weigh wyth themselues the thinges which God hath done, and to marke howe hee knoweth to auenge hys people in due tyme.
I, euen I (sayth she) wyll syng. The repeating of the pronowne of the first person, is not onely vsed of Poetes, but also of Orators: nether doth it onely adorn the oration, Virgil. Cicero. but also moue the affections, and stirreth vp men vnto admiration. Virgil saith: I, euen I am present which did it, turne your weapon against me. Cicero also saith: Ah I miserable man the goodes, the goodes I saye of Gnaius Pompeius, were most cruelly by the voyce of the cryer. &c. This nowe is, as if Deborah should haue sayde: I althoughe a woman, yet a Prophet. I although a woman, yet a sauiour of Israel wyl syng vnto my God.
They vse to put a certayne difference betwene these two latin wordes canere that is, to syng, and psallere which is also to syng: but bycause that difference is not alwaies obserued, yea, one is taken oftentymes for an other, therfore I willingly ouerpasse it.
4 Lord, when thou wentest out of Seir, whē thou departedst out of the fielde of Edom, the earth trembled, the cloudes also dropped water.
5 The mountaynes melted before the Lord, as did that Sinai before the Lord God of Israel.
In the ditties and periodes of songs and of the prophets this is a common vse, that the latter part differeth not from the fyrst, as touching sence, Why in the periodes of the holy scriptures one sentence is repeated. but cōtayneth the same thing, the wordes being somewhat chaunged: which thinge also in the Prouerbes of Salomon is easy to marke. And I doubt not that the same is done vpon iust causes. Forasmuch as of the holy ghost nothing is done rashly or vnprofitably. The sentences also which are entreated of in those bookes, are verye graue, and therfore by that tarying in them, our dulnes is holpen. For it quickly passeth ouer the sence of the firste parte: therfore the latter parte being all one with the fyrst, maketh vs to geue more attentiue heede. Farthermore our hardenes is so greate, that to one stroke it vseth not to geue place. Wherefore it is no merueyle if God strike it with a double stroke. And when the wordes are chaunged, the efficacy and wayght of the sentence alredye spoken, is more and more expressed. The want of humayne speache is holpen, whiche want is suche, that at one speaking, the whole signification of a wayghty sentence can not be opened. Wherfore by that repititiō, that which is not expressed by the fyrst words, is expounded by other woordes which serue for the same thing.
God therefore, by whose conducte this victorye was obteyned, is to bee praysed: whych is by very good reason done, forasmuch as his beneuolence towardes Israel is proued to be no strange or new beneuolence. Wherefore Deborah celebrateth him as an old and auncient patrone of the Iewes. From the time (sayth she) wherin the Israelites at thy cōmaundement, walked .38. yeres by diuers writers (as it is written in the .2. of Deutronomy) about mount Seir, and then at the length by thy will departing from thence, they went forward to the land of Chanaan, thou nobly takest in hande theyr cause. For thou goyng with vs in a piller of fyre, and of a cloud, so fearedst the Chananites our enemies, that they wer not able to resist vs, which were otherwise weake and feble. Before when we went aboute the mountayne, they liued in securitye, and stoutlye contemned vs. But when thou leddest vs out of those places, such a feare came vpon them, that euen the earth seemed to tremble, and the heauens and cloudes caste downe great tempestes and showres. And it was so greate as though the mountaines should roule down greate heapes of water, to the inferior valleis. By these alligories Deborah discribeth the feare that was driuen into the Amorites and Chananits. And it is no maruayle (saith she) if at thy sight they wer so troubled, whē as this Sina was not able to abide y e discēding down vpō it, whē in old time thou gauest y e law, for it was altogether shaken, & it wōderfully trembled. Let the prudēt reader mark that there wanteth this particle Caph. Whiche is a note of a similitude, whiche should be here put. This Sinai is written simply: whē as we must vnderstand euē as this Sina in the old time was moued, so they at our cōming were sore afrayd & trembled. To mount Seir or Edom, which is now mentioned, in the .30. chap. of Deutronomy (where almost the same thing is written) is Pharan added, namely a mountayn lying hard by it, and the like thing is red in the Psalme. The Rabbines of the Hebrewes do bring trifles, A farned thyng of the Rabines and say that God did therfore come from Seir when he would geue the law, because he would firste haue geuen the lawe vnto the Edomites: which when they refused, he went vnto mounte Sina to the Hebrewes, which receaued the law, with a willing and glad hart. But these fables are not drawen out of the holy scriptures, but spring out of theyr own inuē tion, which immoderatly cōmend their own nation, as though they by their own iudgement & vpright wil, had deserued to receaue the law of God. But others thinke, that God when he came to Sinai, was sene to haue descended from those mountaynes of the Edomites, as though he should beginne to goe from thence vnto the Israelites. This also is but a weake reason. The fyrste interpretation fitteth best, for as touching the hystory, when God caused the Israelites to passe ouer beyond the mountayne, then were the Chananites sore afearde, especially when Og, and Sihon the kinges were slayne.
6 In the dayes of Sangar the sonne of Anath, in the dayes of Iahel the highe wayes were vnoccupied, and the trauaylers walked thorough bywayes.
7 The townes of Israell were not inhabited, they decayed, vntill I Deborah rose vp, which rose vp a mother in Israell.
Hetherto is God commended as the auncient defendour of the Israelites, but now is set forth this present victory. And is handled by comparison bicause it is declared that God had now graunted farre greater things than before he had geuen, when Deborah was not yet stirred vppe. For Sangar (of whome we before entreated) althoughe he obteined some victorye ouer his enemies, and did somewhat for the safety of the people, yet he did not perfectly set the Hebrewes at liberty. Neither performed Iahel a full deliuery. For in their time y e high ways also were not then safe, and men were compelled, eyther not to go forwarde, or els to trauaile throughe bywayes and vnknowen places. And thinges were come to that poynte, that villages, and townes whiche were not fenced and inclosed with walles, were cleane forsaken. Wherfore marchandise, husbandrye, & iudgementes were hindred, and the Iewes were compelled to kepe themselues in cities well fenced, except they would haue ben made prayes vnto the Chananits. And this misery indured frō the oppressiō of Iabin to the dominion of Deborah.
But it may seme merueilous, why he maketh mention of Sangar & Iahel both together. Some thinke that she iudged Israell after Sangar. But for asmuche as the holye scriptures write not so, I dare not affirm it. I thincke rather that shee was named with Sangar for honours sake: as though she should haue sayde: Althoughe GOD hath by her nowe killed euen Sisera, and that hytherto GOD hath loued her, yet as longe as shee hath liued vnto this presente daye, the calamity of Israell hath endured, neither was it taken away. This Hebrew worde Perzon in the singular number signifieth, villages, and townes without walles and fenses: and therefore it is construed with a verbe of the plurall number, namely Chadelu. Virgill. Farther we must note that this verbe Chadelu is twise repeated, for it is put both in the beginninge and in the ende of the sentence, as in that verse of Virgil: He demaunded many things of Priam, & many things of Hector.
She sayth that she rose vp as a mother in Israel, bicause she was stirred vp not to raigne as a tirant. Certayn do somtimes fight for theyr country, and do seme as though they would set it at liberty, Cesar. but afterward the same men doe oppresse it no lesse than enemies. Cesar semed to haue deliuered the frenchemen and the Germaines from the yoke of the Romaines, [...]arius Silla. but he vtterlye oppressed the publike wealth, that is, the liberty of the people. The same thing went Marius and Silla aboute.
What is the property of a lawfull prince.And here is touched the duty of a lawful and good prince. And that is to haue a fatherly minde toward his people. Wherfore Senatours were called fathers, and they wer named Patres conscripti. That is, appoynted fathers, whose familyes also wer called Patritiae. And assuredly in the old time it was counted an excellent and a most noble title to be called a father of his countrey, for Tulli estemed it to be so honorable vnto him, that he sayd: The city of Rome called Cicero the father of the country.
8 When he chosed new Gods, then was ther warre in the gates, if there were a shield or speare sene among .40000. of Iraell.
These wordes are expounded two manner of wayes, and that not vnaptlye. First, it may be sayde, that warre did then strayghtway oppresse the Iewes, and that the enemy also beseged theyr gates and cities, when they declined vnto Idolatry. According to which interpretaciō the election is referred vnto Israel, and [Page 106] this worde Elohim, shalbe the accusatiue case, so that there is a reason shewed of the misery wherewith the Hebrues were afflicted. Vndoubtedly they were therfore brused and made afeard, and also not one of many thousandes which durste take a shield, or shake a speare, bicause they had polluted themselues with idolatry. And Deborah testifieth this to be so true, that she may confirme it euen with an othe. Which this particle (If) which is here put declareth moreouer we maye in this sorte interpreate it: I Deborah after that I was stirred vppe of God, there was warre in the gates, either of the tentes, or els bicause the Hebrew souldiors which before kept themselues within, wer now gone forth of the gates: bycause god hath now chosen new thinges, that is, he hath broughte in a new shewe and forme of thinges longinge vnto the Israelites. Oure menne durst do nothing hetherto, which now burst forth and assayle theyr enemies. It is god therefore, whiche hath chosen newe thinges: And this word Elohim in that sense shalbe the nominatiue case. The things which god hath now wrought, are not vnworthely called new thinges: For it is a rare and an vnaccustomed thinge, that armed souldiours should be vanquished of vnarmed mē. And the Hebrues were so with out weapons, y t not among xl. C. men was foūd so much as one shield or speare.
This Hebrewe word Aim is a particle of one that sweareth, and is very much vsed in the holy scriptures. I haue sworne in mine anger, if they shal enter into my rest. Also: Lorde if I haue done this, or if there be iniquitye in my handes &c. The reason of this kinde of speach is, bycause they which do so sweare, doo begin an execration, and sometimes they performe it not. If, say they, they should adde. I do it, let this or that happen vnto me, let me perysh, let me dye, let me suffer cruell punishment, and such like. But sometimes they fully expresse it.
9 My darte is set on the gouerners of Israell, and on them that ar willing amonge the people, prayse ye the Lorde.
10 Speake ye that ryde on white asses, ye that dwell by Middin, and that walke by the way.
Deborah by an eloquent distribution turneth herself to diuers kinds of men, & exhorteth euery one of them to prayse the Lord. She maketh mention of princes before the other, and sayth that her harte is set on them, namely bicause she feruently desireth them to be thankful vnto God, and to prayse him for the benefite which they haue receaued. She calleth them Hokekei, bicause to them pertained to make both decrees and lawes. Afterwarde she speaketh of all those, whiche of theyr owne will and accord had offred themselues vnto the battayle.
Ye which ride on white trim asses. Almost al interpretours vnderstand this to be spoken of merchantes, which ryde to and fro to fayres and marketes. Asses are vsed in Siria. And indeede asses are very much vsed in Siria: for there the asses be stronge, and mighty and of a good bigge stature, and do go pleasauntly.
VVhiche dwell by Middin, Some vnderstande it thus, that they whiche are iudges shoulde be prouoked to prayse GOD. For (saye they) as shee had before stirred vp marchants and rich men to prayse God, so now she calleth vpon iudges to do the same. For as before marchants were hindred from their trades, also were iudges letted from exercising iudgementes. For they being oppressed of theyr enemies could not minister iustice. But it is better that by this word Middin be expressed some certayne place, which paraduenture was grieuouslier oppressed by the enemies thā other places wer. Or els bicause theyr marchandises wer wont to be much occupied, which being now set at liberty & in safety, the inhabiters of that place are peculiarly stirred vp to prayse God, And lastly this semeth to pertayne to the common people. VVhich walke by the way. Namely on fote. For other, either they did ryde, or wer caried vpon asses, for that they were [Page] rich and noble men. All ye (sayth she) Schichu, that is tel, and shew. But bicause that verbe signifieth also to meditate, we will thus expound it: with a redye and an attentiue minde tell or shew. Or els it is sayd, Ye which walke by the way, to declare a certayne cause why they ought to geue thankes: as though shee should haue sayd: All ye, which I haue mentioned, therfore geue thankes vnto God, bicause nowe ye may walke by the way freely.
11 For the noyse of the archers appaised in the places wher water is drawen, there shall they reherse the righteousnes of the Lorde, hys righteousnes of his townes in Israell, thē did the people of the lord go downe to the gates.
When she had nowe praysed God, because he had restored the common highe wayes free vnto the Hebrewes, she addeth now an other benefite which he had bestowed on them, Water is a verye necessarye thing in Syria namely in that thei might with out feare draw water, which before was in a maner wholy letted them. This thing vndoubtedly, althoughe in other places it seemeth to be of no greate value, yet in Siria where is wonderfull greate scarecety of water, it ought to be counted for an excellent gifte. The welles or fountaynes whiche were without the cities by the streates and highe wayes, could stande the Iewes in no steade, by reason of the Chananites whiche kept away al thinges. For the horsemen which were archers, hidde them selues priuely neare such waters, and assayled those which came forth to draw water there. Many of them they led away captiues, and with theyr noyse and cry, they feared away in a manner all from drawinge of water. Ye haue nowe escaped (sayth Deborah) the horrible and barbarous noises and cries of horsemē, which were archers vsed to crye with an horrible voyce when they assayle theyr enemies, Ieremy in the .4. chap. testifieth. And the whole city (sayth he) fled away at the cry of the horsemen, which they made whilest they bended theyr bowes.
After that is setforth an other singular benefite, namely that y e little townes and villages, which wanted fences, and were not inclosed with walles, and seemed to be desolate and emptye by reason of the enemies whiche besieged them, ar now by the help of God reedefied and restored. Wherfore she concludeth that for this cause also, god must worthely be praised. Lastly is added, y t the people of god might now assemble at the gates of y e cities, Why thei geue iudgements in the gates. frō the which before they were altogether prohibited. The iudgement place in the old time was wonte to be in the gates wher thei executed lawes. But by reason of warres and oppressions it seemeth that iudgements ceased, which thing how great a misery it bringeth to the publike wealth, they do manifestly vnderstand, which are not ignorant that in iudgementes in a manner the whole power of the publike wealth is contayned. But why the Hebrewes executed these thinges in the gates, thys seemeth to me to be the cause, bicause they thought those places most meete to be chosen, vnto which not onely the citizens, but also the rusticall and husband men might easely come. And y e vndoubtedly could not be better done in any other place, then in the very gates of the cityes. Geue thankes therfore vnto God, sayth Deborah, bycause all these thinges by his ayde haue nowe recouered theyr olde forme and order.
12 Arise, arise Deborah, arise, arise, singe a songe. Vp Barak, and leade thy captiuity captyue, thou sonne of Abinoam.
Forasmucch as Deborah studied to inflame all the Israelites to geue thanks vnto god, by an eloquēt figure she now stirreth vp herself, y t therby others might [Page 107] be pricked forward, and endeuour themselues by her example to prayse God. Go to, Go to, Deborah, go to, go to sing a songe. This without doubt, is, the manner of sainctes in their Psalmes and songes that they neuer satisfie themselues in praysing God, they alwayes thinke that they are to colde, and for that cause euery where they vse suche stirringes vp of themselues. Here R. Salomon doteth, A fayned [...] sition of R. [...] lomon. when he writeth, that Deborah did to much boast of her selfe, and therfore when her spirite began to waxe faynte, she endeuored her selfe by such stirryng vp to kindle it agayne. If these thinges are spoken by the spirite, as in very dede they are, there can no sinne be in them without a great faulte. Wherfore let Salomon go whether he will with his fables. Leade thy captiuitie captiue. She exhorteth Barac to triumphe & with a certaine pompe to boast of his captiues. For by that meanes it semed that the honor and name of God should more and more be illustrated, when all men vnderstoode, that the Chananites were now captiues vnto the Hebrues who before thought that they would either vtterly destroy the Hebrues or els take them prisoners. This is the punishement of the iust lawe called the law of the like, that they should iustly suffer those things, which they vniustly went about to do vnto others. Farthermore the Rabbines haue here noted that the songe is peculiarly ascribed vnto Deborah, bycause she was a Prophetesse: but the triumphe was geuen vnto Barac, bycause in the battayle he had fought agaynst his enemies.
13 Then they that remayne haue dominion ouer the myghty of the people: the Lord hath geuen me dominion ouer the string.
Agayne the victory is by a comparison amplified, not as it was before, with the euils and discommodities wherwith the Israelites were oppressed, but the conquerers are very aptly copared with thē which were ouercome. They which were ouercome wer vndoubtedly of great renowme, valeant, expert in warres, & noble, but our men seme to be like remnants, for fewe came vnto the battayle and those fewe were of fewe tribes. Besides that those few whiche came were men despised and of no reputation. For that commonly suche are remnātes, namely to be both small in number, and also vile and abiecte, if it be compared with other, whose remnant they are. Howbeit these remnantes, what maner of men so euer they were, they had the dominion, and were gouerners ouer the noble men.
The Lord hath geuē me dominion. This is added by correction, lest any man should thinke that any thing in this battayle is attributed vnto mans strength. It is the Lord himselfe whiche ouercommeth and hath dominion. Neuerthelesse hath done this by me. That worde Li may be thus vnderstand, as though she should say thorough me: or as God would ouercome by her: or the ioy, approbation and pleasure is noted whiche she conceaued in mynde of thys greate honour of God.
14 Out of Ephraim was there a roote of them agayne Amalek, & after thee Beniamin agaynst thy people, out of Machir came rulers, and of Zebulon they that drawe with the penne of the writer.
15 And the princes of Isaschar were with Deborah and Isaschar: so Barak was sent on his feete in y e valley: in the diuisions of Reuben were great thoughtes of heart.
Vergill and Homere rehearsed the order and number of the ships captaynes & people, which wer helpers vnto those princes whom they praised: so now Deborah rehearseth those of y e people of Israel which came to take in hand this warre.
Deborah was of the tribe of Ephraim. A roote of them, that is a prince of Ephraim. This I thinke pertayneth to Deborah her selfe: for as it semeth, she was of Ephraim and iudged the people vnder the oke of Ephraim as is before sayd, and without doubt this warre was taken in hand by her conduct and admonitions. But this semeth somewhat darke, in that it is sayd that the battayle was appointed agaynst Amalek, but by a figure or figuratiue kinde of speache, we must by Amalek vnderstand the Chananites also. Howbeit I am not ignorant, that by this roote of Ephraim, some vnderstand Iosua, who was both an Ephraite, and also fought agaynst Amalek, as it appeareth in the boke of Exodus: and they suppose that in these thinges which follow, therfore is made mention of y e tribe of Beniamin, to declare & shew forth that Saul whiche should come of the tribe of Beniamin should within a while afterwarde finishe the warre agaynst the Amalekites whiche thyng we read was done in the first booke of Samuel. This exposition, as I do not abiect, so also I do not easely allowe it: bycause I do not thinke that the actes of Iosuah are now rehearsed, neither can I be persuaded that Deborah by the spirite of Prophecy, did Prophecy of those thinges whiche should come to passe in the tyme of Saul. I will omit therfore that interpretation, and returne vnto myne owne. Some of the tribe of Beniamin did at the beginning ioyne themselues vnto Deborah, although (as I iudge) they were very few of them. But out of Machir (which was a noble famely of the tribe of Manasses) came some notable men. Zabulon also was not without some Doctors, Lawyers, & Scribes, whiche were better with a pen than with weapons, and that is signified, in that it is sayd. They whiche drawe with the penne of the writer, that is, whiche were exercised in drawyng the pen. And the tribe of Isaschar is wonderfully commended, for from it came princes, yea euen at the beginning. Furthermore it is added that Isaschar was as Barac. For as Barac was sent vnto mount Thabor, so it semeth y t Isaschar with his footemen was sent into the valley, and there he thē on eche side inuaded the enemies, when the battayle beyng begon the Israelites were in daunger, there the Israelites behaued themselues valiantly. Wherfore iustly are they in thys place excedingly praysed. The complices therfore of this warre are mencioned, namely, Ephraim, Beniamin, a part of Manasses, Isaschar, Zabulon, and Nepthalim. But there is nothing spoken of Iuda, Simeon, Leui, and Gad. Afterward are reprehended Reuben, Dan, Aser, and peraduenture al of the tribe of Manasses, as we shal hereafter see. Wherfore they aboue named which ayded in the battayle, were worthily called remnantes, bycause they were both fewe in number and also of no reputation.
In the litel brookes of Reuben. The tribe of Reuben is reproued bycause it detracted the battaile. They dwelt beyond Iordane in the Pastors, and it semeth, that by reason of theyr shepe and cattell they had no regard vnto the publicque wealth. The places of the Rubenites are not vnworthily called riuers: for they had gotten fertile pastors by the riuer of Iordane. He attributeth vnto thē greatnesse and wisedome, but he accuseth them for this, namely, bycause they had so great a care vnto their owne thinges. Such a thing semeth here to haue come passe, as is that whiche is set forth in the parable of the Gospell, namely, that diuers which were bidden vnto the wedding refused to come, bycause some would go proue a yoke of oxen, some had bought a Town, and other some also had maried a wife. But of the remnantes which were gathered out of the stretes & high wayes, was the wedding fulfilled. So also cōmeth it to passe in our dayes, when kynges, Emperours, Princes, Noble and mighty men of this world do therfore despise the profession of the Gospell, bycause they preferre theyr owne commondities before religion and heauenly thinges.
16 Why abydest thou among the shepefolds, to heare the bleatings [Page 107] of the flockes? in the diuisions of Reuben were greate thoughtes of harte.
17 Gilead abode beyond Iordane: but why doth Dan remayne in shipes? Aser sat on the sea shore, and taried in his decayed places.
Ruben is described both by the arte of a shepheard which he exercised and also by the places of Pastors whiche he inhabited: and therwith all it is shewed that they were great men, and men of a wise vnderstandyng, peraduenture to reprehend their swelling and pride, as though they would not obey the commaundementes and conduct of Deborah being a woman. This is the nature of hyghe mindes, that they thinke that al things that they do, are wel done. But in that it is added, To heare the bleatinges of flockes: it may be vnderstande plainely as though the Rubenites had more minde to the bleating of cattell, than they had to the regarde of the publicque wealth, but some vnderstād Allegorically, saying that the Rubenites sat styll among the shepefoldes by the fertile pastors of Iordane, althoughe they heard they lamentations and complaintes of the flockes of Israel, that is of the people of God, with whiche lamentations and complayntes they earnestly implored theyr ayde.
Gilead abode by the riuer of Iordane, or beyond Iordane. Some thinke that the Galaadites were reprehended together with the Rubenites, bycause they also with their cattell abode by Iordane, and neglected this battayle. Halfe the tribe of Manasses, vnto which the Galaadites pertayned, when y e land of Chanaan was deuided, obtayned the region beyond Iordan together with the Rubenites. They which thus expound it, are encombred with a certain doubt, bycause it is before sayd that Machir came: and he was both the sonne of Manasses, and also possessed the mount Gilead. Therfore if Gilead came as it is before sayd, why is he here reproued as thoughe he came not? Peraduenture they will aunswere, Two sonnes of Manasses. that Manasses had two childrē Machir, & Iair, of which childrē wer two families deriued, of whiche either possessed parte of Gilead. Wherfore it might be, that Machir, of whom before is mencion had, came: but Iair is nowe reproued, whiche together with the Rubenites neglected this battayle. But other, with whom I agree, do thus thinke, that the thinges which are now spoken serue to aggrauate y e crime of the Rubenites as though it should haue ben sayd [...]: Thou Ruben without doubt dwellest by the riuers of Iordane, and there dwelleth Gilead also, who came for all that to the battayle. Therfore all excuse both of dwellyng and place is cut of from the Rubenites. And it semeth that this sentence should be spoken by a certaine interrogation. Did not Gilead also dwell by the riuers of Iordane? Wherfore cease Rubē to excuse that whiche thou hast naughtly cōmitted.
VVhy doth Dan go to the shippes? The situation of the Danites This can not be vnderstand of shyppes lōging to the sea, for as much as the lot of the Danites fell not by the sea side: but we must vnderstand it of the shippes of Iordane. Not as though Dan did altogether dwell by Iordan, but (as they say) this tribe was so feared with the sight of the hostes, y t they fled vnto their shippes, to passe ouer to y e Rubenites. And that, euen as it was filthy and vncomely so also is it nowe iustly & worthily blamed.
Aser sat on the sea shore, and in his decayed places. Aser is also blamed, who semeth to haue excused his absence: first bycause he dwelled far of, y t is, by the sea shore: secondly bicause his Cities and Townes were decayed and vnfensed. And therfore would he tary at home, for feare lest if he had gone, his enemyes should easely haue had occasion to inuade his borders. For, for as much as he possessed places whiche were weake, he thought that if he were absent, his neighbours would easly beriue him of them. I do not doubt, but that it was greuous and troublesome to those tribes so to be reprehended, which yet the holy ghost would haue done: partly that they beyng admonished, might repent: partly y e other and [Page] we also beyng by this example stirred vp, myght not refuse to obey the worde of God yea thoughe it be with daunger: whiche if we shall not performe, as these men are now reproued, so also shall we in the last day of iudgement, not onely be reproued with ignominie and irrecouerable hurte, but also we shalbe damned for euer.
18 But the people of Zebulon haue ieoparde their soules vnto the death, and Nepthalim in the high places of the field.
She praysed the tribe of Zebulon and Nepthalim for theyr desertes bycause they had put forth to reproche their soule, that is their life. For other men counted thē fooles, bycause so few and vnarmed men durst rashly take in hand warre agaynst so many and well appointed souldiers as they thought. Or They put their soule to reproche, bycause they nothing estemed their life, and in a manner counted it as a vile thing, putting themselues forth into most certaine daunger of death, if they should looke vpon mans iudgemēt. Howbeit they are for y e same cause very much to be commended, bycause they preferred both God and also his worde before their owne life. And it is added. In high places of the fielde, or els in high fieldes, bycause those were souldiers led vnto mount Thabor, from whiche place they might easely behold y e whole host of their aduersaries. But although they beholde them, yet were they not so feared, to leaue of their enterprise.
19 The kinges came and fought: then fought the kinges of Chanaan in Thaanach and by the waters of Megiddo: they receaued no gayne of money.
Nowe is described the forme of the battayle or victory. She sayth in the plurall number that kinges came and fought: bycause peraduenture Sisera had very many other rulers ioyned with him, who although they were not there in person, they had for all that their hostes there. Or els by a figuratiue kinde of speach the plural number is put for the singular number, as is this sentence of y e Poet. But we haue gone a great space of the sea. Virgil. Cicero. Cicero also sayth, we haue deceaued the people, we semed to haue bene orators. Thaanah, and Megiddo, semed to haue ben riuers in the tribe of Manasses whiche had by them two Cities of the same names, not farre from mount Thabor. We must thinke therfore that the hoste of Sisera possessed all the playne grounde whiche laye betwene these two Townes. Cicero. And those repeticions, for one verbe serue to adorne y e sentēce or song. Nilchamiu Are Nilchamiu, that is they fought then, they fought as Cicero also sayth: No man looketh vpon the matter, no man considereth the reason, &c. so y t betwene two wordes repeted he putteth this one worde (no man) This word also Melachim that in kinges is repeted. Cicero. For it is sayd that the kynges came, and that they fought as Cicero also sayth, This O fathers appoynted is found to be your acte, and not myne, and vndoubtedly it is a most noble acte: but not myne (as I haue sayd) but yours.
They receaued no gayne of money. This may we thus vnderstand, they came to enriche thēselues with the spoyles of their enemies: but that came not to passe according to their expectation. But others interprete these wordes more subtelly, saying, that the enemies so deadly hated the Israelites, that they had no regard to the gayne of the praye, but they would fight vnder Sisera agaynst the Israelites euen without wages, that is, as it is sayd, without meate and drynke & harnesse. Some referre it to this, that they thinke those enemyes of the people of God were such bloudsuckers, that if in the battayle they had gotten any of the Hebrues, they would take no raunsome of them, but strayght way sley them, being such as desired not the pray, but onely thursted for theyr bloud.
20 They fought from heauē, the starres from theyr courses fought agaynst Sisera.
She maketh mencion of the helpe that came from heauen & from the starres, by the will and gouernment of God. But how that came to passe, is not expressed. But it might be, that fire was sent among the enemyes, or that hailestones thundring and lightninges (as Iosephus affirmeth) afflicted the Chananites. Peraduenture also the winde so stirred vp the dust in the face of the Chananites: (as Leui writeth happened vnto y e Romanes in the battayle of Cannensis) that they could vtterly see nothing at all. Liuius.
The starres from their courses fought. That is from their degrees and stations, least any man should thinke that they descended from heauen, or departed from their course.
21 The riuer Kison swepte them away, the riuer of auncientes, the riuer Kison, O my soule thou hast marched valiauntly.
To the helpe of the heauen and of the starres, the riuer fauorably ioyned it selfe: for it swelled, when as otherwyse it was wont to be but small. Wherfore it was so encreased, that it both choked and swept away many of the enemyes. But this worde Goth signifieth not by any meanes to sweepe, but as it happeneth when a house is sweapte or made cleane with broomes, for then what soeuer is vncleane, it is together with the dust cast forth. So in this destruction, they whiche were counted noble, were in the same sorte sweapte awaye, as if they had bene dust and filthe. This word Riuer is often repeated in this verse, whiche vndoubtedly is pleasaunt, when it is in due place done: whiche I therfore speake, least any should thinke these repetitions to be to no purpose. Yea and Cicero also writeth in solute oration: Cicero. When I shall come agayne into fauor with Appius Claudius, and shall come agayne by Cu. Pompeius: I therfore when I shall come agayne, &c. And this Kyson is called Kedumim as thoughe it had two names, and were called by both the names, or els bycause there peraduenture was some other riuer so called, which riuer bicause it ran into Kyson, gaue it also his name. But some translate that word of Ancientnesse, namely of Counsels: bycause God hymselfe had before the foundacions of the worlde were layd, created and appoynted that riuer to this purpose, to be an ayde vnto hym in this victory in tyme to come. It chaunsed not so, that the whole host of Sisera was drowned in that riuer. For how could that be, when there was an incredible number of souldiers, and the riuer of so narrowe a bredth? But as it is to be thought, y e chiefrulers & captaynes which entred into y e water w t their horses & chariots, wer drowned: which thing whē the other souldiers saw, their courage was both dawnted, & also they turned themselues to flight. And we see this to come to passe oftentimes in cāpes, y t those thinges whiche of their owne nature seme to be of no great value, do much profit either this party or y e part in y e victory. This acte without doubt hath some affinity, with y e drowning of Pharao, but y t the sea is not so well cōpared with a litle riuer: neyther did a part of Pharaos host perish in the Sea, but the whole host was ouerwhelmed in it. But all these men (as we haue sayd) wer not drowned in Kison. Farther the rashnes of the Egiptians semed greater then these mens, when as it is much more foolishe to enterprise to passe ouer the sea, then to wade ouer a riuer.
22 Then were the houfes of the horses broken with the oft beating together of the mighty men.
Here is set forth the third calamitye, namely y t theyr horses hoofes were broken. [Page] By nature in dede the horse houfes are myghty and strong, neither are they easely clouen, but the spurryng of them forwarde to ruine was so great in thys conflict, that they were worne awaye. This worde Sos, that is a horse, is spoken in the singular number. And that number is also vsed of our men both Poetes and Orators, in steade of the plurall number. For we saye that Fraunce hath ouercome Spaine, Virgil. and Virgill sayeth: The stoute Romane was no lesse valiant then his fathers. When the houses of the horses were broken and torne, the horsemen could neither inuade the Hebrues, neither yet were they able to saue themselues by flieng away. The Hebrues bycause they wante a superlatiue degree, therefore to expresse it, they double both nownes and verbes: as it is here sayd Miūharoth Deharoth that is of great and very often leapynges. Wherfore the repetition of one selfe same worde serueth not onely for the adornyng of the sentence but also to expresse the vehemency of the signification. There are therfore thre, discōmodities now rehearsed, which came vnto the Chananites, namely one from heauen, an other from the riuer, and the thirde of the houfes of the horses beyng broken.
23 Curse ye Meroz (sayd the aungell of the Lord) in cursing, curse the inhabiters thereof, bycause they came not to helpe the Lorde, to helpe the Lord agaynst the myghty.
She curseth the Citie of Meroz whiche was great and nyghe vnto the place where the battayle was fought, bycause they would not ayde them whiche labored, beyng also desired of them thereunto. Deborah curseth not the Cities and tribes which dwelt farre of, bycause they, although they had no true excuses, yet had they some, suche as they were. But these men whiche dwelt nere at hande, saw y e thing it selfe, and were called: & for as much as they would not heare, they iustly and worthily fell, vnder these sharpe and sore curses.
Said the aungell of the Lord. This she therefore putteth in, least she should seme to speake of anger, as though she should haue sayd: Euen God himself hath commaunded me thus to sing. Other vnderstand by the aungell, Barac, and that peraduēture not ill: for it might be, y t he went to y e Citie to stir it vp to fight, who when he sawe the citizens to be so wilful & obstinate, by the impulsion of the spirite of God, he in this maner cursed it. As touching y e composition, she maketh y e cōclusiō with y e helpe of Lord, & beginneth y e next clause w t the self same wordes, as doth Virgill: Virgil. O ye Periedes do ye these noble thynges to Gallus, to Gallus I say, whose loue doth dayly so much increase towardes me.
What is to be iudged of cursinges & bannynges.We haue at large before handled the place of cursinges, wherfore now I wyll not speake much of it. The Summe is: That it is not lawfull for a man, to curse any mā, for the satisfieng of his owne anger. For when our own matters are in hand, we must loue our enemies: & we must blesse thē which curse vs. But when God doth somtimes certainely make manifest, that he will haue some destroyed, they whiche are so admonished of his wil, can not but allow it, for by the spirite wherw t they are inspired, they wil also the same thing y e God wil. And after this maner Dauid & other Prophetes burst forth oftētymes into cursinges of the enemies of God, whiche selfe same men for all that, as they were men, by naturall compassion whiche is not vicious, were not a litle sory for the destruction of the enemies of God. So Samuel, Dauid, Ieremy, yea & our sauiour himself, wept & lamēted y e fall of vngodly mē. Neither is it to be doubted, but y e dutyes of this kind were very acceptable to God, for as much is they procede from charity. Howbeit when we see some men cruelly to rage agaynste the godly men and Gospell of God, it is lawfull in that case to praye, that either theyr will may be chaunged, or theyr strength confounded, that they shoulde not accomplyshe all the things which they appoint to do. Which things if they can not be obtained, this is at the least to be prayd for, y e God will geue vs strength & myght to suffer all such things which may aduāce his honor & glory. And we must diligētly weigh, [Page 110] that this curse was therfore stirred vp agaynst the citie Meroz, bycause they denyed to helpe y e people of god. What thē is prepared for those, which do not onely not helpe the seruauntes of Christe, but persecute, grieue, and cruelly vexe them? Farther we must marke, that it is sayd: these came not to helpe the Lord, as though God neded theyr ayde: and that coulde not be as touchyng hym selfe: howbeit God in hys people wanteth helpe, and in the members of Christ when they are vexed, Christ himselfe is vexed. Wherfore he will say in the last day of iudgement: I was hungry, and ye fed me, Math. 25. I was thirsty and ye gaue me drinke &c. Wherfore let vs hereby learne to obey whē God calleth vs as did the Israelites whiche are commended of Deborah, neither neglected they to take in hande the battayle. Let vs learne also to helpe those that are in nede, especially when they followe theyr vocation.
24 Iahell the wife of Heber the Kenite shalbe blessed aboue other women, aboue women shall she be blessed in tentes.
When she had cursed the wicked Citie, by a contrary phrase she addeth a good prayer: as the City Meroz was worthy to be cursed, so of the contrary was Iahel to be commended. Christ in the last daye of Iudgement wyll not onely saye: Come ye blessed of my Father: but on the contrary parte, he wyll adde: Go ye cursed. Here is in hys place a parte of the saluation of the aungell Mary, as it is described in Luke: Blessed art thou aboue women. Whiche clause is here twise put for the greater mouing. But in that in this repetitiō it is added, In tentes, it may be thus interpreted, For this cause let this woman be praysed, bycause she dwelleth in tentes. So that by a wonderfull, compendiousnesse of one worde, the slaying of Sisera is noted, which happened not in the campes, but was done in y e tente. Or els we may say that Iahell is to be praysed aboue other womē dwellyng in tentes. For the family of the Kenites dwelled not in houses but in tentes. Wherefore she is praysed aboue all the women Kenites, which are signified by this worde tentes.
25 He asked water, and she gaue him milke, she offred him butter in a cup of the mighty.
Iahel is here praysed for her prudence and strength: For what vertues Iahell is praysed. but the mother of these vertues is fayth. It was prudence to call the enemy vnto her, handsomely to couer hym, and to geue him milke to drynke. Also to finde out a hammer and a nayle, and to chose out his hed among the rest of the members whiche she would strike, and among the partes of the hed to smite thorough the temples. Her might and strength is hereby knowen, bycause a woman durst enterprise suche a notable acte, and feared not to assayle such and so greate a Captayne, but had a full confidence that she, notwithstandyng that she was a woman, should be able to kyll hym. Peraduenture thou wilt saye, the Scripture maketh no mencion here of fayth. I graunte that it doth not by expresse wordes: but when it is sayd she shalbe blessed or praysed, her fayth is noted. For we be al by nature the children of wrath, neither are any blessed with faythfull Abraham, but by fayth, as the Epistle to the Galathians testifieth.
He asked water, and she gaue him milke. That he might the easelyer and soner fall on sleepe. Why menciō is made of butter, this (as some say) is the cause, bycause out of that milke the butter was not yet cherned. And in dede of that kind of milke a mā may drinke a great draught, for as much as beside the quenchyng of thirst it hath also a certaine swetenesse.
She vsed the cup of noble men. Whiche namely was a very great one. For noble mē wer wont to drinke out of large and wide cuppes. Cicero. Cicero also agaynst Anthony sayeth. If so be that it had happened in the Supper tyme among thy greate cuppes, who woulde not count it filthy &c. Yea and they were wonte in [Page] bāquets of noble mē, at y e latter end to bring forth great cuppes. Wherfore this witty woman, to the end she would prouoke him to drinke a very depe drought, vsed a cup apte for the fame. Kimbi. R. D. Kimhi expoundeth these thinges, as thoughe she gaue him not onely drinke, but meate also. For he thinketh that when he had dronke, the woman did set butter before him to eate. Whiche exposition if we receaue, we must then put out this word cup whē as that is vsed for drinke, and not for meate: vnlesse by the maner of a cup we vnderstand such a kynde of vessell wherin meate also is wont to be put.
26 She put her hand to the nayle, and her right hand to the workemās hammer: with the hammer smote she Sisera, she smote of his head, wounded him, and persed his temple.
27 He was bowed down betwene her feete, he fell downe, he slept betwene her feete he bowed hymselfe, and fell: and when he bowed himselfe, there he fell downe, destroyed.
That whiche is translated, She put her hand, in the Hebrew it is put in the plurall number, Taschlechauah, and yet the speache is but of one, namely of Iahel, whiche semeth can not aptly be done. Wherfore some do so expound it, that the two extreme letters of that worde are added by this figure Pleonasmos, so y t the nomber may be reduced to vnitie, that Iahel be sayd to put her hande to the nayle. Other thinke that the plurall nomber, ought not to be referred vnto Iahel, but vnto her strength & might, which extended her handes to these thinges. There are some also whiche to vndoo this heard doubt, say y t the handes should be interpretated moued or put to, in the passiue voyce. For the right hand was put to the hammer, & the left hand vnto the nayle. Lastly, y e order of the wordes whiche semeth to be troublesome, of some is thus construed: Her hande vnto the nayle, A description. namely her left hande: and her right hand to the workemans hammer, put themselues that is, desired or gaue thēselues vnto it. And this is a verye trim descriptiō, wherby this thīg done is manifestly set before our eyes, neither maketh it vs onely in our mindes to see the woman, holdyng in her hand the hammer & the nayle, but also it sheweth vnto vs one certayne part of the body whiche was striken, namely the hed, and in the hed, the very temples, bycause they are easely pearsed. And vndoubtedly that membre was striken of her, which beyng broken or persed, the whole body is vtterly left vnprofitable. Farther, there are here described certain mocions, which are propre vnto such as perish sodenly, & by a violent kynd of death. For whē he was very sore woūded, & by ouermuch payne in a maner astonished, he bowed his body twise or thrise. For he went about to rise, and wanting strength he fell downe agayne, and miserably lay betwene the feete of Iahel. So God throweth down and putteth to shame the arrogant and proude enemies of his people. For what thing can be thought to be more filthy, then for such a great captayne to be spoyled of his host, to lye lurkyng, dronke, and snortyng, and so to be kylled of a woman?
28 The mother of Sisera looked out at a windowe, and cried thorough the lattece: why is his chariot so long a commyng? why staye they the wheeles of his chariots?
29 Her wise and noble Ladyes aunswered her. She also cōforted her selfe.
30 Haue they not founde, & they deuide the spoyles? euery man hath a mayde or two: Sisera hath a pray of diuers coloured garmētes: a praye of sondry colours made of needle worke, of diuers colours of nedle worke on both sides, for the chief of the spoyle.
In the last part of the songe, to the end we might manifestly see, to how great a confusion and ignominy the enemies of God came vnto, and from how great a hope they fell, the person of the mother of Sisera is brought in, and the wordes both of her, and of other noble women which wer together with her, ar setforth. She might haue sayd in few words: The mother wayted, that her sonne should returne with glory and laden with spoyles, whome the wretched woman knew not to haue so myserably perished. But if she shoulde so haue sayde, the oration would haue bene slender and cold. Wherefore to make it of efficacye and vehement, y e talke of the women is put here. Which maner also was very much vsed amonge the Ethnike writers, and it is reade also in Esay the .14. chap. where is expressed the talke of kinges and princes which were deade, A figuratiue speech is not to be accused as a lye. with which they receaued the king of Babilon being miserablye destroyed and discendinge downe vnto them. Neither do the holy writers lye when they fayne such thinges, forasmuch as they write not to deceaue, but to declare y e thing more openly. The motherly affection, & vehement naturall loue of the parentes towards the children is here expressed, whiche for the longe absence of theyr children are very muche carefull, and are many wayes afflicted. It is sayd therefore that the mother of Sisera, whilest he desired to returne, beinge troubled euen herselfe oftentimes, looked out at the windowes or thorow the latesses beyonde the windowes, to see if she could see him returninge. And this she did not without crieng and lamentation, suspecting by this his long tarying that euill had happened vnto him. But the women which stode by had a great deale better hope, for they interpreted y e tarying of Sisera in y e good part. Terence in Adelphis hath notably wel writtē. It is much better, Terence y t those things happē vnto vs which our wiues in our absēce suspect of vs, then those thinges whiche our parentes suspect. For when a man tarieth longe in a place, the wife sayth with her selfe he loueth, or is loued, he is a drinkinge, his minde is pleased, and he is in so good case, that he forgetteth to returne home. But the parentes when theyr sonnes return not in time, by and by they are afraid, least they haue had some fal, lest they be a cold, or haue broken somethinge, and till such time as they returne they are wonderfull carefull. Neither do I rehearse these thinges without a cause, bicause the old translation, writeth y t that most wise princesse of womē which talked together wyth the mother of Sisera, was Siseras wife. Wherfore it is no marueile if she were in better hope then his mother. But bicause heuy thinges are not pleasaunte, and euen by the instincte of nature we fly from them, therefore they which vpon suspicion are heuy do easely receaue comfort. Wherefore it is now written, that the mother of Sisera was so satisfied with the wordes of y e woman whiche comforted her, that she herselfe with the same wordes aunswered her selfe. When shee was pricked w t sorow & heauines. The some of the comfort was, that the victory was altogether on Siseras side, but his returne was differed to distribute the spoile whiche they had taken, and forasmuch as the same distribution oughte iustly to be done, namely to geue vnto euery one according to his estate, laboure, and desert, and for that in so greate an host very many thinges are to be deuided after so noble a victory: it could not therfore be done in a short time.
Thys Hebrew word Racham, signifieth not properly a maid: but yet so must we translate it, bicause that womā being an enemy of the Iewes speaketh with greate contempt of the Hebrew wemen, and nameth them by the secrete parte of the body, namely by the belly and womb. It is spoken by the fygure Sinechdoche but very bitterly. For she signifyeth that they were vnchaste, and appoynted to vnhonest vse. And forasmuch as the more noble rewardes are wont to be geuen vnto princes and the best thinges to the captaine of the whole host, therefore she sayth, to euery man shalbe geuen a mayde or two, that is, the praye of the rascall souldiours shalbe bondmen or bonde women be geuen. But to our Sisera shalbe geuen the most worthiest thinges, garmentes I say of diuers colours and nedle [Page] worke. Plini in his 8. booke the .48. chap writeth that the men in the old time vsed to dye their wolle and garmentes with such sundry and pleasaunt colours, Plinius. bicause they would imitate the most beautifull coloures of floures and herbes. And the same writer attributeth vnto the Babilonians the inuention of diuers coloures in garmentes, and euen as garmentes of siluer which were found out in Asia vnder Attalus the king, were called Attalical, so those garmentes whiche were by the Phrigians wroughte with the nedle, beinge set out with golde and sundry coloures and pictures, wer called Phrigionical. And for that these workmanshippes wer in the old time had in estimation, god would haue the holy tabernacle, and the high priestes garmentes wrought with nedle worke. And this is not to be passed ouer, that by the ciuile lawes it was not lawefull for euerye man to weare such precious garmentes. Wherfore it is sayd now in this song, that garmentes of sundry coloures, and such as were wrought with the nedle ar attributed only to the prince. In the Code de vestibus oloberis, lege, Auratas, It is prohibited vpon great punishmente that any other men shoulde were precious garmēts. Lawes for apparell And it is no doubt, but that in the old time there wer lawes for apparel, which at this day lye vtterly voide. These womē spake as they knew y e maner then vsed, for they were not ignorant of the custome in war, wherby princely garmentes wer not distributed to priuate men, but vnto captaynes and emperors. Discipline of warre amonge the elders. Farthermore we muste consider that the elders vsed greater discipline in their camps, than at this day our men do. For when a town or city was sacked, euery man had not that which he by violence tooke: al thinges wer brought vnto the king or Emperour, and not vndoubtedly that he only should haue them, but that he should part them according to the labor, dignity, and quality of the souldiors, which manifestlye appeareth in the decrees, 23. question the .5. chapter Dixerit aliquis. They are the woordes of Ambrose in his booke of Abraham the Patriarche. And the same thing is most playnly taught, Dist. the .1. chap. Ius militare. This hebrew word Tsoari signifieth properly a necke or neckes in the plurall number, but in this place by translation it signifieth a captayne or prince.
31 So let al thine enemies perish, O Lord: But they that loue thee let them be as the Sunne when he riseth in his strength. And the land had rest .40. yeares.
The thinges which are now mencioned, the holy Ghost doth therfore speake them by Deborah, to expresse with a great emphasis and signification, that those thinges do happen vnto the vngodly which they be afeard of: & the things which they hope happen cleane contrarye. Therefore the songe is nowe concluded with an elegant exclamacion, and consisteth of thinges contrary: So let all thine enemies perish O Lord, as Sisera hath fallen. This her Apostrophe or turning to God stirreth vs vp, that we shuld with a singular affectiō embrace God y e author of so great & notable acts. Deborah also in this speaking, declareth, that she setteth not forth her own cause, for she sayth not, let my enemyes perish, but thine. But they that loue thee, let them continually encrease in al kind of good things, as the sunne increaseth from his rising, vntil it be none wherin he is most strong ether from the spring time to the highest of sommer. She addeth not, Let them that loue him be saued as the Antithesis or cōtrary position required. For these two are contraries, namely to be saued, and to perish. But let them be encreased, saith she, & strengthened, as the sunne increaseth from his rising vnto his strength. By thys conclusion the vse of example is taught vnder the forme of a prayer. Sisera is ouerthrowne, but the people of Israel is encreased with a notable victory: so therfore shall it come to passe and happē vnto vs. We shalbe deliuered if we be godly, & they which do persecute vs for Christs cause, shal perish. Wherfore it is profitable, by exāples to gather out rules of the gouernmēt of God, which rules w t frute let vs apply vnto our own things. This performed Dauid, as touching [Page 112] this selfe same historye, in his psalme, where he sayth do vnto them, as vnto Middian, as vnto Sisera, & Iabin at y e riuer Kyson. Wherfore y e some of this hystory is to set before vs y e seuerity of god toward his enemies, & again his clemē cy towards the godly. And therfore it behoueth y t the seuerity of his iudgements breath in vs a fear, and that by fayth we take hold of his goodnes and clemency.
The syxt Chapter.
ANd the children of Israell did euill in the syghte of the Lorde: and the Lorde deliuered them into the hands of Middian seuen yeres.
2 Wherfore the hand of Middian preuailed against Israel, frō the face of Middiā the children of Israel made them dennes in the mountaines, and caues, and stronge holdes.
3 For when Israell had sowen, Middian came vp, and Amaleke, and the sonnes of Kedem came vp agaynst them.
4 And camped against them, and destroyed the fruite of the earth, euen till thou come to Haza: neyther lefte they anye foode in Israell, neither cattell, nor oxen, nor asses.
5 For they went vp and theyr cattell and came with theyr tents as greshoppers in multitude: so that they and theyr camels wer without number, they came I say into the land to destroy it.
Deborah and Barac were deade: by the authority of whiche princes the people of the Hebrewes were kepte in their dutye and religion. But after theyr death, they fell agayne vnto sinnes, and especially vnto idolatry. But yet they are not counted to haue turned so heynously from God, as they did before: for it is not written: And they added to do euil. Farther their punishment was not so long, for they serued the Madianites onely seuen yeares. Moreouer it is not sayde, that God sold them, as he did before, but that he deliuered them. I confesse that these coniectures are but small: but yet not so small, that they shoulde seeme vtterly to be despised. Two thinges are principally entreated of in this hystorye, The principall pointes of thys history. The ordre of thinges to be spoken of. the affliction of the Hebrewes, and theyr deliuery by Gidion. But bicause eche of these partes haue their causes, therfore we must also entreate of them. For euen as affliction springeth of sinne, and deliuery beginneth of repentance: so was it mete, that first it should be declared that the Israelites had sinned, before mention be made that they were deliuered vnto the Madianites, and theyr repentaunce must first be shewed, before their setting at libertye be spokē of, wherfore these things shal in iust order be spoken of, and shalbe noted in theyr places.
First of all it is written, that Israell sinned, to the end we might vnderstande that they were iustly punished. The kind of theyr synne (as we shall afterwarde see) was idolatry. And the punishment which followed was their deliuery vnto the Madianites to be vexed of them. And what these Madianites were, I thinke it good in few wordes to declare. What the Madianites were. Ierome Madian (if we may credite Ierome) was a citye so called of a certaine sonne of Araham whome he begat of his last wife Ketura. It lieth beyond Arabia toward the South, in the desert of the Seracens, not far from the Sea called Erithreum. And these people were called Madianites, and peraduenture by an other name more in vse with the Ethnikes, namely Maudrenites. From thence Moses hadde his wife and of them also came the Kenites, whiche went together with Moses into the land of Chanaan. And lastly from thēce those black men ar thought to haue theyr ofspring, which in our times wander euery wher, and of some are called Egiptians: they dwell in tentes: and beinge very theuishe [Page] men, they liue all alwayes of other mens goods.
But what these Madianites were, it skilleth not much to know, let this contēt vs, in that by the history it is declared, that the people of God wer by them verye grieuously afflicted. And the Israelites to auoyd the miseries made them Caues for so doth this Hebrewe woorde Manaharoth signifie. What differēce is betwene a caue and a den. And dennes. It is in Hebrew written Mearoth. But what difference there is betwen these two words, as muche as I can gather by the Hebrewes, I wyll declare. Those fyrste places were in bankes of hilles, and were so called bicause from the vpper partes, they had certayne chinckes and holes, which were like windowes, so that throughe them they had light sufficient within. And the same places were very handsome for men to dwel in them. R. Leui sayth, that through those holes or clifts, which were like windowes, spies, when they saw the Madianites comminge, did vse either by kindling of fiers, or by some other token, to geue knowledge vnto the Hebrewes, wherby they might gather their stuffe, fruites & cattels into the dennes & leade them away from the enemies which wer comming by. For dennes wer not in mountaynes, but places vnder the earth in the fields being dark & w tout light, wherein men did not dwel, but they mighte after a sorte hide their things and goods. But caues in lattin are called Specus, a speciendo, which is to behold and to looke vpon, bycause out of them as out of highe places they whyche were there, vsed to looke through. They made also fenced places as bulwarckes and castels, which might be openly sene, but that they could not be conquered. And not only the Madianites inuaded the Iewes, Iosephus but with them were the Amalekites and also the children of the east, whome Iosephus calleth Arabians. They suffred the Israelits to be in peace and quiet, so long as they tilled and sowed the earth, but when the fruites were ripe, they inuaded them, and destroyed and wasted their fyeldes. And the Israelites do aptly setforth the nature of sinners, whiche when they put little confidence in god, & haue almost forgottē him, then they fly vnto mans inuentions, helpes and municions: which yet iustlye and worthelye stande them in no steade: for strayght way it is sayd.
6 Wherfore Israell was excedingly impouerished by the Madianites, and the children of Israell cried vnto the Lord.
Of munitions and castels.Neyther caues, nor dennes, nor strong fensed castels could helpe the miserable Israelites. For sinners must not onely take heede of outwarde enemies, but they must chiefly flye from the anger of God, from whiche vndoubtedly no man can auoyd by caues, dennes or municiōs. And as long as that endureth, these humaine helps do not defend frō outward enemies. And if any man wil not beleue this, Ecbatanis. let him call to memorye the breadth of the walles of Ecbatanis, which as it is written in y e boke of Iudith the .1. chapter) was thyrty foote broad, and seuenty foote hygh, and had in it an hundred Towers, and yet all those thinges could not withstand those which besieged it. Babilon And of Babilon also it is written, that the walles of it was an hundred foote in higth, and fighty fote in breadth, and it is sayd to haue bene so large that it might haue bene a prouince rather then a city, and yet it was conquered and vtterlye ouerthrowen. Suche thinges men goe about when they withdraw themselues from God, these their hornes are erected agaynst God. These thinges do leade vnto desperation the afflicted, which thynk not vpon God, as though tirannes by whome they are oppressed could neuer be plucked out of so strong and wel fenced places. But in Abacuk the prophet such madde building are wonderfully laughed to scorne of the spirite of God, and Abdia in the name of God threatneth the children of Esau, that theyr nest should be throwne downe to the ground, howe soeuer it seemed vnto them that they had set it in heauen.
But what more notable example nede we to seeke for, then that tower, whiche men straight after the flood, began to builde, as though they would defend them selues against God, if he againe should go about to destroy the world wyth waters, but the Lord from heauen laughed to scorne their made furiousnes, as it is amply set foorth in the booke of Genesis. God wanteth no excellent politike deuises: for first, from such, which so much trust to munitions, when they thyncke they shall stand them in most steede, he vseth to take awaye the courages of the bold, and al promptnes, & so to strike them with madnes, that he vtterly maketh them voyde of wisedome. Wherfore he debilitateth their harts, & their strength faileth them. Yea, and they seme to be made afeard and verye sore abashed, euen of the very stones, beames and walles of their Castels. I could here easely shew thinges, whyche haue in our age happened, but that I must haue respecte to bee briefe. Reade the .2. chapter of Barucke.
What then? Are not Cities or Castels to be fensed? Whither it be lawful to fence cities & castels. I deny not but that that may be done, but I would haue Princes which do in such sorte builde, first to be a certained of this, that no thinges created can defend or succor men, vnles with them be ioyned that power of God, whereby with his becke hee ruleth and gouerneth the world: and when hee withdraweth that, whatsoeuer men go about or enterprise, it vtterly happeneth contrarily. And euen as out of breade, wyne, or other meates we ought not to looke for nourishment, if God do drawe backe vnto himselfe that his power and operation, which hee daylye lendeth to those things: so also without it, ther is no defence to be had out of munitions, walles, being otherwise neuer so strong, and Castels very well fenced. Wherefore before we begyn munitions, we must put our confidence in God, and we must lay the most profitable foundation of holy prayers: and pray vnto God, to keepe vs chiefly in true and sincere godlynes, to cal vs backe from synnes, and daylye to geue vnto vs a perfect repentance. Lastly, we must desire, that when a iust and holy man shal haue neede to haue the vse of such munitions, hee woulde vouchsafe to bestow vpon them that his most mighty and healthfull power. Which selfe same cogitations and prayers we must vse both in meate, drinke, apparel, or any other thing, when we begin to receaue them.
And the children of Israel cryed. Now shalbe declared the deliuerye of the Israelites, but firste is set foorth their repentance and inuocation. Nowe at the length the Hebrues flie vnto the sure rockes, vnto the safe dennes, and vnto the true Castels. For the rocke or castle best fenced, (as we reade in the Prouerbes) is the name of the Lord. In that rocke Dauid escaped al aduersities.
7 And when the children of Israel cryed vnto the Lorde, bycause of Midian.
8 The Lord sent vnto the children of Israel a Prophet, who sayd vnto them: Thus saith the Lord god of Israel, I haue brought you out of Egipt, I haue brought you (I sai) out of the house of bōdage.
9 And I haue deliuered you out of the handes of the Egiptians, & out of the hand of al that oppressed you, and haue cast them oute before you, and geuen you their land.
The maner whereby the Israelites wer stirred vp to cal vpon God, is in this place set forth. They were turned vnto God by the impulsion of faythe, whyche was stirred vp by the preaching of the woord of God: for he had sent vnto them a man which was a Prophet, not legions of Angels, not a multitude of souldiours, not armour, neither warlike engins. He directed vnto them a Preacher & Minister of the woord of God. And this ought not to seme absurd, if this verbe Vaiischlah be interpretated in the signification of the preterpluperfect tense, for as much as it is a thing very much vsed in the holy scriptures. And yet I denye [Page] not, that this place may be vnderstand an other way: namely that the Israelites in dede cried first, but yet with a certaine violence stirred vp by troubles and miseries, which violence by it self, could not be allowed of God, nether had it obtained any thing at his handes, except it had bene adorned with a true faith & perfect repentaunce: for the bringing to passe wherof, God not forgetting his mercy, sent them a Prophet or Preacher meete thereunto. Howbeit the first sense, which cōsisteth al the preterpluperfectnes, pleaseth me very wel: although I deny not but that both waies may be admitted. Farther, some thinke that these thinges ar to be vnderstand by Synechdoche, so that it is ment that not one prophet, but very many prophetes were sent of God. But I iudge that it is wrytten of some one certaine prophet, which was of great authority among the Hebrues. And I am not ignorant that some thinke this prophet to haue ben an Angel: which I allow not, forasmuch as he is called both a man and a prophet. And I finde in no place of the holy scriptures y e Angls wer called prophets: although on the contrary we rede in them sometimes that a prophet was called an Aungel, Aflictiō [...] make open the waye vnto profitable sermons. as it most manifestly appeareth of Malachi. But let vs marke this rather, that oppressions and aduersities, which often times happen, do geue good occasion of profitable sermons: for as much as the hearers by such vexation ar made much more attentiue. The Hebrues thinke that this Prophet was Phineas, of whom also they saye that it is written in the first booke of Paralip. the .ix. chap. that he liued in the time of Dauid, when as for all that the same place may otherwise bee expounded. But who hee was, it maketh no great matter. We must rather marke the argument of the sermon, whiche is in fewe woordes toutched. First, the benefites of God are rehearsed: their deliuery I say out of Egipt, wherby they were deliuered from seruitude most grieuous: his defence against those which went about to oppresse them: and lastly, the possession of the land of Chanaan. God had now faithfully performed al these thinges, as hee had promysed vnto their fathers. Whereby it manifestly appeareth that the couenaunt made with the fathers, was on his part kept vnuiolated. Let vs note in these wordes, that God at that time was by this title praised, namely bicause he had deliuered his people out of Egipt: for his nature otherwise is most farre remoued from the mindes of men, neither can it any otherway be knowen, but by the effects. But of this thing I haue inough spoken, as much as semed sufficient. Wherefore it is manifest that the Preacher which was sent from God, doth beate into the Hebrues the benefite which they had receaued, namelye both to stirre vp in the Israelites the knowledge of the true God, and also to shewe foorth hys truth endued with constancy.
10 And I sayd vnto you: I the lord your God. Fear not the gods of y e Amorites, in whose lād ye dwel, but ye haue not obeied my voyce.
Now is added what God againe required of the Hebrues, namelye that hee shoulde be their God, and that they shoulde not feare the gods of the Amorites, or not worship them. For in this woorde feare is verye often comprehended all maner of worshipping and religion. For what should they woorship straunge gods, when they were the peculiar people of the true God, by whom they were deliuered from the house of bondage, that is, out of a prison or dungeon moste hard, and afterward in their iourney they were deliuered both from the Amalekites, & also from the Moabites, & from Sihon and Og the kinges? Wherfore forasmuch as they had receaued these benefites of their God, it was neither lawful nor meete that they should worship straunge gods.
Two principal synnes of the Israelites. Ye haue not obeyed my voyce. Two most grieuous crimes of the people are reproued, wherof the latter dependeth of the first. First they beleued not his word, & then they obeyed it not. Vndoubtedly they which beleue not the thyngs that God setteth forth, do not also obey his cōmaundementes. And contrarywise, they which do truly beleue, do willingly and without compulsion obserue [Page 114] his commaundements. Although the wicked actes of the Hebrues were sundry and manifold, yet onely one is reproued, namely Idolatrye, bicause in it almost al the other sinnes are comprehended. For if we commit synne there, wher God is called vpon, and if we sinne in that thing wherein we seeke to be reconciled vnto god, what goodnes can ther be in any other of our actions? If these things be corrupted in vs, which are taken for holy thinges, what maye be iudged of other workes which are counted prophane? Wherefore forasmuche as in these thinges the Hebrues greuously fel, we must vnderstand that they also sinned in all other thinges.
11 And the Angell of the Lorde came, and abode vnder the Oke, which was in Ophra, that pertayned vnto Ioas the Abiezerit: and his sonne Gideon threshed wheat to prepare his flight frō Midian.
When by faith the sinnes of the Israelites were forgeuen, and that they had called vpon God and repented, their deliuery is set forth, wherby they were deliuered from the outward bondage of the Madianites. Which without doubt God would haue done by Gideon the Iudge, for the which cause hee raised hym vp to deliuer y e Iewes. And this brought he not to passe, til such time as things were almost come to vtter desperation: al humane helpes wer taken away, and the Israelites trusted onely to flight. Wherfore Gideon is not called, but when he gathered some wheate to hide, least the Madianites shoulde violentlye take it away. And that is ment by this Hebrue woord Lehanim, that is (if thou turne it woord for woord) to prepare his flight. For he would hide that wheate from the Madianites, were it neuer so litle, that with it he might somewhat sustaine both himselfe and his household. He which appeared vnto him, was in very deede an Angel, as it shall afterwarde by manifest tokens and argumentes bee declared. He came to Ophra, but to that Ophra whych pertayned vnto Ioas the Abiezerit, which is therfore added, bicause there was also an other Ophra in the Tribe of Beniamin, wherof is mencion made in the boke of Iosua. And I doubt not but y t the Angel came vnto Gideon in the shape of a man, for he abode vnder the Oke: Gideon was of y e tribe of Manasses. and (as we shal heare) he spake vnto hym. Ioas the Father of Gideon was of the family of Abiezer, which in the booke of Numb. and in Paralip. is reckoned among those that were of the Tribe of Manasses.
And Gideon at that tyme threashed corne in the wyne presse. Twoo maners of threashing. The Hebrues haue two wordes, Dash, which signifieth to thresh, but yet then when we occupy to threashing beastes. The other woorde is Chabat, which is also to thresh, but yet with flayles and without beastes. Wherfore it is noted that Gideon vsed this latter kinde of threshing, that he might the better hide that which he did: and therfore it was in a wyne presse, where forasmuche as wyne was vsed to be pressed, no man did easily suspect that any wheate was there threshed. Let vs marke in this place, that the excellent men in the olde time, when they had gotten any leasure, either from holy seruices, or from ciuil things, thei spent al that leasure, either about husbandry, or about the arte of a Shepehearde. For they would not consume them selues with ydlenes, sumptuousnes, glotony, or dronkennes. And this shal we not onely learne in Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, Gideon, and other holy fathers, but also it manifestly appereth by the histories of the Romanes. For there we reade that Curius and Seranus and such like, wer elected for the chiefest Magistrates, when in the fieldes they were at plough, and tylled the grounde. And the earth also at that tyme (as Plini saith) brought foorth her fruites more plentiful and aboundant, when it was handled with the handes of Emperors most noble. Not vndoubtedlye, bicause the earth was endued wyth any sense, but bicause wise men, as they vsed wisely to gouern waighty affairs, so also for husbandry, when they were occupied about it, they exercised it wyth [Page] farre greater diligence then did the rude men. Our Gideon without doubt had seruauntes, whom he might haue commaunded to haue wrought what woorke so euer was to be done, yea and his father (as we shall afterwarde heare) was a man of power among the people. And for all that he was suche a one, yet he despiseth not rusticall woorkes.
12 Then the Angel of the Lord appeared vnto him, and sayd vnto him: The Lord is with thee, thou valiant man.
A salutacion vsed of the godlyHere is expressed a moste auncient maner of salutacion, wherein they sayde: The Lord is with thee. We rede in the booke of Ruth, that Boaz vsed it, when he came vnto his haruest men. The Angell also in this manner saluted the blessed Virgin. Yea, and the Church of Christ by the Minister saluteth the people in the holy seruices, and saith: The Lord be with you. The angel called Gideon a strōg man, not by that strength (as it is thought) wherwith he was before endued, but by the strength which should afterward be geuen him, for the accomplishing of thinges. Although it might easily be, that Gideon was a man skylfull in feates of warre. But the first interpretatiō agreeth better. Howbeit Augustine in hys questions vpon this place, Augustine. thus readeth this particle, as thoughe God hym selfe should be called a strong and warlike man, as if he should haue saide: That God which is mighty & warlike, is with thee, or be with thee. Neither ought it much to moue vs, bicause this woord Man is added, forasmuche as it is after the same maner writtē in the song of Exodus. For God may so be called by a Metaphore. But the first exposition is more receaued, and seemeth more simple.
13 To whom Gideon answered: O my Lorde I praye thee, is the Lord with vs? Why then is al this come vpon vs? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told vs of, and sayde: Dyd not the Lord bring vs out of Egipt? But now the Lorde hath forsaken vs, and hath deliuered vs into the hand of the Madianites.
The hebrue word Bi signifieth in me: and is spoken by the figure Eclipsis as though it should haue bene, looke louingly vpon me. And therfore they turne it, I prai thee: which is a particle of one that exhorteth. The next word is Adonai, by which name Gideon called him which appeared vnto him, not by a religious or deuine title, but by a common title, whych is applyed also to prophane men. For he vnderstood not that he was an Angel: he thought he was some Prophet or holy man. Gideon perswadeth himself that God was not with him, when the Israelites were afflicted with so great miseries. For he vnderstandeth the saying of the Angel, as though he had said that God was not onely with hym, but also with al the Hebrues. God is not supposed to bee with those whiche ar afflicted And it is no doubt, but that the nature of mā thinketh that God is not with those which are afflicted. The saintes after this maner semed to expostulate with God. Wherfore in the Psalmes it is written: Aryse O God, why turnest thou thy face awaye from me? why hast thou forgotten me? and such lyke. This is a grieuous kinde of temptacion, wherunto if a man geue place, and be therwith ouercom, he grieuously sinneth. For he transgresseth the first precept: I am the Lord thy God. But, howe farre that sentence is from the truth, this historye declareth. For when Gideon thought that God was absent from him, then was he present, and talked with him.
VVhere be al his miracles? These woordes may be vnderstande two wayes. The first way is, as though Gideon should reason by contraries, saying: When God was with our fathers, he did marueilous thinges for their health: but now hath he deliuered vs vnto the Madianites, neither deliuereth he vs by his excellent workes: therefore he is not with vs. The other interpretation is, as if by a certain godly expostulation he should say: wher doth God now restrain these his [Page 115] marueilous woorkes? What temptation is counted grieuous to the godly. Why suffreth he the benefites which he so plentifully bestowed on our fathers, so much now to want? Vndoubtedly whilest we ar thus forsaken, al these thinges, as it semeth, are frustrate of their end. These thinges manyfestly declare, what is the temptation of godly men in aduersities & troubles: For the deuil, the flesh, and the world go about to persuade them, that they are nowe forsaken of God, and that they in vayne put their confidence in hym. Which kinde of temptation also was moued vnto Christ, when vpon the crosse he cryed: O my God, my God, why hast thou forsakē me? For none (as I think) would beleue that the same had happened vnto Christ, vnlesse the Euangelists had written, that he being vpon the crosse vsed such wordes. And this temptacion would he therefore suffer, to the end that (as it is wrytten in the seconde to the Hebrues) he myghte be lyke vnto vs in all thynges wythout synne. Wherefore Esay testifieth: Hee hath in deede borne our infirmities, and caryed our sorrowes.
14 And the Lord looked vpon hym, & said: Go in this thy strength, and thou shalt saue Israel out of the lande of Madian. Haue not I sent thee?
The Angel looked vpon Gideon, when he had spoken these wordes: For peraduenture whilest he spake them, he looked not vpon him: but then he behelde him, when he sent him to delyuer the Israelites. But in that he sayth In thys strength, it is expounded two maner of waies. The Hebrues saye, that by the sight of the Angel he was fylled with strength, and therefore it is sayde: go thou in this strength, which I haue now geuen thee, and thou shalt deliuer Israel frō the Madianites. Neither is it anye straunge thing, that God doth chaunge those whom he choseth to any function, and endueth them with sundry gyftes. For we rede that it so happened vnto Dauid and Saul, when they were called to bee kynges. And it is expressedlye wrytten in this booke that Iephthe and Samson were adorned with the spirite of strength. That strength also may here bee noted, which God vsed in helping the fathers, when for them he wrought myraculous thinges in the tyme of Moses and Iosua. Gideon had demaunded where those marueilous woorkes were now become, and therfore the Angel answered him: Go in that strength, whereby those thinges in tymes past were wrought, and by it deliuer Israel. By which woordes the Angel declareth, that hee shoulde not by his own strength bring to passe the thinges which he had commaunded him, but by that power of God, which was geuen the fathers in the olde tyme, The Angel calleth himself the Lord. And this ought not to seme marueilous, that the Angel is called the Lord. For that is for this cause done, either bicause he did it & spake it in the name of God, or els bicause he was in verye deede the sonne of God, which so appeared. The calling of the Iudges is therfore so diligently described, that wee might vnderstand that priuate men are not able to attempt matters and affaires of so great waight, vnlesse a certaine authority had bene geuen them of God. For to gather an hoste, and to take weapons against those whyche haue the chiefe rule of thinges, vnto suche as are weake and destitute of al ayde, it is altogether daungerous. Wherfore ther is required an assurednes and vndoubted calling, which cannot be had, vnlesse fayth go before, whiche consisteth of the woorde of God, when it is rightly vnderstoode. The Aungell vseth an intorrogation when hee sayth: Haue not I sent thee? Bycause this maner of speaking is verye apt to augment a commaundement.
15 And he sayd vnto him: O my Lord, wherby shal I saue Israel? Behold my familye is the poorest in Manasses, and I am the least in the house of my father.
God sayd not that he would delyuer Israel, but he declared that it shoulde be done by Gideon, who therefore maruelleth, forasmuche as he saw that he wanted all such thinges as were requisite to so great a woorke. For warre coulde not be made by a poore man, and one of the base sorte, suche a one as Gideon perceaued himselfe to be: when as to the accomplishing therof wer required power, ryches, and especially authority. Wherfore Aristotle to ciuil felicitye, hath ioyned outward goodes, and that namely for this, bicause they are necessary instrumentes of actes most noble.
Of hys Myllenary or thousand, he therfore maketh mention, bycause God in the publike wealth of the Iewes (as we rede in Exodus) instituted thys maner, namely y t by tribunes or thousands, & hundreds the people should be gouerned: For it could not easily be, that by a few Magistrates, an infinite number of people should be numbred, and so gouerned, that their maners, liuing and ordinaū ces might diligently be looked vpon, whych one thing chiefely pertaineth to gouerne well & rightly. Why God appointed tribunes, Centuriōs and Captaines ouer ten. For when euery man is permitted vnto him selfe in these thinges, he both abuseth his liberty, and also easily transgresseth the lawes, bycause he is not noted. Wherefore God in hys people woulde for that cause haue rulers ouer ten, and ouer hundredes, and also ouer thousandes, least that publike wealth (if the people were necligently looked vnto) shoulde fal to ruine, and waxe woorse and worse. That band of a thousand, wherof Gideon was one, he declareth to be the poorest among all those of the tribe of Manasses. Farther, he saith that he was the least in his fathers house or family, and therfore he saw not, by what meanes he could set at liberty the Hebrues. Some say that Ioas the father of Gideon was at that time a tribune or ruler ouer a thousand men, & that his sonne ment him, when he said y t his family was the poorest among the tribe of Manasses. This sentence I disalow not, forasmuch as afterward it shall easily appeare y e Ioas was of some authority amōg his people. But whither this word Alpi, signify him or no, I wil not rashly affirme, forasmuch as the first exposition, is both apt and also wel agreeth with the woordes of the history.
Whyther Gideon synned in gainsaying the āngel. Many holy mē seme to haue resisted the promises and callyng of God.This must we rather note, wither Gideon in obiecting these things sinned or no. Vndoubtedly if we looke vpon the holy scriptures, we shal finde very many other, which sayd that their infirmity striued against the vocation and promises of God. Abraham sayd he was an .100. yeare old, and therfore he desired that Ismael might rather liue before the Lord, than that he should waite for a sonne of Sara which was both old and barren. Yea, and she also when she heard that a childe was promised her, she could not keepe herself from laughing, bycause she alredy felt her selfe vnapt by nature to beare a childe. Moses also, that he might not be sent vnto Pharao, alledged the impediment of his tong for a let. Farthermore Ieremy sayd: Ah Lord, I am a childe, and I cannot speake. The blessed virgin also sayd vnto the Aungel: How can this be done? forasmuch as I knowe no man. There might peraduenture also be mencion made of others, but these are now sufficient. And I doubt not but that some of these whom I haue touched, fell in speaking these woordes. For God was angrye with Moses, when hee so obstinately excused the office which he had committed vnto him. Saras laughter also was reproued. But I know that the other were praysed for their faith: for Abraham, bycause he beleued the promyse, was iustified, and Elizabeth sayd vnto Mary: What is the differēce betwene those whyche seeme to resyst God. Blessed art thou which beleuedst: for the thinges which the Lorde hath sayd vnto thee, shal be performed. The difference betwene these is hereby to be taken, bycause some did in suche sorte aske an excuse, for that they beleued not the woord of God, neither could they be perswaded to agree vnto God whyche sent them, or made promise to them. Wherfore forasmuche as they synned, God was not without a iust cause both angrye with Moses, and also reproued Sara. But there were other some of them, which beleued the woorde of God, and yet for all that they put foorth certayne questions, not in deede to resist, but to declare [Page 116] what thinges seemed to be a let vnto theyr calling, or to the thynges commaunded them, and in demaunding these thynges, they desired nothing els, than that they might be instructed of the way & maner, which they ought to vse, and they required to be confirmed, least those thinges which seemed to be a let, The same wordes ar allowed in one, that are disallowed in an other. might plucke them backe, either for waiting for the promises, or els from fulfilling the thinges cōmaunded them. Howbeit these men can not be seperated one from an other, by the woordes which they spake, when as almost they spake all one thing. But by the purpose and thought of the hart they are seperated: for if they spake and excused those thynges of incredulitye, they oughte not to bee counted without blame: but if they beleued, and desired onelye to bee confyrmed and instructed, we ought not to diffame them as guilty of incredulity. But who shal discerne these thinges in them? Surely God which knoweth the harts and conscience of euery one of them. And we know that the fayth of Gideon is commended in the .xi. to the Hebrues. But whither that were straight waye geuen him, when he heard the woord of God, or whether it came vnto him after some tarying and wrastling with humane reason, we are ignorant.
16 Then the Lord sayd vnto him: Bicause I wil be with thee, and thou shalt smite Madian as it were one man.
Cease of (saith he) these humane reasons, and haue no regarde to strength, riches, and authority: if these thinges should ciuilly be done, thou mightest iustlye require them. But now thou shalt vse my power and might. Thou shalt saue Israel, not by thine own might, but bycause I wyl be with thee. So God answered vnto Moses when he detracted his message. So was it also said of Iosua, I wil be with him. After that maner was Ieremy answered, when he cryed that he was a childe, and could not wel speake. I wil be with thee (saith the Lorde) thou shalt accomplish al these thinges to whatsoeuer I wil send thee. Gideon therefore is instructed of the way or maner of the victorye, namelye, that God woulde haue the handling and charge of it: and that chiefly by these woordes: Thou shalt destroy the Madianites as it were one man. For w t God it is as easy to ouerthrowe an infinite number, as one man. And the same thing as touching the marueylous murther of the Madianites, then vndoubtedly tooke effect, when they smote one an other with their own swordes, and by the impulsion of God they wounded one the other.
17 Thē he answered him: I pray thee, if I haue foūd fauour in thy sight, then shew me a sygne, that it is thou that talkest with me.
18 Depart not hēce I pray thee, vntil I come vnto thee and bring my sacrifice and laye it before thee. And he answered, I wyll tarye tyll thou come agayne.
He therefore desireth a signe, least he should thinke him selfe to be illuded by a ghost or spirit. For he was not content with words, but he would haue an assured signe of the talke nowe had. But this sentence: That it is thou that talkest wyth me, semeth to be spoken by the figure Eclipsis, so that we must vnderstand, in the name of God, least peraduenture I might thinke, that the woordes which thou speakest, are the woordes of a man, and not count them for the Oracle of God. This visiō hapned to Gideon being wakyng, & not sleeping. These thinges were not done when he was a sleepe (as it appeareth by the historye) but when he was waking, although God, as we shal afterward heare, appeared also by night vnto Gideon. He requireth a signe, bicause it is the parte of a godly man to trye spirites, and not rashlye to beleue euery spirite, especially when any newe and vnaccustomed woorke is commaunded: and that whych otherwyse is not thought to bee lawfull, there no man wyll easilye assent, except he be fullye perswaded that hys callyng is of God. But when doctrine now [Page] receaued, and confirmed by holye scriptures is set foorth, or woorkes required, which in them are commaunded, we must beware that we require not signes, for asmuch as we are bound to beleue and obey them. But of this thing we wil more largely intreate afterward.
19 Then Gideon went in, & made redy a Kid, & vnleauened breade of an Ephah of floure, & put the flesh in a basket, & put the broth in a pot, and brought it out vnto hym vnder the Oke, and presented it.
This place may be enterpreted two maner of waies. One way it is thought that Gideon would haue made redy a dinner for the man of God: for such a one did he take him to be. Therfore for honours sake he desired to refresh him wyth meate in his iourney, & to talk with him at leasure for the shewing of the signe. And he thought not that God or an Angel was present with him. Wherfore he thought to folow the example of Abraham & Lot. And in dede the things which he presented, partained rather to a dinner, thā to a sacrifice. He erected no alter, neither prepared he the fat to be burnt, nor the shoulder and the brest to be lifted vp, nor the blood to be shed. The other interpretation is, that he would therfore bring him a sacrifice, that in that oblation he might obtayne a signe, as to Abel the fauour of God was declared when he was offring sacrifice. And the authors of this sētence beleue that this doth nothing let that Gideon sod the flesh, Flesh in sacrifices was sometimes sod. forasmuch as that kind of sething was sometimes vsed in peace offrings, as the fyrst booke of Samuel testifieth. Of the interpretours of this place this latter sētence seemeth to be receiued: for they iudge y e Gideon intended to offer sacrifices: But I rather allow the first sentēce as touching the feast, although I know that the Angell contrary to Gideons purpose vsed that meate to a sacrifice, and in it gaue the signe, which a little before was desired of him. This hebrew word Mitsoth signifieth vnleauened cakes. Why the Elders vsed so oftē swete cakes in their feastes. But the roote of the word may be Natsa, whiche is to hast, or to make speede. For the Elders were carefull to prepare meate for straūgers with as much speede as might be. Wherfore they straightway baked new bread, bicause peraduenture their houshold bread was somewhat hard and stale. The measure of an Ephah. Therfore, to y e end they might the sooner refresh y e weary, they vsed swete cakes, which were very soone baked. This measure Ephah was not a measure for liquide thinges, but for thinges dry, and (as the Hebrues affirme) it held thre peckes, and a pecke contained .144. egges. And ten Ephas made one Corus. Certaine Rabbines fable that there is therfore mencion made of sweete breade, bycause this thing was done in the time of Easter. But how trifling this is, hereby we may gather, bicause it is wel knowen that swete bread were by the commaundement of God vsed, not onelye for sacrifices at Easter, but also at other times, especially such as wer to be burnt at the altar of the Lord. But if we shal say that Gideon prepared not a sacrifice, but rather a feast, we haue alredy shewed the reason, why he brought swete bread. Gideon is vtterly to be quitted of ydolatry. For his wil was not to do sacrifice vnto the Messanger of God: bicause his purpose was eyther to set meate before the mā of God, or els to sacrifice vnto the lyuing God, by the hand of the Prophet, whom hee counted to bee farre better than himselfe.
20 And the angel of God said vnto him: take the flesh & the vnleuened bread, & lay it vpon this stone, & poure out the broth: & he did so.
21 Then the Angel of the Lord put forth the ende of the staffe, that he held in his hand, and touched the flesh & the vnleauened bread, & there arose vp fire out of the stone, & consumed the flesh & the vnleauened bread: so the Angel of the Lorde departed out of hys syght.
They which thinke y t Pinhas the sonne of Eleazar was this mā of god, which [Page 117] appeared vnto Gideon, affirme y t the same man was also afterward called Elias. And euen as when Achab raigned in Israel, he obtained fire from heauē, wherby the burnt offring was consumed, wherupon he had poured water and that aboundantly & very many times: so likewise now out of the rocke, by the power of god be raised vp a flame, wherby y e meate which was put vpon it was burnt, wherupon he had before caused the broth of the flesh to be poured. I confesse in dede that ther is some similitude betwene these two actes, but therwithal I see many thinges to be causes, wherby the one differeth from the other. Farther, I vtterly reiect this fained tale, wherin they faine that Pinhas was present eyther there or here. Ther, by reason of the great distance of times: & here, bicause (as I haue expounded, Augustine. & the wordes of the history do manifestly testify) it was eyther god himself or an angel, which talked with Gideon. Augustine in his booke De mirabilibus sanctae scripturae, teacheth that the signe, whiche is here geuen, doth aptly agree vnto that which was demaūded. For it was shewed, that by the wō derful power of god, without mans labour and fight, the enemies of the people of the Iewes should be ouercome, euen as by the might of god aboue the ability of nature fire came forth, Ambrose. wherwith without mans healpe or industry those vittailes were consumed. But Ambrose very elegantlye writeth the Allegorye of this place, in the Proheme of his booke de spiritu sancto, which I to auoyd tediousnes do ouerpasse. This one thing onely I wil admonish you of, Al thinges that wee offer, are to bee offred by Christ. y t our giftes are then acceptable vnto God, when wee offer them vpon the rocke, whiche is Christ. There our actions are by the fire of the holy ghost purged, & that which otherwise of his own nature is vncleane, is of God receaued as holy.
And the Angel of the Lord departed. By this sodain departure Gideon vnderstood that it was an Angel whom he saw, wherefore he was sore afraide, as the wordes of the history which follow, do manifestly declare.
22 And when Gideon saw, that it was the Angell of the Lorde, he sayd: Alas my Lord God, shall I bycause I haue sene an Angell of the Lorde face to face?
This is spoken by the figure Ecliptica: for when Gideon sayth: The fathers by seyng of god & of angels wer made alrayde. Alas my Lorde God, shal I bycause I haue sene an Angel of the Lord: there should be added, dye. Thou shalt euermore perceaue that the old fathers, after that they had sene god or beholdē his Angels, wer very sore afraid, yea & so astonished, that they feared present death to come vpon them. And no maruail, for they wer not ignoraunt, what God answered Moses, when he desired to see his face: Man shal not see me and liue. Iohn Baptist also (as we reade in the first of Iohn) sayth: No man hath sene God at any time. And Paul to Timothy hath confirmed the same writing. No man hath sen God, neither can he se him: for he is inuisible, bicause he dwelleth in the light that no man can come vnto. And that also which nowe Gideon speaketh, Mannah the father of Samson (as we shal afterward heare) shal speak. Iacob likewise, after he had wrastled al night, thinking that he had striuen with a man, when he vnderstood that he was an Angel, maruailed howe he escaped a lyue and safe. Haue I sene the Lord (sayth he) face to face, and is my lyfe saued? As though that y t was in a maner impossible. Yea, and the Hebrues, when the Lord discended to mount Sina to geue the lawe, were so striken with feare and dread, that they sayd vnto Moses: Haue thou (we praye thee) to doo wyth God, least, if he go forward so to speake before vs, we dye. To this serueth that also whych is written in the same booke of Exodus, when the couenaunt was then made betwene God and the people, and Moses recited the cōdicions, and sprinkled the people with y e blood of the sacrifices which wer offred, he brought forth the Elders vnto the mountain, wher they saw God sitting in his throne wyth chiefe glory and maiesty. But after the recital of that vision, it is sayd: Neyther did God extende hys hande vnto them: which declareth that it was a newe and [Page] vnaccustomed sight, that men should se god, & haue their life stil whole & sound. Wherfore that altogether is mencioned as a thing geuen by a singular prerogatiue. Ierome. Ierome also testifieth, that Esay was vnder this pretence killed of the Iewes, bicause he said that he had sene God sitting vpon his throne, as it appeareth in the .vi. chap. of his booke. They caueled that he lyed, forasmuch as God cā not be sene of men, which yet remain stil a liue. Wherfore they condemned him for a lier, as though in prophecieng he had taught y e people not the things which the Lord had shewed him, but his own inuencions. This they fained against the innocent prophet, when as bysides it they had no other cause against him.
And there are the like examples in the new testament: when our Lord manifested in mount Thabor to his Apostles a certain shew of his maiesty & glory, he was altogether changed before them, & he shined with an incredible brightnes & light, with whō wer Moses & Elias straightway present, & the voice of the father sounded from heauen. These thinges bicause they many waies ouerpassed the faculty of mans sight, the eyes of the Apostles were not able to beare them: wherfore they fel downe to the earth, & wer as it wer dead. Peter also, whē in fishing at the cōmaundement of Christ he caught an incredible number of fishes: for before his woord he had long labored in vaine, marueiling at the straunge sight, and vnderstanding that God was in Christ, he was so afeard of himself, that he said vnto him: Lord, I pray thee depart from me, bicause I am a sinfull man, and cannot without daunger suffer the presence of God. Paul also declaring his rauishing vnto the third heauen, where he vnderstoode thinges deuine, whyche in word he might not expres vnto mē, writeth: whither it wer in the body, or without the body, I cannot tel. Verely he durst not affirme that those thinges happened vnto him, whilest he had the vse of the body, & senses of this life. Wherefore it manifestly appeareth, that Gideon was not without a cause astonished.
But why the beholding of God or of the Angels seemeth to bring present destruction vnto men, Platos sect. we must now shew the reason. Peraduenture that hapneth by reason of the grosnes of the body, which (as the sect of Platos affirme) is to vs as it wer an obscure & darke prison. Wherfore forasmuch as by it we are letted, so that we cānot see things deuine, if peraduēture at any time we behold them, by & by we remember that the ioyning together of the body & mind is nowe dissolued, & that we shal straightway dye, & that therfore deuine things are set before vs to behold, bicause now is at hand the seperation of the soule frō the body. For Aristotle in his Metaphisicis testifieth, Aristotle. y t the powers of our vnderstanding are in such sort vnable to vnderstand things deuine, which of their own nature ar most euident, y t iustly they may bee compared vnto the eyes of the Owles or Battes, whych cannot looke vpon the brightnes of the Sunne, and lyght of the day. They which thus thinke, doo in deede say somewhat, but not so much as is sufficient, to expounde the thing manyfestly.
The bodye remoueth vs not from the beholding of God.The body from the first creation was not therfore geuen vnto men, y t it should be a let vnto them to know God, neither that it should restraine our soules as in a certain blinde & darke prison: for so the goodnes of God, which created the bodily nature of man, should be accused. And that the thing is thus, the historye of Genesis proueth, which testifieth that God was very familiar with our first Parentes, though they had bodies: for he led them into Paradise which he had planted, he shewed them the trees wherof they might eate, and for certaine trees hee gaue them a law that they shoulde not toutche them, he set all creatures before Adam, to cal them by what name he listed. Wherefore the bodye was not a let, wherby the first man could not be familiar with God. Synne seperateth vs frō god Sinne vndoutedly remoueth vs from the sight of god. Therof cōmeth our dimnes, darknes, blindnes & ignorance as touching things deuine. For this cause we ar turned into Moles, Bats & Owles. But God of his owne nature may be sene, yea he is the lyght it selfe, but that the blot of synne is put betwene. Peraduenture thou wylt saye, [Page 118] that is now sufficiently declared, Bycause of sinne men flye from the sight of God. that sinne is the originall cause of our blyndnesse but we haue not yet shewed, why mē are so afeard at y e sight of god. Yea by cause of sinne happeneth all this also vnto vs: for men, besides y t by reasō of their darknesse they are oppressed with y e diuine light, beyng of sinne accused by their conscience, do flye from the iudge who is no lesse mighty then iust. For they vnderstand that God himselfe is such a one, that by reason of his purenesse and iustice he will suffer no vncleane or filthy thing before hym. Wherfore to haue God present they thinke nothing els, then that their punishement prepared for them and the paynes whiche they haue deserued are at hande. For this cause our first parentes when they had sinned straight way hid thēselues, and at the voyce of God were so afeard, that they determined to hide themselues among the trees of Paradise: whiche vndoubtedly came of a troubled conscience for as much as God of his owne nature is both quickning and also the author of all consolatiō. Wherfore it is manifest that these terrors and discommodities, came not by hys defaulte, but thoroughe our owne wickednesse.
¶Of Visions, or in what sorte and how muche God may be knowen of men.
NOw the matter geueth vs occasion, somwhat to speake of visions of things deuine, and in what sorte and how much God may be sene of men. But least our disputacion should want either methode or els an order, I will first set forth certaine distinctions whiche I perceaue are nedefull.
First, the knowledge of God is supposed to be offred vnto the sēces, Distinctions which serue to the questiō put forth. or vnderstanding. Or els we thinke that it commeth of nature, either els by a prerogatiue, and reuelacion which passeth nature. Father the knowledge of the substaunce, nature, and (as if I should say) of the very essēce, is separated from that knowledge whiche consisteth of tokens, testimonies, argumentes and signes of the diuine presence. Lastly we must speake, either of that knowledge, whiche agreeth with this our life, or of that onely which is looked for after this world. The nature of GOD is not knowen by our sences. I will begyn therfore at the sences: and of the knowledge of them this I suppose, that the nature, substaunce, and essence of God can not be comprehended by the sences. For those thinges haue no affinity with God whiche are vnderstand by sences, but are from him most farre distant. And to say the truth the qualities, which long to any certayne generall worde, and are reckened for accidences, do stirre vp the knowledge of the sences. And for as much as God, whiche is most simple, is not subiect to those, he can not therfore be knowen by the sences. And this to be true is by certaine experience perceaued whiche euery man taketh of his owne iudgement. For it is most certain, that no man hath by his sences perceaued hym. The error of Anthropomorphites. Howbeit the Anthropomorphites persuaded themselues that God might be knowen by the sences, as men which did attribute vnto god a humane body: but their opinion is vtterly reiected. For the holy scripture testifieth that God is a spirite, and it also putteth a manifest difference betwene a spirite and a body, when our sauiour sayth: Fele and see, bycause a spirite hath neither fleshe nor bones. And there is none which vnderstandeth not, that a humane body and his members, can not consiste without fleshe & bones. Farther their foolishnesse hereby appeareth, bycause there is not a body founde, whiche is euery way pure and simple: for let it be as equall as thou wilt, at y e lest way it hath partes, wherof it is composed. And that all composition is agaynst the nature of God, euen the Ethnike Philosophers perceaued.
But leauing the Anthropomorphites, we must speake of certayne other, whō Augustine in his Epistle ad Paulinam, de videndo Deo, maketh mēcion of. Augustine. They as the Scriptures testifie and the right faith confesse, do beleue that God is altogether most simple, and that he wanteth a body. But they deny that he can not [Page] be sene with the eyes of the blessed, in that blessednesse whiche we wayt for. And therfore they say we are deceaued, bycause we measure the state of the lyfe to come by those thinges, whiche we see here to be done and to happen. Wherfore say they, although the dull eyes of our body are not able here to see God, the aungels or spirites, yet when they are confirmed in felicity, they shall see them, but not in dede by their owne nature & power, and the sharpenesse of their sight shalbe so illustrated, Our bodely eyes do not beholde the essēce of God neither here, neither in y e lyfe to come. that they shall see euen the very essence of God. These men peraduenture erre lesse than the Anthropomorphites: but yet they erre. For how soeuer our eyes shalbe confirmed whē we shalbe in the blessed state, they shall for all that remayne eyes, and shalbe bodily eyes: wherfore they shall not excede the nature and latitude of their obiectes. In dede they shall then easely abide a vehementer and larger light, than now they can in seing suffer, neither shall they be hurte by those colours wherwith they are now offended, but yet they shall not attayne vnto the essence of god. For there are no bodies whiche in the blessed resurrection shalbe so nobled, that they shall either be made spirites, or els ceasse to be bodyes. Wherfore neither to the body of Christ is this geuen, that after his resurrection it was turned into a spirite. For this were not to haue the body rise agayne, but to be abolished. Wherfore they, whiche thinke that our eyes shalbe made so perfect, that they shall beholde the substaunce of God, do not beawtifye them, but in very dede destroy them. The Anthropomorphites do sinne agaynst the nature of God, in that they cloth it with a body: but these men do iniury vnto the nature of man, which persuade themselues that it shall not abide in the blessed resurrection. Our sentence therfore abideth and is true, as well of this lyfe wherin we presently lyue, as of the life which we wayte for to come.
What the Patriarches and Prophets saw.But thou wilt aske, what then sawe the Patriarches and Prophetes, to whō we read in the holy Scriptures that God many tymes appeared? I aunswere, that as touching the outward senses, they saw onely certaine images, similitudes and formes, whiche were offred sometymes vnto them by god and by hys aungels, whereby it was shewed both that he was present with those fathers, & also spake vnto them, heard them and admonished them of thinges healthfull. But these things, namely the presence of god or of the aungels, also the wordes and significations, the sense it selfe vnderstand not, but by reason, and in minde they were gathered by those thinges, whiche the iudgement of the senses receaued. Wherfore the Chaldey Paraphrast, when in Exodus it is writtē, that god came to mount Syna, affirmeth, that god himselfe came not simply, but translateth it, that the glory of god came: as thoughe he should haue sayd, certaine noble and wonderfull signes were there sene, by whiche god testified that he hymselfe was there present: whiche selfsame thing he doth in Esay the 6. chap: where he writeth. In what thīgs God shew him self to be presēt I saw the Lord sitting vpon his throne which was highe and lifted vp. But what manner of similitudes and images they were, which offred them selues as tokens of the presence either of an aungell or of god, it is easy to be gathered out of the holy Scriptures. The burnyng bushe appeared vnto Moses, the cloud, the piller of fire, the smokes, voices, thundringes lampes, lightnings, the propiciatory, the arke of the couenaunt, Vrim and Themim, and sondry formes euen of men, whiche either did, or spake, or in some maner of sorte shewed themselues either to Prophetes or to other men. All these thynges I saye, were signes and tokens of the presence both of God and of the aungels. And the same things were sene of the fathers, either when they were slepyng or els whē they were waking: & sometymes by the spirit of god or industry of the angels at the cōmaundement of god, Prophets somtimes se things printed in imagination and somtimes outwardly. y e phantasy or imagination of mē receaued forme by such similitudes and figures. Wherby those thinges whiche god would shewe, were no lesse expressed in the myndes of the vnderstanders, than if they had ben perceaued by the outward senses.
Wherfore in expounding the Prophetes it is true, that very oftentymes we [Page 119] stād in great doubt, whether y e thing were so done outwardly, or rather so appeared to y e Prophet to be done in mind. And in certain of thē by reason of the circū stances of the matter, we are compelled to graunt that it was onely a vision, as Ierome testifieth of the breeches or hosen of Ieremy, Ierome. whiche at the commaundement of the Lord he put in a rocke by the riuer Euphrates: and he suffred them to remayne there so long, till they were rotten: and then he was commaunded to take them, and to put them on agayne. And this vision happened whilest the city of Ierusalem was grieuously besieged by the Chaldeyans, whē the Prophet could not go and come to the riuer Euphrates. For at the same tyme, when he would once haue gone to Anathoth, where he was borne, he was taken euē as he was going out of the gates, and accused of treason. In like manner the same Ierome affirmeth, that that was onely done by a vision, whiche is written in Ezechiell, of the bread baked in the doung of an oxe, and how it lay many dayes vpon one and the selfe same side. To these may be added the eatyng of the booke, and such like, whiche either humane nature, or circumstances of the matters and tymes, suffred not so to be done, as it is writtē. And as touching the preaching & expressing vnto the people, that things which y e Prophetes had in their myndes, a thing sene by phantasy or imagination, was all one, and had as much efficacy, as if it had outwardly bene sene. But yet they fled not vnto the visions of the mynde, when the thing it selfe might outwardly be done. For seyng God can vse both wayes, he hath sometymes taken this way, and other sometymes that way, as it hath pleased him, and as he hath iudged mete and profitable for vs. But in all these things, me thinketh the sentence of Ambrose is to be holden, Ambrose. The visions of Prophets wer not naturall. which intreating of these images, sayeth: That they were such as will did chose, and not such as nature hath formed: whiche vndoubtedly maketh agaynst those, whiche will haue prophesieng to be naturall, as though by the power of the heauens, or some certain instinct of nature, or temperature of humors such images & sights offred themselues to be sene, of the outward senses of the Prophetes, or to be knowen inwardly by imagination & phantasy. The will (sayth Ambrose) namely of god or of an aungell, would those thinges, and aboue other thinges chose them, and not the power of nature formed them.
But there is an other doubt which in dede is not to be left vnspoken of, Whether God at any tyme shewed himself or whether they were alwayes angels that appeared. namely whether god himselfe at any tyme shewed himselfe vnder these images or formes: Or whether onely aungels alwayes appeared, which wrought & spake with y e Prophets, sometimes in theyr own name, & other sometyme in the name of god? Ther haue ben some which said y e god himself neuer appeared, but by angels in y e name of god all those things were accōplished which are written to be either spoken or done in those visions. And they contend that they haue certayne testimonies in the Scriptures which make with thē: among which one is found in the Actes of the Apostles, where Stephen expressedly calleth him an aungell, whiche called to Moses out of the bushe, when as for all that he is in Exodus named God. Farther Paul to the Galathians testifieth that the lawe was geuen in the hande of a Mediator, be the disposition of Aungels. And no man doubteth, but that in Exodus it is written, that the law was geuen by god. Wherfore they conclude that we must vnderstand that God appeared not by himselfe, but by Aungels. Howbeit forasmuch as the essence or diuine nature, can not be taken away either from the holy ghost, The holy ghost shewed himself in a Doue. or from the sonne (for either of them by nature is God) how will they defend their opinion, when as it is expressedly written in the gospell, that the holy ghost descended vpon Christ in the forme of a Doue? If they say that an aungell came and not the holy ghost, they accuse the Scripture as a lyer: but if they cōfesse, that together with that Doue the holy ghost appeared, what shall let but that god himselfe also appeared vnto the fathers vnder other figures and images? They cā from this by no meanes escape, except (which I thinke they wil not do: otherwise they should bring in a manifest heresy) they [Page] will deny the holy ghost to be God. And that which I haue aunswered of the holy ghost, we may obiect the like of y e sonne, out of the wordes of Paul to Timothe the 3. The sonne of God appeared in humane flesh chap, where he writeth: Without controuersy it is a great mistery, god is made manifest in the flesh, iustified in the spirite, &c. For the whole Churche and right faith confesseth that the word was the true god whiche appeared vnder the fleshe of man. Whiche if he did, as vndoubtedly without conterfayting he did, why may he not be said to haue done the same in the old Testament vnder sōdry formes and manifolde figures? Without doubt that was much greater whiche he gaue vnto vs in the latter tyme. But he whiche hath geuen the greater thing we doubt not but that he also can geue that whiche is lesse.
Peraduenture they will say, that that whiche was geuen in the latter tyme, the holy Scriptures do set forth to the end we should beleue it: but that whiche ye require to haue ben done in the old time is no where read. It is the word or sonne of god by whom God spake vnto the fathers & Prophetes. Yea but if we diligently marke, the Scriptures teach, that also. For the sonne of god is named by the Euangelist the worde or [...], whiche we must beleue was not by him done rashly, but bycause it might be vnderstand that by him god spake, when the scriptures testifie that he spake. Wherfore as often as we read, y t the word of y e Lord came vnto this mā or to that man, I iudge that the same is so often to be attributed vnto the sonne of god Christ our Lord, namely that god by him spake vnto the fathers and Prophetes. Which least I should seme to speake in vayne, I wil for this sentence bring forth two testimonies. Iohn. 1. The first is read in the first chap: of Iohn: No man hath sene god at any tyme, & straight way by y e figure Occupatio is added. The sonne which is in y e bosome of y e father he hath reueled hym. For a man might aske, If no man haue sene god at any tyme, who appeared then to the fathers when things deuine wer shewed vnto them? who talked with them, when sondry formes and images appeared vnto them in the name of god, Iohn. 12. and wrought with them? Straight way it is aunswered: The sonne which is in the bosome of the father he hath reueled him: he was to man, the most true interpretor of the father. An other place, is in the gospell the 12. chap: where it is thus word for word writtē. Therfore they could not beleue, bycause agayn sayd Esay: He hath blinded their eyes, & hardened their hart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor vnderstād with their hart, and should be conuerted, and I should heale them. These thinges sayd Esay, when he saw his glory, and spake of hym. Vndoubtedly these two pronounes His, and of Him, do without cōtrouersy signify Christ, for a litle before the Euāgelist had sayd, Though he, namely Christ, had done so many signes before thē, yet beleued they not in hym, that the saying of Esay y e Prophet might be fulfilled y t he sayd, &c. And to this sentence, which in very dede is natural, do agree Chrisostome, Ierome, Cirillus, & Augustine. Farthermore the wordes of Hosea the Prophet which he hath in the 12. Hose. 12 chap: are diligently to be weighed, And thus speaketh the Lord there: I haue spoken vnto the Prophetes, and I haue multiplied visions, and vsed similitudes by the hand of the Prophetes, &c. Hereby we vnderstand, that similitudes were not geuen vnto the Prophetes from the beginning, but god himselfe spake vnto them.
By examples it is declared both that God himselfe, & also that āgels somtymes apperedBut now must we by examples and such as are most euident, confirme, that the appearynges of god are vtterly distinct from the visions of aungels. First it is declared vnto vs in the boke of Genesis, that Iacob saw a ladder which reached from earth euen to heauen, and by it the aungels both ascended and discended. 1 And at the top of the ladder, namely in heauen, stode the Lord from whom Iacob heard noble and large promises. Hereby is gathered, vnlesse we wil stil be blind, that aungels shewed themselues in one kind of images and god himself appeared 2 in an other forme. This selfe same thing may we see in Esay, when he sawe the Lord sitting in his throne, and with him two Seraphins, whiche cried mutually the one to the other, Holy, holy, holy. And with so great reuerence they [Page 119] worshipped God which was in the middest, that with their two vpper winges, they couered their face, and with the two neither wings their feete. Who seeth, not here a great difference betwene god and the aungels which appeared? I will 3 not speake of Ezechiell, which saw aungels in the formes of creatures, namely of an Oxe, an Egle, and a Lion, by whom wheles were turned, but God himselfe sat in the hyghest parte in the forme of the sonne of man. Of Daniell also 4 was sene the auncient of dayes, vnto whom came the sonne of man. And he addeth that thrones were there put, bookes opened, and a certain forme of a iudgement appoynted: then he maketh mencion of aungels, of which he sayth were present ten thousand and ten hundreth thousand, whiche ministred vnto hym.
And here we heare, what great difference there is betwene God and the angels which ministred. Farther there is a place most manifest in Exodus, when God, 5 beyng angry with the people, denied that he would go any farther with them thorough the desert, least being prouoked with theyr sinnes, he shuld at once vtterly destroy them. But he promised to send his aungell, with which promise Moses was not content, and sayd that he would by no meanes go with the people, except god himself would go together with thē. And vndoubtedly by prayer and constantly abiding in his sentence, at the length he ouercame, and (as he desired) had god for y e guide of their iorney. How can these men therfore say, y t god himselfe was not present vnder those formes, but only angels were sene in such images? Moreouer let vs remember, that Moses (as it is writtē in the same boke 6 of Exodus) desired of God to see his face: which his request god (for that he loued him excedingly,) would not vtterly deny, but yet he would not graunt him all that he required. Wherfore he aunswered: My face thou shalt by no meanes see, bycause man shall not see me & lyue, but thou shalt looke vpon my hinder parts, namely my backe. What is more manifest than this testimony? Surely god by certayne wordes here promiseth, to appeare vnto Moses in the shape of a man, of whose forme or image Moses should see not the face but the backe. And the same he faythfully performed vnto Moses: for as god passed by, Moses sawe the backe of his image by the rocke, and heard the wonderfull and noble names of god rehearsed with a most loude voyce. Which when he saw, he fell prostrate to the earth and worshipped: and it is not to be doubted, but that he gaue vnto hym that adoration, which is onely due vnto the onely god. For forasmuch as he beleued that he was there present according vnto his promise it is not to be had in controuersy, but that he worshipped him as being present in very dede. And vndoubtedly god, except he had shewed himselfe present in very dede at the arke & 7 mercy seat, should haue throwen the Israelites hedlōg into idolatry, if he would haue had onely aungels to aunswere such as came to aske counsell, for that he commaunded them to cal vpon him and to worship him there. To these may be 8 added that history whiche is written in the booke of kinges of Micheas the Prophet, whiche prophecied before Achab king of Israell and sayd, that he sawe god, with whō was present an host of aungels, & he heard him aske, who shal deceaue Achab, and that one offred himself to be a lying spirite in the mouth of the Prophetes of the king Achab. By this vision also we vnderstand, that there was an assured and notable difference, betwene god and the aungels, whiche appeared all together vnto the Prophet. Wherfore the gift of god which he gaue vnto the fathers, is not to be diminished or to be extenuated: & we must cōfesse, y t he was in very dede presēt, whē he appeared, forasmuch as we reade y t it was so done, and there is nothing that letteth, as farre as can be gathered out of y e holy scriptures, neither is the very nature of god any thing against, it that it could not be done. It were not sound to attribute vnto aungels all those things which in the scripture are read of such visiōs. For so might we easely slip so farre, y t at the last we should beleue y t the word was not immediatly created by god, but by angels at his commaundement. Wherfore let vs confesse that god was present in very [Page] dede, God was present in verye dede, whē it is sayd that he appeared vnder diuers formes. & shewed himselfe vnder diuers formes, as often as we heare that the scripture testifieth or speaketh the same.
Now resteth to aunswere vnto the places before brought. As touchyng the Epistle to the Galathians, I graunt that the disposition of the aungels was in the geuing of the law: for they stood by God when he spake, they made redy the mist, Aungels ministred vnto god when he gaue the law. thundringes, lightnings, & lāpes, they prepared the tables of stone, & many wayes ministred vnto God being present & speakyng. Neither do the wordes of the Apostle deny, but that God himselfe spake, & gaue the law, as the scriptures testifie. Yea & there haue ben some, which by the hand of a Mediator, do not expound it to be Moses, The aungell which spake vnto Moses in the bushe, was y e sonne of God but y e sonne of god: but whether they do it rightly or wrōgfully, I haue no leasure at thys present to discusse. But we nede not in many wordes to aunswere vnto y e which blessed Stephen sayth (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) namely that an angel appeared vnto Moses in the bushe, & talked with him. For if by the angell we vnderstand the sonne of God (as I haue often admonished) there will then remayne no doubt.
But that the things which I haue now alledged, as touching this matter, may the plainlyer & more certeinly be vnderstand, I thinke it good to confirme them by some testimonies of the fathers. Chrisostome. Chrisostome in his 14. Homely vpon Iohn saith. The things which y e fathers saw, were al of thē by permission, but yet they saw not y e pure & simple substaūce of god. And he addeth: If they had sene it, then should they not haue sene it in any part differing, for y t it is pure, simple, & cā not be described: Wherfore it standeth not, it lieth not, neither sitteth, as sometime it was to those Prophetes shewed. He saith moreouer: God, before the sonne came into flesh, exercised y e father with those visiōs & images. He there also writeth y e, which a litle before we alledged, namely y e with bodyly eyes we cā not see created spirites, as are our soules & angels. Wherfore much lesse must we beleue, y t we can see god with the senses. And least a man thinke, y t it onely agreeth with god y e father to be inuisible, & not with y e sonne, he bringeth thys sentēce of Paul, that he is the image of y e inuisible God. And without doubt he could not be hys image, Augustine. if he were not inuisible, as he is whose image he representeth. Augustine also in his 3. treatise vpon Iohn, saith of Moses: Althoughe it be sayd that he talked with god face to face, yet when he desired to see y e face of god, that is his very substaunce, he could not obteyne it. And in the same place he addeth: He saw the cloude, & the fire, which were figures. And within a litle after: If they say that the sonne was visible before he was incarnate, they dote. Augustine besides these hath in his Epistle to Fortunatianus, gathered many more things to this purpose out of Nazianzenus, Ierome, & other fathers, which wer to long here to rehearse.
Howbeit I will bring two argumentes, which are wont to be obiected against this sentence. In the beginning we sayd that the nature of God can not therfore be comprehended with the senses, bycause his nature is not bodily. But all the old fathers seme not to haue beleued so. Tertullian. For Tertullian agaynst Praxea writeth that God is a bodye, and in other places hee oftentimes testifieth the same. Yea in his litle booke de Anima he teacheth that our soules are bodyes. And whiche semeth more straunge, hee laboureth by manye reasons to confirme it. Yea and in his booke de Dogmat. Eccles. the 11. chap: he writeth that all creatures are bodyes, and euen the aungels by name: bycause there is nothing, whiche filleth all thinges as doth God: but all thynges are limited with certayne places, as it appeareth of the soule, Augustine excuseth Tertulian. whiche is closed in with the body. Augustine in his Epistle ad Quod uult deum excuseth Tertullian in this maner, that by a body he vnderstoode the substaunce, & that whiche is in very dede, as though he therfore wrote that god is a body, least he should seme to deny y t he is, forasmuch as the vulgare people do thinke that y t is vtterly nothing, The nature of god is without a body. which is not a body. Howbeit y e same Augustine in his boke de Genesi ad litterā, in this maner reproueth him, that at sometyme being ouercome by y e truth, he said, That euery body is passible: wherfore, [Page 121] least he should make god passible, he ought to haue denied him to be a body. Neither neded he so to bend himself to y e capacity of y e cōmō people, y e therfore he should pronoūce false things of god. For Christiās are not so to be instructed, y e like rude persons (whō Aristotle also cōfuteth) they should thinke that y t is nothing, which is not a body, but rather they ought so to be taught, y t in thinking of god they affirme nothing w tout rules of y e holy scriptures. And as for y e booke de dogmate Ecclesiastico, we must attribute no more vnto it thā is mete. For it is ascribed vnto Augustine, but the learned beleue not that it is his.
The other thing, which is somtimes obiected, is an argument of y e Anthropomorphites. For they cōtēd, y t for this cause we ought not to beleue y e god is without a body, bycause the Scriptures testifie, y e man was made to y e image of God, which could not be true, except he haue a body as we haue. For y e image should want y e similitude of y e wherunto it is referred. They thinke also y e the Scripture maketh with thē, when as it oftētimes attributeth vnto god the mēbers of men. Ierome. But Ierome (as Augustine to Fortunatianus citeth him) wittely & sharpely derideth their argumēt. If we should leane vnto this reason (saith he) we shall easely proue y t a man hath winges, bycause y e scripture sometimes ascribeth thē to god, to whose image it is manifest y e man was created. These men ought rather diligently to haue weighed that the image of God, consisteth in holinesse, righteousnesse & truth, as Paul hath taught. Whiche thyng if they had sene, they had not only remoued a body from god, but they should also haue led away their mindes from grosser cogitations. Why do they not affirme that God is in very dede a beare, a Lion or fire, bycause so do Amos, and Moses, and also the Epistle to the Hebrues call him? In the 95. Psalme it is written: He that made the eye, shall he not see? he that made the eare, shall he not heare? Ierome saith that there should haue ben said: he that made the eare, hath he not an eare? & he that made the eye, hath he not an eye? But so it is not sayd, least in thinking of him, Why the scripture attributeth members vnto God. thou shouldest be deceaued, & suppose that he hath those mēbers. But the holy scripture, if some tyme it attribute members vnto god, vndoubtedly this is the only cause, to helpe our infirmity, whereby althoughe we can not comprehend the essence of God as it is, yet in very dede it prouideth that by some certayne simboles and shadowes we may vnderstande somewhat. Wherefore members are by a most profitable Metaphore attributed vnto God, that we diligently remembryng his proprietyes, might godlyly and faythfully exercise our myndes. Why the Anthropomorphites are condemned. And the Anthropomorphites: if for that cause they had ascribed members vnto God, as the Scriptures setteth them forth, to be a helpe vnto the weake vnderstandyng of men: they myght be excused, neither should they haue bene condemned. But they contended that the nature of God had so in very dede: wherefore iustly and worthely are they accused. But what shall we aunswere to Paul, whiche of the seyng the nature of God in heauen, sayth: We shall see him face to face, and by that meanes he semeth to graunt vnto our eyes and face the beholdyng of god, and after a sorte to ascribe vnto god himself a face? There is a face of the body and a face of the mynde. Augustine aunswereth that there is a face also of the mynde, when as Paul sayth, that we nowe with a face vncouered do beholde thinges deuine, and not with a vayle put betwene, as the Iewes vsed when they talked with Moses.
But these thinges beyng thus finished and concluded, In the eternal life the blessed shall know the essence of God. let vs in few wordes speake of other kyndes of the knowledge of God. In the euerlastyng lyfe the blessed shall knowe the essence of God, not in dede by the senses, but by the soule or mynde, for as muche as Iohn sayeth: When he appeareth, we shall see hym as he is. Paul testifieth the same, nowe we see hym thoroughe a glasse and in a shadowe, but than shall we see hym face to face. The same thyng is gathered by the wordes of Christ: Their aungels alway beholde the face of the father, for in an other place he hath taught, y t in the blessed resurrection the iust shalbe like the angels of god. Wherof it followeth, y t we shal see god in like sorte as the angels [Page] do: wherfore if they see his face, thā shal we also behold it. There is an other testimony also written by Paul to y e Corinth. Than shall I know, euen as I am knowē. The nature of GOD is not wholy and by all meanes cō prehended. Chrisostome. And y e god seeth vs thoroughly & essencially, no mā doubteth. Howbeit let vs not thus persuade our selues, y t the blessed shall wholy & euery way know y e nature & substaunce of God, but so much only as we shalbe able to receaue [...] for things finit cā not fully receiue y t which is infinite: nether is y e which is created, able fully & perfectly to cōprehend his creator. Wherfore Chrisostome in his .14. Homely vpō Iohn, Ambrose in his first boke vpō Luke y e .1. chap, also Ierome (as Augustine in y e place before alledged declareth) all these I say deny y t the angels see god. But y t can not simply & absolutly be vnderstād, whē as otherwise Christ saith, y t they see the face of y e father which is in heauē. Wherfore it remayneth, y t the same is to be vnderstād of y e whole & perfect knowledge of his nature & substance. Wherfore in Iohn y e 6. chap: it is written: No man hath sene god, but he which is of god, he hath sene y e father. Also: As y e father knoweth me, so know I y e father. Wherfore this is onely geuen to Christ which is god, perfectly & fully to know y e essēce of god. Other also shall see it, but yet so much as their capacity cā cōprehend. If thou aske, whether it shalbe equally or no? I will not aunswere to that, at this present. For in an other place, we shall haue occasion geuen vs to speake of the diuersity or equality of rewardes in the blessed life.
But what shall we affirme of the state of this life? Shall our mind whilest we liue here in knowing of god attayne to his essēce? Whether in this lyfe we may in soule or minde knowe the essence of God, or no. No verely, bicause it is writtē: Man shall not see me & lyue. No man hath sene God at any tyme. And Paul addeth: He can not be sene, bycause he dwelleth in the light that no man can come vnto. Howbeit these thinges are not to be vnderstand as touchyng all maner of knowledge: for also whilest we lyue here, it is geuē vnto vs after a sort to know god. Wherfore these sayings are to be vnderstād (to speake as the stoolemen do) of the substantiall & essentiall knowledge of God. Neither is this against it, in y e it is written that Moses saw god face to face, which also before him Iacob spake, neither y e which in an other place is written of y e same Moses, y e god talked with him as a frend with his frend. For these things are not spokē simply, but by cōparisō with other, bycause those excellēt mē aboue other knew those things, which at y t tyme were opened vnto mē as touching god. For vnto thē god would after an exquisite & vnaccustomed maner shewe himselfe, whiche he did not to others. And this to be y e sēse of these words. Augustine & Chrisostome hereby do gather, bycause afterward when Moses desired to see the face of god, it was denied hym.
The naturall knowledge as touching God, is slender and obscure. Symonides.There remayneth, to intreate of the knowledge of god, which whilest we liue here we may obtayne. First the same is naturall, & that very slender & obscure. Which thing Symonides knew right well, who (as Cicero writeth in hys booke de Natura deorum) being demaunded of Hierone a tyranne of Sicilia, what God was, he alwayes deferred to aunswere, bycause y e more he thought as touching y e thing, y e more obscure alwaies it semed vnto him. Wherfore Clemēs Alexādrinus in his 5. Clemens Alexandrinus. boke of Stromata, bringing a reason, why y e knowledge of God is so hard, saith: It is not Genus, it is not Differēcia, it is not Accidēs, nor y e subiect of Accidēces, & therfore it cā not be vnderstād of vs, which comprehend onely such things in our mind & reasō. The effectes, which y e Philosophers vsed by their vnderstāding to know god, are not equal w t his dignity, power, & faculties. Wherfore they declared only certain cōmō & light thīgs. But we geue vnto him Attributa or proprieties, y t is, good, iust, faire, wise, & other such like: bicause we haue no excellenter things, nor nobler names, whiche cā better be applied, or agree w t him. Neither yet are these things so in him, as we speake: for, for y t he is most simple, The knowledge of God by fayth. he is farre otherwise good, iust, & wise, thā men either are, or are called.
But besides this naturall knowledge of god, this knowledge also offreth it selfe vnto vs, which consisteth of faith, & is by the worde of god reueled vnto vs. [Page 122] But faith is not of vs (as to the Ephesians it is sayd) but it is the gifte of God: for Christ also saith: No man can come vnto me except my father drawe him. Faith therfore aboundantly gathereth out of the holy scriptures y e knowledge of god, as much as sufficeth to saluation, or as much as this our lyfe is able to receaue. Howbeit as Paul testifieth this knowledge also is imperfect. For now we know hym by a glasse in a shadow & but partly: & althoughe in this knowledge we profyte, whilest we liue here, yet can we not atteyn to the knowledge of the essence of god. I know that Augustine thought as touching Paul & Moses, y e sometyme, The opinion of Augustine, of Paul and Moses. in minde whilest they were here, they saw the substaunce of God: but I can not easely agree vnto it, forasmuch as I iudge that those places of Iohn, of the lawe, & of Paul, which I before alledged, are most euidēt. Vnto which this may also be added, which is written in the 6. chap. of Iohn. Not that any man hath sene the father: he which is of god, he seeth the father. And this is not to be passed ouer, y e that which is here spoken of the father, is true also of the sonne, as touchyng his deuine nature. Bycause, as I haue aboue declared, both out of Chrisostome and out of Augustine, the nature as wel of the Sonne, as of the Father is inuisible. And it skilleth not if thou say, as Augustine sayth, that they sawe the nature and substaunce of God, not vsing the outwarde senses but in a certayne traunse or rauishing, or beyng alienated from the vse of this lyfe. These thinges are not gathered out of the Scriptures, yea contrarily we haue heard that Moses was denyed the sight of the face of God. Wherfore by the knowledge of fayth we both knowe God and his good will towarde vs, as much as is sufficient to our true and perfect saluation.
But among all those thinges, wherby out of the holy sciptures we know god, In Christ god is sayd to be made visible. there is none more excellent than Christ himselfe. Wherefore Paul hath iustly sayd: without controuersye it is a great mistery, God is made manifest in the fleshe, &c. The Lord also sayth: Philip, he whiche seeth me, seeth also the father. Paul also said that he knew nothing els, but Iesus Christ, and him crucified. And vndoubtedly in Christ God may be sayd to be made visible: bycause he was ioyned together with man in the same selfe person. Wherfore they whiche sawe Christ, might say y t they had sene God. And he which by faith beholdeth and acknowledgeth him, doth see far much more, than if he should behold the burnyng bushe of Moses. Wherfore to the Collos. it is written, that in him are put all the treasures of the wisdome & knowledge of god. And Iohn doth healthfully admonishe vs in his Epistle the 3. chap. as he which hath a hope to see God as he is, let him prepare himselfe therunto, by purging himself, as he is pure & cleane. Thus much of the Question, now let vs returne vnto the history.
23 And the Lord sayd vnto him: Peace be vnto thee, be not afeard, thou shalt not dye.
24 And Gideon built there an alter vnto the Lorde, and called it Iehouah Shalum, euen vnto this day. It is yet in Ophrath y e pertayneth to the Abiezerite.
Whē these things were spokē vnto Gideō, by y e history it appeareth not, but I thinke it was y e next night after y e things already rehearsed, wherfore he was cō maūded to build there an alter, where y e meates which was setforth were cōsumed with fire, namely vpon y e rocke, wherof is menciō made a litle before. Why God appeared vnto Gideon the second tyme. Gideō was vexed w t feare, supposing y e bycause he had sen god, he should die. Wherfore god cōforted him, y t he being voyde of y e feare, might y e chearefullier prepare him selfe, vnto those thinges which wer cōmaūded him. That feare wōderfully letted his faith. For how could he beleue, that he should set y e Israelites at liberty, which euery houre suspected death to be at hād. Wherfore god in cōforting him, remoued away y e feare, y t he might persecute y e worke, which lōged especially vnto faith. Thou shalt not die, saith he Peace be vnto the. In y e hebrew phrase, peace signifieth trāquility, good successe, & as y e cōmon people say, prosperous fortune. [Page] This word Shalū is deriued of y e verbe Shalā, which is to performe, to finish, & to accōplish. The latin word Pax also which is peace, agreeth w t y e hebrew significatiō. For if we may beleue Augustine, Pax y t is peace, is a trāquility of ordre. And then we recken al things to be peaceable, whē they are right & quietly disposed.
And Gideon built there an altar. These wordes are spoken by the figure Prolepsis: for he was in the night admonished of y e Lord to builde this altare, for the holy scripture vseth to set forth a thing summarily: & then to declare the thing as it was done. Wherfore god came vnto Gideon in his sheape, comforted him, that he should not feare least he should dye, cōmaunded him to buyld an alter, to take a bulloke, to do sacrifice, to cut downe the prophane groue, and to ouerthrow the alter of Baal, Why the Elders vsed alters. which was had in estimation. The elders vsed alters not only to sasacrifice vpon, but y t they might be monumentes of some notable benefite geuen by god. We read y t Moses did so, when the Israelites vnder y e Lord obteyned the victory against Amalek. After y e exāple of Gideō, euery one y t is iustified by faith & hauing peace toward god by Christ, & being assured of eternall life, ought in his hart to graue such a litle, Christe is our peace. Christ is my Peace which thīg Paul also hath taught when he wrote to the Ephes. He is our Peace, which made both one.
25 And the same night, The Lord said vnto him, Take thy fathers yong bullok, & the other bullok of vii. yeares old, & destroy the altar of Baal, that thy father hath, & cut downe the groue, that is by it.
26 And build an altar vnto the Lord thy god vpon the top of this rocke in a playne place, & take the second bulloke, & offer a burnt offring with the wood of the groue, whiche thou shalt cut downe.
That which before was in a sūme spokē, is now particularly expressed. Some thinke y e two bullokes are here mēcioned, of which the one is called y e secōd other by order of natiuity, or as they stoode in order at the racke & mangor. And that second, is specified, to be vii. yere olde, in at which time being made fat, at y e lēgth to be offred to Baal: this bulloke god would haue offred vnto himselfe for aburnt offring. And bycause there is no farther mencion made of y e first bulloke, neither did god cōmaunde what he would haue done with it, therfore I thinke we must vnderstād but one & the self same bullok which before is put absolutly, & thē by exposition repeted y t he might be by some certaine tokēs knowen frō other bulloks, wherof peraduenture his father had many, so y t it was vii. yeares fatted, & stood in y e secōd stalle. And as touching y e vii. yeres fatting there is no cause why we should meruaile at it, Apis the oxe was lōg fatted forasmuch as y e oxe called Apis or Serapis which was wont to be sacrificed, was fatted certain yeares before. And it is not hard to beleue, The Hebrues vsed the superstitions of the Egyptians. but that this custome of the Egyptians was supersticiously kept among y e idolatrous Hebrues, for that they were not onely neighbours vnto Egypt, but also they came out of it into the land of Palestine.
God would haue an alter erected vnto him vpon a hard and stronge rocke, namely vpon y t, wherout fire was stricken, to burne those thinges whiche Gideon brought, as though God by y e miracle had appointed it for himselfe. He cōmaundeth an alter to be raised vp in a place apt, for y e stone or rock, as it is to be supposed, was great. Wherfore he willeth Gideon to chose one certain euen part of it aboue the rest, which was most fit to build an alter vpō. And this is chiefly to be noted, y e god when he would deliuer the Israelites from y e Madianites cōmaūded aboue all things, y e idolatry should be ouerthrowē. For vntill as long as religiō is not restored, Nothing goeth forwarde well in a plub. welth except religion be first restored nothing goeth forward well & luckely in the pub. wealth. Farthermore faith is y e groūdsele & foūdation of actiōs to come. And y t cā not be had, where y e worshipping of god is turned into superstitiō & impiety. Which thing if god in a maner in al expeditions doth obserue, let Magistrates therby gather, what they ought aboue all things to do among y e people whō they gouerne. Priuate mē also by this exāple ar admonished, chiefly to frame piety in their minds. [Page 123] It is not sufficient to build an altar vnto the Lord, vnles the sacrilegious altare be cut downe: neither is it inough to ouerthrow that, vnles vnto the true god be his altare builte. There are whiche fall from the Pope, but they so fall, that they will not follow the Gospell. And some there are which do in such sorte receaue the true doctrine, that for all that they wil not depart from the pernicious masses, and other papisticall impietyes. God hathe not so, not so (I saye) commaunded whiche soeuer of these thou neglectest, thou breakest his commaundemente.
That there were groues by the temples of the idoles, none, About idoles were groues. whiche hath red Poetes or hystoryes, doubteth. That was a certayne mutacion of the Patriarches, which offred sacrifices vnder okes, or in hilles, which they called high places. They delighted (as I thinke) in close places, wherby theyr mind, when they sacrificed, was more voyd of worldly cares and affayres. And for the most parte experience teacheth vs, that in darke places, & where high trees grow, a certain admiration commeth vnto the mindes, by which admiration they applye themselues the more to the meditation of thinges deuine. God cōmaundeth the groue to be cut down, bicause it was together w t y e altare dedicated vnto the god Baal. Yet he commaundeth his wood, and the oxe appoynted for him, to be transferred to his own sacrifice, least any man should think that the true god is not lord of all thinges. For there is nothing so vnder the power of the deuill, but that it may be turned to the glory and honour of god. Yet the godlye oughte not by this example to eate thinges offred vnto idoles, when they know that they are suche in dede. Not vndoubtedly, bcause the nature of that flesh is chaunged, or ceaseth to belonge vnto god, but bicause of the conscience of the weake ones, and leaste it shoulde seeme that we woulde be made pertakers of the table of the deuilles. But such lawes God hath prescribed vnto vs, not vnto him selfe. Wherefore he maye vse thynges dedicated vnto idoles for hys owne burnt offringes.
The groue, the altar, and the bullock are mencioned to belong vnto Ioas the father of Gideon: because he had y e office of a Magistrate in Ophrath: & whatsoeuer was the cause, it is to be thought that he mayntayned idolatry there. And forasmuch as sacred places & sacrifices are appointed to the possessiō of priuate men, therfore magistrates are wonte to haue the rule & disposition of them. Gideon is chiefly commaunded, to do these things that euery man might vnderstand, that in purging of religiō, or amending any other sin, we must first begin at our own famely, and at such as are niest of kinne, least any man should seme to correcte other, and in the meane time leaue his owne neglected and vnamended.
27 Then Gideon tooke tenne men of his seruantes, and did as the Lorde badde him. But bicause he feared to doo it by daye for hys hys fathers householde, and the menne of the Citye, he dydde it by nyghte,
The feare of Gideon resisteth nothyng agaynst hys fayth. God wil haue euery man to fulfil his vocatiō, but yet he forbiddeth not to adde prudence. We must take place, time, and occasion, vnlesse God appoynt these thinges also Howbeit we muste beware, that in adding these cautions we goe aboute nothinge that is agaynst the precepts of God: for that prudence is praysed which with thinges well done neglecteth no sinne. Supersticions are more set by o [...] men, [...]h [...]n pure religion Hereby also we gather that Gidion was not o [...] to [...] basest sort, forasmuch as out of his famely he could take out ten seruantes. He feared, and so feared that in the day time he durst not do that whiche the Lorde ha [...] commaunded. For the worshippinge of Baal was nowe confirmed: and superstitions once established by takinge deepe rootes, are wonte to haue more [Page] authority, than perfecte, pure and sincere worshipping of god can euer obtayne. Such vngodlines is there grafted in the hartes of men, that at this day, if a man in the papacy detest the masse, or deride a pece of bread, which the wicked sacrificers both worshippe and cary about, he shalbe much more cruellye punished and tormented, than if he shoulde with horrible blasphemies defame the true God and our Lord Iesus Christ. So at that time he was counted as a most detestable heretike worthy to be killed, which had done any contumely vnto the holy seruices of Baal.
Whereunto the feare of Gideon tendedBut wherunto tended this pollicy of Gideon? That must needes be cutte of which was done, neither coulde the author of so greate an enterprise be hidden. This is true: but he iudged that in the mean time this daūger was to be auoyded, lest in the day time in the acte doing he should be taken. For he should haue bene letted both by his fathers houshold, and also by the men of the citye, from executing the commaundementes of God. and peraduenture in accomplishinge the worke shoulde haue beene slaine. The name Baall agreeth very well with the true God. Thys Baal (as in an other I haue declared) had his beginninge of Bel the father of Minus. But as touchinge the name, we must know, that by it an excellent propriety of God is expressed. For Baal in hebrew signifieth a Lord, a maister & a husbdā, al which things in very dede agree with God. For he is Lorde of all thinges, and the teacher of all true wisedome, & the onely husband of the churche. Wherefore these men erred not in iudging the proprieties of God. Neyther erred the Grecians whē they called him [...]. For by that title they declared that God is the author of lyfe. The Romaynes also called God Iubiter, as though they should say Iubiter father. Wherfore these words are for god most worthy: and it may be, y t the old mē which so spake, had a respect vnto the true god the chief of all. But that was vtterly vngodly and detestable, which afterward was committed, namely to ascribe these proprieties as well to starres as to men, and also to brute beastes and idoles, wherby all thinges were filled with idolatry. Farthermore the Hebrewes, although God had taught thē his name, by which he would haue them call vpon him, and praye vnto him, yet they forsoke it, & vsed the names & holy seruices inuented by y e Ethnikes, & neglecting the rites commended vnto the both by the law and also by their elders, they receaued prophane ceremonies. Wherfore they had an altare dedicated vnto an idole, a groue about it, and certayn yeares they fed and fatted some certayn bullockes for the sacrifice. And at the length they became not the worshippers of the true god, but the true worshyppers of Baal in all thinges.
Gideon in the night ouerthroweth the altar, cutteth down the groue, buildeth an altar vnto the Lord, & (as he was cōmaunded) offred a burnt offring. Al these things wer testimonies of his fayth, whereby he confessed, and that frō the hart that he detested idolatry, and perfectly beleued in the only lord the god of the Hebrewes 1 and sacrificed vnto him. Some thynges are here mencioned, which were not done by an vniuersall law but by a certayne prerogatiue and priuelege. Gideon being of the tribe of Manasses sacrificeth, when as sacrificing belonged only vnto the Leuites. This if he had done of his own brayne, he shoulde not haue 2 wanted blame. Secondly a priuate man ouerthroweth the aultare, and cutteth downe the groue: in whiche thinge he tooke vpon him the office of a magistrate. But in these things we must haue a regard to the word of god, by which he was peculiarly stirred vp to do these things. Wherfore they which to these works ar not in like manner called, ought to kepe thēselues vnder the common law. But as I haue in an other place admonished, idolatry is of all men to be taken away but yet of euery man, according to his state & condition. Let magistrates by outward violence, ministers by the word, and priuate men, by abstayning and gainsaying, take away vngodlynes.
28 And when the men of city rose rose earely in the morning, they saw the altar of Baall destroyed, & the groue, that was by it was cutte down, and the second bullocke offred vpon the altar that was made.
29 And they said one to an other, who hath done this thing? & whē they enquired and asked, they sayd Gideon the sonne of Ioas hath done this thinge.
30 Then sayd the men of the city vnto Ioas, Bring out thy sonne that he may dye: because he hath destroyed the aultar of Baal, and hath also cut downe the groue that was by it.
31 Ioas aunsweared vnto all those that stoode by: will ye pleade Baals cause? Or will ye saue him? He that will pleade for him let him dye ere the morninge. If he be god, let him pleade for himself against him that hath cast downe his altar.
32 And he called him in y t day Ierubbaal: saying: Let Baal pleade with him, bicause he hath broken down his altar.
They most grieuously prosecute the matter against him which had inuiolated the sacred thinges of Baal, and yet they suffred the worshipping of the true god to lye neglected and despised. It is the maner of humane wisedome, with earnest labour to defend theyr owne inuentions: and obstinately to resiste those thinges which god hath commaunded. They will kill Gideon, as a sacrileger and moste pernicious heretike, they behaue themselfes sediciously against the Magistrate, they shew forth no lawes, but in a certayne blinde fury they iudge the crime cō mitted to be vtterlye worthye of death, when as they themselues rather should haue bene condēned worthy of death, bicause they had violated the worshipping not of an idole, but of y e true God. What he was y e shewed that Gideō did these thinges, the history expresseth not. God suffreth not such thinges to be hidden therfore he had means and ways in a maner infinite, whereby he would make them open. But to know what were the tokens of the thyngs done, it is no skil to vs, but let vs diligently marke the impotency of idolatrers. Idolatrers can not abide to haue vngodlye worshippinges taken away. They cannot by any meanes abide to haue wicked worshippinges taken away. The Hebrewes sayd vnto Ieremy that they would vtterly worshippe the queene of heauen, that is the moone and other starres. The Ephesians being as it were in a rage, cried without meane or reason, Great is Diana of the Ephesians. The Romaines whilest Italy was wasted by the Gothes, Vandales, and Lombardes, neyther cried nor desired any other thing, but that the alters and temples of idoles might be restored. That said they was y e hed of euils, bicause the holy seruices of country were abolished. The like example do we no see in these men, they neither wil nor can not abide, that Gideon shuld escape whō they saw had cut down theyr idolatry. Now is Gideon counted a seditious fellow, which hath committed such thinges as we at this day of the gretest part of christendome ar accused of sedicion, which haue disturbed false worshippinges now being receaued. And we graunt indede that seditions ar to be auoided as much as may be, bicause ciuile peace is a good thinge which wise and quiet mindes ought to desire. Obedience to the word of god is to be preferred before euil [...] peace. But contraryly the truth is not to be suppressed, nether must we sin against the worshipping of God, and it is much better to defēd the word of god thā ciuile peace. Euery godly man so roweth when tranquility of the publike wealth cannot be coupled with the obedience of the word of God. Wherfore for asmuch as the one or the other is to be chosen, the whole and vncorrupted worshipping of God ought rather to be wished for, thā the commodity of outward peace. For the end of cities and publike [Page] wealthes is, to obey God, and rightly to worshi [...]pe god, that is by his word and prescribed rule. For to haue a city or publike wealth quiet and peaceable, is not by it self necessary, but to obey God, to beleue his word, and to worshippe him as he hath prescribed, is the summe and end of all humayne things, and therefore it is to be preferred aboue all good thinges. Neither is it anye newe or vnaccustomed thing, that by true piety sedicions are stirred vp. Christ of that thing hath admonished vs: I came not (sayth he) to send peace on the earth, but a sworde. I came to kindle fire: what will I, but that it should burne? The time shall come sayth he, that for the Gospels sake, the father from the childe, the children from the parentes, brethern from brethren, shall not onely be alienated, but which is more cruell, The godly are not guilty of the troubles whych happen for religions sake. they shall deliuer one an other to the death. And yet these sedicions & troubles are not to be ascribed vnto the godly: forasmuch as they whēthey obey god, do not depart from their office, they do that which they should do: the fault consisteth in the vngodly and idolatrers, they are to be accused, and cōdempned as guilty of those euils, because they can not abide the truth, neyther will they obey the word of god. Wherfore prechers of the gospel ar to be absolued of this crime: for sediciōs spring not throgh theyr default which obey god, but through the peruersnes of the world, which streyght rageth agaynst the word of god.
Ioas, like a wise and stoute Magistrate, at the beginning asswageth the people being in an vprore, shewing them how vnworthy a thinge they doo, when they beyng priuate men, dare auenge the cause of Baal. VVill ye pleade his cause? As though he should haue sayd. It is not your office, it pertayneth to me and the other magistrates. And then he maketh a proclamation agaynst the sedicious persons. He that will so stand in Baals cause, shal dye, and that this daye, or the morninge. He shal not liue till morning, for he shalbe executed out of hand. If Baal be god, let him plead his own cause agaynst him, which hath cast down hys altar, and hath cut down h [...]s groue. If the matter be to be discussed without iudgemente and ordinary action, Baal hath no neede of thys your helpe: for seing he is god, he can right wel reuenge himself. The last part of this sentence is somewhat dark. He that wil plead. Lo, for him or against him, let him dy this day before morning. Some expounde this woorde Lo, to signify, for him namely for Baal, as though the [...]retor had put forth his decree after this maner: Whosoeuer goeth aboute to moue sedition, as though he would pleade for Baal, him will I strayghtewaye punish, as a troublesome citezen, which dareth to take vpon him more then hys state may suffer. The other sense is to expound this woorde Lo, against him, as though he should haue sayde: do not rage in this sorte, bycause he shall vtterlye dye, and that this day before morning, which agaynst Baal hath pleaded and contended. By the power of this god he shall not so escape. And this sentence seemeth to be confirmed by the words which follow: If he be god, let him pleade his owne cause agaynst him, which hath done him iniurye. But I rather allowe the fyrst sentence: because the holy scripture rather vseth this word Lo in that sense.
Gideon by his fathers aunswer was named Ierubbaal. He shal plead (saith Ioas or let Baal plead against him. These ar words ether of them that praieth, which would so speake in earnest or faynedly, or els of one that affirmeth as though he should affirm, that it should vtterly so come to passe. The men which herd these word [...]s, either because they meruayled that the father wished these things vnto his sonne, or els bycause they beleued that the earth would strayghtway swalow him vp, or the lightning would destroy him, or that god would by some exquisit punishment punish him, they waited (I say) to see what would happen. And therfore they called him Ierubbaal. And his surname was then of farre more estimation, when they saw that he escaped safe and sound, and contrarye to the hope of all men deliuered the Israelites from the power of theyr enemies.
By this example Magistrates may know what they should doo, The office of a stout Magistrate agaynste tumultes bycause of religiō when Papistes stirre vp sedition or tumult in their dominion, bicause Masses are abrogated, Idolatry taken away, and the Pope throwen downe. They must valiantly stande by it, and must declare, that this charge pertaineth not vnto these, by violēce to defend rites and supersticions: forasmuch as they haue not the sword: theyr care should be this, to see that godlynes be rightlye and orderlye appointed. If so bee that they desire any thing against lawes or right, and thinke that they haue the better cause, let them from God waite for the successe. He is of himselfe by nature both mighty and wife, and therefore if he allowe the Masse, the Pope and superstitions, hee wyll then take those thinges in hande himselfe. In the meane time they ought to compel their subiectes to obey iust and healthful decrees. By these thinges it appeareth as I suppose, that Ioas was not a Baalite from the hart, for he could not haue said: If h [...]e God, let him pleade his own cause. Vnles thou will faine that he said, in time to come Baal shal pleade his owne cause: but what he before iudged of Baal, now he declareth, when he seeth the daunger of death that his sonne is in for his sake.
33 Then al the Madianites, and the Amalekites, and the children of Kedem were gathered together, and pitched their tentes in the valley of Iszreel.
34 And the spirite of the Lorde did put on Gideon, and he blew a trumpet, and Abiezer was gathered together after hym.
35 And he sent messengers through out al Manasseh, and he also was ioyned wyth hym. And he sent messengers vnto Aser and Zebulon, and to Nephthali, and they came vp to meete hym.
When the vprore & seditions wer pacified, which were stirred vp for a thing godlily done of Gideon, God prouided that occasion shoulde be geuen, whereby he might by Gideon geue vnto the Israelites the victory against their enemyes. That thereby at the last they might vnderstand with howe muche godlines and profit, the worshipping of Baal was taken away. In the cōming of the enemyes the spirit of the Lord did put on Gideon, the spirit I say of strength, as the Chaldey Paraphrast interpreteth. God had before appointed Gideon for a sauiour of the Hebrues, now when he should go forth vnto the battail, he suffreth him not to go vnarmed, but endueth him with his spirit. The Metaphore of putting on is deriued of garmentes, which are put vpon the bodye. The spirite of the Lorde therfore is inwardlye hidden in the outwarde man, and so woorketh by him, as though he had put him on. And this is a phrase of speche very muche vsed in the scripture, and especially in this booke. This did the Angel signify shoulde come to passe, when he said vnto Gideon: Go in this strength, and deliuer the Iewes frō the Madianites. Now is it brought to passe that Gideon is endued wyth the spirite of strength. For this was that power and myght of God, wherewith in the old time he deliuered the fathers. He blew a trumpet, and Abiezer followed him, which in dede was marueilous, forasmuch as they were so angry for the ouerthrowing of Baal. But their myndes were by the inspiration of God chaunged. For when they saw that the Idole did to him no hurt, they began to haue a good opinion of him. The whole tribe of Manasses followed him, also Zebulō, Aser, Naphthali. Gideon alone was called, but yet he would not fight with hys enemies alone. For faith refuseth not humane helpe which iustlye may be had: for godly men are not by fayth styrred vp to tempt God.
36 And Gideon sayde vnto God: If thou wylt saue Israel by my hande as thou haste sayde:
37 Behold I wyl put a fleese of wool in the threshyng place, if the [Page] dew come vpon the fleese onely, & it be dry vpon al the earth, thē shal I be sure, that by my hand thou wilt saue Israel, as thou hast sayd.
38 And it was so: for he rose vp earlye on the morrowe, and thrust the fleese together, and wrynged the dewe out of the fleese, and fylled the vyole with the water.
39 Againe Gideon sayde vnto God: Be not angry wyth me, and I wyll speake onely once more: Let me proue onely once, I praye thee wyth the fleese. Let it, I pray thee, he dry vpon the fleese onely, and let the dewe be vpon all the ground.
40 And God dyd so the same night: for it was drye vpon the fleese onely, and there was dewe on all the grounde.
Mans imbecillity is diuers and manyfold, wherby it cōmeth to passe, that in the promises of God we wauer and doubt. Gideon was called by so playne and manifest woordes, that there was no occasion of doubting left. He had no cōmon signe when the sacrifice was consumed with fire: he is nowe furnished wyth an host, & yet he now also wauereth, & needeth a new confirmation. We vse not so to do when we beleue men: for if there de but a bare promise, or a hand writing made, we are content. But God must continually beate in into vs those things which he promiseth, and seale them with miracles and Sacramentes, and yet euen then also we geue litle credit vnto them. And though we should endaūger our selues for accomplishing of our own lustes, or prosecuting our own affairs, there are we stoute, there are we bolde, and nothing afeard, when as otherwise few there are found which in God his cause, or for his words sake wil put them selues in daunger. In which thing neuerthelesse we ought to be most stoute: for God wyl not leaue vs destitute of his ayde. He addeth the spurres of promises, the confirmation of miracles, and to those which cease of, he threateneth verye grieuous punishmentes. Whence our distrust cōmeth And this pestilence springeth of no other thing, but bycause we trust to our owne sense and reason, more then is conuenient. And against thys euyl there is no remedy so present, as frō them to prouoke our selues to fayth and constancy in God.
Whither Gideon in requiring these signes, be to be condēned. R. Leui ben Gerson thinketh that Gideon, when he required these signes, did partly distrust, and partly beleue: whose opinion if it be receaued, then Gideon is guilty of infidelity. And I iudge y t we must not labour much, vtterlye to acquite him of al faultes. To the Hebrues his faith in dede is commended: but me thinketh that we must not deny but that it was wauering, before it was by diuers meanes confirmed. And vndoubtedly it is a great matter, to confirme the harte of man in the woord of God. Although I am not ignorant, that they which defend Gideon, do say that he doubted not, but that he was called of god to set at liberty the Israelites. But in requiring these signes, he onelye asked counsell of God: whither he should then obtaine the victorye againste the Madianites, when now he had collected and host. And that in the old time with the captaines of the Israelites was a common custome. For Saul and Dauid, although they wer by God chosen kinges, namely to saue the people, neither did they therof any thing doubt, yet did they often times aske counsel of God, whither they should ascend to any place, whither their enemies should be deliuered into their handes: or contrary, whither they should fall before their enemies, or bee deliuered into theyr handes. So peraduenture it might be sayd, that this captain, for that he had not with him the Arke of the Lord, or a Prophet whom he might aske counsel of, as touching the successe of the battail, by those signes did aske counsel of the Lord. Augustine in his .63. Augustine. Ambrose. question vpon Genesis in this maner excuseth Gideon, and affirmeth that he by these petitions tempted not God, but asked counsel as touching the successe. And as cōcerning this thing, as he is wont, he agreeth with [Page 126] Ambrose, who in his first booke de spiritu sancto, and .i. chap. affirmeth that Gideon doubted not. And the Rabbines of the Hebrues think that these signes wer geuen vnto Gideon by the ministery of some prophet: but what he was, neyther the scripture declareth, neither can they tell. And there are some of them whiche suppose that al this thing was done in a vision. But of these things what nede we any more to argue? Forasmuch as there is nothing whiche letteth, but that Gideon might in very dede both demaund, and haue experience of these things. Howbeit, the thing teacheth that al these things happened in the summer time, for that there is mencion made of dew.
I easily assent vnto Augustine, which saith that Gideon tempted not God, Augustine. We maye require a signe to strengthen our fayth. bicause I am perswaded, that by such signes he woulde haue his fayth confirmed, which otherwise was wauering. It is synne in deede to doubt in faythe, but to strengthen the same, it is lawful in time to require a signe. For in the Gospell the man cryed: Lord, I beleue, but helpe thou my incredulitye. Yea and Gideon also in the selfe same thing had before tryal of consolation: wherfore it is no maruel if he againe desired the remedy, which he had had experiēce of. Why Gideon required contrary sygnes. He requireth contrary signes, bicause the first semed not to be so great a wonder, that the rest of the earth should be dry, & the fleese moyst. Bicause such is the nature of wool, that by a certaine proper power it draweth moystnes vnto it selfe, as the Magnete stone draweth yron, and Naphtha, fire. Naphtha a kinde of chalk. Wherefore the wool myght easilye drinke in the dewe, and that aboūdantly, although the earth wer not yet moist. But that about the fleese the earth should be moist, and the wool dry, it was vtterly against nature.
What is the Allegorye of these sygnes, Augustine vpon the .71. Augustine. Ambrose. The Allegorye of these signes. Psalme writeth, and also Ambrose in his first booke de spiriru sancto, in the Proheme. The fleese they vnderstand to be the people of the Hebrues, who in the old time wer watred with the woord of God, when as the whole earth, that is, all other nations, wanted the preaching of the woord of God. Christ also was the minister of the circumcision, & in the first embassadge he sēt his Apostles onely to y e Iewes. But afterward the thing was so altered, that the whole worlde, after the comming of the holy ghost vpon the Apostles, was watred wyth the woord of God, and the Iewes vtterly wanted it, and as barren bowes were cut of from the fertile and fat Olyue tree.
¶Of Miracles.
IN the ende of the chapter twoo thinges are to be enquired of. The first is of miracles: the other is, how much or in what sort it is lawful to require them. The Etymology of y e wordes.
As touching the firste, the Hebrue verbe is Pala, or Niphla, whiche is, it was hard, or marueilous: wherof ar deriued these nownes Niphlaoth or Miphlaoth. By which woordes are noted thinges seuered from other, for their dignitye or excellency, seperated I say, and wonderful. The Grecians call it [...], of thys verbe [...], which is to maruayle. The Latines call them Miracula, that is miracles, bicause they are woorthy of admiration. They cal them also Prodigia monstra, and Portanta, that is wonders, monsters, and thinges seldom sene, that we should vnderstand that God by these thinges wyl shewe that some certayne thing shal come to passe or be done, contrary to the cōmon order of things aboue hope or expectation. Miracles very muche renoumed. Wherfore seing mircales ar done aboue the natural course of thynges, they bring with them admiration. And vndoubtedlye there are verye many miracles, which by writers are made famous, as the temple of Diana in Ephesus. the Tombe of Artemisia Queene of Caria, the horrible great image of y e Sūne at Rhodes, the walles of Babilon, & very many other of y e sort. Wherfore Augustine against the Epistle of the Maniches, the .xvi. Augustine. A general description of myracles. chap. prudently writeth, I call a miracle whatsoeuer appeareth harde or vnaccustomed, aboue the hope or faculty of the wonderer. By which wordes, a certaine large description [Page] of miracles may be had. Transubstantiation is yll fayned to be a myracle. And forasmuch as it said, that a miracle appeareth, they are worthely reproued which do fayne Transubstantiation, and wyll haue it to be a miracle, which can neither be confirmed by the holy scriptures, and seing that it appeareth not, neither can it be sene, it cannot be called a myracle.
After this very common and large description, ther is to be added, that of miracles certaine are true, False miracles and certaine are false. For those are called false myracles, which either are not that which they seme to be, or els if they bee, they are not done by anye power, which passeth nature, but by the powers of nature, although it be secrete. For Angels either good or bad may do them, and that thre maner of wayes. For sometime they applye vnto matter the strengthes of nature, which they perfectly know, of which cōiunction of y e matter wyth efficient causes, do follow effectes, & ar in dede in a maner vpon the sodaine, at the which the beholders cannot but maruayle. The deuils know that of thinges putrified are engendred Frogges, woormes, or some certaine Serpentes, so that heate in certaine degrees be added. Wherfore seing to them it is not hard to couple these thinges together, they do it somtimes to deceaue men with al. And by this meanes Augustine thinketh (as he writeth in his .3. Augustine. booke de Trinitate) that the sorcerers of Pharao did sometimes the same thinges which Moses dyd. Farther, the mouings of the spirites, of the blood and humours, doo verye much trouble the bodies of men: whereby figures, images, and shapes of thinges, whyche in them are kept, are in the same mocion brought before the phantasy or imagination, & by that maner and order, that the troubler of the spirite knitteth them. Wherof do spring sundry and manifold sightes, which we see doo sometimes happen in suche as are in phrensy. And the thing may come so farre, that the formes and images which are inwardly kept, may be called backe euen vnto the outwards senses. Whereby, he which suffreth such thinges, weeneth that he verilye seeth and feeleth those thinges whiche are in his imagination or phansye, and in hys sense, when as in very dede there is no suche thing outwardlye done. And thys kinde of miracles ought rather to be referred to illusions, then to miracles.
It also commeth to passe, that sometimes these spirites by their own power, either of the ayre, or els other elements do forme certaine bodies, y t they appeare vtterly like mens bodies, and vnder them they appeare to whō soeuer they lust. So came they sometimes to Abraham, Lot, and other fathers. These thinges (if we speake properly and simply) ar not true miracles, but in our reason & iudgement ther is nothing letteth, but that they may so be called. Yea and commonly Iuglers are said to do miracles, when as for all that they deceaue by the nymblenes of the handes, or by the powers of certaine thinges natural, do represent thinges wonderful to the beholders.
What true miracles are.But this is the definition of true miracles. A miracle is a woorke hard and vnaccustomed, by the power of God, which passeth al faculty of nature created, to this ende wrought, to cause the beholders to wonder, and to confirme fayth towardes the woord of God. Causes of myracles. Wherefore the matter of miracles are woorkes: and the forme is, that they be hard and vnaccustomed. The efficient cause, is the power of God, which ouercommeth nature created. And the end of them is both admiration and also confirmation of faith.
And that we should not doubt of the efficient cause, this I thinke good to be added: That that power of God which vtterly is aboue the faculties of nature, is to be vnderstande, sometimes to woorke by it selfe, and other sometimes eyther by Aungels or by men, and that in such maner as wee shall afterwarde declare. Augustine. Farther, I wyll adde, that Augustine writeth in the place before alledged against the Epistle of the Maniches, the .xxvi. chap. Miracles woulde not mooue except they were wonderfull, and they would not be wonderful, if they shoulde be accustomed thinges. As therefore they say that by admiration sprang Philosophy, whych Plato thought to be the Raynebowe, and for that cause calleth the [Page 127] daughter of Thaumans, so may we beleue that faith, Faithe cometh not of miracles but is by them confirmed. which cōmeth of the worde of God, although it do not vtterly spring of miracles, yet by them it may be confirmed. And therefore Augustine in his .xii. booke of Confessions the .xxi. chap. saith: Ignorance is the mother of wondring at signes: this is an entraunce vnto faith to the sonnes of Adam, which haue forgotten thee. By this sentence he teacheth that men which haue forget God, haue by the admiration of miracles an entrance or cōming vnto faith. And without doubt it is so. The wyll of God is hidden from vs: but he, as he is good, openeth the same to holy Prophets & Apostles: which that they may profitably declare vnto men, he geueth vnto them the gift of his holy woord. But bicause he knoweth that mortal men are contrary & against his word, he hath graūted the power of working of miracles, that those thinges might the easilier be beleued, which he would haue his messenger profitably to speake. That cōfirmation of faith cōmeth by miracles, Marke testifieth, who toward the end of his Gospel saith: And they went forth, preaching euerye where, the Lord working with them, & confirming the word with signes which followed. And how apt this kinde of confirmation is, hereby it is manifest. The promises of God do of no other thing depend, then of his wyll & power. And the signes which we now intreate of, do testify the power of God, forasmuch as they by al meanes ouercome nature, and set forth the truth of his wil: for by the inuocation of his name, & by his grace & spirit they are wrought. Augustine. Wherefore Augustine in the place now alledged against the Epistle of Manicheus writeth, that miracles do bring authority vnto the woord of God. For he, when he did these miracles, semed to haue geuen an earnest peny of his promises. Neither ar these wordes to be passed ouer, which the same Augustine hath vpon Iohn, in the .24. Miracles consist not in the greatnes of woorkes. treatise. That miracles consist not in the greatnes of workes: for otherwise it is a greater woorke to gouerne this vniuersal composition of the world, then vnto a blinde man to restore light, which he is destitute of.
These thynges declared, there remayneth that by apt distinctions we destribute miracles into his partes. Some of them are to be wondred at, An other distinction of myracles. by reason of the thing it selfe which is done, for that it is so vnaccustomed and great, that in the nature of thinges, we cannot finde the lyke of it. Suche was the staying of the Sunne in the time of Iosua, and the turning of that shadowe in the tyme of Ezechias, the conception and byrth of the Virgin, the foode of Manna in the deserte, and suche lyke. But there are some which ar miracles, not for the nature and greatnes of the thing, but bycause of the maner and waye whiche was vsed in bringing them to passe, as was the cloude and rayne of Helias, the budding of floures and fruites in the rod of Aaron, the thunders of Samuel, the turnynge of water into wyne, and suche lyke: For suche thinges are done by nature, but they were then myracles, bycause of the maner whereby they were wrought, that is, not by naturall causes, but at the commaundement and wyll of Sayntes.
There is an other deuision of myracles, An other deuision of miracles bycause some of them doo onelye mooue admiration, as lyghtenynges and thundrynges in mount Sina, the turning of the shadowe of the Sunne in the tyme of Ezechias, the transfiguration of the Lorde in the Mount. There are other, which besides the admiration, doo bring a present commoditye vnto men, as when by the rodde, dryncke was geuen out of the Rocke, Manna from heauen, and when by the Lord and the Apostles sycke folkes were healed. And sometimes they bring punishment and hurt vnto the guiltye. For by the woordes of Peter perished Ananias and Saphira. Elimas the Sorcerer was made blynde by Paule: and some were by hym delyuered vnto Sathan to be vexed.
By this also are miracles deuided, An other partitiō of miracles. bicause some of them are obtained by praiers. For so did Elias and Elizeus, namelye by praying, restore their deade to lyfe. [Page] Moses also praying for Pharao, draue away Frogs and other plages. And other some are wrought by commaundement and authority. Iosua commaunded the Sunne to stay his course. The Lord Iesus commaunded the windes, and Peter said vnto the lame man: In the name of Iesus Christ rise & walke. Ther ar also other which are done neither by praiers, nor by commaundement, but of theyr own wyll and accord, the saintes them selues doing some other thing. Euen as when the shadow of Peter as he walked, healed those that were sycke, and the napkin of Paul healed also folkes diseased.
Augustine. An other diuision of myracles.Lastly, Augustine (as it is written in his .83. booke of questions, question 79.) deuideth miracles, that some are done by publik iustice, that is, by the stable and firme will of God, which in the world is counted as a publike lawe. By it, God would that his ministers, that is, Apostles and Prophetes, shoulde in preaching woorke miracles. And there are other some which by the signes of this iustice are wrought, as when the vngodly in the name of God or of Iesus Christ do work any miracle, which is not geuen but by the honour and reuerence which thei vse towardes the name of God: not that God, or nature, or any thinges created desire to gratefy them. As, when a man stealeth away a publike seale or handwriting, he may wrest many thinges, either from the men of the countrey, or from the Citizens which are not geuen vnto him, but vnto the seale which they know doth belong to the Magistrate and Prince: So he, which followed not Christe, did yet in his name cast out deuils. Thirdly, are those miracles reckoned, which by some certaine priuate bargaine are wrought, wherby the Sorcerers do binde them selues vnto the Deuyl, and the deuil likewise to them. But those at done neither by publike iustice, nor yet by the signes therof, but come onelye of a certayne priuate conuention. Howbeit wee must knowe, that miracles of the second and third sort are not firme, neither do they assuredly happen. For asmuch as we reade in the .xix. chap. of the Actes of the Apostles, that the sonnes of Sceua would haue driuen out Deuils in the name of Iesus, whom Paul preached, to whom the Deuil said: Iesus in deede & Paul I know, but not you. Which when he had spoken, Ciprian. he inuaded them. And the same thing doth the act of Ciprian testify of the third kinde, before he was conuerted vnto Christ. For by magical artes he assayed to perswade a godly virgin to his filthy pleasure: which thing at the last the Deuil confessed that he could not performe vnto him.
Howbeit we must marke, that these miracles which are by a priuate contract done, Thei be not miracles in deede which the Deuil woorketh. are not in very dede miracles, but pertaine onely to those which we made mencion of before the definition: for although sometimes they bee that in verye dede which they seme for, yet are they not true miracles. For who doubteth, but that it was true fyre, wherwith the Cattel of Iob were burnt? and a true blast of winde, wherwith his house being throwen downe, his children were slayne? Yea and Augustine contēdeth that the Serpents which the Sorcerers brought forth were not illusions, Augustine. but true Serpentes in dede. For the history sayth, that when they came vnto the third signe, the Sorcerers sayde: This is the finger of God, and they testified that now their cunning failed them, & that they could no more do those things which Moses by the power of God did. And that is a token that they wrought not before by illusions, & that the Sorcerers euen tyll that time contended with Moses in things in dede, & not in illusions. But some wil say: Whiche signes say: of Antichrist ar called lyes. If the matter be thus, that the thinges which are done by the diuell & Sorcecers, be in very dede that which they seme for: why is it vnto the Thessalonians of Antechrist written, that by him very many should be deceaued by false signes & wonders? We must say, y t the lye ought not to be referred to y t which is to bee done, but vnto the miracle. For although the thinges which are done, shal sometimes be the same things in dede which they seme to be, yet shal they not be miracles, although they seme so. But Augustine answereth. Signes & wonders ar called lies, either bicause they appeare, & are not in dede, or els bicause they leade [Page 128] men to lyes. For Antechrist by those signes shall seeke nothing els, but to deceaue and allure men to beleue false thinges. That is no newe or vnaccustomed thing, that y e cause should by his effect obtain his name or propriety. But in that they appeare and are not, it may be two maner waies vnderstand: either bicause among true thinges some illusions are mingled: or els bicause thei are set forth for miracles, when as they are no miracles in deede.
There is an other doubt to be dissolued, how that power of God, whiche passeth nature, vseth either Angels or mē, as wel good as euil, to worke miracles. He vseth them as certaine instrumentes, & sometimes he doth miracles at their desire, prayers, and commaundement, without any of their outwarde woorke. And sometimes he wyl haue them, to adde some woorke or maistrye of theirs. For Moses smote the sea, and the rock with his rod. Christ touched the leprous, and anointed the eyes of the blinde. But we must vnderstande that there is two kindes of instrumentes. Some are so ordained, that althoughe they are not the principal causes efficient, yet do they very much profite, for the bringing foorth of the effect, as is pron to cut hard thinges, and medicines to heale, when as for all that they are instrumentes of the woorkemen. What strength instruments of God haue in doing hys miracles. But God in woorking miracles vseth an other kinde of instrument, namely, which of their own nature haue no strength to bring forth the effect. For what good could the rod do to open the sea? What could the shadow of Peter helpe to heale the sicke? Vndoubtedly nothing, if thou looke vpon nature it selfe. The instrumentes therefore which god vseth in these miracles, do of their own nature either nothing helpe vnto them, or rather sometimes let them, as the beholding of the brasen Serpent, the salt of Helizeus, the water of Elias, which he poured on the burnt offering, and the clay which Christ put to the eyes of the blinde. Wherfore, when miracles are done by instrumentes of this kinde which nothing helpe, yea rather do let the might and power of God, is much more apparantly illustrated.
Christ also to teache that natural strength seemeth nothing hereunto, at the mariage sayd vnto his mother: What haue I to doo with thee O woman? Not that he woulde in that thing derogate the authoritye of his mother, but that it might manifestly appeare, that the nature which hee tooke of her, was by hys own power, nothing able to woorke miracles. Wherefore, God vseth both good and euyll, aswel mē as angels, to woorke miracles. forasmuche as God for the working of miracles vseth men and Angels, and those as well good as euyl, and sometimes those miracles are benefites, and sometimes punishments, wherewith men are either punished or holpen, we must not doubt whether God do sometimes punish by good Angels. For it is very manyfest that Sodome was ouerthrowne by Angels, the host of Senacherib slayne by an Angell, and Dauid saw the Angel which was the minister of the pestilence of the Israelites.
But Augustine vpon the .78. Whither God doth by angels directlye helpe. Psalme doubteth whither God by euyll Aungels hath wrought miracles, whereby men wer immediatly endued with some benefite. And he faith, that he hath not red it in the holy scriptures: neither vndoubtedly haue I red it. Vnlesse we wyl say, that at the length it profited Paule, that he was vexed by the angel of Sathan. And that for that cause some wer by him deliuered vnto Sathan, that their spirite in the day of the Lord might be saued. But the question of Augustine tendeth not to this, but whither perfect and manifest benefites, as restoringes to health, prophecies, giftes of tonges, foode, deliuerye, and suche like, are of God sometimes by the Deuill geuen vnto holye men by some certayne miracle: I thinke herein as Augustine thincketh, that the same is no where testified in the holy scriptures. But that by euyll Angels, as wel the godly as the vngodly are tempted, punished & vexed, it is euident. But after a diuers sorte, Augustine. bicause (as Augustine in the same place affirmeth) there are after a sorte two flockes of men, namely one of the wicked, and an other of the good. The good are the flocke of God: euen as the wycked are the flocke of the Deuyll: wherefore towardes them he woorketh more frely as toward his own, [Page] he vexeth, mocketh, and handleth them yll, as by hys owne ryght. And yet towardes them can he not do any thing beyonde the measure prescribed of God. But against the flocke of God he dareth do thing, but so much as God himselfe wyll somtime permit him, as we reade was done of Iob. God sometime suffreth the sayntes to be greuously afflicted of Sathan, to the ende his grace towardes them may most manifestly be declared.
Whither the plagues of the Egiptians wer done by good Aungels or by euyll.But when Augustine expoundeth these wordes of the Psalme: namelye, the sending out of euyll Angels, he doubteth whither the plagues of the Egiptians were done by a good Angel or by the Deuyl. And at the length he sheweth, that the plague and destruction of the first begotten maye be ascribed vnto the ministery of the Deuyl: but the other plagues are to be attributed vnto good angels, that the sentence both of the booke of Exodus and of the Psalme may stand fast. Howbeit, as touching that plage of the firste begotten, in Exodus it is written vnder the name of God: I wil this night passe through Egipt, and wil smite. &c By these woordes that destruction semeth to be ascribed, eyther vnto god, or to a good Angel, and not vnto the Deuil. But that moueth me not much, bycause although it were done by the ministery of the Deuil, yet maye it be ascribed vnto the Lorde. For Iob, when by the woorke of the Deuil he was bereft bothe of goodes and children, said neuerthelesse: The Lorde hath geuen, and the Lorde hath taken away, and that (sayd he) was done by the Lorde, which was done by the Deuil. But some obiect: If we assigne these things vnto the Deuil, then shal he seme to haue fought against himself. For the Sorcerers, by the help of deuils, withstoode Moses, when they did the same thinges that he dyd. And if plagues were by euyl Angels sent against the Egiptians, and the Sorcerers went about to withstand them, then Sathan semed to resist Sathan. Neither could the Sorcerers haue trulye sayde that they fayled, and testified that it was the fynger of God whych wrought. But these reasons in my iudgement are not strong, bycause the thinges done by the Sorcerers, were done by the power of Sathan, which is vnto him naturall. For by it he is able to applye the seedes of thynges and woorking causes to his matter prepared, and to woorke wonders as touching the sight of man. But those thinges, wherewith God afflicted the Egiptians, were by his most mighty power wrought by the instrument of the Deuyll. Wherefore it is no maruail if the Sorcerers failed, and felt the most excellent power of the finger of God.
The place of Exodus and of the Psalme is conciliated.Howbeit the booke of wysdome the .xviii. chap. semeth vtterly to ascribe these plagues vnto God, wher he saith: while al thinges wer stil, and when the night was in the middest of her course, thy almighty word. &c. And in the .xvii. chap. it is written, that the Egiptians being among those plagues, especially when they were oppressed with darknes, wer with horrible vexations of minde, and sights very terrible so vexed, as though most doleful spirites had perpetuallye bene before their eyes, and about their phantasy: which vndoubtedly might be done by the sending of euyl Angels, as the Psalme doth mencion. Their hart also was hardened, and their mindes were dayly made much more obstinate againste the Israelites. And that semeth to haue pertained to the sending downe of euil angels. Wherfore these two places may easely be made to agree, in ascribing the plagues which ar mencioned in Exodus to good Angels, and the terrible sights and hardning of the hartes to the sending of euyl Angels vpon them, of whych the Psalme now alledged maketh mencion.
The power to work miracles maketh not mē better or woorser.But forasmuch as God (as it is declared) for the woorking of miracles, vseth both euil & good, angels & men, the godly men ought not therfore to be greued, bicause oftentimes he geueth not vnto them this faculty. For they are not for y e cause of any worse condition, then are they to whom God graunteth to woorke miracles. For the Lord said vnto his Disciples, when they returned from theyr embassadge: Reioyce not in this, bicause spirites are subiect vnto you: reioyce ye [Page 129] rather for this, bycause your names are wrytten in heauen. There are some which are so desirous of such thinges, that to obteine signes, they are not afraid to vse euen the help of y e deuill: and vnder this pretence they excuse themselues, To worke signes we must not vse the help of the deuill. bycause god himself to worke signes vseth Sathan, in following of whome they do well, so farre ar they of that they can be cōdemned guilty of any crime. They say also that Paul deliuered some to the deuill to be vexed: and therfore they also may vse his ministerye. But what manner of men are they, whiche wil affirme that it is lawfull for them to do asmuche as is lawfull vnto god? God is the author of all creatures, wherfore it is no marueile if he vse them all. But vnto vs it is by the law of god prescribed that we should not do it. It is not lawfull to imitate God in all thinges. And the immitation of god is so farforth commended vnto vs, as by his law it is commaunded vs and no otherwise. For he reuengeth his owne iniuries. And who will saye, that priuate men may do the same? God adioyned vnto his owne burnt offring the bullocke appointed for Baal (as we haue haue now hard) with the wood also dedicated vnto the same idole: Shall euerye one of vs therefore eate thinges dedicated vnto idoles? The rule of our actiōs, is the word of God. Wherfore we ought not to be drawen to imitate him, but so muche as the lawe suffreth. That lawe hath he made, not for himself, but for men, that they should frame theyr life after it. Wherfore it was to him lawful to require of Abraham the immolation of his sonne, which thing none of vs can require of our frend. Paule and other Apostles had euill sprites subiect vnto them, and by them it was sometimes lawfull vnto them, to punish the guilty for theyr saluation: Wherefore those to whome such a gift is not graunted ought to abstayne from excercising the same.
Wherefore the vse of the power of euil spirites is of two sortes, wherof one is with authority, and that belongeth chiefelye vnto god, also to the Apostles, and to the sayntes of the primitiue church. The other by compact & obedience which is vtterly forbidden mē. For what participatiō cā ther be of the light with darknesse, & of god with Belial? And for that cause the sorcerers which beleue thē, can not be excused, yet they ar by the law condēned guilty of superstition & idolatry. And it is not to be thought, but that god vpō very iust causes, and to vs most profitable hath forbidden these things to be done. Why God forbad men to vse the helpe of the deuil to worke myracles. For he prouideth that we should not be deceaued, and that by those meanes we shoulde not be throwne hedlonge into destruction. For therto at the length commeth the fellowshippes with Sathan. For the deuil is a lier, & the father of lyes, and he is also a murtherer, euen from the beginning, as Christ hath taught. Wherfore let this be a firm sentēce, which the scholemen also in the 2. boke of Sentences. Disti. 8: & among them Thomas especially, so that not only the old fathers haue ratified, that if there be any thing to be desired, which is aboue the faculty of mā, the same ought to be desired onely of God, which thing they which do not, they fall into Apostacy from faith, The inconstancy of certayn fathers and especially of scholemen. worshipping creatures insteede of god. I would to god both the olde fathers and the schole men, would haue abidden constant in it, who afterwarde (forgettinge themselues I cannot tell how) consented to the inuocations of sayntes, beynge nowe deade, and haue instituted exorcistes or cuniurers to the bodyes & reliques of saints, which being adorned with no peculier gift of miracles, do with most seuere threatninges, and very imperiously adiure deuils: desiringe of the sayntes, whych are now dead, to driue out euill sprites out of those that be possessed.
But those spirytes if sometymes they gooe oute, as they are bidden they doo not that agaynste etheyr wyll, but they dyssemble obedience, therewith to establyshe idolatrye. And it is no lesse pleasaunte to them to possesse soules, then to vere bodies. Augustine in his x. booke de ciuitate dei, the .xi. Augustine. chapt. telleth that Porphyrius wrote vnto Anebuntes, that certayne sorcerers were so accustomed with threatninges to feare deuils, that they said: That if they would not do those things which they wer cōmaunded to do, they would break down heauen & earth, and so presse and punish them. Who seeth not here the subtelties of the deuil, which faineth that he feareth such folish and ridiculous cuniuratiōs, as they call them. But of this we haue spoken very largely
I thinke it good nowe to returne to examine the laste parte of our difinicion, wherin it was sayd, that miracles are therfore done to establish fayth. And that seemeth to be very much against this particle, that we ought not lightly to geue credite vnto miracles, forasmuch as they may shew occasion of erring. And ther hence is deriued no sure kind of argument, but an argument very daungerous. And that is proued by manye places. First the Lorde sayth in the .24. chapter of Math. that the false prophetes in the latter time shall by sygnes so deceiue men, that if it were possible euen the very electe should be deceiued, which selfe same sentence Paul to y e Thessal. more amply prosecuted. By the boke of Exodus also we learne that we may not beleue signes. For the sorcerers of Pharao did for a little space worke the same signes which Moses did. In Deutr. also it is commaū ded that we must not beleue a prophet, although he worke signes, if he moue vs to idolatry. Wherfore seing miracles may be wrought, aswel for the defending of false doctrine, Augustine. as for true, they ought not to be counted mete to confirm faith. Yea and Augustine in his 10. boke de ciuitate dei the .16. chapt. writeth: If aūgels require sacrifices to be offred vnto them, and worke signes: and contrarywise, if other shall testify that we must sacrifice onely vnto God, and yet working no miracles: we must beleue them and not the other. The same Augustine contra Faustum de Manichaeis sayth: Miracles ar not sufficient to cōfirm faith. Signes ye worke none, wherby we should beleue you, yea and although ye shoulde woorke them, yet shoulde wee not beleue you. Wherfore we must know that miracles in very deede are not sufficient to confyrme fayth: for it is before all thinges nedefull to iudge of that doctrine, whiche is brought: and that by the testimony of the holy scriptures, wherewith if it do agree, we must beleue it euen without signes. But if miracles be added, the beleuers are still the more established: and they whiche yet haue not beleued, are made at the least more attentife, and the way to beleue is opened vnto them
Miracles and sacramentes ar after a sort likeMiracles also ar after a sort like vnto sacraments: for both of them ar added as certayne seales vnto promises. And euen as miracles profite not, vnlesse firste there be a respect had vnto the doctrine: so also the Sacramentes bring no commodity but much hurt, vnlesse they be receaued with a pure fayth. Both of them serue to confyrme faythe, but neither of them are sufficient by themselues. For they are blessed, and to be praysed in dede, which beleue without the helpe of miracles. Our Lord sayth: Blessed ar they which haue not sene, and haue beleued. And yet for all that the confyrmation of signes is not to be contemned. Why the lorde sometimes forbad that his miracles should be published. Paraduenture thou wilt say: Seing they are so profitable to confyrme fayth, why did the Lorde in Math. the .9. and .11. and in manye other places forbidde that they shoulde be published? There were many causes thereof, he woulde firste haue his doctrine preached, and afterward miracles shoulde followe. But if he had permitted certayne whome he healed, strayghtwaye to haue published abroade that which he had done, then should not doctrine haue bene ioyned with that spreading abroade of the miracle, forasmuch as they were not yet instructed in godlynes. He did it also, least he shoulde seeme to be infected with-vayne desyre of worldly glory. Therefore he would by hys own example withdraw vs from the same. Farther none knew better then himself, what they wer whome he healed. And he woulde not suffer euerye one to publishe and preache his miracles. Wherfore he prohibited diuers, that they should not do it. Moreouer he saw that by the vayne and naked preachinge of miracles, it woulde come to passe, that the light and fickle vulgare people shoulde not be led vnto the sincere fayth, but rather to appoynte vnto him worldly honours, which he coueted not. And this to be true the .6. chap. of Iohn declareth, where it is written, that the people bicause they receaued breade of him, woulde haue made him a kinge. Lastly, he would not stirre vp agaynst himself the enuy and woodnes of the high Priestes, Scribes, and Pharesies more then oportunity of time woulde suffer. [Page 130] Wherfore in Luke the .9. chap. when in hys transfiguracion he had shewed vnto his Apostles a shew of his glory, he cōmaunded thē, that they should not at that time publishe abrode that which they had seene. The same thinge also he commaunded, when demaunding what men sayd of himself, he had wroong from Peter the true confession, wherin he affirmed that he was the sonne of God, he commaunded I say that they should not tel vnto other that Iesus was the Messias. For they wer not then so confirmed, that if they had spread such things abroad, they could in disputing haue confirmed the same by apt testimonies. Wherfore he thought meete that they shoulde tary till they were more fully instructed. He would not haue the truth vtterly to be vnspoken of, but yet to the openinge of the same, he chose a time conueniēt. Wherfore it is not therby rightly gathered that myracles are of no force to confirme fayth, bycause Christ sometimes forbad that they should be published, forasmuch as that commaundement of the Lorde belonged onely for the taking of better occasions, and not perpetually to keepe silence. Lastlye there is an other thinge, Whi [...] [...] goeth b [...] rac [...]s or [...] me [...]h after. whiche seemeth to be agaynste that article of the definicion: For it seemeth that faythe cannot be confyrmed by miracles, when as they require it, and wil haue it to goe before them. For in Math. the 13. chapter it is written, that Christe, bicause of the incredulitye of his owne citizens, wroughte in a manner no miracles. And Marke addeth, that he could not. Wherfore it shuld seme that it is rather to be said, that miracles ar constituted and stablished by fayth, when as if it be not present (as the Euangelistes say) miracles can not be done. I aunswere, that they which by prayers will obtayn miracles, must after an accustomed & iust maner be endewed with faith: for vayne are those prayers counted which leane not vnto fayth. But if a miracle be geuen, there is nothing letteth, but that fayth whiche is begon, maye by it be stirred vp & confyrmed. Farther this is for assured, that god is not letted, but that he can also geue miracles vnto the vnbeleuers, God sometime geueth miracles vnto the vnbeleuers. yea he hath oftentimes geuē miracles vnto them. Vndoubtedly Pharao and the Egiptians were infidels. And who knoweth not but that there were vnto them very many miracles wrought by Moses? Christ likewise did then shew the miracle of his resurrection, when all men in a manner dispayred of his doctrine and truth. Wherfore nothing letteth but that faith may by miracles be confirmed. And for that cause as we haue said, they which contend by prayers to obteyne signes, do labour in vayn, except they beleue. Bicause prayers without fayth are of no value wyth God, which Christ hath manifestly taught in Math. the .17. For when his disciples could not heale the lunatike child, when the cause thereof was demaunded, he sayd, that it came of theyr incredulity: whose aunswere openly declareth, Against the coniurations wich are made al the sepulchres or graues of the deade. what we muste iudge of those cuniurers, which at the sepulchers of saincts and at reliques, go about to expell deuels. All thinges are there faynedly done. Deade men are without faythe called vpon, and the deuill playeth to gether with idolatrers, and faineth that he beleueth, to the end that pernicious worshippynges may be retayned: whiche is hereby manifest, bycause those Exorcistes are both men moste vnpure, and also they do all things there without fayth.
Origene vpon the .17. Origene chapt. of Mathew hath very wel written agaynst this abuse. If at any time (sayth he) we must be by these holpē, we must not speak with the spirite, eyther in adiuring hym, or commaunding hym, as though he hearde vs, but onelye let vs perseuere in geuinge our selues to prayers and fastinges. These words spake he, euen then when the inuocation of the dead, and worshipping of reliques were not vsed in the church. What would he at thys day say if he should se the madnes of our times? But to return vnto y e hed of the doubt, I iudge that fayth goeth before miracles, as touching those whych by prayers obtayne them, but not as concerning those whych stand by, and haue not yet beleued the preaching which they haue heard.
Wyth what faith euill men are endewed, by whome god worketh miracles.But let vs see by what meanes miracles may sometimes be done by wicked men. For some shall say in the latter time: Lord, haue not we cast out deuils in thy name, haue not we prophesied &c? Vnto whome shalbe aunswered: Verelye I say vnto you, I know you not. They vndoubtedly in working miracles, as it seemeth credible, added prayers, when as for all that they wanted fayth, neyther were they iustified, neyther pertayned they to the kingdome of God. Wherefore that seemeth not to be firme, that prayers poured out without faith are not herd. But we must note y e ill men which by prayers obteined miracles, wer not vtterly w tout fayth. Three kyndes of fayth. For there ar three kinds of faith foūd. For there is a faith whych consisteth of humayne opinion and perswasion, wherby those thinges which ar written in the holy scriptures ar beleued to be no lesse true then the histories of Liui, Suetonius, & those things which ar now written of the new Ilandes. This kinde of fayth, as touching many thinges, is common to the Turks & the Iewes. Ther is an other faith, wherby we being stirred vp by the heauenly inspiration, do liuely & with efficacy cleaue to the promise of the mercy of God. By this faith certaynelye is attayned iustification. Lastlye the thirde fayth is called the fayth of miracles, whereby we are neither chaunged, nor made the better, euen by a heare: forasmuch as it is the mouinge of the spirite of God, wherewith men are stirred vp to desire miracles, Myracles are not alwayes wrought at the prayers of wicked men. vtterly beleuing that it is the wil of God, that they should be done, and that which is required, should haue successe. Wherfore whilest they leane vnto this fayth, sometimes they obteyne, that whiche they desire: whiche I therefore speake bycause not alwayes they doo so, neither are they alwaies illustrate with that inspiration.
Chrisostome.If so be that thou wilt demaūd, how this kind of fayth can be proued, let Chrisostome aunswere, which vpon the .17. chapter of Mathew maketh mencion of it. There Christ sayd: If you haue fayth as much as is a grain of mustard sede, you shall say vnto this mountayne: throw thy self into the sea, and it shall do it. In expounding these wordes, this father sayth: bycause at this day these thinges ar not done in the church, shal we therfore say that Christiās are destitute of faith? God forbid, that we should iudge so euil of the people of God. The fayth which iustifieth, is present, but that which is called the fayth of miracles, hath now ceased. This kind of faith also is shewed by the words of y e apostle in the .i. epistle to the Corrinthians, wher he sayth: Although I haue all faith, so that I can remoue mountaynes, and haue not charitye, I am nothinge. Neyther let that trouble vs, in that he sayth Al. For that distribution is to be drawn vnto the faith of miracles. But that is more manifestly perceaued by the same epistle, wher the Apostle maketh menciō of fre gratious gifts, saying: to some is geuē the word of wisedome, to other the word of knowledge, to some the power to heale, and to other some fayth in the same spirite &c. That fayth can not in thys place be vnderstand, wherby we are iustified. For it is not rekened among giftes, which ar priuately distributed to some, but is commō to all true Christians. Now as I think it appeareth, by what meanes they whiche are not iustified by theyr prayers, doo sometimes obtayne miracles, namely bycause they ar not destitute of euery kind of faith. But now we haue sufficiently spoken of this fyrst question.
Whither it be lawfull for godly men to desire miracles.Now must we see, whither it be lawfull for godlye menne to desire miracles. These reasōs they vse to alledg which seme to be against it. First because god in that thing should be tempted: and that doth the law of god vtterly forbid. Yea & our sauiour wyth this aunswere reproued the deuill: Thou shalte not tempt the Lord thy God. And the Hebrewes ar reprehended for this by name, bicause thei tempted god in the wildernes. The son of god also, when the Pharesies sayde, mayster, we will see a signe of thee, sayd: This froward and adultrous nation seketh a sign and a sign shall not be geuen them &c. And Achab otherwyse a wicked king, pretended a shew of righteousnes, saying that he would not tēpt God, and therefore he detracted to desyre a sygne.
Vnto the question I answere: That after a sort it is lawful to desire signes, and the same also after a sorte is vnlawfull. The first parte of the sentence is thus proued: When holy men desire, as touching any vnaccustomed vocation to be made more assured of y e wil of God, & are afrayd, least peraduenture they should be deceaued (for as concerning it they haue nothing for certayn in the holy scriptures and we must not lightly beleue men and angels in those thinges: for euil angels vse sometimes to be trāsformed into angels of light) when I say they are troubled with such doubt, & the will is ready, yea desirous to obey the commaū dement of the Lord, if than they desire to be confirmed by some signe, these godly men cā not be accused of tempting of god, or of rashnes. For who soeuer in those cases desireth those thinges, whiche god vseth to offer, he departeth not from the right way. No man is ignoraunt, but that to Achab was offred a signe, that he might be cōfirmed of the promises offred him by Esay. Wherfore to desire those thinges whiche god sometymes geueth and frely offreth, ought not to be prohibited as vnlawfull. The thing wanteth no examples. Moses when he had nede of the helpe of god, oftentymes in the desert obteyned miracles for the people of god. And to confirme the doctrine of truth, both Helias and Helizeus, desired of god that life might be restored vnto the children of their hostes. And to the same end Christ sayd: But that ye should know that the sonne of man hath power to forgeue sinnes, he turned to the man sicke of the palsey and sayd: For what causes godly men may desire miracles. Take vp thy bed, rise and walke. Wherfore miracles are desired of holy men, and that iustly, either that they may be made the more assured of their vocation, or to helpe a great and vrgent necessity, or els to beare witnesse vnto sound doctrine. And alwayes, when they desire miracles to these endes, Cautions in desiring of miracles. let them desire the same not of any creatures, but of god onely, and in asking them let them vse a meane: for they declare that they will or desire nothyng, but that whiche is agreable vnto the will of god.
Nowe on the contrary parte let vs consider after what maner miracles are vnworthely and vniustly desired. First there are some, When it is not lawfull to desire miracles. whiche therfore desire miracles, bicause they are not wel persuaded of the power, goodnesse and prouidence of god, neither seeke they any thing els, but to haue a trial of those things. Neither are they contente with the doctrine of the holy scriptures, which manifestly and amply teache all these thinges. Wherefore iustly are they to be reproued, for asmuch as they be ready rather to beleue miracles, than y e worde of god. Wherfore Abraham aunswered vnto that riche man whiche was tormented in flames of fire, whē he desired that Lazarus might be sent vnto his brethren, that they also should not be thrust downe into the same punishementes: They haue Moses and the Prophetes. By which wordes is manifestly declared, that we must rather beleue y e holy scriptures, thā miracles. There ar other also, which for this cause desire miracles, that they may liue more pleasauntly as touching the flesh, and to satisfie their wicked lustes. Of which faulte the Hebrues are accused, bycause in the deserte, when very great aboundance of Manna was ministred vnto them, they desired fleshe, that they might lyue the more pleasauntly in that wildernesse. Lastly, some desire miracles for this entent, to satisfie theyr vayne curiosity. For (as Plinius hath sayd) y e nature of mā is most gredy of new things. Plinius. Wherfore they seme to desire miracles as playes and passetymes to sporte thē selues withal. In that maner looked Herode for miracles of Christ: for when he was brought vnto him, he desired to fede and delite his curiosity with miracles. Nowe I suppose it is manifest, how it is forbidden to desire signes, and howe it is lawfull sometymes to desire them.
Now must we dissolue these thinges, An answere to obiections. What it is to tempt god. which semed to be agaynst those thinges that we haue spoken. They which by the waye and maner already described do desire miracles, do not without doubt tempt God: forasmuch as that is nothing els, than of an vnbeleuing minde, and of rashnesse, to desire a triall of hys will [Page] and power, whiche vice certainely is in the holy Scriptures iustly and worthily reproued. Wherfore, the Lord Iesus Christ, did not without iust cause reproue the deuil, when he would haue led him to haue throwen himself hedlong from y e temple, whereby he myght be made the more assured of the beneuolence of God towardes him, when that by arte there was a playne way to discende by. The same sonne of god also did not vnworthily reprehend the Iewes as a frowarde and adulterous generation, vnto whom he therfore denied a signe, bycause they had already sene very many, yet they spoke euill of them al, and mocked Christ, in such sorte that they desired not euery kinde of miracle, but one from heauen, as thoughe they would not also deride signes from heauen: vndoubtedly theyr purpose tended to no other end, but to alienate y e people from the Lord, although he had wrought wonderfull miracles. And as touching Achaz the wicked king, I shall not nede to stande long about him: for he fayned that when he was called of y e Prophet, he did very faithfully beleue, as thoughe he neded no miracle, whē as for all that he was altogether vnbeleuing, whiche the 2. booke of kinges manifestly declareth: for he sent vnto Tiglathphalasar the king of the Assirians, to deliuer him from the siege, so farre was he of from putting confidence in the Lord. And when God was not ignoraunt of his discease, he offred vnto hym the remedy of a miracle, and gaue him his choise, whiche for all that he of hypocrisie refused. Obedience is the principall fruite of faith. If Achaz had in very dede beleue god, he would not haue refused to obey, for asmuch as obedience is reckened among the principall fruites of faith.
Let vs (I pray you) with this wicked kyng conferre his most holy sonne Ezechias. For he did not so, but to the end he myght be made the more assured of recouering health, he very modestly required a signe: vnto whō when Esay y e Prophet graūted his desire, willīg him to chuse whether he would haue y e shadow of y e sunne to be remoued forward, or turned backward, he tooke his choise, neither did he frowardly like his father w tstād y e miracle offred him by god. But wicked Achaz added hipocrisie vnto infidelitie. For he considering that miracles are for two causes refused, either for that a man beleueth fully in god, neither hath nede of the ayde of miracles, or els for that he vtterly contemneth god, and passeth no thing at al of his aide, he would hide y e latter disease wherof he was sicke, namely y e cōtēpt of god: & he dissēbled vertue, wherof he was cleane voyde, namely a singular faith, as though he durst not tempt God. But for asmuch as God most perfectly knoweth the hart and the raynes, he reproued hym by the Prophete according to his deserte. What other thing is it to refuse a miracle offred of God, thā to repell the succor of the spirituall infirmitie? As he that is hunger storuen is to be accused if the refuse bread: so was he to be reproued, which reiected a medicine offred hym by god, whē as he knoweth, what euery one of vs nedeth, far better than we our selues can see. This is nowe sufficient as touching these things, whiche at the begynning of the question semed altogether to forbidde the askyng of miracles.
I know in dede there are some whiche thinke that miracles are vtterly not to be desired: Augustine. but onely not to be refused when God offreth them. And they thinke that Augustine maketh with them, whom (in his 4. booke de Consensu Euangelist. and in his questiōs super Genesin. Questiō 63) semeth to affirme thys thing. But if thou wilt obiect, that very many godly & holy men did it, and especially our Gideon: they answere, that they were moued by the spirite of God to desire miracles: and therfore it was all one, as if God had frely offred signes vnto thē, and they of obedience shoulde haue receaued the miracles whiche were offered. But these things ought nothing to trouble vs, bycause Augustine in the places alledged, doth not absolutly and simply prohibet to desire miracles, except they be desired to tempte god withall, or vpon some noughty occasion. Yea in the 63. question vpon Genesis he sayth: When this is not rightly done, it pertayneth to the tempting of god. Let vs heare him rather in his 10. boke of Cōfessions the 35. [Page 132] chap. where he sayeth: In religion also is temptyng of god, when signes and miracles are desired, to take a triall: Whiche thyng I also a litle before haue willed to be taken hede of. And I will easely graunt that the Sainctes required not miracles by the instinct of the fleshe, or prouokyng of humane reason: other wise their prayers had ben voyde and of none effect, for that (as Paul testifieth) it behoueth, that y e spirite do with vnspeakable groning pray for vs. But I thinke I haue now sufficiently spoken of the questions proposed.
¶The vii. Chapter.
1 THen Ierubbal (who is Gideon) rose vp early, and al the people that were with him, and pitched beside the well of Harod, so that the host of the Madianites was on y e north side of thē in the valley by the hil of Moreh.
2 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideō: The people that are with thee, are to many for me to geue the Madianites into theyr handes, least Israell make theyr vaunt agaynst me, and say: myne owne hand hath saued me.
3 Now therfore proclayme in the eares of the people, and say: Who is timerous and fearefull? Let him returne, and departe early from mount Gilead. And there returned of the people 22000. & so 10000. remayned.
4 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideon: The people are yet too many: Bring them vnto the water, and I will try them for thee there. For of whom I say vnto thee: This man shall go with thee, the same shall go with thee: and of whomsoeuer I say vnto thee: This man shall not go with thee, the same shall not go.
5 So he brought the people to the water. And the Lorde sayd vnto Gideō, As many as lappe the water with theyr tongue, as a dogge lappeth them put by themselues: & euery one that shall bowe down hys knees to drinke, put a part.
6 And the number of them that lapped by putting their handes to their mouth were 300. mē: but all the rest of y e people kneled downe vpon their knees to drinke water.
7 And the Lord sayd vnto Gideon, By these 300. men that lapped, will I saue you, and delyuer the Madianites into thine hand: and let all the other people go euery man to his place.
8 So the people tooke vitayles in theyr handes, and theyr trompettes, and he sent all the rest of the Israelites euery man vnto hys tente, and retayned the 300. men. And the host of Madian was beneath him in the valley.
As much as we can gather by the history, the host of Gideon consisted of 32000. souldiers: whiche nomber although it may seme great, yet in comparison of the enemies it was but small. For they had 13500. men in campe, but of the 32000. souldiers of Gideons, god chose onely 300, by whom he would geue the victory vnto the Israelites. This is a very smal number, that of euery thousand he toke only .x. But so god wrought. For there ar few good, said he. If in Sodome there had ben onely x. men iust, the whole Citie had ben saued. The number of good men, thoughe it be small, yet it is of such force, that God for their sakes spareth the rest. Wherfore most true are the oracles, wherin it is sayd: Many are called, but few are chosen, and the remnauntes onely shalbe saued. But although God [Page] allowed not so great a number, yet the acte of Gideon is not to be condemned, which gathered it vnto himself: for he vsed that prudence, which was not cōtrary to the worde of god: yea if he had not collected an host, he might haue semed to tempt god, as he which had refused helpes prepared, and those iust helpes. Let vs remember that in humane actions there ar two notable daungers: One is of rashenesse, Two verye great daūgers in humane actions. when we will not vse meanes and helpes set before vs. With which euill the Anabaptistes are greuously infected: for they will vse no weapons, and they abhorre from the offices of Magistrates. The other daunger is, least we attribute to much vnto humane and naturall aydes, whiche they do that trust to much in their workes. Of these two daungers the one Gideon by himselfe auoydeth in collecting a sufficient great army: for in his enterprise he would not neglect an ordinary ayde of souldiers. And God prouideth that he should not fall into the other daunger: for from the multitude of those souldiers he withdrew the greatest parte. Why God remoued so many from the hoste of Gideon. And why he did it, this reason he bringeth, bycause men do gladly vsurpe glory vnto thēselues, neither will they graunt any of it euen vnto God, as it is mete they should. Therfore he sayth that his will is, that euen as the victory should be geuen by hym, so also it should euidently appeare, to be graunted by hym.
Euen then also when by many souldiers we ouercome, god geueth the victory.Euen then also when many souldiers get the vpper hande, God geueth the victory: but that is not so manifest, as when with a litle host we ouercome our enemyes. God also fedeth vs, euen then when all thinges are aboundant and good cheape: but that is not so well perceaued, as when a great multitude is refreshed with foure or fiue loaues. And vndoubtedlye it is the power of God, when the gospel is defended and spread abrode by men very well learned and princes most stout. But it is not then so euident as when it is sowed by idiotes & power men, and that with great fruite, & incredible felicitie. Wherfore Paul sayd: Brethren see to your vocation: not many noble men, not many mighty men, not many wise men are called, but god hath chosen the foolish, weake, and contēned things of the world, bycause he would not haue the Crosse of Christ and the power therof abrogated, but manifestly to appeare, that euen as Ieremy commaunded, the strong man should not glory in his strength, nor the riche man in his riches, neither the wise man in his wisedome. God doth very wel agree with the Prophet, where he sayth to Gideon, Least Israel boast against me. Who soeuer is proude bycause of the prosperity whiche he hath obteyned, y e same man boasteth against god, and his doing is all one, as if he should chuse vnto himselfe an other god. God commaundeth a decree to be proclaymed, that they whiche were feareful, should returne home. No new thing is commaūded, for asmuch as that precept is found in Deut. the 20. That which is here commaunded it is also cō maunded in Deut. chap: where preceptes of warlyke affaires are very well set forth. First, the Israelites are commaunded, not to be afeard, when they see the weapons, horses, chariotes and multitude of their enemyes, bycause y e Lord standeth on their side. Then it is ordayned, that the Priest should come forth amongest them, with a sermon, confirming the hartes of the souldiers, that they are the people of god, and therfore ought not they to feare their enemies. Farther it is commaunded, that they should be dismissed, which in that yeare had built an house, which had planted a vineard, and whiche had maried a wife. First, least if they should fal in the battaile, they should dye without tasting the fruite of their owne labours. Secondly (as I suppose) bycause such men haue a great affection vnto those thinges whiche they haue lately obteyned, and therfore they do litle good in the campes, The cause of their feare whiche wer dismissed. when as their minde is at home. Lastly, that is also ordayned whiche the Lord nowe commaundeth, that as many as are not of a valiant courage, but feareful, should returne home, least by their feare they should daūt the courages of others. For oftentymes it happeneth, that by the feare of a fewe, which begyn to geue place vnto their enemyes, the rest of the camp, which otherwise are strong and valiant, do turne themselues to flight. Great is y e number [Page 133] of those whiche God refused, when as 22000. departed: But yet bycause God will haue men to acknowledge those things to be iust which he doth: therfore he maketh it euident, that al they which departed, were iustly dismissed, namely bycause they were fearefull. R. Leui ben [...] Gerischon. And R. Leui Gerischon affirmeth that they were also euill men, for as muche as their feare proceded not of a sound and perfect conscience. They feared peraduenture, that the vengance and wrath of God towardes them was now at hand.
The profession also of Christian religion requireth strength, In professiō of Christian religion we haue nede of greate strength. and that no common strength. And therefore the Lord sayd, that we must imitate hym, whiche would build a towre. For first he counteth with himselfe the charges, least afterward not beyng able to finishe the worke whiche he began, he be compelled to leaue it vnfinished. Also we must followe a kyng goyng on warfarre, whiche diligently weygheth with himselfe, with howe many thousand souldiers he may mete his enemyes. Neither is he mete for the kyngdome of heauen, whiche strayght waye pluketh his hande from the ploughe. And howe great a strength we haue nede in professing of Christ, the wordes of Paul do manifestly declare, wherein he sayth: All they whiche will lyue godlyly in Christ Iesu, must suffer persecution. The same thyng also testifieth he, saying: Our battayle is not agaynst fleshe and bloud, but agaynst wicked spirites whiche dwell in the ayre. Wherefore we are not called vnto idlenesse, but to a most sharpe battayle, and therefore we haue nede of stoute and valiaunt courages. What the bowyng of y e knees signifieth. Neither is it sufficient for good souldiers to cast awaye feare out of theyr myndes, vnlesse also they be prompt and industrious. Wherefore the seconde tyme they are brought vnto the water, where yet the sluggishe are separated, which will not drinke, but bowing themselues on their knees. Those are they whiche pamper themselues, they can abyde no sorowe, and they are quickly ouercome. There were onely 300. whiche dranke with reaching their hande vnto their mouth, & they alone were ioyned vnto Gideon. Here may we se, how god with drew frō Gideon his captayne humanes aydes, not vndoubtedly to betray him, but therby to geue him a more noble victory. Wherfore when helpes of nature are taken away, then must strēgth of fayth remayne, wherewith we muste no lesse followe our vocation, then if they were present. Whiche thynge very many doo not, whiche strayght waye as soone as they see themselues destitute of humane helpes, they byd al pure doctrine farewell: when as for all that they ought to remember, that the power of God, whereby the blynde are made to see, the dead made a lyue, and the poore, blessed, nothyng dependeth of worldly helpes.
Concernyng the wordes of the historye two thynges are to be noted. The firste is, that the fearefull are commaunded to returne vnto Gilead, whiche semeth not to be agreable vnto the place where they were. For they were not on this syde Iordane, where mount Gilead laye in the tribe of Manasses, in the famely I saye of Machir, but they were come into the lande of Chanaan beyonde Iordane. Wherefore we muste saye, that either there were two mountes so called: or that that whiche is written of mounte Gilead, is to be referred vnto the begynnyng of those whiche departed awaye: as thoughe it should haue ben sayd, that they were sent awaye, whiche were borne in mounte Gilead. These thinges doo certayne interpretors write, whiche whether they be true or false, it is not certayne. For we are ignoraunt whether Gideon with his host passed ouer Iordane or no. Farther we must note that thys worde Tserath signifieth to purge: whereby the Historye sheweth, that the hoste shoulde be purged of the Souldiers that were dismissed, bycause (as I aboue mencioned) there were none remoued from that multitude of Souldiers, but suche as were vnwoorthy. Wherefore they coulde not iustly complayne of the iustice of God. Iosephus. I very much meruayle of Iosephus, whiche affirmeth that God woulde haue none to go forth [Page] with Gideon, but such as were fearefull, that therby the victorye myght be the more noble, and referred to be receaued onely of God. And he sayth, that they which bowed their knees and dranke, were valiant men, and trusted to much in their owne strength. And for that they nothing passed vpon their enemyes, they kneled downe without any feare and dranke: but they which stoode and reached theyr handes to theyr mouth and lapped water out of them, those sayth he were of a cowardishe minde, as they whiche for feare of their enemyes durst not frely euen drinke. But this fayned thing very much disagreeth with the history, bycause God commaunded to be proclaymed by expresse wordes, that the fearefull should depart, and he would haue hys precept obserued whiche he gaue in Deut. Wherefore it semeth not that he would adioyne timetous folkes vnto Gideon. But Iosephus in hys narration omitteth the commaundement that the fearefull should be dismissed, either bycause it was out of his memory, or els for what other cause I can not tell.
An Allegory.Here myght be annexed diuers Allegoryes concernyng the drinkyng of the waters. For by those some vnderstande pleasures, and some afflictions. And vndoubtedly they are not apte for the kingdome of God, whiche study to fill themselues with pleasures and delightes of this worlde. Neither are they commended, which suffer themselues altogether to be troubled with aduersities. For as they are praysed whiche vse this worlde, as thoughe they vsed it not: so also are they commended, whiche in their minde do not so greuously take sorowes and aduersityes as the Ethnikes doo whiche haue no hope, and are destitute of a perfect consolation of faith.
The history mentioneth that the men which Gideon tooke vnto him, namely the 300. had trumpettes, whiche ought not to be maruelous. For the summe of the souldiers at the beginning was 32000. Wherfore there might be among euery thousand souldiers .x. trumpeters. And therfore it was easy to fynd .300. trumpettes there. Augustine. Augustine vpon this place writeth, that Abrahā (as it is read in the boke of Genesis) armed 318. of his bondemen, against the three kings which had led Lot awaye prisoner, and thereby, he gathereth that he had yet more ayde then Gideon. Which is so much the truer, bycause besides seruauntes and bondmen, Abraham had Abner, Mambre, and Escholl to helpe him.
9 And the same night the Lord sayd vnto him: Arise, get the down into the host: for I haue deliuered it into thine hande.
10 But if thou feare to go downe, then go thou and Purah thy lad downe to the host.
11 And thou shalt hearken what they say, and afterward shall thine handes be strong, and thou shalt go downe to the hoste. Then went he downe, and Purah his lad vnto the out side of the souldiers, that were in the host.
12 And Madian, & Amalek, and all the childrē of Kedem, lay in the valley, like grashoppers in multitude, & their camels were without nomber: as the sande which is by the sea side for multitude.
13 Gideon I say came, and beholde, a man tolde a dreame vnto his neighbour, and sayd: Behold I dreamed a dreame. And lo a cake of barley bread tombled from aboue into the hoste of Madian, & came euen to a tente, and smote it, that it fell: it ouerturned it, I saye, and the tente fell downe.
14 And his neighbour aunswered and sayde: This is nothyng els saue the sword of Gideon the sonne of Ioas a man of Iscaell: God hath geuen into his handes Madian and all the host.
[Page 134]15 When Gideon heard the dreame tolde, and the interpretation of the same, he worshipped. And he returned vnto the hoste of Israell and sayde: Vp, for the Lorde hath deliuered into your handes the host of Madian.
Gideon is also confirmed by the wordes of his aduersaryes: he had withdrawē from hym humane aydes, and therfore least he should be smitten with feare, he prepared a confirmation for him after a certayne wonderfull sorte. God, whiche made vs knoweth right well the nature of mans fleshe and reason. We oftentyme bragge that we put no cōfidence in prosperous things, when they are present: but when we are destitute of them, we wonderfully waxe colde, and there we fele how we deceaued our selues and other. We deserue assuredly for our incōstancy (I wil not say infidelity) vtterly to be abiected: but the heauenly father, as he is good, breaketh not a brused rede, and quēcheth not smoking flaxe, which we now see in Gideon. He sendeth him to the host of his enemies to be cōfirmed, and he vseth y e Madianites, the enemies of y e Israelites for an oracle. And it is not maruelous: for if in the old time he vsed wood & gold in y e tabernacle, at the arke, I say, & mercy seate, to geue answers, what should let but that he may vse men also vnto that office? And without doubt the beginning of the victory was, The beginning of a victorye, is to knowe the feare of the enemyes. to manifest vnto Gideon the feare of his enemyes. For in warfare nothing more profiteth, then to know the feare of the enemyes: and to knowe the same at the length for assured, very much pertayneth to warlike pollecies.
And in manifestyng of it, God obserueth his olde accustomed manner. Longe before that by Rahab of Iericho he shewed vnto Iosuah, that the hearts of the enemyes were excedingly smitten with feare, & now euē by the Madianites thēselues he teacheth Gideon how fearefull they were. Neyther among other testimonyes (as the Rhetoricians say) are there any of more strength, A notable example of obediēce. then the testimonyes of the enemyes. Wherfore when Gideon heard euen of his enemyes how they wer affected, he doubted not of the successe of the battayle. Here is set forth a notable example of obedience. For Gideon was deadly hated of the Madianites, bycause he had now collected an host agaynst them, and yet beyng commaunded to go to their tentes he obeyed. And if he had ben afrayde, there was no other companion graunted him, then Purah his lad. Wherfore seyng he durst take vpon hym so great a thing, it is to be thought that he was illustrate with no small fayth. Neither can he iustly be reproued of vanity, as though he tooke hold of dreames, for asmuch as he obeyed the worde of God.
Hereby also may we learne, Vnto the wicked sometimes are geuen true dreames and the interpretacions of them. that dreames of prophecieng are by God geuen vnto enemies of godlynesse, and to that nation, which afflicted the holy people & the Churche: and this is not the first tyme. For vnto an Ethnike kyng, namely vnto Pharao were fatte and leane kine, full and empty eares of corne, shewed by God in dreames. Vnto the baker also and butler, were shewed thinges y t should come to passe, & afterward, Nebuchad-nezar, whiche led away y e Israelites captiues, saw twise dreames y t had significations. But this is more meruelous, the dreame which is here declared, nedeth no Ioseph or Daniel for an interpreter. For y t which the souldier by y e inspiratiō of god dreamed, his fellow souldier expounded. Wherfore god gaue vnto vngodly men, both a true dreame & also a faithful interpretatiō therof. And y e confirmeth, y e fre giftes of grace are cōmon both to y e godly & to y e vngodly, wherfore it is not mete y t any should boast of thē. For they testify not the holynesse of men, but onely the liberall bountifulnesse of God.
By it also is declared the wisedome of god, & his incōprehensible power, God cā vse the moste vilest thinges to the saluatiō of his children. that he can to y e saluatiō of his vse not only y e enemies, but also al maner of thing, yea the vilest. For what is vayne & of lesse reputation than dreames? & yet for the saluation of y e elect, they serue y e wil of god. Nothing semed vnto y e Ethnikes more ridiculous thē circūcisiō: wherfore y e Iewes were euery where called of thē Apellites [Page] & Recubites, & yet neuerthelesse by it God confirmed his couenant with the fathers. These elemēts also, bread, wyne, & water, are very cōmon things if they be cōsidered by thēselues, in which things for al that Christ hath cōmended vnto vs Sacramentes of most great value. Let vs reioyse therfore that we haue such a God, that can conuert all kinde of things to the saluation of his children. And agayne let vs counte the vngodly (as they are in very dede) for most vnhappy, when as of their owne they receaue damage, so that not onely of their enemyes, and they are wonderfully hurte euen of euery thing most vile.
As touching the Hebrew wordes, they translate Tsallil for noise, and sound: for it is deriued of this verbe Tsalal which is to sound, to make a noyse, or to ryng, as mettall doeth. Farther Tsalath signifieth to roste. For the barley loafe, which is now entreated of, semed to be baked vpon the coales, out of whiche came a wonderfull noyse: & therfore this word Tsallil is transfered hither. But I meruayle, Augustine. wherfore Augustine, writing vpon this place, maketh mencion that there was a table: I thinke it was false in the translacion which he vsed. But the Allegory Iosephus manifestly expoundeth. Iosephus. In Allegorye. In generall (sayeth he) barley bread is vile and despised. And in all Asia no people are of lesse estimation than the Hebrues, whiche now begin to sound & to make a noyse, bycause they had now raysed an host against them, and made Gideon theyr capitaine. In that this loafe by his tombling semed with great violence to ouerthrow their tentes, it manifestly foreshewed that the hoste of the Madianites and Amalekites should be deliuered vnto Gideon and to the Hebrues. This is the Allegory of the dreame, and a most true interpretation therof. Why Gideon was more confirmed by the dreame then by by miracles. Gideon being thus confirmed, departed. But in that he was more confirmed by this dreame, then he was by the former miracles, it is not to be counted for absurd, bycause neither miracles, nor dreames by them selues can confirme doubtfull myndes, but they do it onely then, when God by his spirite maketh them of efficacy, whiche he bestoweth sometymes to these, & sometymes to other, accordyng to his will. Wherfore it commeth to passe, that they whiche sometymes by miracles are not perswaded, may by dreames be drawen: and agayne they whiche by dreames beleue not, may with miracles be conuerted. For God can freely geue power and efficacy vnto those outwarde thinges, accordyng to his will.
¶Of Dreames.
Ethnike authors. The opinion of the Peripatetikes.BVt now must we intreate of dreames: and first we will see what may be affirmed of them by naturall reason: and afterwarde howe much we must attribute vnto them by the worde of God. As touchyng the firste, Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galene, also other famous Philosophers haue written many things, and amongest them Aristotle in his litle booke de Diuinatione per Somnium (if so it be his booke, althoughe we can not doubt but that it is wytty and learned) sayeth first, that this kynde of diuination semeth not vtterly to be abiected, bycause of the common sorte very much is attributed vnto it: and those thynges whiche are commonly receaued of all men, can not vniuersally be false. Hereunto he addeth, that there are very many dreames, of whiche an apte and mete reason may be geuen: whiche (as experience teacheth) deceaue not men, but haue their successe. Therefore it is not mete that we should despise all manner of diuination by dreames. Howbeit we must receaue it warely, for that it is very heard to geue causes thereof, bycause nature in this parte woorketh very obscurely. Aristotle thinketh not that dreames are sent of God. And Aristotle thinketh not that dreames are sent of God. For if (sayeth he) they should be sent of hym, he would geue them to good and wyse men. But it is not so. For foolishe and euill men for the most parte obteyne this faculty: beastes also do dreame: And who will contende that God geueth diuinatiō vnto thē? Neither dreames which are occupied about the phantasye [Page 135] of such as slepe are to this end geuen, that therby they should foretell things to come. Farther if god should geue dreames, he would geue them rather in the day time, that men might the diligentlier behold them. Neyther can we easely se why he should choose the night vnto him for that purpose. And lastly forasmuch as god is not enuious, he woulde not so obscurelye admonishe them, whome he would instruct of thinges to come, but he would shewe them manifestly and opē ly. But dreames are so obscure, that for the interpretation of them we muste go vnto prophetes, and southsayers. These thinges are in a maner gathered all out of Aristotle, wherby he vtterly transferreth the thinge from god vnto nature, as though the reasons of dreames should from thence be sought for. But I wyl in treat of that afterward when I come to the doctrine of the scripture. Nowe will I declare his opinion as touching this thinge.
Dreames sayth he ar either signes or causes, The Peripatetikes exposiciō of dreames. or els cōpared vnto those things whych are signified rashely or by chaunce. Euery one of these thre members is thus expounded, dreames he sayth are signes sometimes of the affections of the body or mind. For by those very often are declared, Formes ar moued accordinge to the diuersity of the humors. which humors do beare rule in the body, abounde, and offend. For accordinge to the quality of nature, and tē pering of humors preuaylyng in the body, are formes & images moued. Where choler aboūdeth, are sene flambes, fires, burning coles, lightnings, brawlings, and other of that sorte. If melancholy get the vpper hand, smokes, deepe darkenesse, all things almost blacke, filthy thinges, dead bodyes, & such like do offer themselues. But fleume stirreth vp images of showrs, raynes, riuers, waters, hayl, ise, and such things as haue aboundant moistnes ioyned with coldnes. By blood ar moued sights that ar fayre, bright, white, pleasaunt, and are like vnto the common purenes and vsuall forme or face of things. Neither do the phisiciōs contemne these things, yea rather (as Galene and Hipocrates teach) they enquire very diligently of the sick, of thē: bycause therby they may vnderstand the temperāce of those humors which lye inwardly hidden. Why forms ar more sene sleeping then wakyng. But the cause why they which are on slepe, & not they which are waking, do by sight fele the nature of these mocions, is this: bicause at the beginning they are little, & when we ar waking, the sense of them flieth frō vs. For by strōger mocions of outward things, which appear before our eyes, we ar drawn an other way, but being on slepe we cesse frō outward labours, & ar voyd from the course of grosse sensible things. Wherfore the sightes and images, which are by the humors continually moued, are better comprehended of the fansy when we are on sleepe, then when we are wakinge. And that whē we slepe we far better fele smalthings, then we do being waking: hereby it appeareth, bycause we thinke that noyses, be they neuer so small, are great thunders. And if any swete fleame sticke peraduenture vnto the tounge or roofe of the mouth, it semeth to vs that we taste hony, sugar, sweete wines, and pleasant meates, yea sometimes we thinke that we largely eate, and aboundantlye drinke. Wherfore those mocions of humors which are small, are in slepe shewed to be as it were wonderfull greate: for whiche cause Physicions do hereby know very many beginninges of diseases.
Dreames also are certayn signes of the affections of the minde, Dreames ar also signes of the affectiōs of the minde. as of couetousnes, hope, ioy, and mirth, and also of qualityes. Wherfore fearfull persons do se other maner of things then they do, which ar bold: so do they which ar couetous se other thinges, then they whych are in hope: also the learned are wont to haue farre contrary dreames, to the dreames of the rude people or artificers. For the mynd also when we slepe, is occupied aboute those thynges, wherein when we are wakinge, we are either daylye, or els verye often busyed. There is an other thynge also dilygentlye to bee obserued (as Galene dooth verye well admonyshe) that there are certayne kyndes of meates, Galene. whyche beynge naturallye cholerike, melancholike, or fleumatik, do by theyr quality, or about the phantasy [Page] of the sleepers moue images and formes, which ar agreable with those humors, although the temperature of bodies of them which slepe dooe not of themselues offend in these humors. Which thing also the phisicion ought to obserue concernynge dreames, namely to see what meat the sick man did vse. Wine also (as Aristotle teacheth) beinge immoderatelye dronke, doth in dreames engender misformed Images.
When a dreame is a sign it is referred vnto a cause, namely vnto the humors abounding, which humors it signifieth. It maye also be called a signe of some euent to come, bycause from the same cause, that is, from the humors whiche are signified, may be caused eyther sicknes or health. Wherefore a dreame, as it is a signe of an humor, so also is it a token of an effect, which is produced of it. For from the self same cause, namely from the humor, springeth both a dreame, and also a discease. Howbeit they are not conuerted, for sicknes or health are not signes of dreames. Dreames are somtimes causes of y e things which we do.
But now let vs see, how dreames may somtimes be called the causes. That is then, when any man by his dreame is perswaded, eyther to do, or to trye any thing, as if a man be made whole of the sicknes of the splen, for that that he was let bloud in the vtward side of his hād, for so was he taught to do in hys dreame. And now and then it happneth vnto the learned, y t they find those things wherof they are in doubt in the same bokes, where in theyr dreame they thought they had found or red them. Dreames sometime by chanse resemble those thinges which happen.
But now let vs consider the third mēber of the distinction which we brought, namely when dreames do rashly or by chaunce signify those things which afterward do happē. That taketh place in those things, whose cause is not in vs, but rather distant, and far of, as if a man should see a victory, or a murther to happē in hostes far distant from him, or any man that is absent exalted to very greate dignity. These thinges say the Peripatitikes are ioyned together by chaunce: neither canne they be conferred together, eyther as causes, or as signes. Euen as if when we are talking of any body, the same man paradueuture come in the mean while, we say Lupus est in fabula, whē as yet the same mencion making of him, was neyther the cause, nor signe of hys commyng. So therfore these thinges are sayd to be ioyned together rashlye, bycause both they come by chaunce, and also they seldome haue successe: for this is the nature of things comming by chaunce, to happen seldome.
Who they be which naturally oftentimes se tru dreamesFarther, Aristotle hath taught, who they be, which aboue other foretell many things in dreames. And the same be chiefly attributeth vnto idle persons & such as ar euer pratling, & thē to such as ar melancholike & phrantike, which are depriued both of sences and minde. He seemeth also to ascribe somewhat vnto kinsfolkes and friendes. For these kind of men haue very many dreames when they slepe. For pratlers and idle persons are wholy voyde of cogitations, wherefore they at inwardly fylled with images and formes. The melancholike also by reason of the power and nature of melancholy, do dreame very many thinges. Farther, they ar very much geuen vnto cogitatiōs. The phrantike also, bicause their mind is void both of the knowledge of the outward senses, and also of the vse of reason: therfore they ar vtterly geuen to imaginations. Lastly, frends do for that cause se many things of their frends in theyr dreames, bicause they ar very much careful and pensiue for them. Al these men now rehearsed, are wont by dreames to foretell many thinges, bycause in diuerse dreames and in a manner infinite, it is not possible, but that some true thinges happen sometymes. They whyche the whole day excercise themselues in shootynge, do much oftner bit the marke, then they which do very seldom shoote. And they which play al the day at dyse or tables, do much oftener throw good castes, then they which little or seldome vse that kinde of play.
Howbeit we must vnderstand y t those signes, which ar attributed to dreames, [Page 136] as touching the fyrst kynde alredy declared, are not necessary, Of dreames which ar signs there is no necessity of the effectes to be gathered. for asmuch as they may be letted. And yet this hindreth not but that they may be signs. For this is so also in the clouds, which vndoubtedly ar signes of rain, when as for al y t sometymes they are discipated by the wind before it rayn. And vrine hath tokens either of sicknes or helth, when yet the effect may be letted by vehementer causes, & the same also happeneth of the pulses. Yea and those counsels, which we haue appoynted, and which with great deliberation decree to do, very oftentimes are not accomplished, bycause some other thinges happen betwene, wherby we can go no farther: which self same thinge if it happen in dreames, it is no maruayle, forasmuche as they are signes of thinges not perfecte, but rather of the beginninges of thinges, and those weake and feable mouinges of humors maye yet be easely letted of many other causes.
Democritus thus expoundeth those dreames, Democritus. which resemble thinges cōming by chaunce, and farre distante: There are alwayes (saythe he) defluctions from things themselues, which ar caried to the bodies of those that slepe, and do affect them with the quality and symilitude which they bring with them. And y e same he affirmeth to be for two causes more felt sleping then waking. First, bicause y e ayre by night is easlyer moued, as we see done, when the water is smitten with a little stone, very many circles ar with that stroke multiplied and driuē a great way, vnlesse some other contrary motion resiste it. But in the nighte the ayre is more quiet, then in the day time, bycause it is not driuen into sundry parts by the course of creaturs which moue themselfes. An other cause is, bicause they which slepe do easlier receaue light mouings. And lastly the same author also referreth not the causes of dreames to god. Galene.
Galene also in his little booke whiche he wrote de presagiis in somniorum, aboue other thinges maketh menciō of this, whē in dreames we se those thinges, which when we were waking, we neither did nor thought, they ought not to be referred neither to artes, neyther to qualities, or custome of those things, which happened when we wer wakinge, but vnto humors. This rule seemeth to tende to thys end, that we might vnderstand of what thinges dreames are to be counted signes. And he graunteth that these things are better knowen in the night, then in the day, bycause then the soul withdraweth it self into the inward parts wher it easilier feleth those things which ar ther. An history of a certayn dream. And he maketh mencion of one who thought in his dreame he had a thigh of stone, which many thought to pertayn to his seruants, but w tin a few dayes after that, his legge fel into a palsey. An other thought that he was vp to the throte in a cesterne full of bloude, out of which he could by no meanes escape. And that declared that much bloud abounded in hym, and that he had very great neede to be let bloud. He maketh mention also of an other, which in his dreame thought that on his critical or iudiciall day he was washed in a bath wyth great aboundance of water, who afterward fell into a great sweat. Farther sayth he they which slepe do thinke sometimes that they are greuousely laden, so that they ar not able to beare the wayght: & sometimes so light and nimble, that they run, & in a manner fly. Al these things saith he, are [...]okens of excesse or defecton of humors.
Hippocrates also of these thīgs in a maner writeth the same namely that y e mind in the day time, destributeth his powers into the senses & other faculties: Hippocrates. And in the night it draweth thē to y e inward parts, & therfore it doth the better know them. Howbeit he maketh mencion that there are certayn dreames which come by god, wherby calamities are foreshewed to come vnto cities, people, and other certayne greate men, for the expounding of which dreames, some do professe certayne artes. Vnto which neuerthelesse he semeth to geue but very small credite. When by dreames it is noted that y e humors do offend, he sayth that they which are in daunger, must be holpen by diete, exorcist, and medicine. And whither the dreames be good or euil, he will haue prayers added. When helth is by dreames [Page] signified, we must pray sayth he vnto the Sunne, vnto Iupiter celestiall, Iupiter possessor, to Minerua, rich Mercury, and to Apollo. But if the dreames be vnlucky, we must pray vnto the goddes sayth he which turne awaye ill, namely vnto the goddes of the earthe, and to the Heroicall men, &c. Wherfore eyther Hippocrates was supersticious, or els he would seme so. But to me, as touching sincere godlines, that I mislike not: Yea it is very much commended, that if at any time wee be vexed with troublesome and terrible dreames, we muste praye vnto god, that it would please him to turne away those euils, if there be anye whiche hange ouer our heddes.
What is the outward cause of dreames.There is an other kinde of dreames, whiche procedeth of an outward cause, namely from the power of heauen, or (as it is commonlye called) the influence, which altereth the ayre. For this ayre touching our bodies, affecteth them with a new quality: Wherby sundrye images and dreames are stirred vp vnto those which are on sleepe. Wherfore there are manye effectes wroughte of heauen, of whych it bringeth forth some in the phantasy, and power or faculty of imagination: and other some in deede. And that may easely be shewed by an example. In dede in the ayre or cloudes there are raine: and in the imaginacion of the Crow there is such an alteration before the rayne, that he beginneth to croke. Wherfore the effects in the phantasy of those which ar on slepe, and also in dede, come vndoubtedly of the self same cause: Yet haue they great diuersity by reasō of the subiectes in which they are made. And it is not to be doubted, but that there is a certayne slender and hidden similitude betweene these effectes. But it is verye hard to vnderstand the reason of this proporcion or analogy. And if we say, that the starres are the cause of such effectes or affections, who can refer these signes vnto his own propre cause, Why diuinatiō by dreames is hard and vncertayne. that is, to some certayne starres more then to other, Assuredly I suppose that there are very few (I will not say none) whiche can do it. Farther if they shuld also be referred vnto propre starres, what can we iudge to come to passe by them, especially as touching things comming by happe, whē as iudiciall Astrology is euermore counted moste vncertayne? In fyne, images & & similituds which ar sayd to portend things to come, ar so doubtful, vncertain & ambiguous, that we can affyrm nothing for certayn of thē. Wherfore this is to be added, that forasmuch as dreams cannot be broght to passe of one only cause, but of many (as we haue declared) we shall easely fal into an error, if we of those many causes chuse onely one certayne cause. Therefore let vs hold this, that is, not easely to foretel any thing by dreames, for that they may easlier de iudged by the euentes, then the euentes can by them be foretold. Wherefore there remayneth of dreames but onely a certayne suspicion, whiche also of necessity is verye sclender.
A gate of horn & a gate of puerye.The two most noble Poetes, Homere (I say) and Virgill, made twoo gates of dreames, the one of horne, the other of yuery. That of horne (as they say) pertayneth vnto the true dreames, and that of yuery, to false: and they say y t the gretest part passeth through the gate of yuery, and not through that of horn. Wherfore in iudging naturall dreames, let vs not passe the measure of suspition, nor stick to much in dreames: forasmuch as it is not the duty of a christiā man to cleaue more then is conueniente vnto perillous and vncertayne coniectures, bicause whilest they so busily apply them selfes to those things, Of dreames sent ether of god or of the deuill. To fore shewe any thynge by visions or dreames twoo thinges are required. they neglect other things whiche are of greater wayght. And the deuil very often times mingleth himself with those thinges to this entent, eyther to cal vs back from good actions, or els to driue vs to actions that are euell.
Nowe let vs see, what we oughte to affirme of dreames sente of God, or moued by the deuel. When any thing by y e work of god or of angels is in dreams foresene, twoo thyngs are required. The fyrste is that certayne notes or images of things which are shewed, do inform or imprint the phantasy or imagination. [Page 137] Secondly must be adioyned iudgement, to vnderstand what those things at the last do portend. As touching the first, we must know, that these notes and images are somtimes offred vnto the senses, bicause of those things which God maketh outwardly to appeare, as whē Balthazar the successor of Nebuchad-Naezar saw in the wall the fyngers of a hande which wrote, as it appeareth in Daniel. And somtimes without any outward sight are images and formes described in the imagination or phantasy: which happeneth two maner of waies. For either the formes or images which are kept in the minde, are called backe to such vse as God hath entended, as when to Ieremy was shewed a seething pot tourned to the North: Or els newe formes are shewed, whyche by the senses were neuer seene, as if formes of coulours and images shoulde bee shewed vnto one blynde from hys byrth.
And in this kinde or prophesieng, images or formes are in steede of letters. Formes or images ar lyke letters. For as they are ordered and disposed, so sundry oracles are shewed. Euen as in the diuers chaunging of letters, orations and sentences are made diuers. Teachers which instruct their scholers, may by their study and industry of teaching fashion manifold images in the mindes of the hearers: although they be not able to geue the iudgement and right vnderstanding. But God ministreth both, God somtimes geueth not vnto one & to the selfe same man formes, and the vnderstandyng of them. They whych haue onely images, are not simply prophecies. not in dede alwaies together: for to some sometimes he sheweth onely the formes, as to Pharao, and to his Butler and Baker, & also to the king of Babilon, al which men needed an Interpretor (namely Ioseph & Daniel) to expound their dreames. And vndoubtedly those, vnto whom are shewed onely the images of thinges to come, are not truely and plainly counted Prophets, forasmuch as they haue but onely a certaine degree, beginning, and in a maner a step of prophecye: euen as Caiphas also the high Priest is not to be counted a Prophet, when as hee spake those thinges which he knew not.
But why God would sometimes by dreames manifest vnto Kinges & Princes thinges to come, as now he doth, there are two causes: The one is, bycause he had a regarde vnto the people and Nations whom they gouerned. For if the penury which was at hand, had not ben shewed vnto Pharao, Egipt had vtterly bene destroyed by famine. Secondly, it was the counsel of the Lorde, by these expositions of dreames, to manifest vnto the world his Prophetes and holy men, which before were hidden, which thing the holy scriptures testifye happened in Ioseph and Daniel. The Ethnike Historiographers also do write verye manye thinges of dreames, which Princes sometimes saw. Yea, Tertulian. and Tertulian in hys booke de Anima, maketh mencion of certayn of those dreames, as the dreame of Astyages of his daughter Mandane, also of Philip of Macedonia, and of Iulius Octauius, whom M. Cicero being yet a boy, thought he saw him in his dreame, and being awake as soone as he met him, he straightway knewe him. And the same man telleth of certayne other also of this kinde.
But omitting these, let vs by testimonies of the holy scriptures (which shall easily be done) confirm, that certain dreames ar sent by God. Mathew testifieth that Ioseph the housbande of Mary, was in dreames thrise admonished by the Angel. The wyfe also of Pilate had knowledge by a dreame, and sent woorde to her housband, that he should not condemne Christ being an innocent. Peter in the Actes of the Apostles the x. chap. saw a sheete let downe from heauen. And in the .xvi. chap. a man of Macedonia appeared vnto Paule, and mooued him to go into Macedonia. And the Lord commaunded the same Paule in a dreame, that he should not depart from Corinthe, bycause he had a wonderfull great number of people in that City. I might rehearse a great many other places, both out of the old Testament, and out of the newe, but that I wil not be tedious. Philo a Iewe. Philo a Iew (as Ierome in his booke de viris illustribus saith) wrote fyue bookes of Dreames, which are sent by God. Ciprian also telleth, Ciprian. that in his tyme wer certain things sene by dreames, which serued for the edification of the Churche: & he doth geue [Page] not a litle, Augustine. Thre kindes of dreames. but very much authority vnto them. And Augustine in his .xii. booke de Genisi ad litteram, the .3. chap. sayth: That there are three kindes of dreames. The first (saith he) pertaine vnto the outward senses, which he calleth corporal. Againe, other some he calleth Spirituall, which consyst of images, & haue place about the phantasy, or power of imagination. The last he nameth Intellectual, bicause they are comprehended onelye by reason and iudgement of the mynde. And those which consist by imagination, namely those that are put in the secōd place (as we haue a litle before taught) saith he, make not Prophets, & affirmeth that Ioseph was much more truly a Prophet, then Pharao. And bicause we wyl not go from our history, we may affirme the same thing of the soldiour, which in the hearing of Gideon expoūded the dreame of his fellow soldiour, namely, that he rather was a Prophet, then he which had the vision. But in this order or degree of Prophetes, Daniel excelleth the rest. For he dyd not onelye interpreate the dreames of the king: but when he had forgotten those thinges which he saw in his sleepe, he could reuoke them into his memory againe. Farther, he did not onely interpreate the dreames of other men, but also he was by God instructed of his owne visions.
By the Deuil also are dreames sometimes moued, for Augustine in the place alredy alledged de Genisi ad literam writeth, that one possessed wyth a Deuil, by dreames declared in what houre a priest would come vnto him, & through what places he would passe. Oracles answered sometymes by dreames and visions. And we are not ignorant that the Ethnikes had oracles, where men were al night to obtaine visions and dreames. Suche a one was the oracle of Amphiarus, Amphilochus, Trophonius, and of Esculapius. In those places, the Deuil shewed vnto those whiche slept, remedies and medicines to heale suche as were sycke: and therwithal also he gaue answer of other matters. And to obtaine such visions and dreames, there were commaunded vnto those which came to enquire of any thing, I cannot tel what choise of meates, and separate lodginges, Pithagorians. and certain pure and chaste daies. It is said also that the Scholers of Pithagoras eschewed beanes, bicause they make troublesome dreames. But our God, to declare that he is not bounde to those thynges, shewed vnto Daniel the kinges dreame, when he and his fellowes by prayers had vehemently desired it of him. And it is not to be doubted but that the deuil can mingle him selfe with dreames, Augustine. when as through his diligence there haue bene and also are now many false Prophetes, wherefore Augustine in his booke before alledged the .xix. chap. If an euyl spirite (saith he) possesse men, he maketh them either diuelish, or mad, or els false prophetes. And contrarywise a good spirit maketh faithful prophetes, speaking misteries to the edification of other.
He also demaundeth in the same booke, the .xi. chap. by what meanes the reuelations of euyl and good spirites may be discerned one from an other. Augustine. Howe dreames ar to be knowē whiche are of a good sp [...], and which are of an euyll. And he answereth: That that can not be done, except a man haue the gifte of discerning of spirites. But he addeth that an euyl spirite doth alwaies at the last leade mē to wicked opinions and peruers maners: althoughe at the beginning the difference can not be knowen with out the gift of the holye ghost. In his Epistle to Euodius, which is the .100. epistle, inquiring of the same matter, he sayth: I would to God I could discerne betwene dreames, which ar geuen to errour, and those which are to saluation, neuerthelesse we ought to bee of good courage, bycause God suffreth his children somtimes to be tempted, but not to perysh.
Aristotle.But what shal we answer vnto Aristotle, who denieth that dreames ar sent of God, and that for this cause in special, bicause God would geue this faculty of diuination to wyse and good men, and not to the foolish and wicked? We answer, that for the most part it is true, that true Prophetes, which are by God illustrate with dreames and visions, Why God somtimes vseth euyl Prophetes and vnwyse. are both good and godlye. Howbeit, leaste it should be thought that the power of God is bound vnto the wysedome or maners of men, God wyl sometimes vse the woorke of euyl men in those things: to [Page 138] declare and shew forth the great and wonderful power of his prouidēce, Tertulian. as one which can vse all kinde of instrumentes. Farther, as Tertulian writeth in hys booke de Anima, seing that he distributeth his Sunne and rayne both to the iust and to the vniust, it ought not to be marueilous, if he bestowe also these gyftes, which serue especially to the instruction of men, both to the good and to the euil. And that we should not be ignorant of his doing, the holy history declareth that the Ethnikes were by God verye oftentimes admonished and corrected in theyr sleepe. So Pharao king of Egipt was commaunded to restore vnto Abraham his wife, and Abimelech king of Gerar was in like maner admonished. And Tertulian saith moreouer, that euen as God, when hee instructed the wycked in theyr sleepe, doth it that they might become good: so contrariwise the Deuil inuadeth the godly when they are a sleepe, by dreames to seduce them oute of the ryghte way. Aristotle thought y e God in distributing his giftes, ought to haue a regard to wise men, and especially to Philosophers: God reuealeth misteries rather vnto the litle ones, then to the wyse. when as Christ hath taughte altogether otherwise. I thanke thee (saith he) O heauenlye father, that thou hydyng these thinges from the learned and wise, hast reuealed them to lyttle ones. &c. Paul also sayth, that the vocation of God chiefly pertayneth to the vnnoble, vnlearned, and weake.
An other argument was, that beastes also when they sleepe do dreame, when yet no man wil say that God ministreth and disposeth their dreames. That Philosopher is deceaued, bicause he supposeth that if God do send some dreames vnto men, he ought therefore to be made author of al dreames, which vndoubtedly to farre frō our meaning. For we referre not vnto God himselfe, al those things which ar natural, as certain peculiar effectes, by which immediatly (as to speake with Scholemen) men should be instructed of thinges to come. We haue sufficientlye before declared of what causes dreames come in creatures. God, though he somtime sēdeth dreames, yet sē deth he not all. And to entreate Logs [...]like: There is no firme connexion from a priuate or peculiar proposition to an vniuersal. Wherefore, though God do minister some dreames, wee may not thereby gather, that all dreames, whether they be in beastes or men, ar sent by hym. Beastes otherwyse haue the power to heare, neither want they eares: and yet, bicause God sendeth not somtimes Prophets vnto them to speake and shewe them thynges to come, we cannot conclude that God doth not sometimes sende holy men vnto men, by whom they maye bee both admonished, and instructed.
He saith moreouer, that if God were the author of dreames, he woulde cause them to be done as wel in the day time, as in the night. But I affirme, God vseth both times, as well the daye as the nyght. that it is free for God to vse eyther time as he wil, forasmuch as he is Lord as well of the day as of the night, and as wel of sleeping as of waking. And that he somtimes did in very deede shew visions vnto prophets in their sleepe, & sometimes when they wer waking, as it semed best vnto him, the holy scriptures do restlfy.
Farther, what absurdity is it, if he oftentimes vse the cōmodity of the nyght and sleepe, when as the Philosophers and Phisitions them selues doo confesse, that men are at such time more apt to receaue mocions very light? Shall this cō modity serue the Phisitions turne to know the humors of the bodye, & can it not serue God, for the saluation of soules? In the booke of Iob the .33. chap. there is a godly and apt place written after this maner: when slepe falleth vpon men, and they sleepe vpon their beds, then God openeth the eare, and sealeth corrections.
Lastly was obiected, that God if he would admonish men, he would do it openly and manifestly, & not obscurely, or by rydles. I answer, that the true prophets and such as were inspired by God, did very wel vnderstand the thinges whyche God told them in such dreames: wherefore they needed no expositers. And if hee somtimes sent dreames vnto Ethnike Princes (as he did vnto Pharao and Nebuchad-Nezar) he therfore did it, to make his Prophetes that wer hidden (namely Ioseph and Daniel) to be notable. Otherwyse he gaue vnto his Prophetes [Page] iudgemēt, & a cleare vnderstāding of such visions which he ministred vnto thē.
Why Aristotle erred.But Aristotle is herein deceaued, bicause he had a respect onely to deceauers, which prophessed such kindes of prophecies, and bewitched men, as though they could expound al sortes of dreames, and shew whet they portended. But we vnderstand not those things which we haue now alledged, of al kinde of dreames, neither of al maner of prophetes. For they pertain onely to those, which God indede sendeth: wherefore the coniectures of deceauers and Southsaiers haue nothing here to doo. But the authoritye of so great a Philosopher doth not muche moue vs: Epicurus. bicause although that Epicurus fauoureth that sentence which he doth, who to disburden his Gods from the labour of regarding of dreames, teacheth that they as al other thinges, Plato. The Stoikes. do come rashly and by chaunce. Yet contrarywise Plato geueth muche to dreames sent of God: and the Stoikes pronounced that dreames in the night, are as it were a familiar and domestical oracle, by whyche God doth prouide for humans kinde. Augustine. Whyther the Soule of it self haue power to foreknow thinges to come. This wil I not ouerpasse, that Augustine in the place before alledged vpon Genesis ad literam, the .xii. booke, and .xv. chap. doth demaund whither the Soule of it selfe haue power to foreknow thinges to come, and that by his own nature. And he denieth that it hath: bicause (saith he) if it had, it woold vse it, when as al men do so earnestly desyre to knowe thinges to come. Wherfore visions and dreames of Prophets attaine to their truth, not by nature, but by God.
But now must we see, how the consideration of dreames shoulde be prohibited, seing they are suggested by God and his Angels: for if the matter be so, then are not dreames to be contemned, Al regarde of dreames is not forbidden. but with diligence to be obserued. I aunswer therto, that al regard of dreames is not forbidden, but that onelye which is procured by euyl and vayne artes, and which is accustomed to be obtained by worshipping of Deuils. Otherwise ther is nothing which letteth, but y t by dreames we may iudge of humors, or, if they be of God, or by anye meanes perceaued to bee of him, to obey them. Thys is also forbidden, that wee extende not naturall dreames farther then their nature may suffer. And that doo they whych applye dreames vnto euentes comming by chaunce, wherein they haue no respect, neyther to the cause, nor to the effect.
The Romane lawes punished Interpretours of dreames.And superstitious diuination by dreames, is not condemned by Christians onely, but also is extremely forbidden by the Romane lawes. For in the .9. boke of the Code de maleficis, & Mathematicis: In the law Et si excepta: It is ordayned that such diuiners should be very greuously punished, so that although they were in any place of dignity, yea and longed to Cesar him selfe, yet myght they be punished: which otherwise was not lawful to do, to men of nobilitye. And by these woordes are they expressed: Aut narrandis somniis, occultam artem aliquam diuinandi. A lawful obseruation of dreames, and an vnlawful. &c. And this difference which we here put for the lawful and vnlawfull obseruation of dreames, is verye well sette foorth in Ieremy the .23. chapter. For there god by his Prophet detesteth vaine and fond dreames, but commendeth suche as are true and of god. In Deut. the .xviii. chap. obseruers of dreames seme generally to be reproued. But we must know, that according to the truth of the Hebrue, there is no mencion made of them. In deede other superstitions and idolatries are ther condemned, but of dreames ther is nothing at al spoken, although in other places the wicked obseruation of them is reproued. It is lawful to praye that wee may be admonished, euen by dreames. Monica y e mother of Augustine. Wherfore the good & lawful obseruation of them is not to be forbiddē: yea, it is sometimes lawful for holy men to pray, that they may be admonished euen in theyr dreames, of those things especially which they iudge meete, & cannot by them selues attaine vnto. Monica the mother of Augustine, being desirous to haue her sonne maryed, for the auoyding of fornication, desired god that he would reueale vnto her somewhat of that thing, euen in her sleepe: and she affirmed that god graunted her a certaine taste, whereby she discerned those thinges which of her self she saw in her sleepe, from those thinges which were shewed her by the suggestion [Page 139] of God. And this doth Augustine write in his .vi. booke of Confessions, the .iii. chap. And leauing him, we knowe assuredlye that Daniel prayed to come to the knowledge of the dreame of Nebuchad-Nezar. And this is to bee holden for certaine, that it is the dutye of godlye men, to praye vnto God, that euen then also when we sleepe, we may be kept chaste and cleane, as touching the body and spirite. For which thing Augustine prayed in his booke of Confessions, Augustine. the .x. boke and .30. chap. For visions which come by night, wherewith either the mynde is troubled, or the body defiled, are punishmentes of synne, especiallye of originall synne. For it should not haue bene so in Paradise, if Adam had abidden in that truth, wherin he was created, as Augustine writeth in his .v. booke against Iulianus, the .viii. chap. Now wil we returne againe vnto the history.
16 And he deuided the .300. men into three bandes, and gaue euerye man a trumpet in hys hand, wyth empty pytchers, and lampes wythin the pytchers.
17 And he sayd vnto them: Looke on me, and doo lykewyse. For be hold I wil come to the syde of the host, & then euen as I do, so do ye.
18 For I wil blow wyth a trumpet, and al they that are wyth me: Then blow ye also wyth trumpets on euery syde of the hoste, and ye shal say: For the Lord, and for Gideon.
19 So Gideon, and the hundreth men that were with hym, came vnto the outsyde of the hoste, in the beginning of the mydle watche, and they raysed vp the watchmen, and they blew with their trumpets, and brake the pitchers, which they had in their handes.
Gideons industry or pollecy is here set foorth, Many policies of Gideon. and the fauour wherwith God prospered his successes and enterprises. He deuideth his three hundreth men into three bandes, that he might on sundry partes inuade the Madianites, and by a sodaine feare trouble their hoste on euerye syde. He vsed also another pollecye concerning the time, for he set vpon them in the night. For when they were in a maner in a dead sleepe, they wer the easilyer by a great hurly burly astonished with feare. Farther, hee chused the moste commodious part in all the night, for suche a purpose: for he assayled the Madianites about the beginning of the second watche or garde. Wherefore it is called Rosch Haticonath, that is, the heade or begynning of the middle watche or garde. This woord Toch signifieth wythin: Augustine. Ther are foure watches of the night, whereof euerye one containeth three houres. and therof is deriued Ticonah, which is a myddle. Augustine in his Sermon De verbis domini, the .14. Oration, sayth, that the Elders deuided the night into .4. partes, of which euery one contained .3. houres, which he confirmeth also by the testimonies of the holy scriptures. For it is said that the Lord came vnto the Apostles in the .4. watch of the night, when they labored so vehemētly in the sea, that their shypp was very neare soonke. The same father writeth the lyke thyng vpon the .79. Psalme. The Glose also in the Decrees .1. question, the .1. Superueniente Pascha, maketh mencion of the names of those partes of the night, Conticinium, Intempestum, Gallicinium, & Antelucanum, that is, the bed time, y e dead part of the night, the Cocke crowing, and the dawning of the day.
And Isidorus in hys .v. booke of Etimologies, maketh .vii. partes of the nyght, Isidorus. for he addeth these three, Vesperum, Crepusculum, and Matutinum, that is, the euentide, the twylight, & the morning. The second watch may be vnderstād the midle watch, as touching our history. For ther are .2. watches betwene the first and the last: wherfore howsoeuer it be, the second must needes occupy the midle place. The inuentone of nyght watches. Plinius. But the inuenter of these gardes or watches in hostes (as Plini wryteth in his .7. booke & .56. chap.) was Palamedes, which by this place we see cannot be so, forasmuch as the actes of the Iudges are of farre more antiquitye, then was Palamedes, vnles peraduenture he spake onely of the watches of the Grecians. [Page] The vse of watches floorished in the olde tyme, not onelye in hostes, but they were had in vse also, for the safe custody of manye other thinges. For at Rome there were watchmen, Watchmen for to geue warning of fyres. which in the night time went vp and downe the Citye, to geue warning of fires, and therfore both in the Digest, and in the Code, the title is: De officio praefecti vigilium. This industrye also was translated vnto Shepeheardes, Watches of Shepeheardes which we may see euen by the Gospel: For in Luke the .ii. chap. the Angels, when Christ was borne came vnto the Shepeheardes, whych kept watche ouer their flocke. We reade also, that both Ethnikes and Christians vsed watches in holy seruices. Watches vsed in holy seruices At Rome there were holy seruices vnto the Goddesse Bona, which were done in the night season. And in the old Testament we reade, that godly women abode all night at the tabernacle, for doing iniury vnto whom, the children of Ely were accused.
Philo a Iewe (as Eusebius Cesariensis in his first booke rehearseth) affirmeth, that the Christians which were in the Apostles time, Philo. amongst other theyr laudable institutions, did most chastely watche, in geuing thankes vnto God, applieng them selues vnto prayers, Tertulian. doctrines, and praysinges of God. Tertulian in his Apologie writeth, that the Christians supped oftentimes and moderatly together, bicause they knew they should woorship God in the night tyme. In the Actes Paul continued his sermon and disputation til after midnight, so that Eutichus a yong man being oppressed with sleepe, fel downe from a high loft. Yea, and Christ also, abode al night vpon the mountaine praying: and he reprehended the Apostles, which could not watch euen one houre with him, and exhorted them to watche and praye, that they might not be oppressed wyth temptation. Ierome vpon the .25. Ierome. chap. of Mathew writeth, that the Iewes had a tradition, that the Messias would come at midnight, in which houre in dede the first born of Egipt were slayne. Wherfore he writeth, that he supposeth that that tradition came from the Apostles, that the Priests in the holye night of Easter shoulde not send away the people, so that if peraduenture the Lord appeare, he may finde them watching. But this is not at this daye obserued: for the watches are not kept on the night of Easter, but on the night of the Natiuity.
Consilium Carthaginense.In the Counsell of Carthage the .4. chap. 49. it is ordayned that a Priest, which without any necessity of his bodye, ceased from keeping night watches, should both be depriued of his degree, and also put out of his benefice. But in the Counsel of Eliberinum, Consilium Eliberinum. chap .35. watchings in Church yardes are prohibited, where they were wont to watch, hauing waxe candles lighted: which I suppose was inuented, not that by that obseruation they might deliuer the soules of the dead from purgatorye, Watches at the Sepulchres of the deade. Ierome. but rather in honour of them. For as euerye man helde deare his friendes which were deade, that the memory of them shoulde not bee forgotten, they watched at the place where they were buryed, one daye in the yeare, which we manifestly perceaue in the life of Hilarion, written by Ierome, where he telleth that a certaine Deacon sayd, that he should watch at the tombe of blessed Antony, within a day or two, bicause now a yeare, or certayne yeares were passed since he died. The Elders watched also at the Sepulchres of Martirs, therby to shew vnto them honor, applieng themselues to doctrine, exhortations, geuing of thankes, & praiers, especially in these perilous times, whē they might not easily in the day time assemble together. Farther, peraduenture piety was by y e meanes the better obserued. For in the day time men wer occupied w t sundry labours & workes. Wherfore, y t the worshipping of God might not lye vtterly neglected, they appointed certaine houres in the night for it.
Ierome against Vigilantius, maruelously cōmendeth the institutiō of y e church for watching, & he thinketh y t we shuld not cease frō this obseruation, although by occasion of these watches, some filthy things wer cōmitted. For (saith he) the errors of yong men, and light women, which can synne also in an other place, and play filthy partes at home, ought not to reuoke vs from so holye a custome. [Page 140] But we see that at this day contrary to the sentence of Ierome, watches ar abolished, not onely of Martirs, but also those which were done in the honour of the Lord, as it manifestly appeareth in the Counsell of Antisiodorensis, chap. the .v. Consilium Antisiodorense. although in some places there remaine some remnants of watches, as at Mantua vpon the feast of Bartlemew, and at Versellis on the night of Saint Eusebius. But al men know, how vnreasonably and immoderatly mē behaue themselues in those watches. Watches turned vnto fastinges. Wherfore they haue conuerted the obseruation of watchings into fastinges. But what maner of fastinges I pray you? Suche which they vse now adayes in abstayning from eating of fleshe. But whatsoeuer it be, the sentence of the Apostle is firme and constant, that the exercises of the body haue no great vtility, but piety is of force to al thinges. We must in dede fast and watch, as much as reason requireth, and strength of the body wil beare. And I doo not thinke that in this thing we ought with to much zeale to imitate Basilius, Nazianzenus and such like, which with outward obseruations so brake their bodies, that at the length they became vnprofitable, both to them selues, and also to other. The golden mediocritye is to be kept, wherein wee must keepe the laudable measure of frugalitye and temperaunce. And thus muche by the waye of watches.
20 And the three bandes blew with trumpets, when they had broken their pitchers, and they tooke their lampes in their leaft hande: and the trumpets in their right hand, to blow withal, and they cryed: the swoord of the Lord, and of Gideon.
21 And they stoode euery man in his place, rounde about the host, and al the host brake theyr aray, and cryed, and fled.
The blowing of the trumpets, with the wonderful great cry of men, on euery syde, and the sodaine light, which the burning firebrandes gaue, when the pytchers were broken, did not onely astonish the Madianites, but they beyng yet oppressed with sleepe, were so troubled, that they could not tel what to do. Wherfore they supposed that there were many and sundry hostes there, and had nowe inuaded their host, and God filled them with such a certaine disines & madnes, that they counted their fellowsoldiours in stede of enemies, and miserably slew one another. The holy ghost suggested thys warlike polecy This warlike pollecy was not found out and inuented by Gideon himself onely, but, as it is to be beleued, he did it by the suggestion of y e holy gost. And how God fauoured his enterprises, the holy history declareth, whereby we might learne, that God must prosper our enterprises, otherwise they are easely made vayne and of no force. For trumpets, fyrebrandes, and empty pitchers, of their own disposition and nature, haue smal force to obtaine a victory, especially if euery one of thē be taken a part, & although being ioyned together, they seme that they can do somwhat, yet if God had not added his power, they wold haue bene but laughed at. And they cried: The swoord of God, and of Gideon. God is mencioned as the true & principall efficient cause, & Gideon is added vnto him, The victorye must not be parted betweene God & Gideon as a fellow worker and instrument appointed to this worke. And it is not therfore so written, bicause the victory should after a sort be parted, and the one halfe geuen vnto God, & the other part to Gideon, whych thing also we must obserue as touching eternal saluatiō. For we must count the obtaining of it, to be wholy receaued of God, and not by free wyl, as the Pelagians do. Not vndoubtedlye to the ende we should lyue ydlely, or cease frō good workes, when as Paul to the Philip expressedly commaundeth, that we should worke our own saluaciō: but that we might vnderstand that all that we do, is of him, euē as in the same place it is added: For it is he which worketh in vs, both to wil & to perform, according to his good pleasure. Of this victory the .83. Psalme maketh mencion: Doo vnto them as thou diddest vnto Madian, as vnto Horeb, & Zeb, & Zebah, & Zalmona. [Page] Which sheweth vnto vs that the order of this history is diligentlye to be kept in remembraunce of vs, that wee maye hope for the like, by praiers desire them of God, and haue a confidence to obtaine them. And not onely Dauid maketh mencion of this narration, but also Esay in his .x. chap. where he entreateth of Senacherib. God (saith he) wil raise vp a whip, like the destruction of Madian. And in very dede it so happened, as the Prophet prophesied: for the whole hoste of that king was by God destroyed, as was this host of the Madianites.
The names of the Captaynes of the Madianites do expres the nature of tirannes.And as touching the names of these Captaines, they doo verye well signifye their tiranny. Aareb is a waster, Zaab is a woulfe, Sabchah is killing, and Salmona is prohibiting shadowe and refreshing. So do tirannes behaue themselues, they wast and rauen all thinges, they kil lyke woolues, and take awaye all refreshing and commodity from their subiectes: when as yet if they were Princes in deede, they should do farre otherwise. But God so punisheth them, that he wil haue their wicked affectiōs of their myndes, manifested not onely in dedes, but also in their names. Yea, and they them selues, as though they wer not sufficiently described and expressed in the holy scriptures, haue framed vnto themselues certaine armes, tending very muche to this purpose. None of them in a maner doo in their armes cary vertues, but Lions, Woulues, Tigers, Beares, Eagles and such lyke, whereby they rather set foorth their cruelty, then vertue and goodnesse.
22 And when the .300. men blew with trumpets, the Lord set euery mans swoord vpon hys neyghbour, and vpon all the hoste. So the host fled vnto Beth-Hasittah in Zererath, and to the border of Abel meolah vnto Tabath.
23 Then the men of Israel were gathered together out of Naphthali, and out of Aser, and out of al the tribe of Manasses, and pursued after Madian.
This counsell or act of God is no new or vnaccustomed thing. For so dyd he when Ionathas with his armour bearer came vnto the host of the Philistians, as we reade in the first booke of Samuel. And that is not vnlike whiche in the secōd booke of Paralip. the .xx, chap. is written, of the battaile, which in the time of Iehosaphat the king, was fought with the Moabites and Ammonites. For in those battailes also the enemies of the Israelites wounded one another. And Goliah was by Dauid slayne with his own swoord. And we also in these daies haue many times experience of the like benefites. For when our aduersaries haue decreed by violence and force vtterly to oppresse vs, by a wonderfull prouidence they haue turned their force against themselues, and being letted by manye slaughters and warres, they haue ceased from their enterprises most cruel.
24 And Gideon sent messengers vnto al mount Ephraim, saying: Come downe agaynste the Madianites, and take before them the waters, euen vnto Beth-Bara, and Iordan. Then all the men of Ephraim gathered together, and tooke the waters vnto Beth Bara and Iorden.
25 And they tooke twoo Princes of Madian, Horeb, and Zeb, and slewe Horeb vpon the rocke of Horeb, and slewe Zeb at the wynepresse of Zeeb. And they pursued the Madianites. And they broughte the heades of Horeb and Zeeb vnto Gideon beyonde Iorden.
Now were other of the Israelites gathered together, as Aser, Naphthali, and Manasses, Gideon also sent vnto the Ephraites, that the victory which he had gotten [Page 141] might on euery syde haue a lucky ende. He enuieth not to haue a companion of his glory, when as yet he with a few put himselfe in great daunger. I would to God we were so conioyned in the Church, that when wee haue begone anye good and profitable institution, we woulde for the performance of the same, desire other to helpe vs: but, which is to be lamented, as our sinnes do deserue, we oftentimes let one an other.
Come down against the Madianites, & take before them the waters. As touching these waters, the Interpreters do varye. Kimhi thinketh that it is not Iordane, his reason is, bicause it is added, euen vnto Iordane. R. Semoloh vnderstandeth that of those waters which deuideth Palestine, or the lande of Chanaan, from Siria, and among those waters he rekoneth Iordane. But the place of Beth-Bara is to be noted, bicause of the first chap. of Iohn, Beth-Bara. where our translation hath Bethania, which in dede lyeth farre distant from Iordane, neither did Iohn there baptise those that came vnto hym. But the Greeke text hath Bethabara. Wherfore it is thought that this place, whereof we now entreate, is ther ment. He commaundeth that the waters should strayghtway be preuented from those which fled, whilest yet they were troubled with feare, before they shoulde recouer strength vnto them againe. We must not slowlye followe the victory. For he knew that it was very much hurtfull for Capitaines, slowlye and softlye to pursue the victorye. Wherefore he addeth all speede, least his enemies might haue space geuen them to vnderstande theyr errour, and to renue their power again. And therfore he commaundeth that with speede they should meete them, that the victorye begone, myght at the lengthe haue a full ende.
And they tooke twoo Princes. The Ephraites accomplished that which Gideon commaunded, in preuenting those that fled, and they slew the Captains of the Madianites: Horeb they slewe at the rocke, which was afterwarde called by his name, and Zeb in the wynepresse, which Kimhi expoundeth, as thoughe there were there a playne countrye. Whose forme or figure was lyke a wynepresse. The Ephraites brought the heades of the twoo Princes vnto Gideon beyonde Iordane. This is supposed to be now put in by the figure Prolepsis: for it is thought that it was not done tyll suche time as Gideon had returned frō the victory being finished. In the meane time let vs consider the ignominy that god put those tyrannes vnto, bringing their most proude heades vnder the power of the Israelites, whom they counted for people very abiect, and wonderfullye oppressed them with their cruelty. It is thought that the head of Pompeius which was offered vnto Cesar, dyd much encrease the calamity of that man. It is also declared that the heade of Cicero was brought vnto Anthonius, as a thing most myserable.
But nowe in fewe woordes we must touche the Allegory of this act, An Allegory taken oute of the holy scriptures not vndoubtedly a vayne Allegorye, but which is drawen out of the fountaines of the holy scriptures. Esay in the .ix. chap. intreating of the redemption by Christ, writeth in this maner: The yoke of his burthen, the staffe of his shoulder, and the rod of his oppressor hast thou ouercome, as in the daye of Madian. By whyche woordes is shewed, that this victorye is to be referred vnto that deliuerye from synne, which by Christ we haue obtayned. Neyther doo these trumpets portend any other thing then the preaching of the Gospel, now spread abroade throughout the whole worlde. For God geueth saluation vnto the worlde, by the ministery and doctrine of the Church, not as though this were sufficient, but the pitchers being broken, burning fyrebrandes are shewed foorth, bicause by the death of Christ vpon the crosse, the lyght of the holye ghost shyneth in the hartes of men, and the cryes of prayers are adioyned, from whence saluation commeth vnto the true Israelite.
¶The .viii. Chapter.
1. THen the mē of Ephraim said vnto him: Why hast thou done thys vnto vs, that thou calledst vs not, whē thou wētest to fight with the Madianites? And they chode with him sharpely.
2 To whom he answered: What haue I nowe done in comparison of you? Is not the gleanyng of grapes of Ephraim better, then the vintage of Abiezer?
3 God hath delyuered into your handes the Princes of Madian, Horeb, and Zeeb: and what was I able to do, in comparisō of you? And when hee had thus spoken, then their spirites abated towarde hym.
The Ephraits nobler thē they of Manasses.THe Ephraites enuied Gideon, bicause great glorye redounded vnto hym by this battaile. That Tribe was much more noble then the Tribe of Manasses. For Iacob when he blessed the sonnes of Ioseph, stretching out his hands preferred Ephraim which was the yonger, before Manasses, whiche otherwyse was the first borne. Wherfore it is no maruail, if they now tooke it hainouslye, that they of Manasses caryed away the victory without their conduct.
Is not the gleanyng of grapes of Ephraim. Gideon aunswereth verye wittely, and by gentle woordes asswaged the spirites of the Ephraites. By the name of spirite I vnderstand violence, which proceded of arrogancy and hautynes of mynde, as we reade in the Gospel: Blessed are the poore in spirite. Hereby it appeareth that a gentle answer breaketh anger. That which sprang of enuy, he so semeth to haue taken it, as though they had bene styrred vp by a certain honest emulation, and desired that they also might be authors of the libertye of the Israelites. They which be enuious, are wont to be sory for this, bicause they want some good thing, which they see other haue alreadye obtayned. Gideon sheweth them, that the matter is not so as they thinke for: when as the greater part of this victory redounded vnto them. VVhat haue I done (sayth he) that may be compared wyth your acte? I beganne the warre in deede, but ye haue slayne Horeb and Zeeb, which was the principallest thing in this battayle. The gleaning of your grapes, are better then my wynepresse. For the two Princes, whom ye haue both taken and killed, are of much more price then the rest of the multitude, which I haue vanquished. And if a regard should be had vnto the Tribe or family, the least part of the tribe of Ephraim is better, and stronger, then all the power and ability of the Abiezerites. Gideon telleth them not that he was peculiarly chosen of God vnto this office: for that woulde more haue prouoked them to anger. Wherfore he thought to geue place to the desyre of glory, wherwyth they burned, and to their enuiousnes. And yet in the mean time he lieth not: for asmuch as the tribe of Ephraim was most strong. Neither could Gideon by himselfe, or by his own power performe those thinges which they did, althoughe by the fauour and helpe of God he dyd greater thinges.
¶Of the affections of enuy and emulation.
BVt I thinke it good somewhat to speake of the affections, namely of Enuye & Emulation, & such like. Affections (as it is wel knowen) pertain vnto the general word of quality, & ar contayned in that forme, which is cōmonly called Passio, & passibilis qualitas. And amongst those ther are two more grosse & very cōmon, Foure principall affections whych followe knowledge. Delectation (I say) & Sorow. Their chief place is in the synowes, which are dispersed in a maner throughout the whole body. Vnto which, when either agreable things to nature, or things contrary ar applied, then either we haue a delectatiō, or els a grief. Farther, ther ar other affectiōs which folow knowlege, [Page 142] by whiche as their nature is, the heart altereth hys mocion by mouing the pulse either vpwarde or downeward, accordyng as knowledge doth receaued good or euil, & that either present or els nye at hand. For when we fele that good is present, 1 the heart therewith is ioconde, and is affected pleasauntly. Laetici [...]. And this affectiō is called Gladnesse. But if we perceaue that the good is not present, but not far 2 from vs, yea at hand and very nyghe to be obteyned, Spes. then are we stirred vp by hope to attayne it, and the heart is in like sorte pleasauntly moued. But when 3 we see that euill is present, the heart flieth awaye with a heauy mocion, Dolor vel Aegritudo. [...]. for it is contracted, it abhorred it, and is vexed: and this affection is wont to be called both payne, and grief, in Greeke it is called [...], so called as the Stoikes thinke, as thoughe it were [...]: that is consumption: for euen as the body of him that is sicke wasteth away by sickenesse, so the mynde semeth in a maner to weare away with sorow. There is also an other knowledge of euill, not now beyng present, 4 but whiche already is at hand. The heart flyeth from that also, Metus. The foure affections whiche haue their begynnyng of Grief & payne. Misericordia. Nemesis. Inuidia. and by hys mouyng very manifestly declineth from it: and such an affection is called Feare.
Of those foure principall affections, these are now to be entreated of, whiche haue their begynnyng of Heuynesse, or Grief. And they also are reckened to be foure. Mercy, Nemesis, Enuy, and Emulation, of whiche Aristotle in his Rethorikes hath written many goodly thinges.
But before we entreate particularly of them, one thing is to be enquired of: Whether Affections are to be counted good or euill. The Stoikes affirme that they are euill, and they haue vniuersally condemned affections, Aemulatio. Whether affections be good or euill. The Stoikes. this reason leadyng them thereunto, bycause by them the mynde, iudgement, and sound Counsell is troubled. For they so distract and shake the mynde or reason, that it can not at pleasure and quietly haue the contēplatiō of thinges naturall and diuine, neither orderly and rightly determine of things to be done. Farther, bicause by their wayght they oftentymes driue men to perpetrate filthy and vniust things: yea and they hurte the body also, when they are very vehement. These in a maner are the reasons of the Stoikes. The Peripatecians teache muche otherwise, that is, that those things are not true, which the Stoikes affirme, The Peripatecians. but when affections are not chastised & kept vnder by reason, then are they suffred immoderatly to runne at randon. For euē y e affections, if they be kept in with certain bondes, are both good and profitable, as beyng the matter of vertues, and whiche are by nature appoynted for their whetstones. For anger bringeth no small helpe vnto strength, and mercy is set vnder the vertue of clemency. And in the same maner it may be sayd of many other.
But this sentence wherin the Philosophers do so disagre, What the holy scriptures affirme of affectiōs must be decided by the iudgement of the holy scriptures. They write, y e man both as touching soule and as touching body was created of God. And they adde, that all things were good, what soeuer God created. Wherfore for asmuch as he planted affections in man, but not euill and corrupt, as now we haue them, but right and sound, which should obey and serue reason, they must of necessity be good. Farther the lawe of God doth euery where commend vnto vs mercy, and preacheth repentaunce, whiche can not consiste without payne and grief of the minde. Dauid also writeth, and Paul repeteth it, be ye angry, but sinne not. Yea and whiche more is, affections are ascribed euen vnto God, as Anger, Mercy, Grief, Repentance, &c. which things althoughe they are not properly spokē of him, yet this must we marke, that in the holy scriptures that is neuer attributed vnto God, whiche in a man is of it selfe vice, or of his owne nature sinne. This so discussed, let vs nowe entreate of mercy.
¶Of Mercy.
MErcy is a grief of the minde, which we take for the aduersity of other men, Cicero. Aristotle. or (as Cicero saith) a grief takē for an others mās misery. Aristotle teacheth, [Page] that Mercy is stirred vp, if we see any suffre greuous things which they haue not deserued. For if wicked men be iustly punished, Mercy is not therfore stirred vp. Farther he thinketh, that those cases whiche we pitye, should be terrible, otherwise if they be but light, we are by them litle or nothing moued. Lastly that they are touched with mercy, which do thinke that such things may sometymes happen either vnto themselues or to some of their friendes. Which is the cause, that Aristotle supposeth, that they which are in prosperity, and do iudge themselues happy, are not prone vnto mercy, yea they ar wont to scoffe & mocke those which are in misery, as they which thinke nothing can hurte them. Likewise he remoueth this affection from such as are desperate and in a most miserable state, bycause they are not afrayd that any worse thing can happen vnto them, then that whiche they haue already. Wherfore they seme in that desperate fortune to haue become men without senses. But if this were true, a man might doubt, by what meanes mercy can be ascribed vnto God, for asmuch as he without controuersy is most blessed, and nothing can hurt hym. But to this might be answered, that mercy is not properly attributed vnto god, but by a metaphore taken of man, bycause he doth those things, Mercy is also to be shewed vnto those which iustly ar punished. which mercifull men are wont to do. For they helpe the afflicted, which self same thing god also doeth. But in this thing I agree not vnto Aristotle, whiche will not haue mercy to be shewed vnto those whiche are iustly punished. For Samuel mourned long time for Saul, whō God reiected not vnworthily, but most iustly. Christ also wept ouer the destruction of Ierusalem which was at hand vnto that City, not vndoubtedly without deserte, but iustly. Neither thinke I this true, that sinnes, which some mē commit, do not stirre vp mercy, but onely calamityes & aduersityes do stirre vp mercy. For holy men are no lesse grieued for other mēs causes, whē they fal into grieuous sinnes, thē they are when they be oppressed with euil fortune, yea they ar so much the more grieued, as that euil is more pernicious, and lesse able to be cured. Wherfore we can not deny, but that mercy is a good affection, for as much as it obeyeth the worde of God and reason, especially seyng the Lord by his own mouth hath pronounced, that the mercifull are blessed, bycause they also shall obtayne mercy.
The other affection which hath his beginning of Heuinesse or Grief, is called Nemesis: Nemesis. the same hath no Lattin worde, although of some it be called Indignatio, that is Indignation, which yet by that word do not expresse all that affectiō: for Indignation extendeth farther than Nemesis. Holy men oftē tymes ar sicke of Nemesis. But leauyng the word, let vs thus define the thing. Nemesis is a grief, which is taken for y e prosperity of wicked men, bycause they seme vnworthy of that fortune. Iust and holy men are sicke oftentymes of this affectiō. Dauid when he saw the vngodly florishing, said: My fete were almost moued. Abacuk also, was grieued that the vngodly were of such force, that they could oppresse the saintes, and deuoure the iust. And Iob semeth in a maner to complayne vnto his friends for the same thing. Farther Plutarche in the lyfe of Homere praiseth this affection, Plutarche. and by occasion therof he far preferreth the Peripatecians in disputing of Affections before the Stoikes, & especially by the iudgement of Homere, who affirmeth that God at the length will angerly punishe, after that the wicked haue a certayne while florished. Howbeit this is to be obserued, that men are not grieued with this affection, for that they shall suffer any losse, by reasō of the prosperous successe of the wicked, or bycause that they by their power can hurt them. For if they were in this maner grieued, thei should not be troubled with Nemesis, but rather with feare. But Nemesis is then, when a man for the lucky successe of the wicked, is moued with astomake & hatred of the vnworthinesse of the person.
How mercy & Nemesis agree and differ.This affection in two things cōmunicateth with Mercy: first bycause either of them is a Heuinesse: farther, bycause eche of thē is stirred vp by the vnworthinesse of the thing. Mercy, bycause good men are grieued and oppressed, and Nemesis, bycause wicked men lyue happely. But in this afterwarde they differ, bycause [Page 143] Nemesis hath a respect vnto prosperous fortune, & Mercy vnto sharpe fortune. Wherfore Nemesis is in a maner a meane affection betwene Enuy & Mercy, for of either it semeth to take somewhat: of mercy it taketh vnworthinesse: of Enuy prosperity, which it hath a respect vnto. Aristotle. Farthermore Aristotle teacheth y t none are affected with Nemesis for other mens vertues: for if otherwise they of vicious and corrupt men, become iust, moderate, strong, and temperate men, we are not then angry, bycause when they are adorned with vertues, they are no lenger counted wicked men. But then at the last we are affected with Nemesis, when those good things come vnto wicked mē, with which we thinke y e good mē ought to be rewarded, as are riches, honours, power, fauor, & such like. But godly men must wisely deale with this affection, that when their myndes are affected with it, bycause of the felicity of the vngodly, let them haue a regarde vnto God, which is the true gouerner and distributer of all good things. Wherfore if men should bestow these outwarde goods vpon the vnworthy, their vniustice might iustly be reproued. But such a reprehension hath no place in God, bycause he doth all things most iustly. This thing Dauid when he did not diligently consider, sayd: My fete were almost moued. As though he should haue sayd: By reason of this Nemesis I had almost grieuously fallen. We muste seldom geue place to Nemesis. Inuidia. Inuidenciae. Cicero. How enuy and enuidēce differ Enuye. The definition of Enuie. Wherfore we must seldome geue place to this affection, least we seme to reprehende the Prouidence of God.
Now must we speake of enuy. Cicero thinketh that it should rather be called Enuidence, for they among Lattin men are sayd to be sicke with Enuy, whiche are enuied. But Enuidence pertayneth to them, which consume away with this disease. And therfore he thinketh that Enuy or Enuidence is therfore so called, bycause that they which are enuious, do to much looke vpō other mens fortune. Enuy therfore is a grief which is takē for an other mās prosperity, especially of those which are equal & like vnto vs. For a poore mā enuieth not a king, neither do beggers enuy noble men. We enuy those that are like & equall vnto vs. And the likenesse is to be vnderstand, as touching kinred, riches, beawty, age, witte, dignity, and such like. The cause of Enuidence is not, bycause we feare that some hurte is at hand of those whom we enuy: for that should be feare. But of a certayne hatred and stomacke we can not abide the prosperity of other men, especially of our matches and like. And therof Enuy is the cause.
Enuy is euermore counted euill, and it is by the holy scriptures grieuously reproued. For it is most manifestly against Charity. For the Apostle said vnto the Corinth. the 1. chap. Charity enuieth not. Charitye [...]. For Paul taketh not properly there y e worde [...] whiche is turned enuy. But to the Galathians he more playnly forbiddeth enuy, writing: Be not ye made desirous of vayne glory, prouoking one an other, and enuieng one an other: Where not only Enuy is reproued, Desire of glory is the mother of Enuy. but the mother of it is also shewed, namely desire of glory. As also we may in this history perceaue. For the Ephraites enuied Gideon, bycause the glory of so great a victory semed to redound vnto him. And this affectiō is of force in all those things, wherin we desire to excel. Neither absteyneth it also from vertues: for y e enuious persons would not that his matches and like should excell him in any ornament of vertues. But the cause why enuy is conuersant among like, is this, bycause although the prosperous fortune of like or matches, doth take away none of our goods, neither maketh vs lesser then we are, yet the Enuious person so thinketh of the good things of other men, as though by them his honor & dignity, gayne, Of [...]. and other ornamentes were darkened. And this is not to be left vnspoken of, y t euery enuious person is one that reioyseth in an other mans hurte: for he reioyseth in the aduersity of his equall. Euery enuious m [...]nne is [...] that is one that reioy [...]eth at another mas [...] Yet are not these to be counted for one and the selfe same vice, seyng they pertayne vnto contrary mocions of the mynde. For Enuidence is a grief or sorow, when he that reioyseth in an other mans hurte is affected with ioy. Yet are these vices, although they be diuerse, otherwise so ioyned together, that there is no enuious man whiche is not moued with the reioysing [Page] in the hurt of an other. And hereby it manifestly appeareth that Enuidēce plainly is contrary vnto Mercy. For it lamenteth an other mās misery, but the enuious man reioyseth therin, bicause of the disease of reioysing in the hurt of an other wherewith he is sicke. Nemesis is ioned also with [...] They that are affected with Nemesis want not also this motion of the mynde. For he which is sory for y e prosperous successe of wicked men, the same man is also affected with pleasure, when he seeth them oppressed and vexed. The Latines haue no worde to expresse this kynde of ioye, wherewith both the enuious man, and he that hath Nemesis is affected, in beholding an others mans prosperity.
Of emulation.Lastly we must entreate of Emulation, which is a grief of the minde, whiche we conceaue for good things whiche happen vnto other, whiche we want, which we thinke should beautify vs, & would gladly attayne vnto them. By this motiō of the minde we desire not, that other mē should be depriued of their ornamēts, but that grieueth vs, bycause we our selues are destitute of thē. And it is a point of a good nature, in this maner to be affected: therfore Emulation is numbred among laudable Affections. Emulation is counted among laudable affections. Cicero in his Tusculan questions, defineth it to be a grief, which procedeth of that, that an other enioyeth that good thing whiche we desire. The same writer obserueth also, that Emulation is sometymes so taken, that it nothing differeth from Enuidence: wherfore it is sometymes reproued. But if the definition therof be receaued, as it is now alledged, it is an affection laudable, bycause it maketh men better: for it vseth to bring forth the imitacion of good things. We must beware that Emulation degenerate not into enuy. Cicero. Riuality is the enuy betwene two louing one woman. The matter wherin Emulation is occupyed. Emulatiō hath hope ioyned with it. The Ephraites were sicke of Enuy, and not of Emulation. But we must take hede, whiche vndoubtedly is easely done, that it degenerate not into Enuy, and Emulatiō procede not so farre, that we should wish that men fortunate and noble, and also wise men, might be spoyled of theyr ornamentes & good things. Wherfore Cicero sayd, that that Emulation is laudable, which is not like vnto riuality. For this is the nature of those that be Riuales, so to enioy their delightes, that they vtterly exclude all other. But addyng these cautions, Emulation is both good and holy. Wherfore Paul exhorted the Corinthians to emulate Charity, and the chiefest giftes. This affection is chiefly occupied about vertues, and al thinges which are had in honour and admiraciō. For that which a man contemneth and dispyseth, he vseth not to emulate. Emulation hath Hope cōtinually ioyned with it, of obteyning that which it desireth. For if a man should dispayre, it is not possible that he should emulate. And thus much of these affections.
Wherfore we gather that the Ephraites were moued with enuy against Gideon, bycause they would haue him depriued of the glory whiche he had gotten. Neither contended they so, bycause they studyed to do the like, although peraduē ture they made that their pretence. But Gideon maketh not mentiō vnto them of his vocation, labour, industry, loue of his countrey, his good acte, & such other thinges, which might haue serued to the amplifieng of hys deserte towarde the people, and of his dignity. For by that meanes he should the more haue moued them to enuy: but after a sort he gaue place vnto them, & interpreteth their affection, as though it were an honest emulatiō. And teacheth them, y t they haue now y e fruit of this affectiō, bycause they had not only imitated him, but they had done more then he had accomplished. But now let vs returne vnto the History.
4 And Gideon came vnto Iorden to passe ouer, he and the 300. mē that were with him, weary, yet pursuing them.
5 And he sayd vnto the men of Succoth: Geue, I pray you, morsels of bread vnto this people that are at my fete, for they are weary: & I will follow after Zebah and Zalmonah Kinges of Madian.
6 And one of the princes of Succoth sayd: Are the handes of Zebah, and Zalmonah now in thine hande, that we should geue bread [Page 144] vnto thine army?
7 Gideon then sayd: Therfore, when the Lorde hath deliuered Zebah, & Zalmonah into myne hand, then I will beate in peeces your fleshe with thornes of the wildernesse and with briars.
8 And he went vp thence vnto Penuel, and spake vnto them lykewise, and the men of Penuel aunswered hym: as the men of Succoth aunswered.
9 And he sayd also vnto the men of Penuel: when I come agayn in peace, I will breake downe this Tower.
10 Nowe Zebah and zalmonah were in Karkor, & their hostes with thē, about fiften thousand, al y t were left of all the hostes of the childrē of Kedem: & they which wer slayne, were an hundreth & twenty thousand men that drew swordes.
11 And Gideon went thorough them that dwelt in tabernacles, on the East side of Nobah, Iogbehah, and smote the hoste, for the host was carelesse.
12 And when zebah and zalmonah fled, he followed after them, and tooke the two kynges of Madian, zebah and zalmonah, and discō fited all the host.
13 So Gideon the sonne of Ioas returned from the battayle, before the sunne rose vp.
After a long parenthesis the history returneth vnto the iust order of y e thing that was done, and declareth in what sorte the ende of the battayle was. When the Madianites and they of the Easte had wounded themselues one an other, and a few of them whiche remayned, fled away: Gideon pursued after them, & passed ouer Iordane. And bycause he had laboured all the night, and sawe that his thre hundreth men were weary, he would somwhat refresh them. Therfore he required meat of y e city of Succoth for his fellow souldiers. Two Succoths. And Succoth lyeth beyond Iordane in the tribe of Gad. Iacob builded it, when he departed from saluting his brother Esau. Whiche I therfore speake, bycause there is an other place which is likewyse called Succoth, but it belongeth vnto Egypt, and is numbred among the first mention places of the children of Israell.
Gideon desireth that he might haue geuen him Kichroth, that is round peces of bread for his weary souldiers. Vndoubtedly, if he had required great plenty of bread or meat generally, they of Succoth might after a sorte haue ben excused. But by name he desired onely bread. Wherfore they whiche would not do that, can not but be condemned of great inhumanite. He bringeth two causes of hys request. He bringeth two causes of hys request: my fellow souldiers, saith he, are weary, namely bycause for the publique health they haue laboured all night: wherby he signified that they were not vnworthy of their reward. Farther we pursue the Madianites, puttyng our selues agayn in daunger for the health of the Hebrues. Either of these cause were sufficient ynoughe to allure their beneuolence.
The princes of Succoth aunswere, namely one for them all, and therfore it is sayd in the singular nūber, Vaiiomer, and he sayd. Wherby is signified that onely the princes and senators of this city were in the faulte, and therfore they were at the length (as afterward shalbe declared) punished by Gideon, and he threatned them only, as it is here written. They do not onely refuse to geue bread, but also they scorne the man. Are, sayth they, the handes of zebah and zalmonah in thy power? Thou speakest vnto vs with so greate a stoutenesse, and so desirest bread, as though thou haddest already taken them. Gideon was griuously angry with these mockes for so vnworthy a contempt, and he freely and playnely forespake, [Page] what he would do agaynst them.
If these vngodly and rude men had bene wise, they would haue ioyned them selues vnto him, to assiste his endeuor in fighting for the common health. But this they do not impudently deny bread whiche men vse to geue vnto suche as are weary and hungry, although they be straungers. A wonderfull diuersity vndoubtedly of things: The Madianites which were strangers, were afrayd and fled: but those whiche were Israelites, mocke Gideon the conquerer. If thou wilt saye they were ignoraunt of hys vocation: we may aunswere, that they could not denye, but that his worke was good. But graunt that they doubted of the vocation and principality of Gideon, what excuse at the laste can theyr moste wanton derision haue? For so did Nabal the Carmilite behaue hymselfe towarde Dauid, when he required some meate of hym for hys Souldiers, makyng mencion of hys fayth, and the fidelitye of hys men, in safegardyng hys thynges. But he dyd not onely denye vnto hym that humanity, but sent awaye the messangers laden with contumelyes. The thynges which Gideon required, were iuste and honesty. Stipēdes and victuales are due vnto an hoste whiche goeth on warfare. For stipendes and vittailes are due vnto the Magistrates, for as muche as he laboureth for the publicque vtility. Wherefore Paul sayeth: Therefore ye geue vnto hym tribute, bycause he is the Minister of God, namely in defendyng the innocent, and punishyng the guilty. Wherefore they of Succoth were bounde to geue those thynges whiche were desired, by the duety of iustice. For the same Apostle writeth, render vnto euery man that whiche is due: to whome tribute belongeth, tribute, to whom custome is due, custome, &c. The Ethnikes also saw this, whē as there are many ciuiles lawes extāt, whiche doo both weyghtely and moste iust prouide, that Souldiers should haue vittayles founde them, when they goo on warfare. And howe muche they synned in mockyng so greate a man, we may gather by the wordes of Christ, who sayeth: If a man saye vnto an other man foole, or Racha, be shalbe guilty of iudgement and Counsell: how muche more shall he be condemned, whiche wantonly scoffeth and mocketh hys Magistrate? Some prynces dyd seuerely punishe those whiche with contumelyes reproched euen theyr images: what ought this man to doo with those, whiche so mocked hym to hys face? These thynges I therfore speake, that we shoulde not thinke that Gideon did vniustly threaten them. It is not for priuate men to reuenge theyr owne iniuryes: But it is the office of the Magistrate to reuenge both hys owne iniuryes and other mennes, and in reuengyng hys owne, he reuengeth also other mennes iniuryes. For what souer contumely is committed agaynste a prince, it redoundeth vnto the publique wealth and all princes. Gideon at thys present dyd onely threaten, yet he stayed not there, least by occasion of reuengyng of hys owne iniury, the commodity of the victorye, whereunto he was called by God, shoulde be hindred. He differred therefore that whiche belonged vnto hymselfe: but with spede he prosecuteth that, whiche chiefely pertayned to the delyuery of the publicque wealth. But princes at thys daye do otherwise, who rather make warre amonge themselues, and that for very lyght causes, then they will take in hande a common cause and defence agaynste the Turke. Yea and there are some, and those of the Cardinalles, whiche write that they will (if they can) call backe Cesar himselfe from that course of victory, wherwith he might obteyne agayne euen the City of Constantinople, and to punishe the Germaynes and Englishemen, and other whiche fell from the Churche of Rome.
Furthermore, Gideon is for thys thyng to be praysed, namely bycause, althoughe meate wanted, and he was despysed of the Hebrues, yet he desisted not from that vocation, wherein he was constituted by GOD. But nowe both prynces and ministers of the Churche will not abyde in theyr office, vnlesse thynges necessary for theyr lyuyng be moste aboundantly ministred vnto them. He threateneth thornes and briars vnto the princes of Succoth. For that Citie [Page 145] whiche the Ethnikes call Trogloditis, had a desert in the circuite therof, Why he threa [...] neth thornes & briars. Penuel. wherin grewe many thornes and briars. Penuel is of Strabo called the face of God: in which place Iacob wrasteled with y e aungell, and sayd at the last: I haue sene the Lorde face to face, and my soule hath escaped safe. The menne of Penuel in mockyng Gideon imitated them of Succoth, and bycause they puttyng theyr confidence in the Tower whiche they had, did so scoffe at Gideon, therefore he threatened to ouerthrowe it after hys victorye. But howe thys Capitayne of GOD got meate, it is not written: and peraduenture GOD so strengthned him and hys hoste, that without meate he perfectly obtayned the victorye whiche he had begon.
He fyndeth hys enemyes lyuing in securitye: it was nyght when he passed ouer Iordane: and they had but euen nowe escaped out of the borders of the Israelites, and they thought y e Gideon would be in quiet at the least for that nyght. These were the causes, that they so securely rested themselues. There were fifttene thousand souldiers together, as certayne small remnauntes: for at the begynnyng there came one hundreth and twenty thousand fighting men, which stoode in the brunte, and bore weapons. Whereby we may easely gather what a greate number there were of boyes, scullions, and vnprofitable men, whiche vse to followe hostes. When the two kynges were taken, Gideon returned, when the Sunne was eleuated, that is, after his rysing: by whiche kynde of speakyng, we manifestly know, that this warre, as it was begon in the night tyme, so also was it finished by nyght.
14 And he tooke a seruaunte of the men of Succoth: and enquired of him: and he wrote to him the princes of Succoth, and the Elders therof euen seuentye and seuen men.
15 And he came vnto the men of Succoth, and said: Behold Zebah and Zalmonah by whom ye vpbrayded me, saying: Are the hands of Zebah and zalmonah now in thy hande, that thou desirest, that we should geue bread vnto thy weary men?
16 Then he tooke the Elders of the City, and thornes of the desert and briars and brake with them the men of Succoth.
17 Also he brake downe the Tower of Penuel, and slewe the men of the City.
Gideon required of this fellowe beyng either a younge man or a seruaunte, to describe vnto hym the names of the princes or Senators of Succoth. He trusteth not his memory, but will haue their names written, and studieth for this thing onely, not to commit any thing by anger with a furious minde. And therfore with mature deliberation he would punish onely the guilty, and not destroy the vnguilty together with the guilty. He sawe that onely the heades of the City resisted him, wherfore he determined to punishe them alone. Theodosius, A fall of Theodosius. an Emperor otherwise most worthy of prayse, fell grieuously, bycause in the City of Thessalonia, for the kyllynge of one Souldier, whiche bare rule vnder him, he commaunded a great number of Citezins to be slayn without any choise, wherby both the guilty, and the innocent were killed. Wherefore he was corrected by the authoritye of Ambrosius beynge Byshoppe, The Emperor corrected of the Bishop. and compelled to publique repentaunce: and by the commaundement of the same man of GOD he made a lawe, whiche is yet in the Code, that the sentence of death beyng pronounced agaynste any man, should be stayed the space of thirty dayes, before he should be put to execution. But nowe a dayes it oftentymes commeth to passe, that some publique wealth is moste grieuously oppressed, if two, thre, or foure Citezins thereof haue offended: all priuileges, liberty, and other ornamentes are in [Page] a moment taken awaye. Why he saued the kinges of Madian on lyue. Farther we muste consider, that Gideon did rashely saue one lyue Zebah and Zalmonah whome he had taken: for he woulde shewe them vnto the menne of Succoth and Citizens Penuel, that GOD had deliuered them vnto hym. He vexed the princes both with thornes and briars, as he threatened, that by theyr euill they myght learne, howe muche and what they had offended. Thornes are vnlucky plāts. Iodeach is in thys place not onely to instruct, but (as I suppose) it signifieth in Lattin animaduertere whiche is to punishe. Thornes are counted euen of the Ethnikes among vnluckly plantes: and therfore it is no meruayle, if they be occupied in punishementes. But whether he slew them, or onely chastised them, by the wordes of the Hystory it appeareth not. But of Penuel it is manifest ynough, both that the tower was ouerthrowē and the Citezins slayne, bycause either they scoffed more wantonly than the menne of Succoth did, or els trustyng to the fense of the place they resisted Gideon, wherefore when they came to the battayle they were slayne: or els let vs graunt that they of Succoth also perished with thornes and briars.
18 Then said he vnto Zebah and Zalmonah, What manner of men were they, whom ye slew at Thabor? and they aunswered: As thou art, so were they: euery one was like the children of a kyng.
19 And he sayde, they were my brethren euen my mothers children. As the Lorde lyueth, if ye had saued theyr lyues, I would not slaye you.
20 Then he sayde vnto Iether his firste borne sonne, Vp and slaye them. But the boye drew not hys sworde: for he feared, bycause he was yet a childe.
21 And Zebah and Zalmonah sayde, Rise thou, and fall vpon vs, for as the man is, so is his strength. And Gideon arose, and slewe Zebah and zalmonah, and tooke awaye the ornamentes, that were on the camels neckes.
Nowe is set forth the punishement of these two kynges of Madian, whiche Gideon had therefore saued on lyue, to shewe them vnto those Israelites, whom he had determined to punishe, when he had obtayned the victory. Firste he asketh them, what manner of men they were, whom they slewe in mount Thabor. They aunswered that they were like hym, and so comely and beautiful, that they myght appeare to be the chyldren of a kyng. And that maye also be vnderstande of one of them, when as it is sayde Echad: we maye also vnderstande it of euery one of them. There are some also which thynke that those that were slayne were in semblance and beauty lykened vnto the children of Gideon, Gideon was exceding beaufull. whome therefore they called a kynge, bycause they sawe hym beare dominion in the hoste. Hereby is gathered that Gideon was excedyng beautifull. But when hys brethrē were kylled, we can not finde by the holy History. But it myght be, that they committed thys acte nowe when they came to make thys warre, or els before when euery yeare they inuaded the lande of the Israelites in the tyme of haruest. Of mount Thabor we haue before spoken, when we entreated of the victory of Barak and Deborah.
It was not lawfull to saue these kyngs on lyue. As the Lorde liueth, if ye had saued their lyues. Gideon mought haue saued these kynges lyues, if they had not slayne hys brethren: but bycause they had slayne them it was not lawfull. For in the booke of Numbers there is a lawe, wherein it is ordayned, that the nexte of kynne muste not suffer the bloude of hym that is dead vnpunished, not that a priuate man shoulde kyll a murtherer, but he must be brought vnto the Iudge that there the cause beyng knowē he myght be punished. And therefore Gideon beyng a Magistrate ought by that [Page 146] lawe to punishe them. Otherwyse he myght haue let them goo, for as muche as they were not Chananites, whom GOD had commaunded, that they shoulde not spare. Wherefore Gideon sweareth nothyng contrarye to the woorde of God. And he sayde vnto Iether. He commaundeth hys firste borne sonne, beyng then a younge manne, to slaye them, but he feared, neyther durste he drawe hys swoorde: The two kynges disdayne, & would not be kylled with the hande of a chylde, euen as Abimelech would be slayne of hys Armor bearer, least he should seeme to be kylled of a woman. Farther, they easely sawe, that they shoulde bee longe in payne or they were dead, when as the chylde by reason of want of strength coulde not rid them out of theyr lyfe quickely. Why Gideon willed his sōne to kil y e kings. And Gideon peraduenture dyd for thys cause commaunde hys sonne to doo thys thynge, to inflame hys hearte, euen from hys tend [...]r yeares agaynste the enemyes of the peopl of GOD, as it is written of Hannibal, who from a chylde vowed hymselfe agaynst the Romaynes: Or elles he dyd it to learne hym from hys tender age to obey the lawe of God, wherein was commaunded that the bloud of the next of kynne beyng shed, should be reuenged.
But might not he haue committed that office vnto a hangeman? why would he so vrge hys sonne? To thys maye be aunswered two wayes. Firste that in the olde tyme it was not vncomely to slay the guylty. Farther, The Hebrues had no hangemen. that it is not sene that the Hebrues had hangemen. And vndoubtedly, that thys was no office amonge the Hebrues, this testifieth, bycause in the lawe it is written, that a blasphemer beyng taken, was so stoned to death, that the hande of the wytnesses dyd throwe the firste stone agaynste hym: neyther was the puttyng to death of any body committed to any peculiar hangeman. And there are many examples whiche testifye that it was not ignominious to slaye the guilty. Saul when he woulde haue the Priestes slayne, called not hangemen to doo it, but turned to the noble men whiche were with hym, and commaunded them to inuade the Priestes: who reuerensyng theyr ministery and dignitye, durst not obey. Onely Doeg the Edomite durst execute so greate a wycked acte, who was not of least estimation with the kynge. Samuell also with hys owne hande slewe kynge Agag the prysoner. Ioab in lyke manner when he had cought holde of the horne of the altar, was slayne of Banaia the chiefe Capitayne of the hoste. Wherefore it seemeth that the Hebrues in that auncient tyme hadde no hangemen.
But as muche as maye be gathered by the Hystoryes of the Ethnikes, Lictores, were ministers appointed to execute corporall punishment. Plutarche. Lictores began at Rome vnder Romulus, who (as Plutarche wryteth in hys lyfe) were called so eyther of ligando, that is of byndyng, or bycause the Grecians callem them [...], or [...], bycause they executed a publique office. Romulus gaue them Roddes bounde together to cary, and to them was an axe ioyned. They had also cordes to bynde the Citezins withall, that beyng bounde, they myght eyther beate them with roddes, or strike them with the axe. But the men of more auncient tyme wanted thys office: euery man executed it without any infamy, as it was by the Magistrate commaunded hym. And in verye dede that woorke of punishyng malefactors, hath in it no dishonestye or vncomelynesse, For if it be honest, for a iudge or prince to geue sentence of death agaynst euyll doers, why then shall it not be iuste and honest to execute the same sentence? Yea and GOD hymselfe in punishyng, vseth not onely euyll spirites, but good spirites.
But thou wilte saye, Why Lictores and hangemen are of the commō people euill spoken of. why are Lictores and hangemen commonly so euyll 1 spoken of? Firste, bycause the common people are afrayde of them, neither would any manne be punished for hys wicked actes: hereby it commeth that the syght of the hangman driueth into them a certayn horror. And that the people were so affected, y e maner of y e publique wealth of Rome declareth, where whē ambicious [Page] men flattered the people more then was meete, they sent away the hangeman out of the market place, and iudgement house of Rome, as euen the Oration of Cicero for Rabirius testifieth. The Romaynes vsed not a hangeman for their Citezins. The Citezins of Rome were not beaten with roddes, nor put to death. Theyr extremest punishement was banishement, they were caried into ylandes, & at the length condemned to y e working of Mettalles. But the latter Romayne lawes, whiche are in the digestes, blotted out that exemption: for in very dede it was vniust. For a faulte worthy of death ought not to be wynked at, althoughe a Citezin of Rome were the author of it. And there were two principall lawes whereby the backe and head of the Citezins were prouided for, Portia lex & Sempronia. the lawe I saye Portia, and Sempronia, whose power and defence neuerthelesse Paul (as we rede in the Actes) vsed, and so escaped both roddes and bondes. This is one cause why Lictores and hangmen are so hated.
2 The irregularity of the Canonistes.An other cause hereof in the Papisticall opinion of irregularity, whiche as the Canonistes wyll haue it, is contracted of euery murther. These men thinke that a man can not so iustly kyll any man, that he may be promoted to the holye Ministerye: when as yet the Inquisitours of the herecticall prauity (as they terme it) doo dayly cause an infinite number, and those innocentes, to be kylled. The Popes Legates also in gouernyng of Cityes, and Prouinces, and makyng warres, althoughe they be Cardinalles and Byshoppes, doo styll continually cause bloud to be shed. But in the meane tyme, with greate hypocrisie they take hede, that the sentence be geuen by a laye Iudge (as they call hym) and so they wrappe themselues out of that irregularity. But the holy Scriptures do not so teache. Moses sayde vnto the Leuites, whiche with hym had kylled so many, ye haue consecrated your handes: so farre was it of that they shoulde be depriued of the holy Ministery. But the Pope saith, that Dauid for shedding of bloud, was in the olde tyme prohibited to builde the Temple. But in this place we muste marke the misterye wherin Salomon shadowed Christ, the peacable king. For he was by hym expressed, whiche hath gathered together the Churche, the true Temple of GOD without weapons, vnto the true and euerlastyng peace. But bloude beyng iustly and ryghtly shed, Bloud shed iustly & rightly, restraineth not from the holy ministery. restrayneth not from the holye ministery. For Pinhas who was hygh Priest, thrust thorough two moste vnpure whoremongers. Elyas, a man of the stocke of the Leuites, slew with hys owne hande the Prophetes of Baal. And Samuell, a man of the same tribe, dyd hymselfe kyll Agag the king, & yet neither of them both were reiected frō theyr office. Neither do I therfore speake these thyngs, to commend the promotyng of murtherers vnto holy orders: but thys only I oppugne, that euery slaughter & euery murther maketh a man so irregular (as these menne saye) that he can not be ordeyned a Minister of the Churche. What if a man haue bene a Iudge or a Magistrate, or in iuste warre hath fought for hys countrey, can not he therefore be ordayned a Minister of the Churche? Peraduenture he hath obteyned excellent giftes of God, and is endewed with singular doctrine, adorned with a pure lyfe, instructed with dexterity of gouernyng, and godly eloquence: can not the Churche (as these men most absurdely thynke) vse hys gyftes? Vndoubtedly that was not obserued in Ambrose, he was seruaunt vnto Cesar, and decided matters in the lawe beyng Pretor of Millan, and yet was he by violence taken to be a Byshop. I knowe that Paul requireth that a Byshoppe be no striker: but no manne doubteth, but that that is to be vnderstande of an vniuste murther or violence. But what should a man here doo? all thynges are by the Papistes handled supersticiously.
3 Nowe the thirde cause why Lictores and hangemen are euyll spoken of, is this, bicause very many of them liue wickedlye and filthy, and were before tyme noughty men. Aristotle. Howbeit the office defileth them not: but rather by theyre faulte they pollute an excellent office. Aristotle in his .6. boke of Politikes the last chapter [Page 147] sayth, that good men abhorre this kind of office, namely of punishing of mē, [...]. bycause it hath a hatred annexed vnto it. For they doe oftentimes incurre the hatred of men. But in my iudgement, a good and godly man ought not for that cause to abhorre his administration. I remēber an aunswere of Chrisippus, A saying of Chrisippus. who being demaūded why he excercised not the office of a magistrate. If I excercise it not rightly (sayd he) I shal displease god: but if I do rightly, I shal displease men: but I wil do neither of both. He semed to some to haue aunswered very prudently, but me thinketh he answered folishly. For he should rather haue aunswered cōtrarily that the publike welth ought to be gouerned, and that rightly, to please both God and good menne: but a wise and good man muste not haue a respecte vnto wicked men. By these thinges it is now manifestly shewed, that Gidion in that he himselfe killed the kinges of Madian, committed nothing that was not decent for him, neyther that he commaunded his sonne to do any fylthy acte.
22 Then the men of Israel sayd vnto Gideon: Reigne thou ouer vs, both thou and thy sonne and thy sonnes sonne, bycause thou hast deliuered vs out of the hand of Madian.
23 And Gideon aunswered them: I will not raygne ouer you, neither shall my chyld reigne ouer you, the Lord shal raigne ouer you.
The people [...]eceauinge a benefite at Gideons hand, would haue made him king, that they might not be coūted ingrate. But seing gratitude is a vertue, it ought to haue no vniust thing ioyned with it: whiche these men obserued not. For they appoynted not theyr kyngdome by the lawe of god. In Deut. the .27. chap. it is written, that he should be a king whom god had chosen. It pertained vnto god to elect a king. Neyther perteined it vnto the people, to appoint a kinge whome they would. Wherfore that which they doo now, is not frely to geue any thing that is theyr owne, but to geue y e which is an other mans. The right to appointe a king, belonged to god, and not vnto men: which thyng also Gideon wysely saw, neyther was Christ ignorant therof, when they which were filled with bread, came vnto him to create him a king, Christ refused a kingdōe offred vnto hym. What manner of men the olde Romayne bishops were. he wayghed the maner of his vocation, and for that his kingdome was not of this worlde, and vnderstoode that they vsurped an other mans right, and were not moued therunto: By iust causes, he put of from himself such a burthē. The same things happened in a maner vnto y e bishops of Rome. Which at the beginning were holy: for very many of thē wer notable by constancy of faith, & martirdom. Farthermore their church was kindled with feruentnes of charity, & towards the poore most liberal, so that it sent almes euen into the east part, to the Ilands and metalle places, where the holy confessours of Christ liued in exile. All which thinges got that chaire much fauor and grace with the faithful. Gregorius. Wherefore the supreame power and kingdome in the church was in a manner offred, some times vnto those bishops: which they like Gideon refused with a great spirite & singuler modesty. Of which thing also what Gregorius the b. of Rome iudged, I will briefly declare. In his .4. boke of Epistles. in the .32.34.36.38. & .39. Epistles he of that matter writeth at large, both vnto Mauritius the emperor, and also to Constantia Augusta, likewise to the Patriarkes, Alexandrinus, and Antiochenus, yea and to Iohn the Patriarche of Constantinople, and lastlye to Anianus Deacon of the same church.
In the time (sayth he) of Pelagius my predecessor, Ioannes Constantinopolitanus when he had assembled a sinode, by an other pretence, claymed vnto him self the title of the vniuersal supreame Patriarch, which thyng Pelagius toke in euil part, and therfore made the acts of that Sinode frustrate. Farther, he commaunded his Deacon which was his deputye, whome he had with the Emperoure, that he should not communicate with Iohn, being so arrogant and proud. Gregorye [Page] succeded Pelagius and decreed the same things, & writing vnto the emperor, sayth, Peter the chiefe amonge the Apostles, neuer called himselfe vniuersall Apostle, and neuerthelesse Iohn byshop of Constantinople now goeth about to cal him selfe the vniuersall Patriarch: & straightway he crieth out: O times, O maners. And this reason he addeth to these things, if the vniuersal head be so ordeyned of men, by the ruine or corruption of such a head, the church also shall perishe together. Of this place Nestorius was once bishop, who beleued most wickedly of the sonne of god. Macedonius had the same dignitye, who beleued not that the holy ghost was god. If those Patriarches had then beene vniuersall Bishops in the church, the whole church had fallen also with them.
Let none of the papistes cry that it is no strong argument: bicause it is none of ours, but Gregories their father: let them cry out against him, who afterward addeth: That he which maketh himselfe vniuersall bishop, taketh away from other bishops their office, for where anye man is vniuersall byshop, he leaueth no office of a bishop vnto others. This also is the collectiō of Gregory, and not foūd out by vs. And vndoubtedly if a man at this day loke rightly and more nighly vp on the thing, he shal see that the bishops of the west doe gouerne theyr churches onely by the ordre geuen them by the bishop of Rome. Gregory counteth it for an absurdity that the Pope should be preferred before the Emperour. Gregory afterwarde addeth that Iohn preferreth himselfe aboue the Emperor: which thing Gregory coū ted for an absurdity. But oure men now a dayes thinke it necessarye that Cesar should be subiect to him: yea they haue oftē times resisted emperors, many times wearied them, and sometimes moued them out of theyr place. And yet Gregory theyr father detesteth and inueigheth agaynst it, as a thinge vniust and not to be suffred. And writing vnto Augusta he is yet more vehemēt, saying that the same belongeth vnto Antechrist. Wherfore let not our mē meruayle, if we sometime cal the bishop of Rome Antechrist, for asmuch as their Gregory, calleth him by y e most goodly title, which wilbe vniuersal bishop.
The sinode of Chalsedonia erred.The Sinode of Calcedonia, as the same Gregory sayth, gaue vnto the seat of Rome this prerogatiue, namely vnto Leo the first of that name. Howbeit no mā vsed it, because our elders being men most holy, saw it was not meete for anye mortal man. Onely Christ is the vniuersal hed of the church For he is the smal grayn of musterdsede, whiche hath incresed into abrode and large tre, that it ouerspreadeth the whole world: and he is that little leauen, wherwith thre peckes of meale wer leauened. And the stone hewed out without handes, whiche is become so great a moūt that it hath filled al thinges. Wherfore Christ him self, for as much as he is able to be with vs, is to al vs the vniuersal hed, to whom euery one of vs cleaueth as membres. Moreouer Gregory admonisheth Alexandrinus and Antiochenus, that they shoulde receaue no Epistles, whiche had written in them a tittle of so great pride. And he sayth, that to receaue such a title, is to fall from the fayth. Now let our men go, and obtrude this yoke, whiche by the testimony of theyr Gregory we can not receaue, except we should go back from faith: Namely in attributing that to a manne, which we must beleue is propre and peculiar vnto Christe. Neither doubteth he to affirme, that this Iohn transgressed the decrees of Christ, the rules of the Apostles, and Cannons of the fathers. All these things sayth he, hath he violated in the vsurpation of this one title. And he addeth, what wilt thou aunswere vnto Christ in the last day of iudgement, thou that hast arrogantly takē vpon thee his office, and wilt haue al his members subiect vnto thee? He commaunded, that we shoulde not call anye a father vnto vs vpon erth. But thou commandest men to cal thee vniuersal father. In what estimation therfore hast thou the wordes of the Lord?
An error of GregoryHowbeit in collecting of these places of Gregory, I thinke there ar some thinges which ar diligently to be takē hede of, namely two: of the which the one is, that he sayth y t Peter was the chief membre of the vniuersal church: & Paule, Andrew [Page 148] and Iohn, were heades of singular churches. This I therefore admonish you, forbycause the Apostles wer not byshops of singuler churches, for they wandred abrode thorough out the whole worlde, they founded churches & wan sondry nacions vnto the Lord, and al they were members, Another error of Gregory. and that principal mē bres of the vniuersal church. Wherfore this sētēce of Gregory is not to be admitted. The other thing, which I iudge is to be obserued, is that Gregory doth testify that this his Iohn did fyrst vsurpe vnto himself the title of vniuersality, Theodoretus. which assuredly I cannot be perswaded of. Forasmuch as Theodoretus in his booke de haerecibus, when he writeth of Nestorius, oftentimes sayth, that he was made vniuersall patriarke. Yea and Iustinianus in suis nouellis, attributeth that title to diuerse Patriarches. And (to speake as the thing is) I suppose, that Gregorie this prety little saynt would haue had the thing or matter of an vniuersal bishop, although he reprehended the name and title. For as the history of those times teacheth, and his epistles testify, he abstained not from gouerning of other churches He shewed indeede that the name should be auoyded, namely least the patriarch of Constantinople by that title should eyther preferre himselfe, or be equal vnto the byshop of Rome.
But before these times, Ciprian wythstoode the churche of Rome, Cipriā resisted the church of Rome. whoe sought then to clayme vnto it self some tiranny, and he iudged that appellatiōs should not be brought vnto the seat of Rome, but would haue Ecclesiastical causes iudged in euery singuler prouince: namely, that they which in any place wer condemned by the iudgement of byshops, should not be restored by the ayd of the seate of Rome: when as yet he chiefly reuerenced the church of Rome, & acknowleged it as y e Matrix in these our regiōs. And assuredly to haue it in great estimacion, is a farre other thing, then to graunt vnto it tiranny or dominion aboue al other. For to the first we may after a sort agre, but to the other we must not assente, vnlesse we will fall from the fayth. Afterwarde in Augustines time, when he was present at the Sinode of Africa, The counsel of Afrike resisted the church of Rome. there was great and longe alteration about this thinge, and at length the bishop of Rome coulde neuer proue (whiche thing yet he chiefly endeuored to do) that this power was geuen him in the councell of Nice, that menne from all partes of the worlde mighte appeale vnto him. Wherefore if it were eyther for lacke of knowlege or of some rashnes, or by the people, or by flaterers geuen to any byshop of Rome, it should by the example of Gideon, Leo, and Gregory haue bene refused.
We must not trust vnto the inconstancy of the common people, The inconstancye of the common people. which is alwayes moueable now they wyll haue Gideon to raigne, a litle afterwarde you shal see that they were most vngrate againste him: for (as the historye declareth) they slew his children. Gideon refuseth not the principality, as though he would not labour in the publike wealth: What the Popes oughte to haue before theyr eyes. but bicause he vnderstode that it was no lawful vocatiō: which the Popes also ought to regard. He had before his eyes y e law in Deut. now alledged. The Pope ought also to loke vpon the words of Christ: Kinges of the nations (sayth the Lord) bear rule ouer theyr subiectes: but ye shal not do so: and being demaunded, who should be greatest, he aunsweared, that he which was lowest, and which more serued others. This is to gouern the church, not to commaund, but to serue. Peter himselfe also taught ministers not to beare dominion ouer their flocke. Who are in the church to [...] uerenced aboue other. And Paule hath written that Christ is set the hed of the church, & not men: although in it they are aboue other to be much made of, & to be honored, whych more then other profet the faythfull, and are more largely endewed with good gracious giftes: and as Christe required of Peter, doo more depely loue him: and which ar more aboundantly endewed with those qualities, which Paule to Timothe and Titus requireth in bishops. If we highlier honor such men in the church aboue other, not as lords, not as vniuersal bishops, not as heads of the church, but as excellent ministers thereof, the authority and obedience of the word of god should therby be nothing diminished.
An error verye hurtful in the church.But they do not so. They haue fixed the exellency and dignity of the ministers of the church, vnto chayres, places, and cities, howsoeuer he be in greater price & honor, which sytteth in those chayres or places, and what manner of man so eue [...] he be in lyfe and manners. And so is there no regarde had to the graces and giftes of God, but onely to the place and seate. This vndoubtedly was the fountayne, ofpring, and beginning of al euils and superstitions. Our elders thought it good, that in cities which were more famous, where marchandises were traded, and were assemblies of men, where Proconsuls or Presidentes gouerned, there also the bishops should be of greater authority and iurisdiction. Whereby custome obteined, that those Churches and chayres were had in greater honor.
But (as it commeth to passe) ambicion crepte in, and in those places byshoppes were ordeyned, not alwaye suche as were more worthye, but such as were better fauored of Princes. And oftentimes the better learned and more holy were geuen ouer to small and abiecte bishoprikes. When Augustine was Bishop of Hippouerhegium, one called Aurelius gouerned the most honorable church of Carthago. And who knoweth not that Augustine in doctrine, maners, and authoritye, farre excelled Aurelius? The same thinge happened vnto Gregorius Nazianzenus, who was byshop in an abiect place, namelye in Sassimis, when as many other, not to be compared with him, obtayned the chief chayres. After this way & maner the bishop of Rome began to be preferred aboue other, namelye bycause of the moste ample dignitye of the citye: The cause why the bishop of Rome was preferred before other. whyche cause neuerthelesse he vnderstanding that it was no firme groundsele of the honor which he had obteyned, he hath fained other causes of his excellency. And first he pretendeth that he had this priueledge by y e councel of Nice: which yet he could not proue before y e fathers of Africa, bicause in that Sinode the charge onelye of suburbe churches was committed vnto hym. Not a charge to beare dominion, but to geue counsel to admonish, and if there wer any things of more waight, to referre the same to the counsell. As to the bishop of Alexandria the suburbe churches of Egipt, and to the byshop of Antioch of the suburbe churches of the east parties. And it was not geuen the bishop of Rome, to be the vniuersall pastor. Neyther is it possible that a weake and mortall man should feede the flocke of Christe in all countries.
Farthermore the bishop of Rome boasted, that he was set to be the head of the church: The bishop of Rome canot be hed of the whol church. whych cannot be meete for any man. For from the heade ar deriued mouinge and sense by the sinewes, into al members, as Paule very well teacheth to the Ephesians and Colossians. But no man can performe that, as of himselfe, by closures & ioynts to quickē the mēbers of y e church w t the sprite of god. It lōgeth onely to christe, Magistrates & princes may be called heads of the people. to destribute vnto his mēbers spiritual mocions, illustracion of the minde, and eternall life. Indede kings and magistrates may be called heads of the people, bicause they gouerne ciuily, and from them we may looke for good lawes and ciuyle mouinges: but in the church men entreat not of ciuile life, but of spiritual and eternall life, which we cannot loke for, but at gods hand, neyther can any mortall men quicken the members of the church. Kinges & magistrates when they are godlye, in my iudgemente oughte to haue the chiefe place in the church: and to them it pertaineth, if religion be il administred, to correcte the defaultes. For therfore they beare the sword to maintayne Gods honor. But they cannot be heades of the churche. Paule to the Romaines and to the Corinthians, where he maketh rehearsal of the members of the churche, putteth some to be eyes, some noses, eares, hands, and feete: but he adorneth none with the dignity of the heade, who yet to the Ephesians sayth this of Christe, that god had geuen hym to be the head of the body of the church. We must not make the church two headed. Let the papistes shew writen in any other places of the holy scriptures, that Christ gaue an other hed vnto y e church, & they shall haue the victory. But I know assuredly they cānot. For if that could haue bene done the church should be a two hedded monster. But it is a sporte to heare what Iohn, sometimes B. of Rochester in defendyng the Pope aūswered [Page 149] to this. To graunt two heads of the Church (sayth he) is not absurd: for the Apostle writeth, the man is the head of the womā, & neuertheles euery wife hath byside her husband which is the head, an other head also. Wherfore he concluded that we may thus affirme of the church, namely that it hath both Christ and the Pope to be head. But this man faileth by a false Sillogismus of equiuocatiō. For speaking now of a head, as it is attributed vnto the Church, he falleth to a natural head. In matrimony the husband is the head of the wife, not the natural hed, How the husband is the hed of the wyfe. but as touching aeconomical life. But the natural head of the woman, is the beginning of her natural life. And vndoubtedly if we looke vpon the natural head in the church, we shal finde that it is not one head: but looke howe manye men there be in it, so many heades shal there be: for there is none without an heade in it. And when we speake of the head of the Churche, we must keepe our selues in the Metaphore: and as it should be absurde and monstrous, for one man to haue two natural heades, so shal it be iudged as portentous, for the Churche to haue two Metaphorical, that is spiritual heads. We must alwaies, whē we entreate of any thing, persist in the same order and kinde: which thing if wee doo not obserue, we shal easily be deceaued by equiuocation.
But let vs returne to the Pope, Of the keyes foundation of the Churche. who least he shoulde seme to be destitute of testimonies of the holy scriptures, taketh two places out of them. Whereof the one is: Vpon this rocke I wil builde my Churche, and wyll gyue the keyes. &c. But that place pertaineth to al those which confesse the verity of faith: for Peter, when the Lord demaunded what the Apostles beleued of him, aunswered in the name of them al, that he was the sonne of the liuing God. Wherefore, that which Christ speaketh vnto him, pertaineth to all them, whych together wyth him beleue and professe the same selfe thing. For the keyes are geuen vnto the Church. And in Iohn, the Lord after his resurrection gaue them vnto all them: at the last also, when he should ascend vp into heauen, he sent them all alike to preache throughout the world. And as touching the foūdation, the Church hath no other foundation but Christ. For Paul vnto the Corinth. sayde: No man can lay any other foundation, then that which is already layde, How the Apostles are called foundations of the Church. which is Christ Iesus. And if at any time the Apostles be called foundacions of the churche, that is to be vnderstand, bicause they in the first time of the Churche cleaued vnto the foundation, as the first and greater stones, not bicause the Churche leaned vnto them as to the principal foundation.
The other place which they bring out of the scriptures, is, Not onely to Peter was the cōmaundement geuen to feede the flocke of Christ. bicause Christ saith vnto Peter, feede my Lambes. But they are excedingly deceaued: for it was not the office of Peter onely, but also of the other Apostles, to feede the flocke of the Lord. But it was so sayd peculiarly vnto Peter, bicause he had denyed the Lord thrise, and therefore he might haue seemed to haue fallen from the fellowship of the Apostles, vnles he had of Christ bene restored by certaine woordes. And that not onely he, but also other ought to feede the shepe of Christ, his own woordes testify, which be writeth in his Epistle, wher he admonisheth other Ministers to feede the flocke of the Lorde. But graunt, that the Lorde gaue vnto Peter anye principal thing: what hath the bishop of Rome common with him? Let hym declare his spirite, and as Peter hath labored for the Church, let hym also labour: which thing if he performe, then wil we acknowledge him, not as an vniuersal bishop, but as a good Minister of Christ. The spirite of Christ is not boūd to chairs He sayth that hee hath the chaire that Peter had. What seate I pray you speaketh he of? The holy ghost is not bounde to seates. But graunt that it were so, Antioche had Peter sitting in it before Rome had. For that church he planted, and long whyle gouerned. But they say that he was slayne at Rome. But the Iewes crucified Christ himselfe at Ierusalem, which is a thing of greater waight. Wherfore if we should follow this argument, the bishop of Ierusalem should be preferred aboue all other. Yea, and Peter, as it is written to the Galathians, was not the Apostle of the Gentiles, [Page] but of circumcision, as it was agreed betwene Paul, Iames, Iohn, and Barnabas. Neither do we euer reade that Peter prescribed the other Apostles any thyng, or that they depended of him. Yea Paul most manifestly testifieth, that he receaued nothing of Peter. Farther, it is certaine y t Peter was slain vnder Nero, & Iohn liued euen to the time of Traiane. And they say that Cletus, Linus, and Clemens succeded Peter at Rome. What then, shal we thinke that Iohn the Apostle was subiect vnto Clemens? And of necessity he should be so, if the Byshop of Rome be the vniuersal head or general bishop. But who wil say that this may be suffred? Moreouer, An Epistle of Clemens. lyes may be confuted with lyes. Our aduersaries bring the Epistle of Clemens, which is a fained Epistle, as a thing certaine. We wyl gratefy thē in this thing, Clemens Iacobo [...]ratri domini, Epis copo Episcorū, & regnanti Ecclesiam que esi Hierosolymis, & omnes que sūt vbique, Dei prouidentia. and we wyll now graunt that to be true, which is false. Let them marke his superscription, which is written after thys maner: Clemens to Iames the brother of the Lord, by the prouidence of God y e bishop of bishops, & gouernour of the Church which is at Ierusalem, and of al the Churches euery where. What wyl they say here? The bishop of Rome ascribeth his title vnto the Byshop of Ierusalem, and attributeth this vniuersall charge of all Churches vnto him, and not to himselfe. This argument maketh verye muche agaynste those, which haue vnto the Churches obtruded this Epistle for true, & ratefied it. But that can nothing hurt vs, which is takē out of that epistle, against our doctrine. For we know that it is a fayned thing, as that which was neuer alledged by any of the fathers. And in it the same Clemens affirmeth, that he hym selfe wrote the litle booke called Itenarium Perri: which booke (as it is said in the Decrees) is counted among the Apocripha bookes. But of this thing I haue spoken sufficient, & these thinges haue I rehearsed, onely that we might vnderstand, howe much Gideon is to be preferred before the Antechristes of Rome.
Whither the gouernment of God bee excluded by humane Magistrates.Here is put forth an other question, whether the rule and gouernmēt of God be therfore excluded, bicause the Magistrate of a publike wealth, or of Aristocratia, or of a kingdome, is geuen vnto a man. The cause of the doubt is, bicause when it was sayd vnto Gideon: Thou shalt raygne ouer vs: he answered, I wyl not raygne ouer you, but the Lord shal raign ouer you. It is not hard to dissolue this question proposed: forasmuch as the administration, wherwith God gouerneth publike wealthes, hindreth not the Magistrate, which is his Vicar & Minister. And assuredly God raigned together with Dauid and Iosias: and the Israelites at that tyme had a certaine Magistrate, and one of their own, with whom also God himselfe also gouerned. Wherfore the wordes of Gideon do not teach this, that God cannot raigne there, where as is a lawfull king. But this thyng onelye he regarded, that the present state of thinges, whiche was instituted by God, When God is sayd to gouerne pub. wealthes. ought not to be altred without him. Ther was a publike wealth then in Israel, they had Senatours, and in al places ther wer Iudges appointed: wherfore the forme of the publike wealth could not by men be chaunged, w tout great offence. If so be thou wilt demaund, when it is to be thought that God doth gouern & rule in other Magistrates? I answer: Then, when this is onely prouided for, that Citizens may liue vertuously. And forasmuch as piety is of al vertues y e most excellent, the Lord doth then raigne, whē althings ar referred vnto it. Farther, as touching ciuil actions, when to euery man is rendred his own, & Magistrates gouerne not for their own commodity, but for the publike vtility.
When the thing is otherwyse, shall wee saye that God raygneth or no, as when Nero, Domitianus, Commodus, Heliogabalus, and suche wycked men wer gouernours? A distinctiō of those thynges which are done vnder Magistrates. Did God then cease from gouerning of the worlde? I thynke we must make a distinction of these thinges, which are done in those kingdomes, of the good thinges I say from the euil: forasmuch as there is no Empire so vitiate and corrupt, but that it stil retaineth in it many good thinges. Let vs looke vpon the gouernment of Nero, & we shal se ther in a maner, an infinite number of wicked and mischeuous actes, where yet many partes also of Iustice floorished. [Page 150] Prouinces were gouerned by Pretors, and Presidentes, which execute lawes, not altogether vniustly. It was lawful for Paul to appeale vnto Rome, neyther could the Hebrues by the lawes be permitted to iudge him as they lusted themselues. And the same Paul, when he had shewed that he was a Citizen of Rome, escaped both from bondes and from stripes. Wherefore seing in a gouernment most corrupt, very many good and profitable thinges floorished, the same coulde come frō none other but from God. It is therfore manifest that god at that time forsooke not the care and administration of thinges.
But if thou go forward and aske, How God ordereth himself toward the fauts of Princes. whether the vices and corruptions of Empires are to be referred vnto God: I wyll answer, that the true cause of synne is in man, but the wil of God doth neither allow those vices, nor cōmaunde them in his lawes: yea, he prohibiteth and detesteth them. But he vseth them to punish the wickednes of the people: for, for the synnes of the people, he maketh an hipocrite to raygne, and in his fury he geueth kinges. For such thinges are euyl and synnes, and haue in them a consideration of punishments: & as they are punishmentes, they pertayne vnto the iustice of God.
But when Princes are so corrupt, what is to be done? We must obey, Whither it bee lawfull to ryse vp against euyl Princes. but vsque ad aras, that is, so farre as religion suffreth. Maye priuate men take vpon them to alter a corrupt Prince? They may do it in admonishing, in geuing coū sel and reprouing, but not by force of weapons. Yea, Citizens may fight for the defence of the publike wealth, as long as it lasteth. Wherfore Pompeius, Cicero, and Cato, are not lightly to be condemned, for that they resisted Cesar, going about to styrre vp insurrection, althoughe at that time the publike wealth was very corrupt. But when he had once obtained the Empire, he ought not by priuate men to be depriued with weapons. Wherfore Augustus said vnto Strabo, who spake euil of Cato, being then dead, that he was a good Citizen, which contended that the present state of thinges should not be chaunged. In the publyke wealth of the Hebrues, which floorished in the time of Gideon, God gouerned in very deede. It was (as I haue said) Aristocratia, where Elders were chosen by common voices, to do iustice: in which office, vnles they rightly behaued themselues, they were both punished, and put out of their roume: but if there happened any hard warre, God himselfe raysed vp Iudges, but they were not chosen by the people, neither did the children succede the Parentes in that office. After this maner did God gouerne the Hebrues. The wordes of Gideon sufficientlye declare, that the Iudges exercised not the office of an ordinarye Magistrate. It was in the Lord to rayse vp for the time whom he would, What we must consider when any thing is offred vnto vs. therfore the Lord said vnto Samuel: They haue not reiected thee, but me, that I should not raigne ouer them. Hereby we gather, that when anye thing is offered vs, we must alwayes weigh, whither the same be good of his own nature, and whither it bee lawfully geuen, and may lawfully be vsed. Which if it be not, let vs put awaye from vs, whatsoeuer is offred, as Christ reiected Sathan, when he promised hym all the kingdomes of the world, neither receaued he the kingdome offred him by the people. Thys the Pope considereth not, who for his vnlawfull Supremacye or tyranny, continually warreth, and there is nothing which he attempteth not: so farre is he of to refuse these thinges. &c.
24 Againe Gideon said vnto them: I would desire a request of you, that ye would geue me euery man the earings of his pray (for they had golden earinges, bicause they were Ismaelites.)
25 And they sayd: we wyl geue them. And they spread a garment, and dyd cast therein euery man the earinges of hys pray.
26 And the weyght of the golden earinges that he required, was a thousand seuen hundreth syckels of gold, besides collers, & pomanders, [Page] and purple rayment, that was on the kinges of Madian, and besyde the chaynes that were about their Camels neckes.
27 And Gideon made an Ephod thereof, and put it in hys City, in Ophra. And all Israel went a whooring after it in the same place, which thing was the destruction of Gideon and hys house.
Here is set foorth an example of a most grieuous fal, very much to be lamented. A man holy in miracles, and notable in faith, filthelye falleth. Euerye man therefore is admonished, not to trust vnto his former lyfe, and thinges that hee hath well done.
Kim his opiniō of the Ismaelites and Madianites. They had golden earinges, bycause they were Ismaelites. Kimhi thinketh that the Madianites and Ismaelites were al one, which he saith is confirmed by the booke of Genesis, wher it is written that the brethren of Ioseph sold him to the Madianites, and straightway it is added that the Ismaelites sold hym in Egipt, wherfore he gathereth that they were al one, namelye which had theyr ofspring of Agara. And she (as some say) was Ketura the handmayd of Sara, & afterward the wife of Abraham. But the Chaldey Paraphrast interpreteth the Ismaelites, Arabians, and not Madianites. Yea and Iosephus in his booke De antiquit. by the children of the East he vnderstandeth Arabians. They turne this Hebrue woorde Scheharonim lunulas, y t is litle Moones, wherof is mēcion made before. For in the Arabike toung Schehara signifieth luna, that is the Moone. The other woord Netiphoth is deriued of Nataph, which signifieth to drop. For that woord signifieth a drop, namely that is odoriferous. That was enclosed in smal vessels either of gold or of syluer, that with them both the necke might be adorned, and the nose fylled with a most swete smel. Of the vse of carynges. But the ornament of earinges was most auncient, and vsed in the time of Abraham. For his seruant gaue vnto Rebecca bracelets, when he desired to haue her for a wyfe, for Isaac his Maisters Sonne. The Romanes also sometimes vsed them, as we may gather out of Platus in Epidico: Doest thou not remember (sayth he) that I brought thee an earing on thy byrth day? The Egiptians also vsed them: for it is written of Cleopatra, that she tooke from her eare a most precious pearle, and dissolued it in vineger, whē she contended with Antonius for a sumptuous preparation of a banket. The Carthaginenses also wer decked with bracelets, as Plautus in Penulo testifieth. For thus he writeth: And as I suppose, they haue no fingers on their hands, bicause they go with ringed eares. Gideon tooke also purple garmentes: but whither he vsed them to his purpose, Ephod. it appeareth not. He made an Ephod. The Hebrewe woord Aphad is to binde, or to gird, whereof this nowne is deriued, signifieng a garment which compassed the shoulders, and then it was bound together, and it after a sorte girded together the inward coate. Gideon did therfore make this ornament, to be a monument of the victory which he had gotten, as some write: in which thing if he sought his own glory, he cannot but be blamed. But if this were onely his desyre, to keepe in perpetual memory the benefite of God, he is not to be accused, for as much as oftentimes such monumentes were erected, as y e holy scriptures testify. Iacob erected a stone, whē he went in to Mesopotamia, and whilest he fled from Laban in Gilead, he builded a great heape of stones together. And it were to long to rehearse all the monumentes or tokens, whiche were in the old time set among the people of God, that the memory of the benefites of God should not be forgotten. Gideon made an Ephod, and vsed a sygne, not so apt and conuenient. Wherin Gideon synned. He mought haue written a song, as Barac and Deborah did, or erected a pyller, or some suche like thyng.
God had not commaunded in the law, to make an Ephod to this vse, but onely that the Priestes should put it on, when they should doo sacrifice. Neyther is it needeful now to describe the forme of this garment, for as much as in Exodus [Page 151] it is most manifestly set forth: this thing onely I wil admonish you of, Twoo kynde of Ephodes. that there were two kindes of it, as the holy scriptures declare, & as Ierome both to Marcella, & to Fabiola, & against Iouinianus the first booke testifieth. There was one which onely the high Priest vsed. It was made of purple violet coulour, sylke, & scarlet, it had gold wrought in it, & sūdry kindes of most precious stones. There was also an other which was called Ephod bad, that is a linnen Ephod, whyche the Leuites also vsed in holy seruices. Wherfore in the .1. of Samuel the .2. chap. we reade, that Hanna made euery yeare for Samuel a litle coate and an Ephod, when she had then offred him vnto the Lord, to minister at the tabernacle. Yea and Dauid being girt with an Ephod, daunced before the Arke of the Lord. The children also of Dauid were girt with an Ephod. But Gideon made his a pontifical and precious Ephod, for the other kinde was simple & of linnē, wherefore he should not haue neded so great cost to make such a one. For there wer gathered (as the history teacheth) a thousand seuen hundreth (as manye expound thē) sicles of gold. Some suppose that Gideon did therfore make an Ephod, that euē as Micha durst take vpō him, to haue a holy ministry at home in his own house, so did Gideon now attempt the same. But of this sentence we wyll afterwarde speake, when we declare Augustines minde of this thing. But nowe following the interpretation which we haue alreadye begon, which is of those which say, that Gideon made this, to remaine as a signe and monument of the benefite of God geuen vnto the Hebrues, this I iudge is to be added, that the vulgare men began to haue in admiration the signe which was set vp, and as they wer prone to superstitions, they iorneyed thither, and offred peace offringes there, whych thing was a ruine and snare vnto them: for by title and litle they fel into idolatry. Neither was Gideon without blame. For he erected y e monument, & abused the signe: & when he saw how the people fel, yet tooke he not away that monument, but rather winked at it. Ezechias afterward did more rightly, who when he saw the people offer insence vnto the brasen serpent, he brake it downe. Certaine Rabbines labour to excuse Gideon, bycause wyth a good mynde he caused the Ephod or monument of the benefite of God to bee made, but the Israelites misused it. But they go about that in vaine, for as much as the scripture sayth, that it turned to the destruction of Gideon and his house.
Augustine intreating of this place, Augustine. thinketh that the figure of Synechdoche is here to be vnderstand, so that by this word Ephod, al priestly ornamentes may be noted, as though Gideon would in his Citye haue an holye ministery: which was plainly against the wil of God, who had appointed to be worshipped at the Arke of the couenant. That was no other thing, then to plucke away men from the tabernacle of God, & after a sort to deuide the church. Gideon & the people did not (saith Augustine) sacrifice vnto idols, but with these garmentes they constituted a worshipping vnto the true God in Gideon his house, that is in Ophra. But forasmuch as they did otherwise then God had prescribed, they fell therfore into a certaine kinde of Idolatry. And that Gideon worshipped not idols, it doth not onely hereby appeare, in that he ouerthrew the altar of Baal, cut downe his groue, and offred vpon the alter of God, the bullocke consecrated vnto Baal, but also bicause the people al his life time (as we shal straightwaye heare) are sayde not to haue woorshipped Baal.
This woord whooring is to be vnderstand Methaphorically, The Methaphore of who [...] tyng. which is a thing very cōmon in the scriptures. For the Church is the Spouse of God, and therefore it ought to worship him onely, and to depend onely of him. Wherfore, euen as a maried woman, if she leauing her own husband, follow other men, is counted an harlot and vnchaste: euen so also the Churche, when it forsaketh the worshipping of the true God, and geueth place to supersticions, is iustlye called a harlot and an adultresse. And this is it whiche is nowe wrytten, that the chyldren of Israel went a whooryng after the Ephod, instituted by Gideon.
Wherefore Augustines opinion is, that Gideon would haue had God worshipped so in his country, that the same thynges might ther haue bene done, which were done in Silo, where the Arke was. Which opinion, although it can not be confuted by the scriptures, yet it appeareth not very lykelye: For we reade not that he had Priestes with him. Neither doo the Hebrue Doctors (who otherwise are diligent in expressing of thinges done) attribut these thinges vnto him, but rather agree with the other sentence, namely that he constituted it for a monument of the victory which he had obtained, which afterward was an occasion of superstition. Wherefore it semeth to be spoken more probably, that this erected signe was had in admiration of the foolishe people, so that they thought it to be a place very meete to doo sacrifice there, and especiallye for the offring of peace offeringes vnto the true God, which seemed not woorthy of reprouing. For at that time it was lawfull to doo that in a maner euerye where, but superstition dayly creeping more abroade, they began to attribute more then was meete vnto that signe, as to a thing deuine, and which had in it some power of God, and for that cause they offred sacrifices, and did incense vnto it, keping neuertheles a pretence of the worshipping of God, and the name of God the Lorde, as in the time of Ezechias they did incense and sacrifice vnto the brasen serpent.
Whence came the begynnyng of reliques and inuocation of the dead.And in the same maner we rede happened at the beginning of the sepulchers, bones, and reliques of holye men. The Christians buried the dead bodies of the Martirs, as honorablye as they coulde, and to haue the memorye of them kept, they began to haue places of prayer at their tombes, not vndoubtedlye where they would woorship and inuocate the Martirs, but where they might heare the woord of God, receaue the Sacramentes, and exhorte one an other to defende the faith. And in deede that place seemed not a litle commodious for such a purpose: For the sepulchres of Martirs seemed to admonish & inflame the myndes, to enterprise the same battailes, and to behaue them selues most constantly for the name of Christ. Wherfore it was thought that in assembling to the Sepulchres of Martirs, two commodities were gotten. First, bicause some honour might be geuen to so great Confessors, whilest the memory of them was not suffered to be forgotten, but with verye great ioy thankes were geuen vnto God for their happy victory. The other was, bicause men might bee stirred vp to enterprise the like, The beginning of the images of Sayntes. and to hope for the like gifts at Gods hand. And after the same maner began the images of Christ and of the Apostles priuatelye to bee made, namely that their death, which semed vnto the world full of ignominye, myght be made more honorable, and that the memory of them might floorishe, and by beholding of those images so set vp, men might be prouoked to the iust and laudable imitacion of them. If the thing had abidden within these bondes, it might haue bene borne with al, neither was there any thing there which might iustly be condemned: but euen as the act of Gideon was turned at the length to idolatry, so in successe of tyme folowed the inuocation of Martirs at their sepulchers, and the images of saintes began to be set vp and woorshipped, not onely in priuate places, but also in temples.
The act of Gideon was a snare to him, and to his house, for both hee synned, and his children (as we shal heare) were horribly slayne. It brought also great misery vnto the Israelites. For from this superstition they fel by litle and litle to the open worshipping of Baal, wherfore they were most grieuously oppressed of their enemies: howbeit as long as Gideon lyued, they woorshipped not Baal. Hereby we gather, that al worshipping of God, instituted without his woorde, is to him vnacceptable, and to vs most daungerous. There is but one God, and he wil be worshipped but one way, namely as he himself hath cōmaunded. And if to the worshipping of him, ther be any thing to be added by the decree of men [...]o [...] comelines sake, and for a iust and ciuil order, the same ought to bee but lyttle, Gideon sinneth two wayes. and also mutable, as it shall bee thoughte good for to aduaunce edification. Wherefore Gideon synneth twoo wayes, both in that hee abused the Ephod [Page 152] which he made for a signe, and also bicause when he sawe superstition to come thereby, he prohibited it not. The good intent of Gideon excused not his act, although he had a shewe of piety. Leo the first of that name, Leo the fyrst. in his Sermon of the Passion of the Lorde, sayth that Peter, when he cut of the eare of the seruant of the highe Priest, was moued with a godly mocion. But what godlye mocion coulde it be, which Christ reproued, yea and so reproued it, that he affirmed that he which so drewe the swoorde, should perishe with the swoorde? What other thing was this, then to haue a zeale of God, but (as Paule sayth) not accordyng to knowledge. Paule also the Apostle, when he afflicted and destroied the Christians, thought that he dyd God high seruice.
These thinges haue a shewe of a good intent (as they call it) or of godlynes, but they are not in very deede that which they shewe for. Euen so encreased the pompe of the Masse, by no other meanes, then by a shewe of a good intent. For it seemed good vnto our Elders to adorne the Supper of the Lord. Wherfore this Pope added this thing, and an other that thing, so that at the lengthe the thyng came to thys poynte, that these additions excluded the institution of Christ, in such sorte that it may seme to be any other thing els, then the Supper of the Lord, for those thynges are obserued which men haue inuented: but that which Christ willed, namelye that brethren should communicate together, and celebrate the memory of his death, this I say is abolished.
But why the woorshippinges instituted by mans inuention are to bee abiected, this is an assured reason: Why worshippings inuented by man, are to be abiected. bycause in woorshipping of God we must do all thinges chiefely throughe fayth, but it is of no force if it want the word of God. Wherefore if rites which are retayned for the woorshipping of God, lacke hys woorde, faith may not be geuen vnto them, and therfore ar they rather synnes, then woorkes pleasing God. For all that is not of fayth, is synne, The authority of the fathers is not sufficiēt. as the Apostle saith. But they say that in those woorshippinges, the authoritye of the Fathers, which were present at Counsels, ought to be sufficient, neither ought we to esteeme their sentences of any lesse value then the holy scriptures. But I wil turne the same to them againe, and aske whither they thinke Gideon was a holy man? That they cannot deny, forasmuch as the Epistle to the Hebrues the xi. chapter notably testifieth him so to be. I wyll demaunde of them also, whyther Aaron were a holy man? They wil not deny it I suppose: when as hee was of God appointed to be the highe Priest, and the fellowe of Moses in woorking of miracles. And yet for all that either of them, when they instituted a woorshipping without the woord of God, are greuously accused by the holye Scriptures. Let them therefore cease to obtrude vnto vs the Saintes: but when we require the woord of God, if they wil that we should beleue them, let them bring foorth the holy scriptures. We know that rites and worshippinges instituted euen by God himselfe, are not acceptable vnto him, when they are done without fayth, as Esay, Ieremy, and Dauid most manifestly teache, howe muche lesse wyll hee receaue those thinges which are inuented of men, whiche for that they are not grounded on his woord, doo vtterly want fayth?
¶Of a good Intent.
BVt bycause there is something alledged of a good Intent, whereby some go about to excuse Gideon, I thinke it good briefelye to touche those thynges, which are necessary, as concerning it.
As touching the signification of the woorde, Intent signifieth a motion of the mynde, whereby by some meane we tende vnto an ende, as if a man shoulde study by geuing of gifts or by seruices to attain vnto any honor. For the nature of thinges is in such sort, that many thinges are so connexed together betwene themselues, that by the one is made a steppe vnto the other. For by medecines & drinkes we attaine vnto health: by studies, reading, & teachers, vnto wisdome. [Page] Wherfore an intent is an action of the wil, for it is his office to moue and stirre vp the mynde. And forasmuch as the wyl doth not perceaue the thinges that he desireth, before that it hath the knowledge thereof, it moueth not, nor forceth the minde before knowledge, which raygneth in the power of intelligence or vnderstanding. It perceaueth both the end, and those things which serue to the end, and ministreth them vnto the wyl. Therfore Intent stirreth vp to the end, as to a terme, The definition of an intent. by those thinges which vnto it are directed. Let this be his definition. A wyl tending vnto the ende by some meanes. Wyl, which is his generall woord, is an act of the power that wylleth. The differrence is taken of the obiect, namely of the ende, and these thinges which are ordeined vnto it: as nowe as touching Gideon, his intent was a motion of his wyll, to keepe the memory of the victory geuen him, by the Ephod which he had made. In will therefore he comprehended at once both the end and the meane.
There is bothe a good intent & an euyll.An Intent in deuided into a good intent and an euyll. And to a good intent this is chiefely required, that the ende be a thing iust and good: which yet is not sufficient. For if a man should steale to geue almes, he vndoubtedlye shoulde set before his eyes a good thing, but bycause the meane is euyll, therefore the intent can not be called good. But if the ende bee both vnlawfull and euyll, then shall the intent also be euyll. Wherefore that the intent be good, both the ende and the meane must be honest and good thinges. Howbeit certayne thinges are by theyr nature so euyll, that we can neuer vse them rightly. As theft, periury, adulterye, An euill intent of two kyndes. and suche lyke. Wherefore the Apostles rule must alwayes be firme, that wee must neuer doo euyll thinges, whereby good thynges maye followe. Therefore an euyll intent is two maner of wayes: that is, eyther by the naughtynesse of the ende, Twoo thinges are required in a good intent. or els of the meanes. But the intent can neuer bee good, except bothe ende and meane be good. Thus farre the Philosophers and schoole Deuines agree wyth vs. Nowe must we see wherein they differ from vs.
The Philosophers doo thinke that the righteousnes of the ende and meanes dependeth of humane reason or naturall vnderstanding, as though it were sufficient to put a difference betwene iust thinges and vniust: but that we denye, and requyre fully fayth and the woorde of God, Augustine. as sure rules, whych thyng Augustine testifieth in many places, and especiallye vpon the .xxxi. Psalme, where he sayth: Doo not count thy woorkes good before faythe, whyche are nothyng els, then (as me thynketh) great strengthes, and a most swyft course out of the waye, and he which so maketh haste, runneth headlong to destruction: Wherefore a good intent maketh a good action, Faith directeth the intent. but fayth directeth the intent. Wherefore we must take heede, when we purpose any woorke, that our hart haue a regarde vnto fayth, whereby it may direct his endeuours.
The schoole Deuines wyll easelye graunt that fayth gouerneth the intent, and maketh it good. But we differ from them for three causes. Fyrst, bicause we 1 affirme that faith dependeth onely of the woorde of God: but they wyll haue it to leane vnto Fathers and Counsels, Faith must not cleaue vnto fathers & coūsels and that in no case maye be graunted vnto them, forasmuche as fayth must bee constant, and vtterlye without errour: whych twoo thynges are not founde in the Fathers and Counsels, bicause they speake thinges one contrary to an other. Fathers very often stryue wyth Fathers, and Counsels are against Counsels: and those Fathers are rare, yea in a maner none, whych haue not sometyme erred, and that in thinges most waightye, and very many Counsels haue neede of amendement. Doth not the scripture by expresse woordes testify that all men are lyers?
2 The other thing, wherein wee can not assent vnto the Schoolemen, is, bycause by a good intent they affirme that our woorkes are made meritorious, yea and that of eternall lyfe. Which thing how farre of it is from the truth, the nature of merite may teache vs: whereof I mynde not nowe to speake.
3 The thyrde thing wherein we differ from the Schoolemen is, bycause they [Page 153] wyl haue the worke to be made good by an habitual good entent as they speke: The habitual entent of the Scholemen. That is to saye, done without any good mocion of the hart. They fayn that our actions do please god, as prayers, reading of Psalmes, and geuing of Almes, although in act we thinke nothing of God, & they suppose y t thys habitual entent which they place in him, is sufficient inough. So that if thou shouldst demaūd of him, whych doth these thyngs, why he doth so? he may be redy to aunswer, that he doth it to the glory of god, especially whē in doing of it he hath not a cōtrary mind or repugnant will. But this can we not graunt vnto them, for asmuch as in this negligence, wherby when we work we think not of god nor of his glory, the commaundement of god is violated, which commaundeth vs to loue god withall the hart, withall the soule, and withall the strengthes. Wherfore we rather counsell that this maye bee knowleged a synne, then to be counted a good woorke.
But bicause they perceiued that theyr sayinges haue some absurdity, they added, so that in the beginninge of that woorke, we thinke somewhat of god and his glory, and so that that which is purposed, be directed vnto hym. But no man doubteth but that the begynning of all those thinges whiche we do, oughte to be good: but afterward, if fayth follow not those thinges whyche we haue well begonne, and if when we are working, we haue not a respect vnto god and his glory, we shall runne hedlonge into sinne, which may not be dissembled. Farther, if we should worke as we ought to do, and as the law requireth, yet should we (as Christ sayth) be still vnprofitable seruants: so far is it of, that we can clayme vnto our selues any merites. Wherfore so long as we desist from thinkinge vpon the honor and glory of God, we fall, neyther are such falles to be dissembled, but rather to pray that they may be turned frō vs, forasmuch as of their own nature they are sinnes, Fayth is not sufficient in h [...] bite, but we must beleue also in acte. although vnto the beleuers for Christes sake they are not imputed vnto death. Wherfore let there be added to our workes a good entent: But yet such an entente as is adorned with faythe, and let vs performe the same not in habite but in acte. Wherfore the Lord sayth in the Gospell of Mathew the .6. chap: The lyght of y e body is y e eye. And if thyne eye be symple, y e whole body shal be lyght. But if the light which is in thee be darknes, Augustine. how gret shal the darknes thē be? These things Augustine (in his questions of the Gospels, y e .2. boke, & .15. questiō, and agaynst Iulianus in y e .4. boke, & 20. chap.) iudgeth to be vnderstāded of a good intent. And in like maner writeth he in his .10. Tome, the .2. Sermon, where he entreateth vpon this place, we must not do righteousnes before men, to be seene of them. The intent (saith he) is alwayes to be applied vnto the glory of God, but the wyll to haue it knowen vnto men, is to be auoyded, but so much as shall seme to pertayne to the honour of God. And to that tendeth that whych Christ speaketh: A good tree cannot bringe forth euel frutes, neither an euil tre, good: for as much as the tree signifieth the entent. Wherfore this act of Gideon done of a good intent (if those thinges be true whyche we haue sayde) cannot be excused, when as fayth gouerned it not.
28 Thus was Madian brought low before the children of Israell so that they lift vp theyr heds no more: and the lande had quietnes .40. yeares in the dayes of Gideon.
29 Then Ierubbaall the son of Ioas went and dwelt in his owne house.
30 And Gideon had 70. sonnes which came out of his thigh: for he had many wyues.
31 And his Concubine that was in Sechem, bare him a sonne also, whose name he called Abimelech.
When we heare that the earth had quietnes, we maye note two metaphores. The first Metaphore is, whereby the land is taken for them that dwell vpon it. The other is, whereby silence is put for peace: for that in peace the cryes of souldiers, the noyse of weapons, the blast of trumpets, and the running to and fro of horsemen and fotemen are not harde. Augustine in this place doubteth, howe it could be, Augustine. that God suffred superstition and idolatrye so longe vnpunished. And he bringeth two answeres therfore. First, that Gideō did indede streyghtwayes as sone as the warre was finished, Why the punishmente was differed 40. yeares. gather a masse of golde, but he made not the Ephod by and by, but longe after, namely towarde the end of his life: or that the Ephod was made as sone as the victory was accōplished, but the people fell not to idolatrye, till aboute the latter tyme of his life. An other cause he addeth, because in that superstition the name of God was kept, neyther was the worshipping of Baal and other gods of the Gentles admitted for that, as long as Gideon liued, the Hebrewes came not to that mischief, & therfore god delt not so sharply agaynste them. And it was no small benefite to geue them peace for .40. yeares: of which thing, seying I haue spoken before in the former iudges, I shal not nede now to repeate the same agayne.
Ierubbaal wente and dwelte in his house. He coueted not a perpetuall rule, as did Cesar, who after v. yeares did agayn, couet to continew vnto himself the prouince of France other. v. yeres. But Gideon when he had obteined peace, ceased from warres, and dismissing his host, led his life at home in his owne house, in a manner like a priuate man. Suche are vprighte mindes whiche indeede wante ambicion.
In his commē taries vpon the 1. of Samuell the 25. chap. He had .70. children, for he had many wiues. Of hauinge many wiues I will not nowe speake muche, bycause it is to be entreated of in an other place: this is sufficient to be sayd at this present, that god in the old lawe permitted the same after a sort vnto the fathers.
VVhich came out of his thigh. This is therefore written, least peraduenture we should suspecte that of those .70. children some were adopted. Besides the 70. whiche he had of his wiues whiche were many, he had Abimeleche by hys concubyne.
¶Of Matrimony and hauing of Concubines.
THe place doth now admonish me, somwhat to speak of hauing of cōcubines, wherof is often mencion made in the histories of the old testament. But fyrst must we define Matrimony, that therout we may gather the vse of concubines: for vnlesse the nature of it be manifest, Of Matrimonye. Marrimonium coniungium, nuptie connubium. The definition of matrimony. we can not se how that hauing of a concubine differeth from it. Matrimony, mariages, wedding, and wedlocke sygnify al one thing. And Matrimony (as it is had in the .i. boke Inst. Iustin. whē mēcion is made of the power of the father, and in the degestes de ritu nuptiarum, is defined to be a coniunction of man and womā, an inseperable conuersation of life, and a communication of gods law and mans law. But this diffinicion muste be perfected by the holy scriptures. Wherfore we must adde, that this coniunctiō of man and woman was instituted by god, for the bringing forth of children, for the taking away of whoredome, & that therby humayne life might haue helpes and commodityes. In this difinicion vndoubtedlye the coniunction of man and woman holdeth place in the matter. The inseperable conuersation of life pertaineth vnto the forme, for with this purpose and will man and wife muste marye together. For though by adultery that copulation be taken away, yet when the matrimony is contract, they ought both of them to haue this in theyr mind, that beyng once ioyned they must abide & liue together. This belongeth also to the forme, that the cōmunication of gods law and mans law be had betwene them. For they must be both of one religion, & cōmunicate humayne things one w t an [Page 154] other. For the wife goeth into the famely of the husband, and with the husbande is counted all one fleshe. Yea and the substance of either parties are made in all poyntes cōmon, but the efficiēt cause of this ordināce was god himself, euen frō the beginning, who made vnto Adam a helper. And the end (as we haue sayd) is the procreation of children: for god sayd, Increse and multiply. But as touching the other ende, namelye for the aduoydinge of whoredome, Paule in the .1. to the Corrinth. hath very well and playnly written.
If thou wilt demaund, Whither bōds or writings ar required to contract matrimony or no. Ierome. whither bondes or writynges are required for the cō tracting of matrimonye, we maye au [...]swere, that they are not required. For the consent of eyther party is sufficiente, as it is had in the Authentikes, and in the Code, where entreaty is made of mariages. But that whiche Ierome writeth to Oceanus, that hereby a wife is discerned from a concubine, bycause a wyfe must haue bondes and a dowry, which thinges concubines had not, thys I say is not vniuersally to be receaued. For his sentence is to be drawen vnto y e wife, which before was a concubine. As touching her she neded bondes, that shee mighte no more be counted a concubine, & y t the children which she had alredy, or afterward might haue, might be legitimate. But a dowry is not required of necessitye, because (as it is a cōmon saying,) a dowry hath not place without matrymony, A dowry is not necessary to cō tract matrimonye. but matrimony may cōsist w tout a dowry. For a dowry is geuen for the easier susteyning of the hurthē of matrimony. The Cannons haue added, and y e profitably, y e Matrymonyes should not be contracted priuely. For if the assent of the man and wife be secrete and without witnesses, Agaynst secret mariages. Iudges can pronounce nothyng of suche a matrimony contracted. Wherefore if theyr wils should he changed, and after those secret matrimonies, they should contracte solemne and publike mariages, the first mariages geue place vnto them, and the conscience is kept both perplexe and also wounded.
But to speake of hauing of concubines, two things ar to be considered. First what the Romaine lawes ordeyned of it: Secondly, Of hauing o [...] Concubines. in what sort it was among the Hebrewes vsed, or what is to be vnderstand, when we reade that the fathers had concubines. As touching the first hauing of cōcubines, was by the ciuile law a certayne kind of matrimony: for a concubine was not a harlot, Hauyng of a Concubine semed to the Romaynes to be a kind of Matrimony. The definition of a Concubine which was common to many, nor also a harlot, which was kept of a man together with his lawful wife. And how much it differeth from a wife, it shall appeare by the definitiō of a concubine. For a concubine is she which hath the vse of mariage wyth one that liueth sole. But for that shee is not vnseperable, (bycause they that are so ioyned maye easely be seperated) therefore a concubine differeth muche from a very wife: Farther humayn rights ar not communicated with her, for a Concubine goeth not into the famely of him with whome shee is conuersant. Yea and theyr goodes and facultyes are not commune together, neyther are the children borne of that coniunction, counted lawful and iust heyres, vnlesse they be made legitimate by the benefyte of the prince. Howbeit it is by the Romayne law forbidden that a manne shoulde haue manye Concubines at once, and it is prohibited to haue a Concubyne together with his wife. Moreouer by the Romayne lawes, such can not be counted as Concubynes, whych may be vsed as harlots, as a fre virgine, and a widow vnder .25. yeres of age: for if a man medle w t them, eyther it shalbe matrimony, or els iudged whoredome. Howbeit a widow maye be a Concubin, if before witnesses it be declared, that she is taken not for a wife, but for a Concubine. And lastly there can be no Concubine, whiche may not become a wife, although not in that place where she dwelleth, yet at the least in an other place, which I therfore ad, because by the Romaine law it was not lawful for the President to mary a wife of that prouince wher he gouerned, whiche yet he might haue as a Concubine.
And if thou wilt demaund, whether the Romayne law allowed Concubines [Page] or no. Whether the Romaine lawe allowed concubines or no. I wyll answer, that they did absolutely allow thē, because they condēned, not hauynge of Concubines as a thing vnlawfull, so that it were vsed as before is sayd. Yet it shadowingly reproueth that coniunction, when as it suffreth not the children borne of Cōcubines to be lawful & iust heyres, vnlesse at the length of a Concubine she should become a wife, or vnlesse it be by the authority of the prince. Howbeit we must know that the children of a Concubyne, were admitted vnto a certayne little portion of inheritance, but yet not to a like and equall portion with the legitimate. Yea and the children borne of a concubyne, are not in the power of the father. But when of a Concubine she is made a wife, then it was necessary that there shoulde be tables of Matrimony.
If we will retayne the Romayn law, a handmayden cannot be made a Concubine: for by that law a handmayden could not be made a wife. For the coniunction of a free man with a hand maiden, the Romayn lawes called Contuberniū, neyther did they count it for a iust matrimonye. Howbeit by handemaydens the Romaynes vnderstode not hired seruantes, but such as were bought: whiche I therefore speake, because our hired handemaydens, are free persons, and therfore it is lawfull to contracte iust matrimony with them.
The Concubines of the fathers were wiues.But now let vs consider of the law of the Hebrewes, & what is to be thought of the Concubines of the fathers. They wer in very dede wiues, although oftentimes they were handemaydens, as Agar, Bala, Zilpa, and as this Concubine of Gideon. In the iudgement seate, and as touching ciuile actions, it seemeth that free men of those places where these fathers were conuersant, could not contract matrimony with them, and therfore paraduenture in holy scriptures they were called Concubines. But yet before god, that is by the law of matrimony institituted by hym, they were wyues. Wherfore in the boke of Genesis Agar whyche is called a Concubine, is also called a wife. Therefore there were two differences betweene the Hebrewe lawes and the Romayne lawes: bycause wyth them hauinge of Concubines was no matrimony, but with the Iewes it was before God: although openlye and by ciuill reason, bycause of the seruile condicion of the woman, shee was not acknowledged peraduenture for a wyfe. Farther, herein they differ, bicause the Iewes had handmaydens to theyr Concubynes: & the same was not lawfull for the Romaynes, if we followe that lawe, that shee should be a Concubine, which may be made a wife. Whē as the Romayne lawes counted not that for matrimony, which was contracted with a handmaydē. But this ciuill law was not in Ieromes tyme retayned in y e Romayn Empire, Ierome eyther because y e Ecclesiastical canons had mitigated it, or els for some other cause. For in hys Epistle to Oceanus, he speaketh of certayne, whyche had theyr handmaydens in steede of wiues, for this cause not callinge them by the name of wyues, to auoide burthens, and charges, who yet if they became rich, made theyr handmaydens wiues. After what maner the decrees permit Concubines. But we must know moreouer, that where Concubines seeme to be allowed and permitted in the decrees, the same is to be vnderstand of those which are in very deede wiues, although by the Romayn lawes and ciuily they were counted for Concubines, bicause that woman was not solemply maried, although there was a mutuall consent betwene them of matrimony. This which I haue brought is had in y e distinction .34. chapter. Isqui & Christiano. Whereof the first is the decree of the councell of Toletanus: the other is the testimony of Isidorus in his booke de distantia noui & veteris Testamenti. But when in the decrees there is mēcion made of Cōcubines, which ar not in very dede wiues, they are vniuersally prohibited. And that is, when eyther party will not alway dwel together, neyther acknowledge one an other as man and wife.
Why the son of Gideon was called Abimelech.And this shalbe sufficiēt at this time as touching these things. Let vs now returne vnto Gidion, who had by his Cōcubine a son named Abimelech. The Etimology of y e name is: My father y e king. Peraduēture y e cōcubine of Gideon was arrogāt & proud, which coūted Gideon for a king, and therefore called her sonne by this name, and kindled in him the flames of bearing rule, that he might right sone play the tirant, and claim vnto himself a kingdome as dew vnto his father.
32 So Gideon the sonne of Ioas died in a good age, and was buried in the sepulchre of Ioas his father, in Ophra Abiezer.
33 But when Gideon was dead, the children of Israell turned away, and went a whoryng after Baalim, and made Baal-berith their God.
34 And the children of Israell remembred not the Lord their God, whiche had deliuered them out of the handes of all their enemyes on euery side.
35 Neither shewed they mercy on the house of Ierubbaal Gideon, according to all the good thinges whiche he had done in Israel.
There is often mencion made in the holy scripture of a good age. What a good age is. And in the 15. chap. of Genesis, it is promised vnto Abraham as a certaine excellent good thing. And it semeth to shewe two things: first a iust space of lyfe, so that death should not come vntimely, and strike as yet in tender age. Farthermore it signifieth prosperity of life and a profitable end. Wherfore it is required therunto that the minde be sound, the body not broken with diseases, no want of riches, the famely, countrey, and dignity abiding firme: this is iudged a good age. But what shal we reckē of eternal life? I thinke Gideon obteyned it also, Whether Gideō was at the last saued or no for as much as in the Epistle to the Hebrues the .11. chap. he is numbred with those fathers, which liued adorned with faith. Thou wilt say peraduenture that his faith was not iustifieng and perfect, but onely of that kinde of faith which sufficed to worke miracles. But I do not thinke that the Apostle, when he made mencion of Gideon, and of the other fathers, wrote of that faith. For the faith whiche there he speaketh of, he defined in the begynning that it is an [...] or (as they say) the substaunce of things to be hoped for, & a certaynty of y e which is not sene. And in composing the Cataloge of the mē, which where adorned with this faith, he maketh mēcion of Abraham, whō he testifieth to haue ben iustified by faith. Wherby is gathered that the faith whiche is there attributed vnto the saintes, is the true and perfect faith, by whiche the godly are counted iust before God.
But they say, he fell into superstitions. I graunt y t, but he might be renewed by repentaunce, whiche is the effect of true faith, and at the last attayne eternall lyfe. But thou wilt say, what repentaunce was this? when he ouerthrewe not the Ephod whiche he set vp, neither reuoked the people from superstition? Vndoubtedly there is neuer any repentaunce counted fruitefull, vnlesse that be amended which was done amisse. To this I aunswere, it might be (as Augustine saith) that this superstition began toward the latter end of his life, which thing, being repentaunt, he had decreed to take away if he had liued. But being preuē ted by death, he was not able to performe it.
And was buried. They made no prayers or supplications to deliuer his spirite from the paynes of Purgatory, And we read not in any place of the old testamēt that for the same cause there were either sacrifices or oblations made.
And when Gideon was dead, the Israelites went a whoryng and worshipped Baal. Wherby we may learne how ingrate men are towards God. He had adorned them with so many benefites, & yet their good prince being dead, which kept them in their duty, they fel straightway frō y e true worshipping of him. Wherfore it hereby manifestly appeareth how diligētly we must pray for good princes & a godly Magistrate: for then is vnderstand with how great a commodity they were geuen vnto the people, when now at the length the anger of God waxing fierce, they are taken awaye. For that there were many Baalim, What Bahal-berith was. The Iupiter of couenaunt. in this place is perticular mention made of Baal-berith whiche a man may call Iouē foederis, or Iouē foederatum. Hym made they a God ouer them, and worshipped him for the Lord. The summe of the worshipping of him semeth to be this, that they referred [Page] al y e good things which they had, as receaued of him: & they beleued y t he turned away frō them those euils which they were not troubled with. By reason of which faith, they counted him for their God, & worshipped his outward image.
And forgat the Lord their god. We can not worship straūge gods but straight way we must cast away the true God. He is one, and therfore he refuseth to be worshipped with more. Wherfore it remayneth that they do not worship the true GOD, but theyr owne inuentions, as many as doo with the true God ioyne other whiche are idoles: for there is no true God whiche wilbe worshipped that way. Or els this is the sense of it, that the Israelites did wonderfully fal from the true God, bycause they did not onely worship Baal, but they so worshipped him, y t they vtterly forgot the god of their fathers and grandfathers, & altogether abiected y e worshipping of hym. Which thing they vsed not alwayes to do: for many tymes they so allowed outward gods, y t yet in the meane tyme they retayned some part of the olde worshipping.
Neither shewed they mercy on the house of Gideon. That happened vnto thē, which must nedes come to passe. When we departe from the true God, the offices of charity are neglected, for he whiche is euill agaynst God, can not be good to men. An example of Constātius the Emperor. This vnderstoode the Emperor Constantius the father of Constantine: who thought that they would not be faithfull vnto him, whiche for to kepe still their dignity, departed from the worshipping of Christ. Gideon in dede deserued so to be punished: but they ought not so to haue dealt against hym, especially seing they behaued not themselues so for the reuenging of religion.
To shewe mercy, is a phrase much vsed of the Hebrues, and it is read in many places in the holy Scriptures, neither signifieth it any thing els, then to do good, and to be of a gentle louing and ready minde to helpe those whiche haue nede. And that whiche is nowe spoken, by a certayne anticipation comprehendeth the narration whiche we shall heare in the chap. following, of the calamity and destruction of the house of Gideon. In the meane tyme let vs consider the nature of the worlde: it is wonderfully infected with the vice of ingratitude: we see in a maner no notable or excellent gifte bestowed vpon any man, whiche by the children of this worlde is not recompensed with great ingratitude. We must not besiste frō wel doyng bycause of ingratitude. And yet for this occasion we must not suffer our selues to be withdrawē from doyng good, least when as other are euill, we imitate them in departing from our office. Let vs go forward to do good vnto our neighbours and brethren: who if they be thankful, let vs chiefly reioyse for thē, Why God permitteth ingratitude in the worlde. and afterward for our selues. But if they be otherwise, let vs turne our selues vnto God himselfe, for whose cause we do rightly, decreing with our selues, that we must not haue a regard what the sinnes of mē deserue, but what God requireth of vs, or what is decent for vs, remembryng y e God very often permitteth the vice of ingratitude in the worlde, wherby our mindes may be the more erected vnto him, for whose cause all our thinges are to be instituted, and let vs so direct vnto him those things which we do, that we require nothing of this world to be rēdred vnto vs as a reward. Farther, whē we see that mē do for the most part after this maner reward those with great euils, whiche haue done them much good, we may cal to remēbraunce the life to come, where shalbe rendred vnto euery man according to his workes. Whiche thing if we had not a cōfidence that it shall one day come to passe, we should vtterly take away the prouidence of God.
¶The .ix. Chapter.
1 THen Abimelech the sonne of Ierubbaal went to Sechem vnto his mothers brethren, and spake vnto them, and to all the famely of the house of his mothers father, saying.
2 Say, I pray you, in the audiēce of all the men of Sechem, [Page 156] whether is better for you that all the sonnes of Ierubbaal, whiche are 70. persons, either that one man reigne ouer you? Remember that I am your bone, and your fleshe.
3 Then his mothers brethren spake of him in the audience of al the men of Sechem all these wordes: and their hartes were moued to follow Abimelech: for sayd they, He is our brother.
4 And they gaue him .70. peces of siluer out of y e house of Baal berith, wherewith Abimelech hired vayne and light fellowes whiche followed him.
5 And he went vnto his fathers house in Ophra, and slew his brethren the sonnes of Ierubbaal, seuenty persons vpon one stone. Yet Iothan y e yongest sonne of Ierubbaal was lefte, for he hid himselfe.
6 And all the men of Sechem gathered together, with al the house of Millowe, and came and made Abimelech king, by the playne of the image whiche was in Sechem.
The destruction of the house of Gideon is declared, & the detestable vsurpation of tyranny. Abimelech went, as I suppose from his fathers house: for he vnderstoode that he could not there easely go about that whiche in his minde he purposed. He was minded to bring into Israell the power of a king, and being otherwise a priuate man, went about to alter the state of the publique wealth. Which thing was vtterly vnlawfull. For that forme of gouernement, whiche the Hebrues then vsed, was instituted & allowed by God, euen as it is written in Exodus and Deuteronomy. Wherby is also gathered, that if at any time the people would haue a king, he ought to be created, whom the Lord appointed. Farther, if they should haue appointed a kyng by humane reason, so great a dignity pertayned not vnto him, whiche was borne of a concubine. It semeth that it should rather haue bene geuen vnto the other sonnes of Gideon, and to the first begotten, before the rest.
It is good to marke by what guile he worketh. He accuseth his brethren, Abimelech accuseth his brethren vniustly. as though they affected the kingdome. VVhether (saith he) is it better, that I or they reigne? As though he would say, one of these two thinges must nedes come to passe, and except I obteyne the kyngdome, they will clayme it vnto themselues: which was vtterly false. For they wēt about no such matter, yea it is rather to be thought but they followed their fathers steppes: who when y e kingdome was offred him, refused it. Therfore it is very likely that they as legitimate children would follow the example of their father. He goeth to those men chiefly whom he hoped would soone be wonne to come vnto him, namely vnto the kinsfolkes of his mothers.
He vseth glorious reasōs. First he declareth y t the rule of one alone is better thē y e dominon of many. And y t is most easy to persuade humane reason. Wherfore Homere sayth: It is not good y e many raigne, let there be one Lord. Homerus. Aristotle. Whether a kingdome be better then [...]ristocratia, or no. Which verse Aristotle bringeth in his Metaphisikes. Whiche thing in dede might be graūted as touching the institution & perfection of the nature of man. For in a kingdome occasions in deliberatyng are not ouerpassed and corrupted: and the execution of things decreed, is not delayed and slacked, as we see often happeneth where many beare rule. But in this corruption of nature it semeth to be otherwise, for as much as in it hangeth a daunger & that most grieuous, le [...]st the kingdome should fall into the hands of a wicked man. Wherfore it is better to retayne Aristocratia, that is, the gouernaūce of many good men. Abimelech vrgeth not wi [...]h the other argument, as he did before, namely the publique vtility, but the proper cō modity of his kinsfolkes. I am (sayth he) your fleshe, and your bone. As though he [Page] would haue sayd: When I am created kyng, I will chiefly haue a regard vnto you. I will increase you with riches, dignity and power. Wherfore it is better for you to chose me for your king being your kinseman, rather then a straunger. He sayth that he is their flesh and bone, when as yet he was more fleshe and bone of his brethren, and of his father whiche was dead. For children pertayne more vnto the father, then to the mother. But this fellow lieth in all things, and speaketh to get fauor, What to be fleshe & bloude of any mā, signifieth. and y t guilfully. It is an Hebrew phrase, to be y e bone and flesh of any man. Laban spake so vnto Iacob, when he required of hym Rachel for a wife. This sayd the Israelites also vnto Dauid, when they created hym kyng. And Paul to the Ephesians sayeth, that we are the members of Christe, fleshe of his fleshe, and bones of hys bones: for as much as he is our head and the head of the Churche, as the husband is ioyned vnto the wyfe. In summe, it is a speeche whereby is declared the greatest coniunction that may be.
The reasons of Abimelech are confuted. Abimelech offendeth most grieuously in these reasons. First, in that he affirmeth, that it is better that one do rule, and that the gouernement of many is to be auoyded: here I say he deceaueth and is deceaued: bycause this thing was not to be weighed by the nature thereof, but by the worde of God: for we must not obey humane reason, but the commaundementes of God. Farther, he deceaueth the Sichemites, whē as he sayth: Ye are my fleshe and my bone, for althoughe we must haue a respect vnto our kinsfolkes, yet that must be done without any preiudice of the publique wealth, or breach of the cōmaundementes of God. Wherunto thou mayst adde, y t in electing Magistrates, a regard must be had to the commō cōmodity, & not to a proper profit. But the people is moueable, especially to sedicions & tumults: therfore the Sichemites ar cōtent with the reasons of Abimelech, and gaue him money, whiche they would not willingly haue done for lawfull vses. Why the money was in the Temple. The money was in the Temple, either bycause it was gathered of oblations, and therfore as holy there kept, or els bycause it was then the manner (as in the olde tyme it was at Rome) that the common money should be kept in the Temple of Saturne, whiche was the threasory.
Seuenty peeces of Siluer. Some interprete it a pounde of Siluer, & other some, Siluer peeces of money. But whatsoeuer it was, this summe we can not know precisely and exactly. But this is certayne if they were peeces of money, we must thinke they were of a great deale more weight, then are ours: for an hoste could not be hired for so small a price. What manner of men Abimelech adioyned vnto him. And the men with got them to this warre, are set forth by two wordes of very great signification: Rikim that is vayne, poore: Pechizim, that is light, and hedlonge. And as R. Dauid affirmeth in libro Radicum, these men are vnderstande to be light, chiefly in science or knowledge: in whiche signification the same worde is read in the Prophete Zophonia the 3. chapiter. Euen at this daye also suche men are ready to go on warfarre, namely beggerly fellowes, whiche haue wasted and consumed their goods, and whiche are light hedded, yea hedlong to take vpon them, and to do any wicked acte. And that commeth hereof, bycause they are lyght in science or knowledge, that is, they want iudgement and ryght reason. Warre maye sometimes iust be made. Vndoubtedly warfarre is a thyng lawfull and iust, if a man vse it ryghtly. For, for as muche as the holy Scriptures doo teache, that the Magistrate beareth the swoorde to reuenge wicked actes, and to defend the good, it followeth that he may arme souldiers, and call together his Citezins to a iust warre. Wherfore Christian men in the old time went on warfarre, when they were compelled to take wages euen of Ethnike princes. For the army of the Thebeians was holy: for they were al in a maner slayne for Christes sake, and Christian souldiers sometymes when the host was almost destroyed with thyrste, by prayers thorough Christ obteyned water of GOD. But amonge these holy souldiers, Hyred souldiers are not cō mendable. are not those hired warriers woorthy to be numbred, whiche for three crownes a month sticke not to put theyr lyfe to sale, & strayghtwaye offer themselues, and runne vnto euerye one that calleth them, when [Page 157] they heare a Trompet or a Dromme, and addicte themselues to hym that offreth them most, hauyng no regard at all vnto the cause whiche they defend.
The Sechemites, if they had bene wise, ought, The sinnes of y e Sechemites when they had heard the accusation agaynste the children of Gideon, to haue enquired whether the thyng were so or no, and when they had founde it so, they ought to haue brought them to the Senadrim, that they might by theyr iudgement haue bene punished. Senadrim was an assembly of 70. Elders. But if they had founde it otherwise, it was their parte to haue chastned and kept vnder Abimelech as a false accuser. But they did otherwise, they consented to the coniuration, and gaue the common money vnto Abimelech. At the least they should haue remembred this, that to them (whiche were but certayne members of that publique wealth) it pertayned not to create a kyng. Examples of murtherers of kinsfolkes. At the length he procedeth to the murther of his brethren, vndoubtedly a heynous crime, whiche (as it shalbe declared) sprange of a very great ambition. An accustomed example both in the holy Scriptures, and also in the Ethnike histories. Cain slewe Abel. Ioseph was solde of his brethren. Ioram the sonne of Iehosaphat (as it is in Paralip. the 21. chap.) slewe all his brethren. Absolom also an vngodly sonne spared not euen hys own father. Romulus among the Ethnikes slewe hys brother Remus, and Domitianus slewe Titus, Bassianus Caracalla also slewe Geta. And vndoubtedly tyme woulde not serue me, if I should rehearse all the examples of lyke sorte.
I am not ignoraunt that these manquellers pretended some excuses for theyr wicked acte, but they were but vayne. Firste, Pretences of murtherers of their kinsfolks they pretended that they for the publique wealthes sake destroyed their brethren and kynsfolkes whiche were all desirous to be kynges, bycause the kyngly power, An aunswere of Alexander the great. Cicero. whiche one pertayneth onely vnto one, can not be very commodiously distributed vnto many. So Alexander the Macedonian aunswered vnto Darius, that the worlde could not holde two Sunnes, as though one shuld hinder y e other in gouerning. Neither was Cicero ignoraunt of this reason, who in his .3. booke de Officiis sayth, that Remus slewe Romulus vpon a certayne shewe of vtility, as though he saw that the kingdome should better be gouerned by one, then by two. Whom yet he confesseth to haue offended, beyng deceaued with this shewe of vtility, and that he put of all humanity and piety. The other thing whiche they pretended is, that therfore they slewe theyr brethren or kynsfolkes, bycause they had conspired agaynst them. But when (I praye you) complayne they of conspiracies? euen then when they had slayne those, whom they complayned of, & they could not defend thēselues.
He slewe 70. brethren, excepte one namely Iotham, of whome shall mention be made afterwarde. The Hystorye writeth that there were 70. slayne, either bycause Abimelech so willed and commaunded, or elles bicause onely one wanted of that summe: The maner of the scripture in reckenyng of numbers. whiche thyng we may see oftentymes vsed in the holy Scriptures, that some certayne number is mentioned as a full number, from whiche yet some may be taken away.
He slewe them vpon one stone. It is thought to haue bene some notable stone which was appoynted for a place of execution. Abimelech therfore is by a greate and detestable murther of hys brethren, consecrated kynge. Kynges were appointed to profit men, and to defend them: but he begynneth his kyngdome with murther. Wherfore he ought rather to be called a Tyranne, then a king. The place where he was created, is setforth: wherfore we must vnderstand that this worde Alon, signifieth a plant, whiche R. Dauid in libro Radicum supposeth to be a pine tree: Ionathan maketh it a chestnut tree: and Ierome turneth it alwayes an oke. Sometimes it signifieth a plaine: and the Chaldey paraphrast interpreteth it Mischar, that is, a playne field, thether assembled the Sechemites to create a kyng. There was an image or piller set vp (as some thinke) to a superstitious woorshippyng: whiche thyng althoughe it be not agaynst the wicked manners of thys people and impiety of Abimelech, yet it is not of necessity [Page] that we should so thinke: for we rede many tymes in the Scriptures, that images were erected, not for diuine worshippynges, but for other causes. In the booke of Genesis the 31. chap. a heape of stones was set vp in mount Gilead as a border and monument vnto the posterity of Iacob and Laban: and in the 35. chap. of the same booke, a piller was erected by the tombe of Rachel. Yea and Absalon adorned his tombe with an image.
The famely of Millo.The famely of the mother of Abimelech was not noble, when as she tooke her name of the towne. Millo is the name of her house. That worde signifieth other wise a gulfe filled, whiche Salomon built by the City of Ierusalem. The Sechemites created a king, the other tribes neither were at it, neither wer they called. So was there a schisme among the Israelites, whiche is wont oftentymes to happen when the worshipping of god is viciated. These thynges haue I briefly noted as concernyng the Hystory.
Now let vs more nighly looke vpon the wicked and flagicious actes, by which this man came vnto his tyranny. First he was very ambitious, he deceatefully and falsely accuseth his brethren, vseth the corruption of bribery to worke treason, is a robber of the commō threasory, he wrought by open violence, and at the last committed murther of his brethren, called Parricidium.
¶Of Ambition.
What Ambicion is. What honor is Excellent men are iustly honored.AS touching the first, Ambition is to much desire of honor. And honor is that reuerence which is geuen vnto any man, to beare testimony of his excellency. And that testimony is borne vnto hym iustly and of right: bycause it is mete, that we recompence somewhat vnto them, whiche doo helpe and norishe vs, and are endewed with giftes of God. And we haue nothing more worthy or better then honor. Farther, that they and their like may go forwarde to excercise them selues longer and more constantly in helping & keping of other. Moreouer, that we adding such reuerence, may get vnto them authority, whereby they may the more aptly and commodiously execute their office. It is lawfull for godly men to receaue the honours offred them. Hereby it is manifest that it is lawfull euen for holy men also to embrace the honours whiche are geuen vnto thē for vertue, doctrine, and pietyes sake. For they both desire and allow things that are iust, and do reioyse that men performe that whiche the law of God will haue done. And he commaūdeth to honor the father, the mother, the Magistrate, and such like. Wherfore if men obey his preceptes, holy men can not but accept it thankfully. Thou mayst adde, that if it should not so be, their ministery would be contemned, whiche is by all meanes to be auoyded.
What must be taken heede of when honours are admitted.But bycause we are prone to pride, hautines, and arrogancye: therfore we must beware, and that circumspectly, that for the desire of honor, we abuse not that whiche after a sorte may be iust. Wherfore I thought it good to note those thinges, which I iudge are to be taken heede of in this thing. First, that we rest not in this kinde of good, as in the last end. Whatsoeuer we do, must be directed vnto God, and especially that honor whiche is geuen vnto vs, when we rightly and orderly execute our dutyes, so that thereby both we our selues may know, & also teach other to glorify God, Honor is the reward of vertue. & not men in good workes. For this hath Christ commaunded, that we shoulde so directe our wookes, whereby they whiche see thē, may glorify God the heauenly father. Neither ought this to moue vs which is [...]ōmonly spoken, y e honor is the rewarde of vertues. For y t is not to be vnderstād, neither as touchyng y e vertues thēselues, nor yet in respect of the mē which are adorned with thē. For it shuld be very yll w t either of thē, if they had no other ende performed then honor. The ende of good men is eternall lyfe, and the heauenly kyngdome. And the ende of vertues, is to prepare and renewe vs to the glory of God. But honor is called the rewarde of vertues, as touching other, [Page 158] whiche doo beholde and wonder at the giftes of God in good and holy men: Howe honor is the rewarde of vertue. and and when they desire to offer or recompence them somewhat, and haue nothing excellenter then honor, then doo they geue that. Wherefore after this maner is honor counted the rewarde of vertue. The other caution is, that a man doo not 2 so burne with the desire of honor, that he care not howe he come by it, whether it be by right or by wrong. Salust hath writtē an excellent sentēce of this thyng: Salust. The good man and the euill doo both a lyke desire vnto themselues glorye, honor, and rule: this man the true waye, but the other, bycause he wanteth good artes, contendeth to attayne it by guiles and disceates. Thirdely we must beware, 3 that a man desire not more honor, then his merites and vertues require: or extort dignity and honors, when as rather he is worthy of vituperation. For this should be both absurde, and also want all maner of iustice.
Abimelech tooke not heede of the thynges whiche I haue rehearsed, Abimelech is ambicious. but incurred them all. For he set before hym the kyngly power, or rather tyranny, as the laste ende: for to it directed he all hys actes and cogitations, also he contended vnto it by disceates and guiles, and not by the good waye and iust meanes. Yea he seemeth rather to graunte vnto a sentence of Euripidis: A sentence of Eripidis. That ryght it selfe is to be violated for dominions sake. And for as much as he wanted merites, he rather extorted honor, whiche is geuen as a testimony of vertues, then got it vnto hymselfe by iuste meanes. He deceaueth hys Citizens with no obscure kynde of bryberye, for he flatteryngly requireth of them the kyngdome, bycause he woulde bestowe vppon them greate and moste ample benefites, for as muche as he was theyr kynseman. The Ethnike lawes condēne inordinate ambicion. The lawes also of the Ethnikes doo condemne suche inordinate ambition. For as muche as in the lawe Iuliā, de ambitu, it is decreed, that he whyche by bryberye obtayned honours, shoulde be condemned, both by paying of money, that is, a hundreth crownes, and therewith all made infamous.
He deceaueth hys brethren by a false accusation, as we haue shewed: Abimelech falsely accuseth his brethren & cōmitteth treason. and goeth farther and committeth treason agaynste the people of the Hebrues. For he attempted to alter, yea rather to euerte the state of that publique wealth. In the digestes ad I. Iuliam, Maiestatis, he is sayde to committe that cryme, whiche dyd any thyng agaynste the people of Rome, or agaynste the safety thereof. And who seeth not that Abimelech very diligently conspired agaynste the libertye of the Hebrues. He infringeth this lawe also: whosoeuer hath with hym men armed with swoordes and weapons, and kepeth possession of some certayne places: whiche thyng the history affirmeth that Abimelech dyd. Abimelech is guilty of robbyng the cōmō threafore. For he gathered together souldiers and came into Ophrath, & inuaded his fathers house. Wherfore he committeth treason, which (as Vlpianus testifieth) is next vnto sacrilege. Abimelech also is guilty of robbyng the common treasure, when as he abused the money, whether it were publique or holy, to hys owne priuate vse.
¶Of murther of parentes or kinsfolkes called Paricidium.
LAstly, whiche was moste heynous of all, Parricidium. he polluteth hymselfe with the murther of hys brethren: of whiche wicked cryme there are many thynges wrytten in the ciuile lawes ad I. Corneliam de Parricidiis. And as farre as I can gather out of the lawes & Hystoryes, in the old tyme the name of that crime was geuen vnto those whiche murthered their parentes, grandfathers, great grandfathers &c. vnto those also which murthered their sonnes, neuewes, and sonnes in the .iiii. degree &c. But afterward Pompeius extended the signification therof farther, & they were called Parricidae whiche slew their brethren, sonne in lawes, daughter in lawes, father in lawes, or mothers in lawes, and suche other. A lawe of Numa Pompilius Althoughe there was an olde lawe, and geuen by Numa Pompilius: He that wittingly [Page] bringeth a man to death, let him be taken for a parricide. And also Augustine in his 3. Augustine. booke de Ciuitate dei the 6. chap. counted Romulus guilty of Parricidium, bycause he slew hys brother. And there he derideth the Ethnikes, which affirmed that theyr gods suffred Troy to be destroyed, bycause they would take vengeaunce of the adultery of Paris. But howe (sayeth he) were they fauorable vnto Rome, when as the builder thereof committed strayght waye at the beginnyng parricidium? But the same Augustine in his booke de Patientia (which yet is supposed to be none of his) in the 13. chap. appointeth a certayne latitude or degrees betwene Paricides: for (as he sayth) he sinneth more haynously which kylleth his parentes or children, then he whiche murthereth his brethren. And he whiche sleaeth his brethren, offendeth more, then he whiche destroyeth those whiche are farther of a kynne. And the wicked cryme of sleayng parentes or grandfathers, semed to be so horrible, that at Rome for the space of 600. yeares, from the building of the City it was not committed. Romulus in his lawes made no mencion of Paricidium. An aunswere of Solon. Yea and Romulus, making no mencion of it in his lawes, and beyng demaunded, why he left it out, aunswered, that he could not be persuaded that any suche thyng can happen vnto men. Solon also beyng asked why he lykewise by hys lawes restrayned not parricidium, aunswere: that he by occasion of his lawes would not admonishe men of so horrible a wicked cryme, and stirre them vp vnto it after a sorte by hys admonishyng. For it oftentimes happeneth that they whiche prohibite certayne vices, prouoke men to fall into them, whiche very often will doo those thynges whiche they are forbidden.
The punishement of Parricides.But as for the murther of brethren and kynsfolkes, it was a thing vsed euen from the begynnyng, as all historyes do testifie. And the punishement of paricides whiche slewe theyr parentes or children was by lawes (as it is had ad legem Corneliam de parricidis) that they should be sowed in Culeo, that is, in a lether sacke, & with them were put an Ape, a Cocke & a Viper, & thē they were cast into the deepe of the sea, or into the next riuer. But they which slewe of their kinsfolkes or cousins, were punished with the sworde onely. These punishementes, if they were at any tyme by the Magistrates neglected or winked at, God himself punished, as the history of Samuell declareth of Absalon, whych slew his brother, and most cruelly inuaded his father. He striketh also with furiousnes & madnes those men whiche commit such horrible wicked actes, as both the Poetes & also the historiographers write of Nero & Orestes. For either of thē whē he had slaine his mother, was mad. And it is a cōmō saying, y t they which cōmit so great a wicked acte, Cicero. cā not be quiet in mynde. Wherfore Cicero in his Oration for Roscius saith, y e certaine yong mē of Terracinēsis which were accused for killing their father, wer by this meanes absolued, bycause they wer foūd in y e morning sleping, for y e iudges could not beleue y t they could slepe, which had cōmitted so detestable an acte. Domitianus also whiche slew his brother Titus, was killed by y e vengāce of God. And in like maner Bassianus Caracalla, whē he had destroyed his brother Geta. And not to ouerpasse our Abimelech, God (as we shall heare) sent an euill spirite betwene hym and the princes of Sichemites, and either party was taken with a certaine furie, so that at length they destroyed one an other.
7 And they told it vnto Iotham, who went, & stode on the toppe of mount Gerizim, & lift vp his voyce & cried, & said vnto them: Herkē vnto me ye men of Sechem, that God may herken vnto you.
8 The trees went forth to anoynt a king ouer them, and sayd vnto the oliue tree, reigne thou ouer vs.
9 But y e oliue tree said vnto thē, should I leaue my fatnes, wherw t by me they honor God & man, & go to aduance me aboue the trees.
10 Then the trees sayd vnto the figge tree, come thou and reygne [Page 159] ouer vs.
11 But the fyg tree aunswered them: Should I forsake my swetenes, and my good fruite, and go to aduance me aboue the trees?
12 Then sayde the trees vnto the vine: Come thou and be kinge ouer vs.
13 But the vine sayd vnto them: Should I leaue my wyne, which maketh mery both god and man, and go to aduaunce me aboue the trees?
14 Then sayd al the trees vnto the bramble: Come thou and raign ouer vs.
15 And the bramble sayde vnto the trees: If ye wyll annoynte me kynge ouer you, come, and put your trust vnder my shadow: and if not, let the fyre come out of the bramble, and consume the Ceders of Lebanon.
16 Now therfore if ye haue done truly and vncorruptly, to make Abimelech king: and if ye haue delte well with Ierubbaal, and with his house: if moreouer ye haue done vnto him according to the deseruyng of his handes:
17 (For my father foughte for you, and aduentured his life, to deliuer you out of the handes of Madian.
18 And ye are risen vp against my fathers house this day, and haue slayne his children .70. persons vpon one stone: and haue made Abimelech the sonne of his mayde seruant, king ouer the men of Sechem: because he is your brother.)
19 If ye, I say haue delte truly and vncorruptly with Ierubbaal & his house this day, reioyse ye with Abimelech, & let him reioise with you.
20 But if not, let a fire come out from Abimelech, and consume the men of Sechem, & the house of Millo. Also let a fire come forth from the mē of Sechē, and from the house of Millo & destroy Abimelech.
21 And Iotham ranne away, and fled, and wēt to Beer and dwelt there from the face of Abimelech his brother.
Iotham the brother of Abimelech inspired (as it appeareth) with the spirite of god, threatneth that punishments are at hande both for him and for the Sechemites. He ascended vpon the mount Gerizim, The citye of Sechem. whiche was nere vnto the citye of Sechem. In the booke of Genesis. 34. chapter. there is mention made of this city: at that tyme Hemor the father of Sechem possessed it, who rauished Dina: wherefore the citye was destroyed by Simeon and Leui. And afterwarde Iacob gaue it vnto Ioseph, Ierome A place of Genesis is expoū ded. to haue it besides his common lot in the lande of Chanaan for his posterity, as we rede in the same booke the 48. chapter. Wherefore it was in the tribe of Manasses, and as Ierom in his Hebrew questions vpon Genesis testifieth, Iacob was there healed of his haltyng, which he got by wrastling wyth the aungell, as it appereth in the same boke the 34. chap. namely y t he came Salem to the city of Sichem. And we must know, that Salem there is not a name of a city, but signifieth safe and sound. Otherwise Salem longed not to the Amorhites but to the Iebusites, whiche afterwarde was called Ierusalem. In his Epistle to Eustochius. whych conteyneth an Epitaph of Paule, the same Ierome writeth that this city lay situate by the side or roote of mount Gerizim, and in his time it was called [Page] Neapolis, and it longed vnto the Samaritanes. And the same is it whiche Iohn maketh mencion of in his Gospel the .4. chapter, wher it is written Sichar, but (as Ierome sayth) by a corrupt word, for it should haue bene written Sechem. Thither went Iesus, when he went out of Iewry into Galile.
But the mount Gerizim and Eball lay one ouer agaynste an other, and in one of them euery yeare were recited blessings, The Mountes Gerizim & Eball. and in the other, cursings. Thither did Iotham ascend, peraduenture at that time (as some suppose) when the multitude was assembled, according to the institution to heare the blessings and cursinges of the law. Whiche thinge yet (to speake as it is) semeth to me not verye likely, for as much as I rather beleue that for the worshipping of Baal, that ceremonye was omitted, and partelye because it seemeth that the multitude did for this cause assemble thither, with a solemne assemblye to constitute Abimeleche theyr new kyng. Wherefore in that solemnitye, Iotham spake these thinges, vndoubtedly by the holy Ghost, as the euent taught. The sūme of his oration conteineth an exprobation of the wickednes which they had cōmitted, and a threatning of most grieuous punishments. And that the thinge mighte be made more playne and manifest before theyr eyes, he vseth a most elegant Apology.
Of a fable and Apology.
What a fable is. Augustine.AN Apologye they saye is a kinde of fable. And they define a fable to bee a narration of a false thing, fayned for cōmodities sake, or oblectation. Or as Augustine sayth in his .2. booke and .11. chapt. de Soliloquiis, a fable is a lye made for delectation: althoughe properlye it cannot be called a lye. For the falsenes is strayghtway found out, and specially in Apologies. For in them are brought in insensible or vnreasonable creatures, talking one to an other, and entreating of matters very weighty. And as sone as the hearer perceaueth y t, straightway he vnderstandeth that the thing is fayned, and not so done in dede. And vndoubtedly certaine thinges in fables are very likely, Certain fables are likelye and some are not. and some are most farre distante frō probability. For it is very likely, that sometyme there arose a cōtention betwen Aiax and Vlisses, for the armor of Achilles, which was iudged at the length vnto Vlisses, and that Aiax therfore toke such a displeasure, that becomminge madde he slewe himselfe. But contrarywise it is altogether improbable that a woman was turned into a plant or into a stone. An Apology. Wherfore an Apology may be counted a fable which is not likely.
The kindes of a fable. What fables are to be repudiated, & what to be admitted. Filthy fables are to be repudiated.The kinds of a fable are, Comedies, Tragedies, Satires, and Narrations of Lirike and Heroike Poetes, & also Apologies. But which of these fayned things are lawfull, and which are vnlawfull, thus may be discerned. They which haue fylthinesse & scurility, that is, mirth ioyned together with filthines, ought not to be admitted. But those which are written honestlye and shamefastlye, so that they refresh the mind with some pleasure, and ar also profitable to setforth good maners, are not be despised. That fylthy ones are to be repudiated, the Apostles confyrmeth by two testimonyes. To the Corrinthians in the first Epistle he writeth: Euill communications corrupt good manners. And to the Ephesians the. v chapter it is written, let whoredome and all vncleannes and couetousnesse not reigne in you, as it becommeth sayntes: then is added [...], and [...], and whyche are not comelye. By these woordes he reproueth all those cōmunications whych are contaminated with filthines & scurilitye. Plato. The same thing saw Plato in his thirde boke de Repub. wher he excludeth Poetes which spake of gods, as though they should speake of men. Bycause they in so writing, do both vnworthely intreate of the nature of god, which is best and most high, & also they excuse the sinnes of common men, when as they testifye that both the gods and also noble mē committed the same sins, which thing assuredly we may see in the cōmodye Enuchus of Terence, where Cherea a wycked yonge man (beholding a wanton table in the harlotes house, Terence wherein was painted Iupiter persynge [Page 160] vnto Danae by a showre) began to haue a pleasure in himself, bicause he beyng a vile man did those thinges, whych he knew by that table the chief God in the olde time committed. I did it (sayth he) and I dyd it with a good wil. Cicero. Cicero also: Homere (sayeth he) fayned these, and transferred humayne things vnto the gods: I had rather they had transferred thinges diuine vnto vs.
Augustine in his .2. booke of Confessions the .15. and 16. chap. complaineth and soroweth, that he being a child and younge man, learned profitable words. Augustine. But yet in thinges vayne. I would to god (sayth he) I had beene instructed in profitable writings: I hard Iupiter thūdring and therwithall cōmitting adoultry. The mindes and affections of men ar prone inough vnto vices: wherfore it is wickedlye done, that children and younge men should in that age be by vyle and filthye fables stirred vp vnto sins. Apologies are profitable, whych consisting both of honest wordes, and good arguments, do rightly instruct that first age. Esope. Esope the aunciente writer happely excercised hymselfe in this kinde, althoughe there are some which referre his Apologies vnto Hesiodus, who was aūcienter thē Esope. But this our Apology (wherof we now entreat) was written long before Esope and Hesiodus tyme. For the time of the iudges, and namelye of Gidion, was an hundreth yeares and more, before the war of Troy. There is an other Apology also in the .2. boke of kinges the .14. chap. where Amasias obteyning the victory of the Edomites, prouoked the king of Israel to make war with him. Vnto whom the king Ioas aunswered thus: The thistle of Labanon sent vnto the Cedre that is of Libanon, and sayd: Geue thy daughter to my son to wife. And y e wyld beast went out of Libanon and trode downe the thistle. By which Apology he shewed that he was so much greter, thē Amasia the king of Iuda, as the Cedre excelleth the thystle, and admonished him that he should after that sort be troden down & oppressed of his host, as was the thistle by wilde beastes.
These things haue I therfore rehearsed, lest the Greke and Ethnike writers should be thought to be the first inuenters of these profitable fayninges. The vse of Apologies. Al men agre in this, that the vse of Apologies are then to be had, when we haue to do w t rude persons. For they vnderstand neither perfect Sillogismes, or vnperfect, neyther are they able to perceaue inductions, so that of perticulars they cangagather vniuersals. And they passe not vpon the exāples of noble men, for that 1 they themselues are abiect and base. Wherfore when such wayes of doctrine can not take place, there remayneth nothing but fayned narrations, where beyng allured by the ne [...]mes of the thing, they geue much heede to the thinges which are spoken, and sometimes at the length are perswaded. They are good also to help 2 memory: for things [...] are so new & pleasaūt, do very must delight: & thinges that are so sweete, are not so easely forgotten. Farther, men will easlier suffer themselues to be reproued by Apologies, then by open wordes: for the playne truth 3 engendreth hatred. But beyng couered w t Apologies and darke speeches it may be suffred. At the beginning the hearers know not wherto the thing tēdeth: therfore for y t they knowe not what wilbe spoken, they tary out the end, & are at the last peraduenture perswaded. Christe finished the whole parable of the vine: and at the end the Phareseis and Scribes vnderstode that it was spoken against thē. So also among y e Romayns Menenius Agrippa by an Apology wōne the people, which wer departed, to adioine thēselues agayn to y e Patritiās. For these causes ar Parables, dreames & visiōs of Prophets very much vsed in y e holy scriptures.
The fable of Esope of the frogges which desired a kinge, differeth not muche from this Apology which we ar now in hand with: for to thē after the beame or post which they dispised, was geuen a dragō, which by litle & litle eat thē vp al.
And I wil begyn at y e declaration of the fable wherin it is said: If ye haue done rightly and orderly, reioyse with Abimelech, and Abimelech with you. But if not, let a fire come out from him, & consume you. The oliue tree, vine tree, & fyg tree is the famelye of Gideon: and the trees which desire a king are the Sechemites. [Page] And as among trees there are some noble and some abiect: so also amonge men there ar some noble and excellent, and some vnnoble and of no reputacion. The bramble brier signifieth Abimelech. Of the brāble or briar. Plini. Plini in his 24. booke and .14. chapt. writeth of this kind of thorn. And as touching this matter, these are the properties therof: it is a plant vile and abiect, as was Abimelech, who was a bastard and borne of a hand mayd, so that he was not to be compared with his brethern. And as he without any vtility gouerned the Israelites, so is the brāble wont to bringforth no frute. The bramble also pricketh, euen as Abimelech very muche hurted the Israelites. Moreouer some write that the bowes of brambles are sometimes so vehemently shaken and moued with the winde, that out of them is fire kindled, wherewith not only they thēselues burn, but y e whole wood wherin they grow is burnte: which thinge Iotham nowe foretelleth to come to passe of Abimelech. Wherfore the properties do wonderfully well agree.
But here are twoo questions offred vnto the readers. The fyrst is, bycause it is said that the trees wente to the Oliue tree, vine tree, figge tree, and bramble, to create them a king, when as the Sechemites went not vnto Abimelech, and vnto the sonnes of Gideon, but rather Abimelech wente vnto them. The other is, wee do not here reade that the sonnes of Gideon refused the kingdome offred vnto them, or aunswered those thinges which the trees sayd, when they were called to raygne.
The latter question I thinke may be dissolued two wayes, sayinge, that the sonnes of Gideon in dede answered not so: but they would haue answered so, if they had beene demaunded. Wherefore Iotham knowyng so rightwell al their mindes and wyll, seemeth not to speake so muche from the purpose. Or els we may say, that Gideon hymself aunswered for his sonnes, when he said: I wil not reygne ouer you, God himself shall raygne ouer you, And that we maye vnderstand, what the three noble trees ment by theyr aunsweres, this is to be called agayne to remembrance, that the kingdome was offred vnto Gideon, not onelye for himselfe, but also for his sonne, and sonnes sonne. Wherefore he refused the kingdome for three. And hereof it commeth (as the Rabbines suppose) that ther are three kindes of trees brought in.
But as touchinge the first question, the Sechemites and Israelites came not vnto Abimelech, to make him theyr kinge, but yet the holy ghoste so speaketh by Iotham, bicause he is he that knoweth y e harts, & knew that that people laboured with this desire to haue at the length a king. For they had manifestly declared it before, whē they offred y e kingdome vnto Gideon, & afterwarde more manifestlye they shewed it in the time of Samuel, when they altogether desired to haue a king geuen them, as other nacions had.
What manner of argument is gathered out of this Apologye. Argumentum a comparatis A maiore ad minus. Maior.Out of this Apology is drawen an argument of thinges compared together. For the sonnes of Ierubbaal are compared with Abimelech, as farre nobler then he, euen as the olyue tree, vine tree, and fyg tree do farre excell the bramble and brier. And the reason is from the greater vnto the lesser by negation, as though it should haue bene sayd: If euen they would not raigne, and iudged that it was not lawful for them, which were most excellent, endewed with vertues & faculties, apte and mete for to raygne: much lesse is it lawful for him to reigne which wanteth vertues, and is vnapte for a kingdome. But they which were noble, & might haue raygned, Minor. would not, neyther did they thinke that it was lawfull for them. Wherfore Abimelech neyther could, neyther oughte, to haue bene by you appoynted kinge. The first proposition is manifest ynough by the rule of things compared: and the second most manifestly appeareth by the Apology. We maye by the like argument reason of the Ecclesiasticall state.
For if the fathers which were endued with a great spirite, The argument is ap [...]ed vn [...] the Pastors of the Church. notable in wonderfull vertues, and excellent doctrine, woulde not execute the office of a Pope or Monarchy in the Church, or take vpon them principality ouer all Bishops and Churches: that is much les to be graunted vnto their posterity, which are much inferiour vnto them, yea not to be compared with them. But they woulde not: wherfore neither is it meete that those shoulde. The first proposition appeareth (as we haue already said) by the rule of thinges compared: but the minor is proued both by Ciprian, and also by the Counsell of Carthage, lykewyse by Augustine, Leo, and Gregory.
Farthermore, by this act we gather, what euyll commeth by chaunging the state of a publike wealth, especially when it was allowed by the woord of God, as was the Aristocratia of the Hebrues. Neither was there any cause, why they should chaunge that forme of the publike wealth: The Churche oughte not to haue altred the forme of the gouernmēt therof for God hym selfe gouerned them, gaue them .70. Elders, and raised them vp Iudges in perillous tymes. In like maner ther was no cause why the Church should chaunge the forme of her gouernment. Neither can they which brought in the Papacy alledge any thing which the Hebrues could not haue said to defēd their peticion for hauing a king. For as these men faine for themselues, that the Church shoulde be rightlier gouerned by one, namely the Bishop of Rome, then by many Bishops, of whyche euery one fully should haue care, as touching his owne portion: So myght the Iewes haue alledged, that their kingdome shoulde be farre better gouerned by one, then by many. And they might haue spoken that with muche more likelyhood, when as the land of Chanaan extendeth not so farre as the Church, & very many thinges as touching ciuil matters maye be better executed by a Kyng that is absent, then the Church which extendeth most largely, can be gouerned of a Pastor that dwelleth in Regions most farre.
Fire commeth out of Abimilech, Tirannes oppresse and gouerne not. bicause oppression taketh his beginning of Tirannes. So sayd Samuel vnto the Hebrues, that the king would make theyr children Carters, their daughters handmaidens, and compel them both to eare and tyll their ground, and take awaye from them their best Oliue gardens and vyneyardes. Neither was that which Samuel rehearsed, the right of a king and appointed of God, but that, which as the Prophet saw, kings would afterward vsurpe. Otherwise the law of a king is contained in Deut. the .xvii. chap. From the Pope, as it is here said, there is come foorth a fyre, whiche hath wasted and corrupted all Churches.
But it is meete to consider what the profitable and fruitful trees answered when they were required to take vpon them a kingdome. Holy men wyl not be promoted aboue other men. They saide they were content with their own good thinges: and therefore they would neither receaue a kingdome, or suffer anye alteration of their state. After the same maner euen holy and godly men doo. Ambrosius very much and long time resisted, bycause he would not be created bishop of Millane. Augustine also many wayes laboured to be no Elder or Bishop. And among the Ethnikes Numa Pompilius long time & much deferred, before he would take vpon him y e kingdom of Rome. Diocletianus, although before he gouerned very tirānically & very cruelly, yet after y t, he resigned it, & being desired to take vpon him the Empire again, he vtterly refused it. Saul also (to turne to the holy history) hid him self among the stuffe & burthens, when he should be publikely consecrated. But now a daies, bicause we haue thornes and brambles euery where, al men with a wonderful ambicion desire to be created Bishops or Popes, and by their tumult and importunity, all Christendome is in a maner shaken. Wherfore it is the part of good men to be content with their vocation, and not rashly to demit themselues vnto that vocation which is against y e word of God: especially when in that vocatiō, wher in they are placed of God, they may be both beloued of him, & also profitable vnto mē: as the Oliue tre, vine tree, & fig tree in this Apology testify of thē selues.
But how answered the Oliue tree, that his fruit is much made of, not onely of men, but also of God? That is therefore so said, bicause God in his tabernacle would haue lightes burning, Oblation. which wer maintained with the purest oyle. Farthermore, Minacha, whither it wer of meale, or of graynes, of fruite, or of fine cakes, it was cōmaūded to be ouersprinkled with oyle. Moreouer, Priests, Prophets & Kinges, wer annoynted with oyle. Also with oyle wer made many plasters, salues, cered clothes, and diuers and manifold medicines. And in many other countries, for want of aboundaunce of butter, meates are seasoned wyth oyle. And in the Psalme .104. it is said, that it is good to beautify the face. Therfore it is not absurdlye sayde, that both God and man make much of this liquor. But in that it is said, that wyne maketh God mery, it ought not so to be vnderstand, as though God either drinketh, or hath neede of wyne, to make him mery: but bicause in sacrifices pouringes out of wine were had. And as the Rabbines declare: the Leuites in the oblation of sacrifices, did then begin to sing with the voice, trumpets, and harpes, when the wyne was poured out.
¶Of wyne and dronkennes.
BVt bicause very manye vntemperate men, being reproued for dronkennes, are wont by this sentence to excuse their sinne, which otherwise is most filthy, saying that they abuse not wyne, forasmuche as they vse it to that ende, for which it was inuented, and created of God, namelye that men wyth it shoulde make them selues mery: A diuision of that which shal be intreated of. therefore I thought it good to refell their wantonnes. Wherfore first I wil declare the iust vse of wyne. Afterward I wyll shewe the abuse thereof, teaching it to be against the law of God. Then wil I bring examples, manifestly to open that the abuse of it is a thing as wel damnable as filthy and detestable. Moreouer I wil rehearse the horrible effectes of this euyll. And lastly I wil answer to those cauillations and sophistical argumentes, by which the Epicures defend dronkennes, and the abuse of wyne.
1 As touching the first I deny not, but that wine hath excellent properties. For it quencheth thirst, Healthful and honest vses of wyne. which might also be done with water, but not so commodiously: bicause wine in quenching of thirst, maketh a man strong, and engēdreth 2 spirites, whereby nature is very much recreated. Farther, it is medicinable for colde and weakenes both of the stomake, and also of the other powers, whiche serue for the life of man. Wherfore Paul writeth vnto Timothe to vse wine for 3 the stomacke, and often diseases thereof. It is sometimes also not vnprofitably occupied outwardly for woundes. Wherefore in the .x. of Luke it is writtē, that the Samaritane bound the woundes of him whom he found halfe dead, and poured 4 wine and oyle in them. Moreouer wyne maketh mery, and helpeth not a lytle to driue away sadnes and heauynes of the minde. And therfore Salomon writeth in his Prouerbs the .31. chap. Geue strong drinke to them which ar heauy, & wyne to them that haue griefe of hart. Let them drinke and forget their pouerty, and no more remember their sorrow. And we rede in the .104. Psalme, wine reioyceth the hart of man.
The wonderful liberality of God towardes men.For so great was the goodnes of God towards men, that he would geue vnto them not onely thinges necessary to lyue by, but also largely bestow on them delicates: bicause properly and by himselfe he delighteth not in the pensiuenes, sadnes, and heauines of men, but desireth to haue them liue holilye, and godlyly, with an honest and holy mirth of hart. Wherfore he hath graunted vnto thē, not onely the vse of wine, but also oyle, and most pleasant odours, also flesh, and likewise diuers and manifold kindes of meate. Vndoubtedly the vse of wyne is sometimes profitable vnto those, which ar recouered of their diseases, & must be restored to their old health, and as a certaine Philosopher sayth, a heuines & certaine bitternes of old men are by it likewise mitigated and lenified, as hoppes, which otherwise are most bitter, become swete, being stiped in water. But we [Page 162] must take heede that we keepe a measure, We must keepe a measure in drinking of wyne. otherwise the gladnes which by wine is sought, is easely turned vnto most great heauines. For the intemperance of wine doth easely lose his vtility. Yea if men come to dronkennes, then is the vse of wine a very heauy thing, and ful of daunger. Wherfore it is necessarye to put a difference betwene the vse and abuse therof.
Moreouer, this is to be added, that to haue to much drinke, or to be droonke, A distinction of dronkennes. Marsilius Ficinus. may be taken two wayes, either properly, or Metaphoricallye. This difference Marcilius Ficinus plainly teacheth in the argumēt of his Dialogue de Iusto, and maketh one kinde of dronkēnes aboue the Moone, or celestial, stirred vp by drinking of heauenly drinke, wherby the minde being set without it selfe, and aboue it selfe, forgetteth al mortal diseases, and onelye considereth thinges diuine, by the brightnes wherof, first it waxeth dimme, but after that it somewhat tasteth the sauour of them, it is by a new heate chaunged from his first habite or quality, whereby whithin a while it clearely beholdeth spiritual thinges, and whilest it healthfully tasteth them, it is with great fruit nourished. Wherfore it is written in the Psalme: we shal be made drōken of the plentifulnes of thy house. Musaeus. Orpheus. Yea and Museus an auncient Poet saith, that the reward of vertue, is perpetual drō kennes. And Orpheus before Museus said, that the same was signified by the ceremonies and holy seruises of Dionisius. The other kinde of dronkēnes he sayth is vnder the Moone, and worldlye, which is stirred vp of drinke called Letheus, that is, carnal drinke, whereby the minde being set without it selfe, and vnder it selfe, it forgetteth things diuine, and doteth. Neither is it to be doubted, but that this kinde of dronkennes is vtterly to be auoided. Of the first kinde of dronkennes, which is Methaphorical, there is plaine mencion made in the Prouerbs of Salomon, where wysedome stirreth vp men to drinke wine, whiche she hath set foorth on her table, plentifully and aboundantly. Yea and Christ also our Sauiour, which is the true wisdome, promiseth vs such a wyne in the kingdome of heauen. By Translation also is described the wyne of compunction and furye, which God wyl geue the vngodly to drinke, wherby they shal become mad, and according to their desertes be turned into furiousnes.
But leauing these Methaphores, Dronkennes condemned by the holye scriptures. let vs returne vnto dronkennes properly taken, wherof we now intreate, & let vs declare by testimonies of the holye scriptures, that suche abuse of wyne is prohibited and forbidden. To the Ephesians Paul saith: Be ye not made dronke with wine, wherein is wantōnes. But be ye filled with the spirite, speaking to your selues by Psalmes, Himnes, & spiritual songes. Vpon which place Ierome saith: Ierome. we cānot at one time be filled w t wine and the holy ghost: For the Apostle putteth these thinges as contraries, euen as we cannot serue two maisters. He that is filled with the spirit, hath wysedome, meekenes, shamefastnes, and chastity: and he which is filled with wyne, hath folishnes, furiousnes, malepertnes, and filthy luste. They which are not fylled with wine, can easely sing Psalmes, Himnes, and spiritual songes: which thing they cannot do, which haue gorged themselues with wyne. The same Paul also writeth: Haue no care of the flesh, for the lustes thereof. And Christ by expresse woordes saith vnto his Disciples: Take heede your hartes be not ouercom with surfeting and dronkennes. And in the old testamēt in the Prouerbs the .31. chap. it is written: Geue not wine vnto kinges. And in the .23. chap. Looke not vpon the wine when it is red, and when it sheweth his coulour in the cup, and goeth downe pleasantly. And in the .2. chap of Ecclesiastes, Salomon saith, y t he thought to geue his hart to wine and pleasant thinges, and at the length he founde that this study and purpose was mere vanity. Laughter (saith he) I thought to be errour: and I said vnto ioy, why doest thou in vaine deceaue? This mirth of wyne and pleasant thinges, ought not to be often vsed of holye men, for as muche as Christ hath taught that they ar blessed which mourne: they (saith he in Mathew) shal receaue consolation. But in Luke the .7. chapter it is added, that they shall [Page] laugh. And it is the surest way, that we presently want some ioy, to laughe perpetually. In the .v. of Esay it is written, wo vnto you which rise vp carely to follow dronkēnes, and to drinke euen til night, to be inflamed with wyne: and the harpe, and viole, timbrel and pipe, and wine are in your feastes. &c. And againe in the same chap. wo vnto you that are mighty to drinke wine, and are stronge men to mingle dronkennes. Ioel also in the first chapter writeth: Awake ye vp which are dronken with wine. And this is not to be passed ouer, that in Leuiticus, Aaron and his sonnes are cōmaunded not to drinke wine, before they come to sacrifice before the Lord. And Paul twise commaundeth that the Ministers of the Church should not be geuen to much wine. And when he counselled his Timothe to vse wyne for the stomake and diseases, he addeth that it should be but a litle, least he should let lose the bridle to dronkennes. In the olde law also the vse of wyne was forbidden the Nazarites: and the Rechabites are in Ieremy commended, bicause at their fathers commaundement they abstained from wyne: at which time yet they knew that these thinges were written, which nowe in the history we haue in hand, as cōcerning wine, namely that with it both God and men ar made mery, and that also which is written in the .104. Psalme, that wine maketh mery the hartes of men. Wherfore let vs gather that these are not contrary, to vse wine temperatly and moderatly, and that it was geuen of God, to make vs mery in a due time, and in a right vse.
There are certaine tymes wherin myrthe is not cōueniēt.Neither ought we to be ignoraunt of this, that some suche tymes chaunce, wherein it is not meete for Christian & godly men to geue them selues to mirth: sometimes we must mourne for the synnes which we haue committed. And somtimes we are troubled with very grieuous miseries: and when we are vnder the hand of the rod of God, we must pray more vehemently, wherunto fastings and chastning of the body much helpeth: which thing Paul declareth in his first Epistle vnto the Corrinthians, when he saith, that it is lawful somtimes for the husband and wife to depart one from an other for a season, but yet with the mutual consent of them both, that they may geue themselues to fastings and praiers: although we must not for such abstinence appoint any certain dayes of the yere, but leaue the time to the prudence of the spirite. Howbeit this reason maketh much against those, which contend that we must continually drinke, that at no time we may want mirth. Yea and the same Apostle sayd of him selfe: I chasten my body, and bring it in to bondage. By which saying he admonished the Corrinthians by his example to bridle the lustes. Ther might be manye more examples rehearsed out of the holy scriptures, manifestly to declare, that both dronkennes, and also to much vse of wyne are prohibited. But these shal be sufficiēt at this time. And this onely wyl I adde, that euen the verye Ethnikes knewe this thing also. Plato. Testimonies of the Ethnikes. Seneca. Plato in his .7. booke de Legibus, toward the ende writeth, that Minos by his lawes prohibited the Cretenses, that they shoulde not drinke together to dronkennes. And Seneca saith in his .84. Epistle: Dronkēnes is nothing els then a voluntary madnes. And straight way after: The quality of dronkennes continuing many daies, is furiousnes. Moreouer, they which striue wyth cuppes, although they ouercome other in taking much wine, yet wil they or nyl they, they are ouercome of the tonnes. And it is filthy for a man to take in more then he is able to receaue, and not to know the measure of his stomake.
Hitherto we haue sufficiently declared, that the abuse of wine is both against the holy scriptures, and also humane reason. Now let vs proue the same by examples: that they which wil not beleue by the sentences before alledged, maye yet at the least be taught by these examples. Noah a great man, iust, and loued of God, The dronkennes of Noah. who saw two constitutions of the world (for he liued both before and after the flood) is set foorth vnto vs, as an example vtterly to auoid dronkennes, when as he hauing droonke more wyne then was meete, laye in the tabernacle most filthely naked, and his priuy partes, which wer wont to be couered, he left [Page 163] bare and vncouered: and he which was wont to bee a schoolemaster of vertues, was a great offence vnto his children. Cham mocked him: the other two sonnes of a better and holier nature, were sory, and very much ashamed of their fathers filthines. By this act it is sufficiently declared, that shame, derision, and offence follow dronkennes.
But of thys synne wee haue a notable example in Lot, The dronkennes of Lot. who vndoubtedlye dranke not immoderately, to the end he would abuse his daughters, and to commit incest, but to put away cares and griefes which hee had taken, for the ouerthrow of the .v. Cities, for the losse of his deare wyfe, and also of his substaunce. Hee woulde also comforte hys Daughters, that they shoulde not take to muche thought, specially for the losse of their mother: although he ought to haue inuented other wayes of comforting. But this I speake onely, least any man shoulde thinke that he did with his will drinke to muche, to pollute him selfe with most fylthy lustes: Yet for all that, to muche aboundaunce of drinke was the cause of hys most vyle incest, being otherwyse an olde man, and in a tyme farre oute of purpose, for asmuche as the iudgementes of God were declared agaynste the fylthy lustes of the fyue Cities. And which is wonderfull, wyne so alienated Lot from hym selfe, that he vnderstoode not with what women hee had companyed. Wherfore rightly sayth Seneca in his .84. Epistle before alledged: Seneca. They whych are droonke doo many thinges, which afterward when they are sober, they are ashamed of. Lot sought to make hym selfe mery by wine, and he incurred a perpetuall heauynes. Let them therefore which seeke to be made mery with ouermuche wyne, remember that they put them selues in to a moste present daunger, and by that meanes may easely throw them selues headlong into most greuous wycked actes.
Neither is y t to be allowed which some alledge for an excuse, that such euents are vncertaine, so that a man cannot tel for certain, whether he which drinketh to much shal fal into these filthy thinges or no: bicause the thing is so surely knowen, that euen the daughters of Lot being yet virgins, vnderstoode it, namelye that the olde man by wyne, might be driuen to fylthye lust, and so be deceaued, that also he had to doo euen with his daughters. Who wil therfore say that he knoweth not that which they vnderstoode? Lot was deceaued and snared by his daughters, but such as loue to muche mirth, that is, dronken men, snare themselues, & openly fight against them selues. God punisheth drōkēnes wi [...]h most grieuous punishmentes. Why the holye scriptures se [...] forth the history of Lot. Neither thinke they with themselues that God with most grieuous punishmentes, taketh vengeaunce of dronkēnes, and suffreth the abuse of his gift most precious, long vnpunished. These bibbers are wont somtimes to bring forth Lot as a patrone of their intemperance, Neither doo they marke, that the holy scriptures do set foorth the historye of him as an horrible, and in a maner tragical example. God did not meanely punish that mans dronkennes: for he had to doo with his daughters, they conceaued by him, and the thing coulde not bee dissembled: incestious chyldren were borne, Ammon and Moab, of whom came the Nations of the Ammonites and Moabites, which were both hated of God, and enemyes vnto the Israelites. Lot him selfe (as it is to be thought) was alwayes sory for the crime which he had committed, and was talked of, of euerye man.
And seyng that the testimony of the holy Scriptures is extant, and shall remayne vnto the ende of the world: as often as they are red, so often is noted and spreade abroade hys infamy. If so be that God spared not a man, otherwise holy, the Neuew of Abraham, and harborer of Aungels: what will hee doo to those glottons and Hogges, which hauing no vertue, day and night, eyther lye or syt dronken? That whych we reade happened once vnto Lot, these men euerye daye exercise it.
But that which our dronkards alledge of Lot, Dronkēnes obiected to Cato. the Romanes in the old time alledged of Cato, excusing their dronkēnes, bicause that most graue mā somtymes [Page] in the night recreated his minde, not vndoubtedlye in bolling and bibbing immoderatly, but in sipping and drinking a litle, adding therwithall muche honest talke. Neither considered they, that that good man was sober al the whole day, labored muche in determining and iudging of causes, in consulting with other Senatours concerning the publike wealth, in hauing to do with the people, in executing the office of a Magistrate, in reading and writing. These should haue imitated these good and honest studies.
But let vs go on in rehearsing examples. Ammon Dauids sonne was slayne of Absalon, not assuredly when he was sober, but when in the banket hee was more mery then was meete, by drinking of to much wyne. And as it is declared in the latter end of the .1. boke of Machab. Simon the high priest was with his .2. sonnes Mattathias & Iudas slayne of his sonne in law, when in the feast they wer in a maner dronken with ouermuch wine. And the history of Iudith (although it be not found in the Canon of the Iewes) sheweth that Holofernus, otherwyse a most fierce Captain of an host, was so ouerwhelmed with wine, that w t smal a doo he was behedded of a woman. I might adde how Sisera being dronken, was slaine of Iahel, although his drinke was milke, and not wine.
And if that we wyl besides these reade ouer the histories of the Ethnikes, we shal finde many and notable examples of those, which wer most grieuously hurt by dronkēnes. Alexander of Macedonia. Alexander of Macedonia, the Conqueror of the world, was most filthely ouercome with wine, and being dronke, slew Clitus his friend, most valiant and faithful, whose diligence, industry, labour, prudence, and strength, he had in warres long time vsed, to his great commodity. Wherfore when he had slept after his wine, and being awaked, and remembring the wicked act that he had committed, he was so ashamed and sory, that he wished himselfe dead. But yet he amended not the vice of dronkennes: yea once afterwarde hee droonke so much wine in one night, that he fel into a feuer, and for that he would not temper himselfe from wine, within a while after he died. Wherefore Seneca in his 84. Epistle already alledged, writeth that Alexander, which had escaped so many daungers, and vanquished thinges most dificile, by intemperaunce of drinking, M. Antonius. and by that herculaue and fatall cup, perished. M. Antonius, otherwyse a stout and valiant Emperour, a vanquisher in many battailes, so laded hymself sometimes with wine, that euen in the Tribunall seate in the morning, before the people of Rome, whilest he was sitting to geue iudgement, he was compelled to vomite. And in Egipt he vsed much drinking, wherby he could do nothing noblye, The feast of the Lapithares & Centaures. but was by Octauian driuen most filthylye to flight. What the Poetes write of the feaste of the Lapithares and Sentaures, it is better knowen, then I shall neede now to recite. And I thinke I haue nowe brought sufficient examples: whych beyng diligently considered, serue muche to the detestation of dronkennesse.
The effectes of dronkennes.But they which are not feared from the filthynes thereof by the woords of God, which we haue first set, and doo not abhorre it, being perswaded by the examples now alledged: shall peraduenture be wonne, and led from it, by considering of those euyls, which spring of the abuse of wyne. It is expedient that the tree be knowen by his fruites. And vndoubtedly suche a thing is dronkennesse to be counted, as the fruites are knowen, whych spring of it. But that we may speake orderlye, The hurtes & damages comming of dronkennes. wee wyll deuide the euyls thereof by their subiectes: for it hurteth the body, vexeth also the mynde, wasteth the goods, and is hatefull to our neighbours.
As touching the body, by dronkēnes come oftentimes sodaine deathes, dissolucions of the members, Apoplexia is, when mans sē ses are taken a way. the disease called Apoplexia, and sundry and miserable chaunces. For the smoothe and plaine ground is vnto dronkardes a denne: for they fall, breake their legges, their armes, and sometimes their neckes: and are burnt when they fall into the fyre. The liuer is inflamed with to much drynke, [Page 164] the head is pained, the members are made weake and tremble, the senses ar corrupted, the natural heate is ouerwhelmed with ouermuche wyne, the stomake which is ouer largely distended, is sicke with crudity or rawnes, and with intollerable paines: the whole body is in a maner inflamed, and the thirst is augmented. Dronkardes lye groueling like blockes, and so are beriued of their strength, that neither head nor foote can do their office. Wherfore it is written in the .23. Prouerb. 33. chap. of the Prouerbs: To whom is wo? to whom is sorrow? to whom is strife? to whom is sighing? and to whom are woundes without cause? Or to whom is the rednes of the eyes? Euen to them that tary long at the wine, and to thē that go and seeke largely to poure in wine. Looke not vpon the wine when it is red, and when it sheweth his coulour in the cup, and goeth downe pleasantly: in the ende thereof it wil bite like a Serpent, and put out his sting lyke a Cockatrice. Thine eyes shal looke vpon straunge thinges, and thine hart shall speake leude thinges. And thou shalt be as one that sleepeth in the middest of the sea, and as he which sleepeth in the top of the mast of a shyp. They haue striken me, and it payned me not, they haue brused me, and I felt it not. When I awake, I wyll seeke it againe. &c. And behold with how many punishments God afflicteth drō kardes. Esay in his .v. chapter, agreeth with Salomon: For he also saith, Esay 5. wo vnto those which are mighty and strong to drinke wine. And in the same v. chap. hee saith that dronkardes regarde not the woorke of the Lorde, neither consider the woorke of his handes. Moreouer, to suche men is wo: Ierome. bicause (as Ierome vpon that place writeth) they are most vnhappye, who being from morning to night occupied in dronkēnes, glotony, and sundry pleasures, they vnderstande not the woorkes of the Lord in them: and not considering wherfore they were created, slepe out in a maner their whole life. Wherfore Ioel cryed out vnto them: Ioel. 1. awake vp ye dronkards, weepe and howle all ye that drinke wine. But dronkardes are not by these cryes stirred vp, for they do not onely sleepe, but seme to be in a maner buryed. Wherefore Vergil aptly saith of a Citye, Virgil. that it was buryed wyth sleepe and wyne.
But now let vs see how muche the soule or mynde is hurt with dronkennes. How much the mynde is hurte with wyne. Dronkardes are oftentimes striken with the spirite of amasednes, and are turned in a maner into furiousnes: they become like brute beastes, so that there seemeth to remaine in them no vnderstanding. It is a grieuous thing wythout doubt for a man to wounde himselfe, or to depriue himselfe of any member, but of his own free wyll to take away his minde from himselfe, it is an euyll intollerable. In Hosea the .4. chap. it is woorthely written, that wyne and dronkennes take away the hart. And in the .xix. of Ecclesiasticus it is written: wyne and women make wise men to apostatate, that is, to depart from right institutions, so that they are no more their own men: for they are withdrawen from their office and vertue, & also fal from the right trade of life. And in the same booke the 31. chap. it is written, wine dronken with excesse, engendreth bitternes of mind with braulinges and skeldinges. Dronkennes encreaseth the courage of a foole tyl he offend: but it diminisheth his strength. In these woords ther is an elegant Antithesis, namely that wine increaseth the courage & spirits, & causeth greater audacitye, but it diminisheth and weakeneth the strength. Plato. Wherefore Plato in his .vi. Dialogue de Iusto, at the beginning: A dronkard (saith he) hath a tirrannical hart, for he would rule all men as he lust, and not by any reason or lawe. Dronkennes also bringeth obliuion of lawes and ryghte. Wherefore Salomon saith in his Prouerbes, that wine must not be geuen vnto kinges, least peraduē ture they drinke, & forget the law ordained, & change the iudgement of al y e children of the poore. Plato also writeth in his .3. booke de Repub. y e dronkēnes may be suffred in any mā, rather then in a Magistrate. Plato. For a dronkē man knoweth not the groūd wheron he is. And if a Magistrate be dronk, thē hath y e keper nede of a keper. This is moreouer to be added, y t ther is nothing kept secret wher drō kēnes [Page] raigneth. Bicause it openeth not onely the secrete partes of the body, but also of the minde. And in drinking ar poured out woordes vnshamefast, foolish, vnapt, Horace. and wycked. Wherefore Horace describing the effectes of dronkennes, sayth: What is it that dronkennes committeth not? It discloseth thinges secrete, it establisheth hope, and thrusteth foorth the vnarmed man into the battaile. It taketh away the burthen from careful mindes, it teacheth artes. Whō haue not full cups made eloquent? and whom being in extreme pouertye, haue they not made careles? Plato. And Plato in his first booke de Legibus, toward the ende saith thus: When a man drinketh wine, at the first it maketh him cherefullyer: afterward the more he drinketh, the greater and better hope he is in, and feeleth him selfe stronger. Then, as though he were wyse, the man is fylled wyth that confidence, liberty and audacity, that without feare he both saith & doth whatsoeuer pleaseth him. The same Plato in his .vi. Dialogue de Legibus, sayth: He which is fylled wyth wine, is stirred vp with a woodnes, both of mynde and body, and both draweth, and is drawen euery where. And a dronkard is as a man out of hys wyt.
Seneca. Seneca in his third booke of Natural questions, the .20. chap. saith, that dronkennes tyl it be dryed vp, is madnes, and with ouermuch heauines is brought on sleepe. And in his .60. Epistle to Lucillus toward the end: One houres dronkennes recompenseth his long madnes, with the wearynes of a long time. And in the .84. Epistle: Dronkennes draweth out al vice, and kindleth it, and detecteth it. It putteth awaye all shamefastnes, whose nature is to resist euyll endeuours. Where to much power of wyne possesseth the minde, whatsoeuer euyll lay hidden, bursteth foorth. Dronkennes maketh not vices, but brinketh them to light. In dronkennes, he that is proude, his pride encreaseth, crueltye in the cruel man, malice in the enuious man, & all vices ar detected & brought to light. By it a man forgetteth himselfe, speaketh doubtful and stamering woordes, it causeth vnconstant eyes, a reeling pace, disines in the hed, and the house to seme to go round about, tormentes in the stomake, when the wyne boyleth, & it distē deth euen the bowels. Cruelty for the most part followeth dronkennes, for M. Antonius, wonderfully reioyced at the heades and members of the banished mē, that wer brought him at a feast. Also in the .20. chap. of the Prouerbes it is written: Wine maketh a mocker, and strong drinke a troublesome fellow. Whosoeuer erreth in it, shal neuer be wyse. But bicause there are some which boast that they can drinke a great deale of wine and be stil sober, & of a sound iudgement, I desire them to harken vnto Seneca in the Epistle now alledged, who sayth: Let such men also say that by drinking of poyson they shal not dye, and by takyng of poppy they shal not sleepe, Barefoote. and by drinking of Elleborne they shal not cast forth and purge whatsoeuer is in the inward partes.
The discōmodities of wine when it is excessiuely dronken, which we haue hitherto rehearsed, Dronkēnes wa [...]eth the goods pertaine both vnto the bodye and vnto the mynde. But nowe must we adde, how it bringeth hurt vnto our substance & goods. In the Prouerbes the .21. chap. it is written: He which loueth wine and fat thinges, shal not be riche. And in the same booke the .23. chap. it is thus written: Keepe not company with wine bibbers, and those that deuour flesh. For the bybber and the glotton shall be brought vnto pouertye, and he which geueth himself to much sleeping, shal be clothed wyth torne garmentes.
Dronkards discommodious to the [...]e neighborsAnd how muche discommodious dronkardes are vnto their neighbours, it is easye to see. They are iniurious, and rayle vpon those whom they meete. And being in their fury, they fal into filthy lustes, and so easelye polute other mens Spouses and wiues. And by horrible meanes they rage against the famelies of their neyghbours. They are an euyll example, yea and offence vnto other Citizens. And whilest they spend and consume their substaunce vpon wyne & dronkennes, they haue no regarde to prouide thinges necessary for their own house. [Page 165] Yea, whilest they are in their dronken fury, they handle their innocent wife and children euilly, and defraude the poore of their almes, whiche if they lyued more sparingly, they might be able to bestow vpon them. They make them selues vnprofitable for the publike wealth, when as dronkardes can neither execute the office of a Magistrate them selues, nor yet wel ar they able to obey those that gouerne. They trouble also and infame the Church, wherefore they are seperated from it. For Paul in the .1. to the Corrin. the .5. chap. nombreth dronkardes with those, with whom we ought not so much as to eate. There is scarce anye euyll which cannot be adioyned vnto the effectes of dronkennes.
But to conclude the matter, An aunswer to those which defend ouermuch drinkyng. first we graunt vnto those (which doo naughtely vsurpe this place which we haue nowe in hand, and lay it for a coulour to defend the vice of dronkennes) that it is lawful to vse wine for necessity, for medicine, and also for mirth, but yet it must be tempered with sobriety, neither maye it excede a meane, yea it must agree with time, place, degree, age, and kinde. After this maner let the saintes reioyce before their God, namely with geuing of thankes, and celebrating diuine prayses. Neither Salomon in the .23. chapter of the Prouerbs, saith wo vnto those which drink wine, but vnto those which in it consume their time, which geue them selues to nothing but to drinking, contending who can drynke moste, prouoking one an other, and compelling others to drinke. These are reprehended, and not those whiche modestlye vse the gyft of God. Let men so make them selues mery with wine, that afterward they maye be more chereful to obey God, and to suffer heauy thinges, if neede bee. And let men beware they forget not them selues, that they ouerwhelme not their senses, and choke vp their strength. Neither is the holy scripture vngodlye and violently to be drawen vnto the licence of the flesh. Yea we ought so to bee readye that we may obey the Apostle, who sayd: It is good not to eate flesh, and not to drinke wine, if it should turne to the offending of the weake brethren. Let vs also remember that the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke, neither ar they commended of God, which can drinke more wyne, then the rest. The woorde of God is no defence for dronkennes, yea it detesteth it. We wil pleade therfore against these, with the doctrine of Ecclesiasticus, the .31. chap. where it is said: shew not thy selfe a man in wine, that is, shew not thy strength in drinking. For ther are some which try how strong and mighty they are in this intemperaunce, and also with ouermuch drinking of wine, do oppresse al the powers, both of the body and of the minde. The wise man goeth forward and sayth: for wine hath destroyed many. As the fornace proueth the hardnes of the swoorde in the tempering: so doth wine the hartes of the proude when they are dronke. Wine moderately dronken, is profitable for the life of man. What is his lyfe that is ouercome with wine? But it was created to make men mery: Wyne measurablye dronken, and in time, brinketh gladnes and cherefulnes of the minde. &c. These thinges may easely teache and answer those men, which vnder the pretence to make them mery, labour to defend and maintaine dronkennes.
Let them consider with them selues, that the gyftes of God shoulde neuer be seperated from the rule of modesty and temperaunce. Let them not forget that the Apostle in the Epistle to the Galathians, reckoned dronkennes among the woorkes of the fleshe. He also admonished the Romanes that they shoulde not be conuersaunt in Chambers, in eatynges and dronkennes. And to the Thessalonians he sheweth the filthinesse of thys vyce, when he sayth it pertayneth vnto the nyght. They which are droonke (sayth he) are dronke in the night: as though he would affirme it to be a thing vnwoorthy, to be seene by the light of the day. But as concernyng this thing, these are sufficient: Let vs now returne vnto the history. We haue alredy said what the Oliue and vine trees answered vnto the trees which woulde haue promoted them to a kingdome, and wee haue manyfestlye shewed how the Olyue and Vine trees serue, both for God, and for men. [Page] Of the fig tree there is no question: for he maketh no mencion of God, but onely saith, that he wyl not forsake hys sweetenes.
22 And Abimelech raigned .3. yeares ouer Israel.
23 And God sent an euyll spirite betwene Abimelech and the men of Sechem: and the men of Sechem brake their promyse to Abimelech.
24 That the iniury of the .70. sōnes of Ierubbaal, and their bloud might come and be layde vpon Abimeleche their brother, whyche had slayne them: and vpon the men of Sechem, whyche had ayded hym to kyll hys brethren.
25 So the men of Sechem set men in wayte for him in the toppes of the mountaynes: who robbed all that passed that waye. And it was tolde Abimelech.
Tirannye is of no long time. Abimelech exercised his tiranny three yeares, and no longer: for violence cā not be either perpetual, or of any long time. He iudged not the Israelites in setting them at liberty, neither did he them any good, but onely raygned. God at the length tooke vengeaunce, and made the bloode of the sonnes of Ierubbaal to redound vpon Abimelech and the Sechemites.
And he sent an euyl spirite betwene them, to reuenge the murther, which not onely Abimelech, but also the Sechemites committed. Abimelech was annointed king onely by the Sechemites, but (as the history here declareth) he vsurped his tiranny ouer all the Israelites.
God required the bloud of the sonnes of Ierubbaal at the handes of Abimelech and of the Sechemites. Vnles men do with iust punishmentes punish murthers, God by himselfe punisheth them.
¶Of Murther.
BVt to make the thing more plaine, twoo thinges seeme to be intreated of. First, what maner of murther is condemned by the word of God, & ought by the Magistrates to be punished. Secondly, who are guilty of thys crime.
As touching the first, we must know, that not euerye murther is condemned. For if one kil a man by chaunce, in exercising a thing honest and lawful, he incurreth not the punishment of Homicides. Wherfore in the old law there were graunted Cities of refuge. For in verye deede he kylleth not: but as it is there written, God (wythout whose wyll nothing is done by chaunce) deliuered him to be killed. A Iudge also or Magistrate, when he punisheth flagicious men, is not therefore a murtherer, bicause it is not he that killeth, but the law, yea rather God himselfe, who hath wylled, and also commaunded that it should so be done. Farthermore, he which is set vpon by theeues or enemyes in a solitarye place, or where he can not be holpen by other: if in defending him selfe, and according to the lawes, repelling violence by violence, hee slay a robber or theefe which inuadeth him, he is not guilty of murther: for as muche as in that case he is armed both by the lawes and by the Magistrate. For the publike wealth wyl not that a Citizen should so perishe: therefore it geueth hym leaue to defende him selfe by weapons. Cicero. By thys meanes Cicero defended Milo, bycause hee had slayne Clodius, who first set vpon him by snares. Also the woman Thecoites obtayned of Dauid, that the Magistrate shoulde not kyll her sonne, who had slaine hys brother, falling out in the fielde. They were alone sayth she, and therefore it is not knowen whyche of them inuaded one the other first. Souldiours also, when in iust warre they slay their enemies, commit nothing vniustly.
Wherfore that murther, which is to be punished, & cōdēned by y e lawes, is thē iudged to be cōmitted, when of purpose a mā is killed of priuate men. And they which wer to be codēned of this crime, wer not by y e Romanes called homicides, but sicarii. In y e law Cornelia, the title is de Sicariis & not de Homicidis. Sicarii. And they are so called, whiche do weare about them Sica, that is a shorte skayne for to kil a man, and by the figure Synechoche, by the worde sica is vnderstand all kindes of weapons. And not onely they whiche kill are guilty of this crime, but also they whiche either in dede or counsell doo helpe, and in theyr sayings and aydes haue a respect vnto this, how to kill a man. Yea the will is to be punished, The will is to be punished in this kynde of euill. althoughe it haue not successe: which thing in the ciuile iudgement is not vsed, but onely in three kinde of crimes, namely of manquellers, called Sicarii, of rauishers, and of traitors. Wherfore that manqueller is to be punished, which throweth a weapon at any man, to the end he would kil hym, or hauing that mynde, woundeth him, although he dye not therof, as it is had in the digest in the same title in the law Diuus, where Adrian y e Emperor answereth y t we must haue a respect vnto the wil, and not to the euente. And that is to be vnderstand, when the will manifesteth it selfe by any tokē. But I did not without cause say that all these things are thus, as touching ciuill iudgement: bycause otherwise before God the desire and decree of the minde, as touching all kinde of sinnes, are cōdemned for sinne. Christ sayth, he that beholdeth a woman and lusteth after her, hath already committed aduoutry in his heart. And that the will in those crimes is coūted for the facte, euen the holy fathers and Canons do decree. Ierome. Ierome vpon Esay (as it is in the title de Paenitentia, distinction the first, chap. Omnis) writteth: Ciprian. Thou hast not killed with the sworde, but thou hast killed with the will. Yea and Ciprianus in his Sermon de Mortalitate writeth, y t he which desireth martirdome, is a martyr before God. It is one thing (sayth he) for the will to want martirdome, & an other thing for martyrdome to want the wil. These thinges are had in the same destinction, chap. Nunquid. And in the same destinction, chap. Periculose, Augustine. Augustine is brought in, who sayth, y t the Iewes did no lesse kyll Christ then the Romanes, althoughe with their handes they inuaded him not. By this destinction he conciliateth the Euangelistes, who seme to disagree as touching the houre of the death of the Lord. One of them sayth, he was crucified the third houre, & the other, the sixt houre. Augustine affirmeth both to be true: Augustine. For the Iewes at the third houre cried Crucify, Crucify: wherfore as touching them, they slew y e Lord then, who yet was afterward at the sixt houre crucified by y e souldiers of Pilate.
But Abimelech and the Sechemites wer murtherers and parricides, not onely in wil, but in helpe, worke, and deede, and therfore it is no meruaile if God so seuerely punished them.
Furthermore we must cōsider, how meruelously and wonderfully God vseth the vngodly. By them (as we here see) he taketh vengeaunce of other vngodly, and sometymes by their labour, he both excerciseth and correcteth the iust. What more? They are his hangmen, whom also when he hath vsed, he destroyeth also at the last, either here, or after they be departed out of this life.
He sent an euill spirite betwene them. For they were stirred vp one agaynst an other. The Sechemites (as it is to be thought) against Abimelech, bicause he both oppressed and contemned them. And agayne Abimelech agaynst them, bycause (as the hystory declareth) they dispysed him. What contēpt is. Contempt consisteth in three thynges. And it is well knowen that by contempt is prouoked anger: for it is called an action, whiche pertayneth to estimation & opinion, bycause some thing semeth to vs not worthy of estimation, when peraduenture it is not so. Moreouer despising consisteth chiefly in thre thinges: for either we contēne onely in mind, when we despise any men & their goods, or when we do thē any discōmodity, not thereby to seeke our own gayne, but onely to reioyse at theyr discommodity: or lastly when we adde wordes or deedes: whiche haue ignominy or contumely ioyned with them. These thre things may [Page] we easely see in the Sechemites. First, they despised Abimelech, when they receaued Gaalus a souldier as a captayne, hauing Zebul appointed theyr gouerner by the kyng. And vndoubtedly they so receaued Gaal, y t they did put their confidēce in him. Wherfore it followeth that in mynde and estimation they despised Abimelech. Farthermore they dammaged him, when by conspiracyes they spoyled and slewe those that passed to and fro. These, whom they iniuried, pertayned vnto Abimelech, or at the least way, for that that he was king. Lastly they added reprochefull wordes, as we shal afterward heare.
Christ prohibited anger as the beginning of hatred, murther and destructiō, for he sayd: He that is angry with his brother, is worthy of iudgement. For anger and reuengemēt are seperate one from the other, onely as the roote & the fruit. For he that is angry with any man, if he hurt him not, that chaunceth, bycause either he can not, Kinges are vehemētly angry Homere. or els feareth the punishmēt of the lawes. He y t hateth hys brother (saith Iohn) is a murtherer. But amōg those which are counted very angry, kings aboue other are numbred, when they perceaue y t they are despised of their subiectes. Wherfore Homere sayth: Great is the anger of a kyng displeased.
The conspiracies of the vngodly are of no long tyme.Hereby we learne that the conspiracies of the vngodly can not continew lōg. They are in deede oftentymes ioyned together to do euill, but yet they are easely disseuered. The kings of the earth stoode vp, and the princes assembled together, agaynst the Lord and against his Christ. But the Lord whiche dwelleth in heauen, shall laughe at them, and the Lord shal haue them in derision. Theues, robbers, whoremongers, & such as conspire against the Church, publique wealthes, & princes, do oftentimes confederate together: but straightway great enemityes ryse vp amōgest them, and they betray one an other, yea and sometymes kill one an other. Aristotle. Wherfore wisely sayth Aristotle, that honesty is onely the sure foūdation of amity, bycause that whiche is honesty is not chaunged: but pleasant and profitable thinges, do not alwayes abide the same. Princes of our tyme, as often as they haue made league one with an other, haue afterward not only ben made enemyes, but they haue gone to warre one with an other. Wherfore Salomon rightly writeth in y e 11. chap. of the Prouerbes: Although y e vngodly cōspire, they shall not escape. Wherfore their fellowshippes are to be auoyded, and we must enterprise or go about nothyng, hauing confidence in the amity of the vngodly.
¶How Sinne dependeth of God.
NOw remayneth to examine how it is written that God sent an euill spirite betwene them. But bycause of that matter, I haue in an other place more more fully entreated, and will shortly speake more aboundauntly of it, here I will but briefly teache the thing.
The scriptures testifie, that sinnes sometymes haue a consideration of punishments: wherfore when it sayd that god punisheth & taketh vengeance of the vngodly by sinnes, he doth nothing vnmete of him selfe. For he bringeth not forth the deformity and filthynes of sinne, but is the author of iust punishment. For sinnes are to men euill, but vnto God, who vseth them, good. God planteth no new malice in the vngodly: but yet he vseth that malice whiche is in them by reason of originall sinne, and other sinnes whiche they adioyne vnto it. He suffreth it not to burst forth, but when it semeth good vnto him, he gouerneth and directeth it whether soeuer it pleaseth him. A Similitude. As the Phisition comming vnto the sicke person, doth by medicines drawe corrupt humors out of his body, and bringeth them out either by a purgation, or by a sweate, or vomite, or letting of bloud, as he iudgeth it best, yet doth he not graft in the sicke person naughty and corrupt humors: So God causeth to be brought to light our malice, whiche was not brought forth before, but lay hid within, to make manifest his iustice, and to opē our sinnes, and yet he suffreth them not to breake forth by chaunce or rashely, [Page 167] but ordereth and gouerneth them accordyng to his iudgement, that euen by thē he doth fulfill the limites of his prouidence. Wherfore Esay sayth that the kyng of Babilone was like an axe or staffe in hande of God: for he would force hym against the Iewes rather then against other nations. Wherfore y e malice of sinne is wholy ours, but the gouernyng, successe, and effectes therof ar vnder the rule of God, so that they can accomplish no more then he will suffer. Neither can the vngodly bring to passe those thinges whiche they go about agaynst euery man, nor also at all tymes, but they are gouerned accordyng to the determinations of God, whiche are most holy and iust. Neither is it absurde that one and the selfe same action, as it is gouerned of God, is both good and holy, but as it commeth of vs, it is vicious and corrupt.
And bycause we wil not go from our history, the sinne of cruelty and ambitiō, was vtterly Abimeleches. But that it should burst forth, and first destroy the famely of Ierubbaal, and thē the Sechemites: that is to be referred vnto the gouernment of GOD. Farthermore the disobedience and wicked desire of tumultes, was altogether of the Sechemites. But that it should burst forth, when the famely of Gideon should be punished: and that they rather chosed Abimelech to theyr kyng, then an other: and that their fury should rage agaynst him, rather then against any other: y t was of the gouernement of God, wherby (as the holy hystory sheweth) he sent betwene them an euill spirite, namely the deuill, by whose labour, enemities, and hatreds were on either side kindled, and wōderfully inflamed, by mete occasions seruing thereunto.
Farthermore we must consider, that God is bound vnto no man, God is fee & geueth hys grace not being d [...]ūe to geue vnto him his grace. For, if it shuld be geuē of dewty, then should it not be grace: & yet he neuer, either not geueth it, or els beyng geuen, taketh it away, but vpon iust cause. He in dede created man vpright, and being indewed with it: but yet he by sinning, spoiled both himself and his of it. And for as much as we are borne vnder originall sinne, and the children of wrath: to whom soeuer it is not geuen, it is iustly not geuen: and to whom soeuer it is geuen, it is freely geuen. Moreouer we dayly heape sinnes vpō sinnes: wherfore god in withdrawing it, is not to be accused of iniustice. For he cōpelleth no man to do euill, but euery man willingly sinneth: wherfore the cause of sinne is not to be layd in him. The cause of is not to be sayd in God. For seyng he procreateth not in vs wicked desires, he ought not to beare the blame, if wicked actions doo spring out of a corrupt roote of wicked affections: yea the goodnes of God is rather to be acknowledged, whiche is present, and so gouerneth the wicked affections, that they can not burst forth, nor be hurtefull and troublesome to any, but when he hath appointed to chasten some, and to call them backe to repē taunce or to punishe them.
Neither ought we to thinke that after the sinne of the first man, Whence ou [...] frowardnesse springeth. God created a wicked lust, and euill affection, to corrupte all our whole kynde. It was not so done: but nature when it departed from God, fell by it selfe from lyght to darkenes, from the right way to vice, and from integrity to corruptiō. And how good so euer it was before, it nowe degenerated into euill. Wherefore let this be holden for certayn, that sinne entred into the world by men, and not by God, as Paul testifieth to the Romanes. And in that Christ saith, Synne entred into the world by man & not by God. that the deuill when he lieth, speaketh of his owne, it is not to be vnderstand onely of himself, but also of his members, whiche when they lye or do euill, worke not by the worde of God, neither are they moued by the inspiration of the good spirite. And they excedingly reioyce, and haue great pleasure in those thinges whiche they do, so farre is it of, that they should be compelled by any violence.
Moreouer we must note, Of permission. that when either the Scriptures or fathers doo seme to affirme God to be the cause of sinne, this worde permission is not then so to be added, as thoughe he onely suffred men to synne, and by hys prouidence or gouernement wrought nothing as concerning sinnes. In dede he letteth thē not, thoughe he can, but vseth them, and sheweth in them his myght, and not onely [Page] his pacience, Augustine. whiche thing Augustine vnderstood right well, and in disputing agaynste Iulianus, he confuteth that sentence, wherin it is sayd that God suffreth sinne only according vnto pacience, and proueth y t his might is also therunto to be added by the wordes of Paul, who wrote vnto y e Romaynes: If God by much pacience hath suffred vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, to shewe forth his anger, & to make knowē his might. And vndoubtedly there are many things in the holy scriptures, which can not alwayes be dissolued by the worde of permission or pacience. For the heart of the kyng is sayd to be in the hād of y e Lord, so that he inclineth it whether soeuer it pleaseth him. And Iob testefieth, that it was so done as god would. But as touching the sinne of the first man, when yet nature was not viciated and corrupted, Of the sinne of the first man. we graunt, that the cause therof came from the wil of Adam, and suggestion of the deuil, and we say that God permitted it: bycause when he might haue withstanded and letted it, he would not do it: but decreed to vse that sinne, to declare his iustice and goodnes.
¶Whether we can resiste the grace of God, or no.
BVt now ariseth an other doubt, as touching our nature, as it is now fallen, & corrupt, whether it can resiste the grace of God, & his spirite beyng present, or no? There ar sundry degrees of grace of God, I thinke we must cōsider that there are as it wer sundry degrees of the helpe or grace of God: for his might & aboūdance is sometymes so great, that he wholy boweth the will of man, & doth not onely Counsel, but also persuade. And when it so commeth to passe, we can not departe from the right waye, but we are of Gods side, and obey his sentence. Wherfore it was sayd vnto Paul: It is hard for thee to kycke agaynst the prycke.
There is no violēce or coaction inferred to mans will.And yet must we not thinke that when it is so done, there is any violence or coaction brought vnto the will of man: for it is by a pleasaunt mouyng and conuersion altered, and that willing, but yet so willing, that the will therof cōmeth of God: for it is it, which willeth, but God by a stronge and most mighty persuasion maketh it to will. But somtymes that power of God and spirit is, more remisse: which yet (if we wil put therunto our endeuor & apply our will) we should not resiste: yea we should obey his admonishmentes and inspirations: and when that we do it not, we are therfore sayd to resiste him, and oftentymes fall. And yet this is not to be vnderstand as touching the first regeneration, but as concerning those whiche are regenerated, whiche are now endewed with grace and spirite. For the will of the vngodly is so corrupt and vitiate, that except it be renewed, it can not geue place vnto the inspirations of God, and admonishynges of the holy ghost: & it in the first immutatiō of mās conuersion, it onely suffreth: and before the renewyng, it continually (as much as in it is) resisteth the spirite of God. But the first parentes whilest they were perfect, if with y e helpe of grace beyng somewhat remisse, they had adioyned theyr endeuor, they might haue perfectly obeyed the commaundementes of God. But we although we be renewed, seyng grace is more remisse, remitting nothing of our endeuor, we shall not be able constantly and perfectly to obey the commaundementes of God, but yet we may be able to containe our selues within the boundes or limites of an obediēce begon: whiche thyng bycause we do not, therfore oftentymes we sinne, and greuously fall.
Why the grace of god worketh not alyke alwayes in vs.But why God geueth not his grace alwayes to his electe after one sorte, and one increase, but sometymes he worketh in them more strongly, and sometymes more remissedly, two reasons may be assigned: First, least we should thinke the grace of God to be naturall strengthes, which remayne alwayes after one sorte. Wherfore god would most iustly alter the degree & efficacy of his helpe: wherby we myght vnderstand that it is gouerned by hys wil, & not as we lust. Moreouer it oftentimes happeneth y t our negligence & slouthfulnes deserueth this variety.
Lastly let vs conclude the matter, that if we wil speake properly, it is not to be sayd that God either willeth or bringeth forth sinne, in that it is sinne: for what soeuer God willeth, & whatsoeuer he doth, it is good. But sinne, in y t it is sinne, is euil. Wherfore god neither willeth nor doeth it, in that it is sinne: yea he detesteth, prohibiteth, and punisheth it by his lawes. And if at any tyme it be sayd in the Scriptures, that he either willeth or worketh sinne in men, that must be referred vnto other considerations, whiche I haue declared both in an other place, and also now here. And this is sufficient as touching this question.
And God sent an euil spirit. By an euil spirit I vnderstād either the deuill, What is vnderstād vp an euil spirite. or wicked affections, or cruelty stirred vp to reuenge iniuryes, but the end was to take vengeaunce for the bloud of the sonnes of Ierubbaal.
The men of Sechem layd wayte agaynst hym. The cause of y e lying in wayt There may be three causes of their lying in wayte. First, bycause they would slay him as he passed by. And an other was, bicause they would not haue his souldiers to go to and fro. The third was, to shake of their yoke, and to declare that they were free. This was as much as to say, as they now nothing passed vpon his kyngly power.
It was tolde Abimelech. A short sentence & cut of: wherby yet we vnderstand that Abimelech passed not that way, for feare of fallyng into their snares.
26 Then came Gaal the sonne of Ebed & his brethren, & they went to Sechem: and the men of Sechem put their confidence in him.
27 Therfore they wēt out into the field, & gathered in their grapes, & trodde them, & made mery. And they went into the house of their God, and did eate and drinke, and cursed Abimelech.
28 And Gaal the sonne of Ebed sayd: Who is Abimelech? & who is Sechē, that we shuld serue him? Is he not the sonne of Ierubbaal, and Zebul is his hed officer? Serue rather the men of Hamor the father of Sechem. But why shall we serue hym?
29 And who will geue this people into myne hand, and I wil take awaye Abimelech? And he sayde vnto Abimelech: increase thyne army, and come out.
Here cōmeth an occasion of the euils: one Gaal by chaunce trauailed that way: the Sechemites hired him to be their ruler and captayne: and therefore puttyng their confidence in him, they go out into theyr vineardes, gather the grapes, and treade them, with great security. What this Gaal was, it appeareth not by the Scriptures R. Salomon thinketh he was an Ethnike. R. Salomon. The Sechemites were so afeard of Abimelech, that they durst not gather their grapes: wherfore they hired this man. First, now they go forth into the fielde, whiche thyng before they durst not doo: they make great ioye and mirthe. For in the olde tyme also (as it semeth) they vsed, as they do now a dayes, The wātōnes vsed at the gatheryng in of grapes. great wantōnes and liberty in the gathering in of the grapes: of whiche custome sprange the Comedyes and Tragedies with the Grecians. And when Bacchus returned a conquerer out of India, the people led daunces in honor of him at the wynepresses. Yea and the Chaldey paraphrast maketh mention of daunces in this place.
They went into the temple. It was also the manner among the Ethnikes, to geue thankes vnto God of their first fruites. But these men go into the temple of God, and rate, drinke, singe, and curse their kyng: and whom before they had annoynted, hym now they rayle vpon, and teare with reproches. And that in the temple, wherin before they had taken counsel for to make Abimelech their ruler. Such are the iudgementes of God. The place might haue admonished them: for out of it they gaue him money: but forgettyng all thynges, they curse him: Although the scripture expressedly declareth not, whether this tēple were that selfe [Page] same, where out they tooke the money in the beginning.
VVho is Abimelech? In the feastes of their wine gathering, they mocke theyr kyng, and that he beyng absent, and aboue the rest Gaal, much more greuously scorneth hym. Let vs marke the peruersenes of mans nature: if any sinne be by chaunce committed, it addeth not a iust remedy, but healeth mischief with mischief, & cureth sinne with sinne. They should haue called vpon the Lord, & haue repented: but these do far otherwise, they se that they haue done noughtly, & yet they go farther to reproches. This is the manner of the frowardnes of man: yea and Dauid when he had committed aduoutry, did not strayghtway repent, as he should haue done, but slewe Vrias. Iudas whē he had betrayed Christ, would not repent, but went and hanged himselfe, and so was author of hys owne death. So in a maner when we haue sinned, we go to worser sinnes. They ought not in deede to haue chosen Abimelech: but when he had once gotten the dominion of things, they should not so haue cursed him. Before the victory they sing a song of victory. There is nothyng more foolishe, then to contemne an enemy: for an enemy is not to be contemned, vnles he be ouercome. But this Gaal goeth childishely to worke. He exhorteth and prayseth the Sechemites, bycause they had shaked of their yoke. And he composeth his oration of thynges compared together. A cōparatis. He compareth Abimelech with Hamor the prince of that Citye, whom the sonnes of Iacob slewe by guile.
VVho is Sechem? Sechem in this place is not the name of the City, but of the chief man, namely the sonne of Hamor.
VVho is Abimelech? He is the sonne of Ierubbaal. He hath in vs neyther right, nor iurisdiction. Let hym goo and bragge amonge his owne. Sechem was in the olde tyme Lorde of this Citye, hym we ought to haue obeyed. But we slewe hym, howe then can we obeye this man? This comparison is nowe manifest youghe. But to increase the contempt more, Zebul (sayeth he) is the seruaunt of Abimelech, knowen well ynough vnto vs, whome he hath made ruler ouer hys Citye. Therefore we shall haue two Lordes. And we whiche woulde not obey the Lord of Sechem, shall we nowe obeye a seruaunt? It is an vnworthy thyng. The sēse of the oratiō of Gaal. Wherefore this semeth to be the sense of hys oration. If we shoulde haue serued, we should rather haue serued Sechem. But we haue not serued him: therfore neither will we serue this Abimelech.
Serue the sonnes of Hamor. As though he should haue sayd, serue them rather whiche were the auncient Lordes of this Citye: and if we haue not serued them, why should we serue Abimelech &c.
And who wyll geue thys people into my hande? The other parte of the oration contayneth an exhortation, wherein he exhorteth them, to make hym ruler ouer the people. VVho will geue? This forme of speakyng expresseth an affection of one y t wisheth. I (sayth he) if I were your ruler, would easely take away Abimelech. All the Sechemites were not of one opinion. Hereby it appeareth y t al the Sechemites were not of one opinion▪ There were many which thē also wer on Abimeleches side. Wherfore, I would to God sayth he, y t all you were of one mynd, I would thē easely take away the tyranne.
[...] is a turnyng of a speache to some person. And he sayd vnto Abimelech: Increase thyne army. He vseth an Apostrophe to Abimelech beyng absent: for it is easy to rayle vpon one being absent. He speaketh very Thraso lyke. It is as thoughe he should haue sayd: increase thy power how thou wilt, I set nothing at all by it.
30 And when Zebul the ruler of the Citye hearde the wordes of Gaal the sonne of Ebed, he was very angry.
31 And he sent messangers vnto Abimelech guilefully, saying: Behold Gaal the sonne of Ebed and his brethren be come to Sechem, and beholde they fortefy the City agaynst thee.
[Page 169]32 Nowe therfore aryse by night, thou and thy people that is with thee, and lye in wayte in the fielde.
33 And ryse vp early in the mornyng as soone as the Sunne is vp, and thou shalt assaulte the Citye, and when he and the people that is with hym, shall come out agaynst thee, do vnto them what thyne hande can finde.
Zebul was ruler vnder Abimelech, & when he heard these reproches agaynst his Lorde, he could not suffer them. Hereby let vs marke how foolishly the Sechemites behaued themselues, when they go about to fall from Abimelech, they retayne yet still his ruler in the City. So god oftētymes striketh men with madnes. Neither want there exemples of this thing euen in our tyme.
He sent messangers guilefully. The Hebrew word is Miremah or Tomah: and it signifieth nothyng els, but that he sent letters priuely, the summe whereof was: Gaal is chosen captayne agaynst thee, the Sechemites fence the City, that they may both defend thēselues within, and also exclude thee without. And such is the subtility of Zebul, that he not onely telleth what was done in the City, but also geueth Counsell what Abimelech should doo.
VVhen it is mornyng. The Hebrewe worde Tischim in the coniugation Hiphil from the roote Schacham signifieth to ryse early, the Grecians say [...]. And where in Luke the 21. chap. toward the end it is sayd, Turba mane conueniebat ad eum: that is: The people gathered vnto him in the morning: the old translation was (as Augustine also hath noted vpon this place of the Iudges ( Populus manicabat ad eum. But that worde is barbarous and straunge. Augustine. Manicare. In Greeke it is rede, [...].
And assalte the City. This is the Counsell of the ruler, that early in the mornyng he should besiege and assaulte the City by guile.
Do as thine hand shal find. By this Hebrewe phrase is signified nothyng els, but that so do thou as occasion shall serue.
34 And Abimelech rose vp early, and all the people that were with hym by nyght: and they laye in wayte agaynste Sechem in foure bandes.
35 Then Gaal the sonne of Ebed came out, and stoode in the entryng of the gate of the City. And Abimelech rose vp and the people that were with him, from lying in wayte.
36 And when Gaal sawe the people, he sayde to Zebul: Beholde there come people downe from the toppes of the mountaynes. To whome Zebul aunswered: The shadowe of the mountaynes semeth men vnto thee.
37 And Gaal spake agayne and sayde: Beholde there come people down from the nauel of y e earth, and one Captaine commeth by the waye of the playne of Moonenim.
Their lying in wayte was distributed into foure bandes, & when Gaal should go forth of the city, Zebul was together with him, & as far as we may coniecture, Zebul vsed double fraude: for first he sent a messanger vnto Abimelech, & signified vnto him, what he thought good to be done: & afterward he ioyneth himselfe deceatfully vnto Gaal, as though he would be on his side, that he might the safelyer do those thynges whiche he thought to doo, & that Gaal should not mistrust hym, Wherfore Gaal goeth forth, being nothing afeard of priuy enbushements, and together with hym went Zebul.
Thou seest the shadow of montaynes. Zebul derideth him, saying: They be shadowes [Page] whiche thou thinkest to be men.
Out of the nauel of the earth. This is a metaphoricall kynde of speache, for as the nauell appeareth aboue the belye, so are the mountaynes aboue the earth. Wherefore by the nauell he vnderstandeth the mountaynes from whence Abimelech descended with his company. And when he came from the mountaynes, it is very lykely (whiche thyng yet is not here mentioned) that he ouercame the guarrisons, whiche the Sechemites had put in those places.
38 And Zebul sayd vnto him: Where is nowe thy mouth, that sayd: Who is Abimelech that we should serue hym? Is not thys the people that thou haste despised? Go out nowe I praye thee, and fyght agaynst them.
39 And Gaal went forth before the men of Sechem, and fought agaynst Abimelech.
40 But Abimelech pursued hym, after he began to flye before hym, and many were ouerthrowen and wounded euen to the entryng of the gate.
41 And Abimelech dwelt at Arumah: and Zebul thrust out Gaal and his brethren, that they should not abide in Sechem.
42 And on the morowe the people went out into the fielde. And it was tolde Abimelech.
43 And he tooke the people and deuided them into three bandes, & laid wayt in the field, and looked, and behold the people were come out of the City, and he rose vp agaynst them and smote them.
44 And Abimelech, and the bandes that were with hym, rushed forwarde, and stoode in the entryng of the gate of the City: and the two other bandes ran vpon al the people that were in the field, and slewe them.
45 And when Abimelech had fought agaynst the City all the day, he tooke the City, & slew the people that was therin, and destroyed the City, and sowed salt in it.
Zebul coulde not holde hymselfe, but that he must nippe that Thraso. Thou didst contemne (sayeth he) Abimelech: nowe come out agaynst hym, and shewe howe valiaunt thou art.
VVhere is thy mouth? This worde Aphoh is ambiguous: for it signifieth where, and sometymes it signifieth now. But bycause it is before sayd where, it is mete to be taken here for Now, & so let vs say: Where is now thy mouth: vnles we will haue it a repetition, to say: Where, where is thy mouth: & by the figure Metonumia a mouth signifieth wordes: The manner of feareful men. for we speake with y e mouth. He vp braydeth him with the maner of feareful men: for cowardes are wont before the daunger stoutely to bragge: but when they come to the daunger, they are wonfully afrayd: but contraryly stoute men bragge not much, neither do they rashely thrust themselues into daungers. But in daungers they are most constant.
He went forth before the princes of Sechem. Gaal fighteth, but peraduenture not prepared, for Abimelech came vpon him vnlooked for. Yet Gaal goeth forth agaynst him, least peraduenture he should seme to be a coward.
And he fled before him. Abimelech followed hym when he fled, euen to the gates of the City, where he slewe many. Gaal thought he should haue ben receaued into the City, and for that cause he fleeth vnto the gate. But Zebul thrust hym out of the Citye. But thou wilt demaunde, by what meanes he coulde be excluded the City, whē as the Sechemites had made hym theyr ruler? Kimhi answereth, first that all the Sechemites stoode not against Abimelech: the people also [Page 170] (as they were of an inconstant mynde) when they sawe Gaal flye, turned theyr purpose, and fell to Abimelech. Hereby we gather howe foolishe it is to trust vnto men. Ieremy sayeth very well and wisely: Cursed be euery one, that putteth hys confidence in man, and maketh fleshe hys strength. The Sechemites put theyr confidence in Gaal, and at that very instant vsed hys ayde. Gaal on the other side putteth hys confidence in the Sechemites, and was thrust out of the City by them, in whom he did put his confidēce. This is the nature of the people, when fortune a lyttle fauoreth, strayght way they forsake them whō before they followed. The common people altogether depende vpon chaunce. Here may we see also an other foolishenes of the Sechemites, who thought that when they had cast out Gaal, Abimelech had straightway ben satisfied. For they goo forth into the fieldes, to excercise theyr rusticall workes, to gather in theyr grapes, I saye, or to tyllage. But it happened farre otherwise. For Abimelech placed two bandes to lye in wayte, and he hymselfe with hys hoste came vnto the Citye, that neyther they whiche were in the fieldes, coulde get into the City, nor they which were in the City coulde come out, to helpe theyr men in the fieldes. This pollecy of warre vsed Abimelech. They thought he had nowe bene pacified, but the anger of kynges are not straightwaye asswaged.
And he sowed salte. These moste miserable chaunces happened vnto the people, they whiche went forth into the fieldes, were killed, the Citye it selfe was besieged and conquered, the Citizens slayne, the Citye defaced and vtterly ouerthrowen. But Abimelech stomachyng the matter more then was meete, sowed salte in the Citye: whiche was a token of a wildernes and deserte. What the sowyng of salt signifieth. For salte dryeth the grounde, and maketh it vnfruitefull. In Hebrewe Malach signifieth salte. Thereof commeth the verbe Malach whiche is, to salte: but in the coniugation Niphal, Nimlah, is a verbe, whiche signifyeth to destroye, to breake downe and to waste. That woorde Ieremy vsed in hys 14. chap. and Dauid in hys 107. Psalme, GOD turneth a fruitefull lande into a saltishe grounde, that is, maketh it waste and deserte. In the yeare .1165. Fredrike Oenobarbus the Emperor ouerthrew Millane, and sowed salte there. For that City tooke parte with Alexander the thyrde being Pope, agaynst Cesar: whiche thyng Fredrike tooke in very yll part.
46 And when all the men of the tower of Sechem hearde it, they came to the castle of Thelberith.
47 And it was told Abimelech that al the men of the tower of Sechem were gathered together.
48 And Abimelech went vp to mount Zalmon, he and all the people that were with hym: and Abimelech tooke axes, and cut downe bowes of trees, and tooke them and layd them on his shoulder, and said vnto the people that were with him: That whiche ye haue sene me do, make hast, and do as I haue done.
49 Wherfore all the people cut downe euery man his bowgh, and followed Abimelech, and put them to the castle, and set the castle on fire with them. And al the men of the tower of Sechem dyed, about a thousand men and women.
50 Then went Abimelech vnto Thebez, and layde siege to it, and tooke it.
That tower of Sechem was a bulwarke of the Citye. Wherefore when the City was takē, the princes distrusting themselues, entred into an other inward holde, where also was a temple: and it was called the house of the couenaunt of God: for the Israelites forsaking the couenant of the true God coupled themselues [Page] vnto straunge Gods.
And it was told Abimelech. Mount Zalmon was nighe vnto that hold, whether Abimelech and his people got them vnto: for he had determined to burne that castell and temple whiche was in it. Neither ought we to meruaile, that y e temple was so fensed, Temples were wont to be builded in castels. when as it was the maner so in the old tyme. For Rome, when longe a go it was taken and burnt of the Senones, the Capitolium, where in was the temple of Iupiter, remayned safe. Yea and Iosephus sayth that when Ierusalem was besieged of Titus, the temple was a strong bulwarke for y e City. But the cause why the Sechemites got them thether, was not onely bycause the place was so well fensed, but also bycause they had a supersticious opinion of Baal: for they thought that he would be with thē, & defend his temple. So foolish men, when they haue in deede no religion in their mynde, yet they put their confidence in holynes of places, and wōderfully trust in images & temples, & also in reliques of saintes. But thereby they are nothing holpen, but to their destructiō they are slayne euen in temples, as we rede it happened now vnto these men.
[...]. And by them they set the castle on fire. There is in these wordes Alleosis of the gender, for the Masculine gender is put for the Feminine, for as much as this relatiue Eos that is them, is referred to the bowes, which in the Hebrew is a word of the Feminine gender. Mencion is made of the vtter destruction of the Citye, for it was not onely ouerthrowen, and strawed with salte, but also the princes were slayne with fire and smoke. Abimelech in this warlike pollecy shewed not vnto all, what he would do, he onely biddeth the people to follow hym. Gideon also when he tooke the pitcher, fire brand, and trompet, commaunded the other to do the same: so Abimelech tooke a bowe on his shoulder, and the other did the like. He kindleth fire, and burneth all them which were in the holde, otherwise he could not haue conquered the tower. Some thinke y t Gaal also perished here, & that beyng put to flight by Abimelech, Why the vngodly obtayne victoryes. he got him to this holde. After this sorte God tooke vengeance vpon the Sechemites. And Abimelech, althoughe he were an vngodly and cruell tyranne, obteyned the victory: so also god gaue Nabucadnesar power, to afflicte the Iewes, and to leade them captiues to Babilone. And likewise vnto Tiglathphalasar to oppresse the ten tribes. All these men had the victory, and yet was their cause nothyng the better. This rule god vseth oftentymes to punishe the euill by euill, although he do not straightway punish them all. Some he punisheth before, and other some afterward: and there are some also, whose vengeance he reserueth for the world to come.
Abimelech triumpheth as thoughe he had better cause: but yet this hys ioye is of no longe tyme: A Similitude. for the hande of the Lorde abydeth hym also. In Comedyes, the strength of the Poete is not perceaued by the Prologe, nor by one acte or two, but we muste wayte for the ende and the conclusion of the whole fable. So if a man wyll geue iudgement of an Image, or of any other fayre Picture if he onely marke the Knee or Legge, he shall easely be deceaued: for he must consider the Armes, he Shoulders, the Sides, and proportion of the whole body. After which selfe same maner, if we will vnderstand the iustice of God in his workes, we muste tary tyll the ende, and then shall we see the iudgementes of god full. Augustine sayeth ryght well that god, Augustine. when he punisheth any certayne wicked acte, doth signify that he hateth all wicked actes. And when he differeth the punishementes of the vngodly, he admonisheth vs, to thinke vpon an other lyfe. Wherfore if Papistes, A comforte in the felicity of the vngodly. if Turkes, if Tyrannes are not punished in this world, let vs with a patient minde wayte for the last acte, and last iudgement of god: for they shall not go vnpunished.
Dauid sayeth in his 73. Psalme: My feete were almost moued, and my steppes had welnye slypte, bycause I freated at the wicked, when I sawe the peace of synners. For there are no bandes in theyr death, and they are lusty and stronge. They ar not in trouble as other mē, &c. And I sayd, doth god know these things, [Page 171] and is there knowledge in the most highest? For so doth our flesh iudge, when it seeth y e vngodly liue in prosperity: when the matter is so. is there (sayth he) knowledge in the moste highest? Wherefore I haue clensed my harte in vayne, and in vayne I haue washed my handes in innocency, in vayne was I punished all the day, and it was paynfull to me, to know this. For they are moste harde to vnderstand, and I began in a manner to dispayre, vntill I went into the sanctuarye of God, and vnderstood theyr last end. For who may not easelye be deceiued in the rich man and Lazarus? When as the one in mans sight semed to haue bene most blessed, and the other most miserable. Therfore (sayth he) it was paynefull vnto me, vntyll I was broughte into the sanctuary of God, & beheld theyr last iudgement. But as touching Abimelech, the prophesy ought to be fulfilled whiche Iotham pronounced: Let a fire come out of Abimelech and destroy his enemies.
God suffreth Abimelech to excercise his tiranny three yeares, in which space be semed to tary for his repentance. But he heaped vp vnto him self angre in the day of anger. For if he had ben wise he would easly haue thoght thus with him selfe after the victory: The Sechemites sinned thoroughe my perswasion: if they ar now so seuerely hādled, what shalbe be done to me at the lēgth? But he being blinded that he could not se these thynges, at the last was filthily slayne. So the vngodly ar dronken with prosperous fortune, and god semeth to fede them vp, as sacrifices, which are first fed and fatted, before they be killed. In whiche sense Esay in the .34. chap. writeth: The Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozra. Wherfore Abimelech, by all the things that he saw, is made neuer a whit the better, yea rather he was made the more insolent, and attempteth other thinges more tirannical. In the boke of Ecclesiasticus the 8. chap. it is writtē. Bicause sentence agaynst the euill is not executed spedely, the childrē of men do without any feare perpetrate euil thinges. Therfore are men made so hedlong to sinne, bicause they abuse the goodnes of god: & it is so far of, y t the vngodly, when he seeth an other corrected, should amend, y t he alwayes becōmeth worse & worse, and alwaies endeuoureth to goe on farther in wickednes. Whiche thinge I woulde to God we woulde follow in vertues and good deedes. Abimelech had ouercome the Sechemites, neither was that sufficient for him: then tooke he the holde, neyther was that ynough for him: he conquered the citye of Thebez, and yet did not this suffice him. He will go on farther yet: and is most filthyly slayne. As concerning the city of Thebez, Kimhi sayth, that it also fell from the gouernment of Abimelech. Dauid Kunht.
51 But there was a strong tower within the citye, and thither fled all the men and wemen, and all the chief of the city, and shutte it to them, and went vp to the top of the towre.
52 And Abimelech came vnto the towre, and fought against it. And went hard vnto the doore of the towre to set it on fire.
53 Then a woman caste a piece of a milstone vpon Abimeleches heade, and brake his skull.
54 Who streightwaye called his page that bare his armoure, and said vnto him: Draw thy sword and slay me, lest men peraduenture say of me: A woman slew him. And his page thrust him thorow and he died.
55 And when the men of Israell saw that Abimelech was deade, they departed euery man to his owne place.
56 Thus God rendred the euill of Abimelech, whiche he did vnto his father, in slayinge his brethern.
57 Also all the wickednes of the men of Sechem did god bring vpon [Page] theyr heads, and vpon them came the curse of Iotham the sonne of Ierubbaall.
The menne of Thebez closed and sensed the outwarde partes of the Tower verye well: And kepte themselues within, hauinge all the gates and entrances shut vp.
They ascended vpon the toppe. This Hebrewe woorde Gag sygnifieth the toppe of the house, not sharpe poynted, but playne, for vpon it they might walke. And bycause it was dangerous, leaste a manne shoulde fall from the toppe, it was commaunded in Deutronomye, that a cyrcuite or a stay should be added to the roofe of the houses.
To burne the gate. Bycause he hadde so good successe before to conquere by fyre, he thoughte now also to had the like fortune.
A woman threwe a stone. Abimeleche puffed vppe with victories, setteth an example before oure eyes, that wee shoulde not to muche put confidence in presente felicity. By his luckye successe he thoughte his cause was good, and that they whome he had destroyed, had theyr rewarde for theyr wickednes. Such is the iudgemente of menne, they thinke that accordinge to the wayghte of the punishments, so are the sinnes of the afflicted, and theyr euil deserts, so that they whych are greuously vexed, seeme to haue greiuously sinned. And vndoubtedly the booke of Iob is all whole in a manner of that argumente. For his friendes did therefore gather that he was an euill man, The argumēt of the booke of Iob. bicause he was so grieuouslye afflicted. But yet oughte wee not so to thincke: For there maye be other causes why GOD wil haue the sayntes oppressed in this world. Christ teacheth vs in the 13. chapter of Luke (when certayne tolde him, that Pilate hadde mingled the bloud of y e Galileians w t sacrifices, & they loked that Christ should haue cried out vpon the crueltye of the President) howe wee oughte to take profite by the punishments of other men. We ought to take perfect by the punishmēts of other. For he aunswered: do you thinke that those Galileians sinned aboue all the reast, bicause they suffred these thinges? No verilye, I tell you, but excepte ye repente, ye shall all likewise perishe. Or thinke ye that those 18, vpon whome the Tower in Siloi fell, were sinners aboue all men that dwel in Ierusalem? No verely, I tell you, but excepte ye repente, ye shall all lykewise perishe.
Abimelech also shoulde rather thus haue sayd wyth himself: If these things haue chaunsed vnto them, what shall then happen vnto me? Let vs also speake thus with our selues. If by the Turkes and Saracenes so grieuous thinges haue happened vnto the Grecians, Hungarians, and Africanes, what shall then become of vs at the length? Excepte we repente, wee shall lykewyse peryshe.
The names of two milstones. A peece of a milstone. Thys Hebrewe woord Rachab signifieth a milstone. But there ar two milstones, namely that that is aboue, and that that is beneath. The higher is he, which is called Rachab, bicause it is put vpō the other, and after a sort rideth vpon it. The other is called Schachab, bycause it semeth to lye still. By what meanes the woman hadde a peece of a mylstone in the vpper parte of the house, it appeareth not. Howebeit it is verye likelye, that they caryed vppe stones, and greate heauye peeces of rockes into the vpper partes of the houses, to haue them in a redinesse to beate backe the enemy.
And hys page thruste him thorowe, and he died. This is the ende of a most cruel tiranne. He is killed of a woman, and when he saw that he must nedes dye, he studieth to put away the infamye, neyther would he haue it sayd of him, that a woman slew him. What madnes is thys? He is at the poynt of death [Page 172] and he vaynelye thinketh vpon glorye: He thinketh it a reproche to be killed of a woman, and is nothinge carefull for the soule, nor for the other life: he onelye careth for his name and fame. And god when he hadde vsed thys mannes cruelty to afflicte the Sechemites, at the laste destroyed him also. He entred in by euell artes: He raygned cruellye and tyrannouslye, and died moste filthylye. And when Abimelech was dead, euery man returned into his country. Neither was the tower which he assaulted, conquered. And least any man should thinke that these thinges happened by chaunce, but that all menne myghte vnderstande that they were doone by the prouidence and counsell of god, the cō clusion is added: Thus God rewarded. Herebye we are very well taught, that if at anye time the like thinges doo happen, wee muste not attribute them to fortune, but onely vnto the prouidence of God. Achab the kinge when he went on warfare, chaunged his apparell, and woulde not be knowen to be the kinge, but be counted a raschall souldiour: yet was he slayne wyth an arrowe, whiche was shut at auenture, whiche thinge myghte haue seemed to haue bene done by chaunce, when as yet God in very deede gouerned the shafte. And in like manner as Plutarch telleth, Pirrhus was slayne of a moman in besieging of Thebez, Plutarch. she throwing downe a tyle from the house toppe. Verye many suche thinges are doone in oure time, whiche seeme vnto vs therfore to haue happened by chaunce, bycause wee knowe not the causes of thynges, and iudgementes of God.
Moreouer by thys conclusion thys we profitablye gather, that GOD at the length reuoketh all thynges to hys tribunall seate and iudgemente. If wee shoulde demaunde, why the Sechemites were so myserablye afflycted, and why Abimeleche was so fylthylye slayne? The holye Ghoste aunsweareth, God reuenged the ingratitude of the Sechemites toward Gideon, and the Parricide of Abimeleche, who slewe his bretherne. For the bloode of so manye bretherne cryed no lesse vnto the Lorde, then the bloode of Abel, as is written in Genesis. Lastlye let vs note, that there are hitherto some good Iudges spoken of, among whome is put Abimeleche, a moste cruell tyranne, that theyr vertue by a comparison, or an Antithesis myghte be made more noble. But happye was that publyke wealthe whyche amonge manye good, had onelye one tyranne, but we amongest manye euell, haue scarce one good Prince. And vndoubtedlye God gaue not vnto the Israelites thys tyranne, neyther raysed he hym vp after the manner of the other Iudges: but they elected him themselues.
¶The .x. Chapter.
1 ANd after Abimeleche, rose vp to saue Israell Thola, the sonne of Pua, the sonne of Dodo, a mā of Isaschar, and he dwelled in Samir in mount Ephraim.
2 And he iudged Israell .23. yeares, and died, and was buried in Samir.
AFter the deathe of Abimeleche, followed a longe peace, namelye .45. A peace during 45. yeares. yeares: which space of time is destributed into two Iudges, whereof the one gouerned the people three and twenty yeares, and the other two and twentye yeares. So greate is the goodnes of God, that he would restore peace vnto men, though they deserued it not.
And after Abimelech, rose vp Thola. In that it is written both of this Iudge, and of the other: And there rose vp: wee must not for all that thinke, that they of theyr owne minde claimed vnto thē selues the principality, but they wer [Page] elected vnto it by the lord, and of him set to rule by the people of Israel. And thei are sayd to haue risen vp, bycause they followed the instinct of the Lord.
To saue Israell. Betwene good princes and tirans this is the difference: Tirans seke onely theyr own gayn, but good magistrats haue only a care for this, to saue the people. Dauid Kimhi thinketh y t Abimelech also saued the Israelites, although he both slew his bretherne and made ciuil warres. The difference betwene a tyrā & a true prince. Dauid Kimhi. For he was a warlike and stoute man: wherfore outward nations feared him. But I wil not easely graunt vnto this sentēce: for as much as the holy scriptures mencion not that he made warres w t outward nations, which they would not haue otherwise left vnspoken of. If thou wilt say, that it maye therefore seeme that he saued Israel, by cause he is nombred amonge the Iudges: I aunsweare, this is rather to be marked, that the scripturs called him not a Iudge, but rather a king: neither is it written that he iudged, but reigned. But in that he is nombred among the Iudges, that was the cause which we haue before touched, namely that the vertues of the Iudges might be more illustrat, and that it might be made manifest, how much princes that are geuen of God, do excell those whiche men choose vnto themselues. Iosephus in his boke de antiquitatibus leaueth out this Thola, and onely maketh mention of the other; A iudgemente of the storye of Iosephus. of whom we will straightway speake. And it is no meruayle, for that author is wonte to ouer passe very manye thinges, and sometimes to alter some thinges.
Of the tribe of Isaschar. That tribe was the lowest and obscurest tribe, but god hath no respect to persons. The state of this pub. weal was most excellent, namely Aristocratia, wherin god chosed Iudges indifferētly out of all the people. And there was none which could iustly complayne, that his famely could not be exalted to the highest dignity of rule, which thing happeneth not in a kingdom. For all the kinges came of the famely of Dauid.
The sonne of Pua Ben Dodo. That word is ambiguous & darke: for it may be both a nowne proper and a nowne appellatyue. If it be a proper nowne, (as the Chaldey Paraphrast supposeth) we must say that Thola had to father Pua, & that Pua was the sonne of a certaine man named Dodo. But other thinke that it is a nown appellatiue, and that signifieth an vncle, and hath a pronowne affixed vnto it of the third person. And some vnderstand that by that pronown is referred or signifyed Abimelech, as though it were noted that Pua was the vncle of Abimelech: which sentence som of the Hebrewes allow. Yea and the lattin interpreter, to expresse that sentence, and that there might be no darkenes therin, addeth the name of Abimelech. But how Pua shoulde be vncle vnto Abimelech, and so the brother of Gideon, beinge of an other tribe, it seemeth meruellous, bicause tribes were not mingled one with an other. Some aunsweare that it mighte be that they were brethern on the mother side, but yet not on the fathers side. For such womē which had no inheritāce, maried oftētimes in other tribes: but so did not they which had inheritance, that the lands and inheritance should not be confoūded, wherfore it might easly come to pas, that ether her husband beyng dead, or she by him repudiated, maried agayne in an other tribe. And by this meanes Gidion & Pua may be bretherne, although they came of sūdry tribes. But y t those daughters whych were inheritors, might not mary in an other tribe, it is by many examples confirmed. Saule otherwise a Beniamite, gaue his daughter to wyfe vnto Dauid, who was of the tribe of Iudah Iehoida a prieste of the tribe of Leui, maryed the daughter of king Ioram whych was of the tribe of Iuda, as it is written in the latter booke of Paralip. the .22. chap. Aaron a Leuite maryed Elisaba, the daughter of Aminadab, of the tribe of Iuda. Wherfore there ar two opiniōs, one is of them which thynke that Dodo is a proper name, Now a mā mai be the sonne of his vncle. and the other of those which say it is a name appellatiue. The third opinion is, that that annexed pronown, namely of him, is to be turned, his, so that this Thola had one and the self name to his father & to his vncle, which bi the ordinary meanes was not lawful, [Page 173] yet was it detested, when a man dyed without children: for then the brother maried his wife, namely him of whom he was begotten, and the other which was dead, whose name he bare, and was made his heyre. This sentence lyketh mee well: for it very aptly declareth, how a man might be the sonne of his vncle. &c.
3 After hym rose vp Iair a Gileadite, and hee iudged Israel .xxii. yeares.
4 And he had .xxx. sonnes, that rode vpon .xxx. Coltes, and they had .xxx. Cities, whych are called Hauoth-Iair euen to thys day, & are in the land of Gilead.
5 And Iair dyed, and was buryed in Camon.
Of what tribe this Iair was, appeareth by this woord Gilead which is repeated: for Manasses had Machir to his sonne, who begat Gilead. And his name was cōmune with the mount, wherein Iacob and Laban made a league, and named the place Gilead, bicause there they raised vp a heape of stones for a wytnes. Eusebius C [...]s [...] riensis. Eusebius saith, that the backe of this mount tendeth to Arabia and Phenicia, and is ioyned with the hyls of Libanus. And this mount hath a City of the same name. Machir conquered that City, and gaue vnto it a name, which was cōmon both to his sonne and to the mount. Wherefore Iair was of the Tribe of Manasses, a man hauing plenty of children: for he had .xxx. And no maruaile, when as then they vsed to haue many wyues. His children was no Rascals or cōmon people, yea they were horsmen: which is thus described, which rode vpon .30. Asse colts. This Hebrue woord Air signifieth either a Colt or an Asse, Dauid Kimhi according to which sence are signified .xxx. Mules: or the colt of a Mare, as R. D. Kimhi expoundeth it. Neither were they onely horsmen, but also riche: for they possessed .30. Cities, bicause euery one of them was ruler of a City: wherfore their father must nedes be very noble.
They were called Hauoth-Iair. Bicause they wer not enuironed with a wall. And were so called euen to this day, namely euen vnto Samuels tyme, who (they say) was authour of this booke. In the booke of Numbers the .xxxii. chap. it is written, Iair tooke many Cities from the Chananites, and they were called Hauoth-Iair. Wherefore it is demaunded, whither he were the same man of whom we now speake, or whether he were an other? I doo not thinke that he was the same, forasmuch as betwene them both there were .300. yeares passed. He was a certaine other man distinct from this Iair, of whom we nowe speake, but yet hee was of the same famely: and paraduenture this was his Neuew, for they which are of the same famely, doo for the most part retayne the names of their kynred. Vnto this Iair came those Cities, whych that other Iair tooke from the Chananites. Wherfore the places agree: but that it is not the same man. This Iudge therefore is noble, when as the twoo former were but of a base famely. Neither doth Nobility anything hinder to gouerne a publike wealth, if self trust and insolence be taken away: yea rather they haue examples of their Elders, excellent stirringes vp to vertue, and very many helpes, to gouerne thinges well. And it is not vnlikely but that the people vnder these two Iudges, rightly worshipped God in long and quiet peace, otherwise God would not haue geuē them so long a time of rest. But after them, the Hebrues turned againe vnto Idolatry.
6 And the chyldren of Israel wroughte wickedlye agayne in the sight of the Lord, and serued Baalim, and Astharoth, and the gods of Aram, and the gods of Zidon, and the gods of Moab, & the gods of the children of Ammon, and also the gods of Pelisthim, and forsooke the Lord, and serued not hym.
7 Wherefore the wrath of the Lord was kyndled against Israel, [Page] and he delyuered them into the handes of Pelisthim, and into the handes of the chyldren of Ammon.
8 Who from that yeare vexed and oppressed the children of Israel xviii. yeares, euen all the children of Israel, whyche were beyonde Iordan, in the land of the Amorrhites, whych is in Gilead.
9 Moreouer the chyldren of Ammon went ouer Iordan, to fyght also against Iuda and Beniamin, and agaynst the house of Ephraim. And Israel was in verye great miserye.
10 And the chyldren of Israel cryed vnto the Lorde, saying: Wee haue synned agaynst thee, euen bicause we haue forsaken our God, and haue serued Baalim.
When they heaped synnes vpon synnes, the latter sinnes wer alwaies more grieuous then the first. And this is not to bee passed ouer, that they are sayde to haue synned in the syght of the Lord: for the world otherwise is often times deceaued, and the iudgement of men many times, either aloweth or excuseth sins. And the euyl which the Israelites are sayde to haue done, was nothing els but Idolatry. As soone as the good Princes were dead, the people easely fel to worshipping of Idoles, and why they were so prone to this wicked crime, there may be many causes alledged. Why the Israelites were so prone vnto idolatry. Fyrst, they sawe that the Nations which were nyghe vnto them, when they woorshipped Idoles, floorished in all kinde of riches and honors, but they thēselues wer wonderfully oppressed with penury of thinges. Wherfore they thought that the Gods of those nacions were both better & more bountiful, then their own God. They considered that they them selues whyche woorshipped but one God, were fewe in the number, but there was an infinite number which woorshipped Idoles. And as they detested the ceremonies and holye seruices of other Nations, so on the other syde other Nacions bothe abhorred them, and also vexed them with contumelies. Lastly, the woorshipping of the true God was more seuere, and after a sort more sadde, it hadde no pleasure, no chalenging of battayl one with an other, no stage playes, no daūcings, no running at tylts, no Comodies, no Tragedies, all which thynges they sawe were vsed in the woorshipping of Idoles, yea and also often times were added most vyle and fylthy thinges. And forasmuch as the nature of man is of it selfe ready vnto pleasures, hereof it came, that they turned vnto straunge holy seruices. And vndoubtedly the same causes in our time doo moue the myndes of many, and therfore manye cleaue vnto the Papistes, whom they see to lyue muche more pleasantly, and to floorish in goods and riches: they see also that they are more in number in Italy, in Spaine, and in Fraunce, then we are. Bicause also they thinke that they are infamed and reproched, when they ar called Schismatikes and Heretikes. And lastly bicause our ceremonies, as touching the senses of the flesh are dry, and without pleasures, they haue no copes, no descant synging, no musical Organes, nor stage play Masses. Hereof come these defaultes and fallinges of many. I might also adde, that many say their fathers lyued so, and died in that religion, The stubdernnrs of the Iewes agaynste God. which reasō is with many of great force. Such things without doubt did the Iewes thinke vpon. But it is marueilous to behold their stubburnnes. It seemeth that they had wholy bent their mindes, perpetually to resist their God. When God would haue them to obserue his ceremonies, they sought for other ceremonies at the hands of the people that wer nigh vnto thē. And for as muche as God hath nowe decreed, that those ceremonies shoulde by Christ be made of none effect, and they wyl styl keepe them: they doo therin that which ouerthwart wiues are wont to do, when the husband wyl, they wyl not, when he wyll not, then they again wyll. They did not onely woorship Baal and Astharoth, but also the Gods of Aram, & Zidon, the Gods of the Moabites, and of [Page 174] the children of Ammon, and also the Gods of the Pelisthims. If we marke the number, they woorshipped seuen kyndes of Idoles.
And forsooke the Lord. They did not onely follow straunge Gods, but also forsooke the woorshipping of the true God. There is a certaine Emphasis in this woorde forsooke. It signifieth as much, as if it should haue bene said: They would not so much as haue the woorshipping of the true God named, neyther made they any more mencion of it. Wherfore the wrath of the Lorde kindled against them, and he deliuered them into the handes of the Philistians. &c. Whē they forsooke the true God, he againe tooke away from them his helpe, and sold them to the Philistians and Ammonites, whom they so serued, as thoughe they had bene their bondslaues. And the yoke of the Ammonites was much more greuous, then the yoke of the Philistians. Wherfore Iiphtah tooke in hande warre, singularly against the Ammonites, as against the chief vexers of the Israelites. Farthermore let vs marke, that euen the self same yeare, wherin Iair died, they were vexed and oppressed of their enemies. The Lorde taried not: straightwaye after the death of the Iudge, hee beganne to afflict the people. In whyche place we must note, that most stronge Nations, so soone as they are destitute of God, are easelye without anye a doo conquered and ouerthrowne of their enemyes. For it is God onely which geueth power and strength, and therefore the Israelites were straightway oppressed of their enemies, bicause the Lord had forsaken them: for God is not onely the efficient cause of might and rule, but also it is he that keepeth and preserueth it. They oppressed vniuersally al the children of Israel. For they kept not them selues within any bondes: but wandred and made rodes through out al the borders of the Hebrues, which thing is noted by these woordes: Yea and they passed ouer Iordan. The tribes of Ruben, Gad, The request of the twoo tribes & the halfe tribe was vnwyse. and part of Manasses dwelled on this syde Iordan. For all that region was verye fertile, therefore they required it of Moses, when the other tribes were not yet passed ouer Iordan: but they did not wel marke what they desired: for although it wer a most fat and fertill countrye, yet was it alwaies in greater daunger: For often times their next enemies made rodes into their landes. And this is very cōmonly sene, that men are more careful for gaine, then for health: but the Ammonites did not onely rob and spoyle those tribes, but they also miserably afflicted al Israel. When they had passed ouer Iordan, they would also fight against Iuda, Beniamin, and Ephraim, which were of al the tribes most noble. Wherfore we must beleue, that they raged against al the Hebrues.
VVherfore the Israelites were aboue measure oppressed. And they cryed vnto the Lord. When they were but a litle oppressed, they were nothing moued: but when they wer farther vexed, and most grieuouslye afflicted, What God hathe a respect vnto in the punishmēts, wherwith hee punysheth synners. they began to turne to God, and cryed vnto him. Neither did they that lightly, but weeping, repented from the hart, confessed their sinne, & implored his ayde. This thing onely God regardeth, when he afflicteth his people with aduersitye, where wordes wil not serue, he addeth stripes and vexations, which are certain vehement sermons towarde the stiffer sorte, and are of great force towarde the godly, and those that are predestinate vnto saluation, but to the vngodlye & impenitent, to their greater damnation. God did not these thinges, as thoughe he had a pleasure in the euils of men, or that he woulde satisfye himselfe after thys maner (for that thing onely Iesu Christ vpō the crosse performed) but that they which ar fallen, may be called backe into the right way, vices corrected, and his iustice declared. And the Israelites do not onely cal vpon God, but also humbly acknowledge, and submissedly confesse their synnes. For they knewe that God heareth not synners, except they repent.
11 And the Lord said vnto the children of Israel: Haue not I delyuered you from the Egiptians, and Ammorhites, and children of [Page] Ammon and Pelisthim.
12 Moreouer the Zidonites and Abimelech, and the Moabites oppressed you, and ye cryed vnto me, and I delyuered you out of their handes.
13 But ye haue forsaken me, and haue serued straunge Gods: therfore I wyll delyuer you no more.
14 Go and crye vnto the Gods whom ye haue chosen: let them saue you in the tyme of your trouble.
Howe God answered the Israelites.When the people called vpon the Lorde, and began to repent, God in deede answered them, but yet sharpely and hardly. He answered peraduenture by the high Priest, which had Vrim and Thumim, by hym counsell was asked of God publikely: It may also be that some Prophet was stirred vp, by whō God spake. The Hebrues thinke that God answered by Pinchas, whom they say lyued vntil the time of Elias, but that they faine without any testimony of the holye scriptures. And if we looke vpon the time, Pinchas was at the least .330. yeares before these thinges were done. Why God answered so sharplye. But let vs see why God answered so hardly vnto the Hebrues, namely that the people should repēt, and that not vulgarly, but with stable and firme constancy. It is as much as if he should haue said: ye woulde be deliuered, that when ye are deliuered ye may woorship straunge Gods againe. For who can beleue that ye wil not hence foorth depart frō me? Haue ye not called vpon me at other times, and as soone as ye were deliuered, ye fell from me? I haue deliuered you from the Egiptans, Ammorhites, Ammonites, Philistians, Zidonians, Amalechites, and Maonites, but ye begon straightway to worshippe straunge Gods a fresh. For it was a thing most vnmeete, that they which ar by God set at liberty, should take vpon them to worship Idoles of many nations.
A moste sharpe Irony. Go and cry vnto your Gods, whom ye haue chosen. Doth God commaund vs to sinne? No vndoubtedly. There are sundry figures in the holy scriptures, which vnles we diligently marke, we shal easely fall into most grieuous errors. This exprobation which is set foorth by an Irony, is most grieuous: as though he would haue said: Now at the length ye haue tried, and ye vnderstand what your Gods can doo. The same Irony vsed Elias towarde the Prophetes of Baal: Cry (saith he) more loude, peraduenture your God is on sleepe, or is in hys sommer parler. He dyd not commaunde them to crye, but more attentiuelye to marke, what god they woorshipped. This is therfore an ironious oration, and a most bytter taunt.
¶How God sayth that he wyl not geue that whych he wyl geue, and contrarily.
HE saith he wyl not helpe them, and yet afterward he helped them. Did Godlye therfore? No vndoubtedly, but as yet the repentaunce of the people was not come vnto that point that he would haue it, according to that state and condicion that they were then in, he saith he wil not helpe them. For God knoweth the momentes of times. So vseth a Phisicion to handle his Patient, when hee requireth wine in his burning and heate of his feuer. I wyll not geue it (sayth he) not bicause hee will neuer geue it, but bicause hee knoweth when it shal be profitable vnto him. A similitude. Againe the sicke person desireth a purgation, the Phisition denieth him it, bicause he wil first haue the humors wel concocted, that they may the easelier be educed: so doth God now with his people.
And this is no vnaccustomed forme of speaking in the scriptures. The Lord said vnto Moses: Suffer my wrath to kindle, that in a moment I may destroye them. These things he said, when as yet he would spare the people, but the praiers of Moses pacefied God, and therfore he would haue them inflamed, and his [Page 175] affection & faith increased. In Mathew, the woman of Canaan cried vnto Christ: but he, as though he would not heare her, passed by, saying nothing. Then shee being more instant, I am not (saith he) sent, but to the sheepe which hathe peryshed of the house of Israel. And she not yet ceasing, he called her Dogge. It is not good (saith he) to take the childrens breade, and geue it vnto Dogges: and yet had he euen from the beginning decreed to help her. But first he would haue her faith brought to light, that it might be knowen by all meanes. And in an other place vnder the parable of one that desired breade, he saith: To whom the good man of the house which was within, answered, I and my children are in bed. And the other being instant, by his importunity obtained as many loaues as he would. So in this place God aunswereth, that he wyll not helpe, God is not chā ged, but wyll haue vs chāged namely that people, as they were then. For their repentaunce was not at that instantful. God chaungeth not his sentence, but wil haue vs more and more chaunged.
Ieremy in his .xviii. chap. saith: If I shall speake euyl against any nacion, and that nation shal repent, I wil also repent me of that euyl, which I said I would do. And that Ieremy might the manifestlier vnderstande the thinges that were spoken, he bad him go into the house of a Potter, wher he saw the Potter make a vessell of claye, which was broken in the handes of the woorkeman. But the Potter made againe an other vessel of the same clay. So saith the Lord: If they repent, I wyl also repent: I doo now make for them euill thinges, but for euyll thinges I wyll make good: and yet as I haue saide, he chaungeth not his sentence, bicause suche threatninges and promises doo depende vpon a condicion, which is sometimes chaunged, when as God yet abideth the selfe same.
Of thys thyng right well wryteth Chrisostome vpon Genesis, in hys .xxv. Homely: The Lord commaund Noe to builde an Arke, and threatned that after 120. yeares he woulde destroye all mankinde by a flood: but when in the meane tyme they nothing at all profited, he cut of twenty yeares, and sent the flood in the hundred yeare, and yet was not god chaunged, but the condicion of men varyed. The same Chrisostome also (vpon Mathew, in his .65. Homely, when he interpreteth this: Verely I say vnto you, ye which haue forsaken all thynges. &c.) demaundeth: Was not Iudas one of the twelue, and shall Iudas syt vpon the twelue seates, and iudge the twelue Tribes of Israel? Dyd Christ chaunge hys sentence? No (sayth he) but Iudas was chaunged. Whiche selfe same thing wee must iudge of the Citye of Niniue, and of king Ezechias, whom god pronounced should dye. For neither Niniue at that tyme perished, nor Ezechias dyed: bicause they were chaunged. God sayde at the beginning, that the feare of men shoulde be vpon beastes. But it happeneth contrarily: for men are nowe afrayde of Lyons, Beares, and Tigers, bycause they are of them oftentymes torne. But that commeth hereof, bicause of the condicion of men is chaunged, and not the counsell of God.
Wherfore those promises of god are to be vnderstande accordyng to the present state of thinges. Therefore when we heare the promises of God, How we must take the promises of God. wee must thus thinke: Either they haue some condicion adioyned, or they are absolutelye put. Farther, either they are of force for this time onely, or hereafter they shalbe fulfylled. And as touching the condicions of promises and threatnings, we must diligently marke, that some promises are of the lawe, and some of the gospell: & what they differ one from an other, I haue before aboundantlye entreated. Promises of the law haue a condition annexed. And this wil I now briefly say, that promises of the law are those which haue a condicion annexed, so that the promise is not due, vnlesse the law be most perfectlye fulfylled: and so those condicions may be called causes of rewardes, if we coulde fulfyl them, which thing, seing by reason and this corruption and vice of nature we are not able to performe, god is not bounde to render the rewarde. Wherefore, seing we cannot fulfyl the lawe as we ought to doo, all cause of meryte is vtterlye taken awaye, and yet are not those promyses geuen in vayne.
For although by reason of infirmity, we cannot performe the condition, yet yf we flee vnto Christ, and being regenerate, do begin a better lyfe, the promyses which were promises of the law, Promises of the Gospel. are made promises of the Gospel: not bycause we liuing vnder grace, do fulfil those conditions, but bicause by Christ they are made absolute and perfect, whose righteousnes is imputed vnto vs. In this maner must we thinke of the promises of God.
How we must vnderstand the threatnings of God.In like manner is it of threateninges: bicause often tymes muste bee added this condicion: Except ye repent. I sayde often tymes: bicause vniuersallye it is not true, as it appeareth in Dauid, who repented, and yet suffered those thinges which Nathan threatened. Moses also repented, and yet came hee not into the promised land. And as touching the condicion of repentaunce, we must not ouer passe this, that it is not perfect in vs: otherwise the forgeuenes of syns should be due vnto vs as a rewarde: wherefore wee must holde this for certaine, that the condicion of repentaunce is Euangelicall, and when there is repentaunce founde in vs, it is a fruite of fayth, and not a merite. Of this thing ryght well wryteth Chrisostome in hys .v. Homelye to the people of Antioche, Chrisostome. where hee comforteth the people, bicause of the threatninges of Theodosius. He bringeth a place out of Ieremy the .xviii. chapter, A difference betwene Princes of the worlde & God. and addeth that the sentence of God is farre otherwise, then the sentence of Princes of this worlde. For the sentence of a Prince is straightwaye, as soone as it is once spoken, performed, and can scarcely be chaunged: but the sentence of God, if it haue threatened any thyng, is not headlong vnto destruction, nor vntreatable, yea rather it maye seeme a degree and a certaine beginning vnto saluation. For by this meanes God oftentimes reuoketh synners vnto the right waye, and saueth them. And thus much as concerning condicions.
But as touching time, we must not alwaies looke, that God should straightway performe his promises. If he deferre it, wee ought thus to comfort our selues, he hath not yet accomplished, but he will doo it in due tyme. He will in the meane time after this maner exercise our faith. God seemeth many times to do nothing lesse, then that which he hath promised and threatned. He promised vnto Dauid a kingdome: but by what tribulations did he exercise him, before that he accomplished his promises? For first he was poore and a Shepehearde, afterward being taken into the court, he began to be hated of Saul, and so endaungered, that there wanted very litle, but that he was almost fallen into his power. When our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ should be borne of Mary, the Angell promised, that he should haue the throne of Dauid his father, and yet till he was thirty yeares of age, he lyued in a maner vnknowen. And then was he odious vnto the high Priestes, Phariseis and Scribes: and was in that sort long tyme yll handled, and at the length by them crucified. Wherfore Esay very wel admonisheth, that he which beleueth, shoulde not make haste. For God will in due time performe those thinges which hee hath promised: but it is our part in the meane time, not to prescribe any thing vnto him. Paul in the .x. to the Hebrues writeth: ye haue neede of pacience, that doing the wyll of God, ye maye obtaine the promise. For yet a litle while, and he that shall come, wyll come, and wyll not tarye: and the iust liueth by faith. But if any withdrawe himselfe, my soule shal haue no pleasure in him. The same thing also must we determine of threatenynges. God sayde he woulde ouerthrowe the Babilonians: but they floorished and triumphed, yea and they led awaye the people of God captiue. Wherefore God would not then accomplish his threateninges, which yet afterward when he saw his time, he performed.
Let vs apply these thinges vnto our place. What sayde God? I wil not helpe you, that is, at thys present: but afterwarde when I see oportunitye I wil helpe you. Yea and God oftentimes answereth vnto vs also inwardly, & in our hart, [Page 176] I wil not helpe you: for ye are laden with sinnes. What shal we then doo? shall we cease of from prayers? Not so. Let vs rather imitate the Hebrues: they, the more sharpely God answered them, the more they increased their repentaunce. Iohn saith: If our hart accuse vs, God is greater then our hart. What we must aunswer to the accusation of our hart. Our hart doth then accuse vs, when we say vnto our selues: God wil not heare, bicause of our synnes, God doth the more accuse vs, bicause he seeth more in vs, then wee our selues can see. Wherefore Dauid said: Clense me Lord from my secrete synnes. What remedy is there then? For who is he, whom his hart accuseth not? Let vs turne our selues vnto Christ: and if that our hart shall say, he will not helpe, let vs say vnto it: This I may wel beleue, if I should looke vpon my selfe onely, but I looke vpon the sōne of God, who hath geuen himself for me. Hereof springeth that confidence which Paul had, when he said: Who shall lay accusation against the elect of god? It is god which iustifieth. &c. Wherefore if god accuseth vs not, neither will our hart accuse vs, when we beholde Christe. For we haue now confidence towardes god, and we shall obtaine. And whilest wee are conuerted vnto Christ, not onely accusation and sinne is abolished, but repentance also is augmented, as we now see is done in the Hebrues.
15 And the children of Israel aunswered vnto the Lorde: we haue synned, doo vnto vs whatsoeuer is good in thyne eyes: onelye wee pray thee delyuer vs thys day.
16 Then they put awaye their straunge Gods from among them, and serued the Lorde: and hys soule was grieued for the miserye of Israel.
17 Then the chyldren of Ammon gathered together, and pytched in Gilead, and the children of Israel assembled them selues, and pitched in Mizpa.
18 And the people and Princes of Gilead sayde euerye one to hys neyghbour: whosoeuer wil begyn the battayle against the chyldren of Ammon, shalbe Captaine ouer al the inhabitantes of Gilead.
The repentaunce of the Hebrues profited: god aunswered very sharpelye: The propertye of true repentaunce. I wyl not heare you. But they crye againe: Doo what seemeth good in thine eyes, that is, what soeuer pleaseth thee. This vndoubtedly is to repent, when we are not onelye repentaunt for the synnes which wee haue committed, but also wee willingly suffer, what soeuer pleaseth god. A notable example is set foorth vnto vs, in that they put away their straunge gods, and woorshipped the true god. It is not sufficient to take awaye euyll thynges, excepte in the place of euyll thinges we substitute thinges that are good. Many haue taken awaye Masses, idolatries, and superstitions, and yet haue not woorshipped god trulye: bicause he is not woorshipped by woordes, but by true fayth & good woorkes. But ther are very fewe which embrace these thinges.
And hys soule was grieued. Contraction & ampliation of the mynde. Thys Hebrew woorde Tiktsad signifieth to drawe together. When we reioyce and are merye, the spirites in vs are made more ample: but when wee are sorye, the spirites are contracted vnto the hart. So it is said that God contracted hys soule, Affections are improperlye attributed vnto God. and was after a sorte sory for the miseries of his people. This kinde of speeche is not proper of God, but improper. For God is not sory, neither is he touched with affections. Wherefore it is a speeche after the condition of men. For often times those thinges are ascribed vnto god, whych are noted to be in men. [...]. And often tymes thinges which happen vnto men, are ascribed vnto God. For men are fyrst grieued for the miserye of an other, before they haue compassion of them.
Therfore (bicause God doth that, which men do that ar grieued, that is, bicause he helpeth) it is said he his grieued, which thinges happeneth in men that helpe those that are in misery. Such a kinde of speche is ther in the booke of Numbers the .21. R. Moses Maimon. chap. The soule of the people was faint, bicause of the iourney: for that wildernes grieued the people. But R. Moses Maimon sayth, that this woorde Catsad signifieth not onely a minde, but also a wil, which being before ready to reuenge, did now after a sort withdraw it self. Howbeit the first interpretacion seemeth to hang wel together. The Ammonites on euery side grieuously oppressed al Israel, but bicause Gilead was a notable City and wel fensed, they determined therfore first of al to conquer it. But the children of Israel pitched in Mispa, so far from thence, that they could not easelye succour those that were besieged. Wherfore the Gileadites in so great a daunger, thought they had nede of a captaine, for the administration of thinges: for the state consisting onely of the people, there could be nothing well done, vnles some one man were made ruler ouer them. Euen after the same maner, as the Romanes were wont in great daū gers to create a Dictator. Wherfore the Giliadites saw that they needed a Captaine, but who that should be, they could not easely prouide.
VVho so euer say they wyl begyn the battayle agaynst the Chyldren of Israel, let hym be our heade. Peraduenture they had desired a captaine of the Lord, and receaued an answer, that by this token they should know who should be receaued as their captaine: namely he, which first shoulde begyn the battaile against the enemies. Such signes God somtimes vsed, without any voice or outward oracle: as whan he promised the seruant of Abraham, that she should be Isaacs wife, which should geue drinke vnto the Camels. It maye also be that the Citizens decreed so among themselues, that the chiefe man of the city being stirred vp with the desire of the rewarde, might the more couragiouslye and cherefully fight against their enemies. In this maner Chaleb, when hee besieged Hebron, encouraged the mindes of his soldiours. Whosoeuer (said he) cō quereth Hebron, I wil geue him Achsa my daughter to wife. With which promise Othoniel being moued, cōquered the City, & was made the sonne in law of Chaleb. So in these hard times, when things wer in great daunger, it was necessary to vse such coūsel. But what if he which first would haue begon the battaile against the aduersaries, had bene a naughty and wicked man? What I say shoulde then haue bene done? What also if he had bene vnmeete to gouerne the publike wealth, although he had had warlike strength? This obiection maketh me rather to allow the first sentence, that is, that the signe was offered of God, and therfore they were sure, that he would not geue them an euill captaine. Although as touching the question, we may thus answer: All ciuil promises are so farforth to be kept, as they may be performed by honest wayes & right meanes, that is, so much as conscience and the woord of God wil suffer.
¶The .xi. Chapter.
1 ANd Iiphtah the Galaadite was a mightye man, the sonne of an harlot: and Gilead begat Iiphtah.
2 And Gileads wyfe bare hym sonnes, whiche when they wer come to age, thrust out Iiphtah, and said vnto hym: thou shalt not inherite in our fathers house: For thou art the sonne of a straunge woman.
HEre is set foorth vnto vs Iiphtah, a man abiect and obscure, not as touching his Tribe: for he was of the Tribe of Manasses, but as touching his mother: for he was the sonne of an harlot. Wherefore his brethren [Page 177] thrust him out as a bastard. The name of his father was Gilead, who seemeth to haue bene so called by the name of the mounte and citye. And that man had not onely this bastard to sonne, but also he had other which wer legitimate children. Wherfore though Iiphtah had a noble man to his father, yet that nothing profited him, bycause he was a bastard, and not borne in lawful matrimony. Wherfore by the ciuil law of the Hebrewes, it was not lawful for him to haue place in the congregation of Israell. For in Deut. it is written: Bastardes had not place in the congregation of Israell. Mamzer shall not enter into the congregation or assembly. Zor is in Hebrew a stranger. And a bastard is so called, bicause he pertaineth not vnto the famely of the father.
She that bare Iiphtah was not a wife, but a harlot. This Hebrewe word Zonah signifieth two thinges. Firste a vitler, that is suche a one as selleth thinges pertayning to victuales, for Zon signifieth to fede or to bring vp. It signifieth also an harlotte. Paraduenture for this cause, bicause vitlers are oftentimes euill spoken of, as touching chastity. As it appeareth by a certayne lawe of Constantine, which is had in the Code ad. l. Iuliam, de adult. And vndoubtedly eyther signification may aptly be applyed vnto this place. Some of the Hebrewes thinke that Iiphtah was not the sonne of an harlot, but only the sonne of a concubine, whych was not espoused with wedding tables or bonds, and a dowry. The mother of Iiphtah was not a Concubine. But that semeth not very wel to agree. For the Hebrewes called not a concubine Zonah, neyther had it bene lawfull for his brethern to haue thrust out Iiphtah as a straū ger, if he had bene the sonne of a Concubine. For the hauinge of Concubines of that sorte, was with the Iewes true Matrimonye. Farther, wee muste knowe that the Hebrewes had an other word, which signified an harlot. And that is Kedashah, as though a man would say, sancta, that is holy, as Virgill sayth: The holy hunger of gold.
This word Kadash signifieth to prepare. For as godly men prepare and sanctify themselues to the worshipping of god: so do harlots prepare themselues vnto the decking and gayne of the body.
And in Deut. the .23. it was commaunded, that no such whore should be in Israell. And it is added, that the hire of Zonah, that is of a whore, shoulde not bee brought into the sanctuary: wherfore we may therby gather that zonah and Kedashah, are taken both in one signifycatiō. In the .21. of Leuiticus it was not law full for a prieste to haue such a one to wife. Thou wilt say peraduenture, what should it auayle to make such a lawe, if there were no harlots in Israell? Why bastards were not admitted vnto the pub. wealth. What not to enter into the congregation signifieth. I aunsweare, that god in dede commaunded there shoulde be none, but the people obeyed not. But why would not god haue a bastard to come into the congregation? Not bicause that he shoulde be the worse man, if he shoulde liue vprightly: but that the people might know, that god detesteth whoredom. And not to enter into the congregation, was nothing els, then to be made vnapt for the executing of an office, either ciuil or holy. Although otherwise he had to his father, eyther a priest or a ruler. Wherfore it was not lawful for bastards to execute the office either of a Tribune, or of a Pretor, or Magistrate, or prieste.
Why therfore doth god now make a bastarde ruler ouer his people? Bycause he prescribed the law vnto men, and not to himselfe. An other cause is, least they which are so borne, shoulde be therefore straight waye discouraged. Farther, that they myghte remember that they are not excluded for theyr owne faulte, but for theyr fathers faulte. But nowe to returne vnto Iiphtah, hys brethren coulde not haue thruste hym oute, excepte he hadde beene borne of an harlotte. Otherwise a Concubyne was a lawefull wyfe, and the chylderne of Iacob whyche were borne of hys Concubynes, abode wyth theire other bretherne, [Page] and wer inheritors together with them. But thou wilt say: Abraham did thrust out Ismael. That was done before the law, and by the singular wil of God, that the whole and perfect inheritance myght come vnto Isaac. Otherwise by the ordinary lawe of the Hebrewes, the children of Concubines, were not vtterly excluded from al inheritance.
¶Of bastardes and children vnlawfully borne.
A diuision of children.BVt to make the thing more plaine, we wil thus deuide children: namely that there are some which are lawfull, and not naturall, as they that are adopted. Other some there are which were naturall, and not lawfull, as they whiche are born of Concubines. (But here I speake of Concubines after the manner of the Romaynes: For as touching the Hebrewes, they which wer born of them, wer legitimate). What childe is called a bastard And there are other which are both legitimate and natural, as they which are borne in iust matrimony. Lastly, ther are some which ar neyther legitimate nor naturall, as are bastardes. A bastard is he, whiche can not tell who is his father, or if he can tell, it is one, whom it is not lawefull for him to haue to his father, as it is written in the Digestes de statu personarum, in the lawe Vulgo concepti. There is a greate difference betweene the condicions of children: but we, as touching this matter that we haue in hand, will neyther entreate of children adopted, nor of children legitimate naturall, but onely of naturall children, and bastardes, which seme to be more obscure then the other.
Children natural not legitimate, may be made legitimate, as it is in the Code de Naturalibus filiis. Legē Anastasii. And the wayes how they might be made, ar described in y e same Code, in y e law Si quis. But bastards could not be made legitimate. If we wil speak of the childrē of Cōcubines after y e maner of the Iewes, they wer legitimate, as we haue before taught. But the Romaynes counted thē not as legitimate, onely this they ordeined, that they might be made legitimate. Farther, bastards are not in the fathers power, neither can they be: but they that are naturall, may be, if they be made legitimate. These things I speake, that we mighte vnderstande in howe greate a miserye bastardes are. Wherefore Iiphtah could not atteyne to the inheritaunce of his father. And these lawes were made, that men might be plucked from whoredome, if it were but onely for the ignominy of theyr children. Chrisostome. For when they do beget bastardes, they hurt them without hope of recouery. Wherfore Chrisostome vpon the epistle to the Romayns (whē he enterpreteth these wordes: Now is the houre for vs to rise from sleepe) vehemently inueygheth agaynst whoremongers. Why dost thou sowe (sayth he) that which is not lawfull for thee to reape? Or if thou doo gather, it is ignominious vnto thee? For infamy wil therby come, both to him which shalbe borne, and to thee also. For he as long as he liueth, shalbe ful of ignominy, and thou, both whē thou art liuing and when thou art dead, shalt alwaies be noted of filthy lust, &c. Wherfore it is ordeined by the lawes, that bastardes should not be admitted to the inheritance of theyr fathers.
The father when he dieth, may geue somewhat vnto natural childrē, yea they succede, though they be not put in the will, when there ar no other children. But yet they succede not in the whole, but onely in two twelue partes, as appeareth in the Code de Naturalibus liberis, The ecclesiasticall cannons. in the law Licet patri. But the bastard was so farre of from succeding the father, y t he could not desire of him so much as should serue to finde him, as it is in Code de incestis nuptiis, in the law ex cōplexu. But the Ecclesiasticall Cannons deale somewhat more gentlye: for they permitte that a bastard should haue somewhat geuen him to find hym withall, as it is: Extra, of him which maried her, whom before he had polluted with aduoutry in the chapter Cum haberet. And herein both the lawes of god and man do agree. Neyther [Page 178] as I haue before sayd, were these lawes written of hatred or cruelty agaynst bastardes, but that at the least by this meanes the filthy lustes of men should be kepte vnder.
Howebeit this I will not ouerpasse, that by the lawes of the Romaines, the bastarde myght succede his mother, as it is had in the Digests ad Senatus consultum Tertul. L. 1. he may also complayne of his mother, if she leaue him out of her wil, as it is had in the digests de inofficioso Testamēto. L. 29. which is to be vnderstand, except the mother be noble. And why bastardes are not counted in the steede of children, and ar depriued of their fathers inheritance: Augustine. Augustine besides these reasons which I haue before brought, bringeth also an other out of the holy scriptures. For it is writtē in Leuit. the .20. chap. He y t commeth to the wyfe of his vncle, shall dye wythout children. But (sayth he) many ar born also of incest, whose parents are not childles. He aunswereth, that the Lord so speaketh in the lawe, bycause such ar not counted for children. Wherfore theyr fathers are iustly sayd to be without children, althoughe they haue children: bicause it is al one, as if they had none. And bicause such children are contēned of the father, Bastardes proue oftentimes worse then other children. Chrisostome. Plutarche. neyther are they rightly brought vp nor chastised, oftentimes they proue worse then the other. Chrisostome vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes the .12. chapter, in his 29. Homely, exhorteth the people, to think that god doth like a father when he chastiseth vs: for the father neglecteth vnlawfullye begotten children and bastardes. Wherefore god when he chasteneth, doth part of a true and lawfull father. Plutarch in his Problemes the .103. Probleme, saythe that the Romaynes had foure surnames, so that some were called Cnei, and other some Caii, and those names they noted by two letters onely, or by three. Wherefore he demaundeth, whye Spurius y t is a bastard, was written by these two letters Sp. bicause sayth he, the fyrst letter S, signifyeth Sine, that is without, & P, Pater that is, a father, bycause he was borne of an vnknowen father. Althoughe that maye also be applied vnto Posthumos, that is such as ar borne after theyr father is dead: but to them it was not cōtumelius to be called Spurii. For. Sp. Melius, Sp. Cassius and other of that name were very notable citisens. We haue harde the law of God, and the ciuill law, now let vs see the Cannons.
In the decrees distinction .56. chapter. Presbiterorum, What the Cannons decree of bastardes. Chrisostome. bastardes are not suffred to be admitted vnto holy orders, vnles they wer first brought vp in monasteries, as though by this meanes they might be amended. But the Canons which afterward follow, are somewhat more gentle. Chrisostome vpon Mathewe in hys .4. Homely, as it is in the same place recited, chapter Nunquam, teacheth y t so to be borne, ought not to be hurtful vnto the children. For if a man haue bene a thiefe, a whoremonger, or a murtherer, and then repent him, his former life shal not be hurtefull vnto him: much lesse oughte the sinne of the father to be hurtefull vnto the child, yea rather if the child behaue himselfe wel, he shal be so much the more notable, and worthye of more prayse, in that he hath not followed the steppes of his father. Ierome. Ierome in his Epistle contra Ioannem Hierosolomitanum ad Pammachium, as in the same decrees appeareth in the chapter Nascitur. Bastardes sayth he, are not to be contemned: for they haue the hande of god to make them, Gregory neyther did god disdayne to make them, and to geue them a soule. &c. Gregory also in the same place in the chapter Satis peruersum, sayth, that it is a thinge vnworthy, that the child should be so punished, for the pleasure of the father, that he shoulde not be promoted vnto the holye ministerye. Ierome in the same place chapter Dominus. If Christ in his genealogy vouchsafed to reckē bastards, why shall not we then admitte them to the ministerye. &c?
After these Cannons whiche are somewhat fauorable vnto bastardes, What the father hindereth bastardes, is brought out a stronge argument on the contrarye parte. Whoremongers (saye [Page] they) do seme to poure in a certayne power into the seede, whiche power passeth also into the children, wherof follow euill inclinations, and therof are they iudged to be worse then other, bycause when they ar children, they are not corrected. Wherfore if they be promoted vnto the holy ministery, the churche shall receaue dammage. Yet at the last it is added, in the chap. Cenomanensis, if there be any that are notable, they maye be admitted vnto holye orders: but yet not that it shoulde be a generall rule of all, but onelye a priueledge. And these thinges are written in the decrees.
But in the decretalles de filiis presbiterorum it is had, that bastardes if they be made Monkes, may come vnto orders, but in suche sorte that they be not promoted vnto dignities, and be not made eyther Abbottes or Priors. But if they liue without the monastery, the bishop may ordeyne them, and geue them small benefites, but that is by his authority, and (as they commonly cal it) by dispensacion. But ecclesiasticall dignities must not be geuen them, but by the Pope: for that power he kepeth to himselfe alone. The iudgment for promotinge of bastardes must be left vnto the church. But suche releasinges of Popes and bishops tend onely to gayne. The iudgemente of these thinges shoulde haue beene left vnto the churche: which ought herein to haue a respect to two thinges, to her owne necessitye, and to the excellent vertues of him whome it will promote. If the Church shall haue greate neede, and he excell in vertues, the manner of his byrth shall nothing let him.
For Paule to Timothy and to Titus, when he diligently writeth of the election of bishops and priestes, forbiddeth nothing of thys kynd of men. But thou wilt say, in the olde lawe bastardes were excluded from the ministerye. I graunte that, but we ar not now bound to that law, & it was made onely for the detestation of aduoutry. But nowe if they can much profite the churche, theyr election is not to be prohibited. And it is vayn which is writtē in the decretals, that legitimates maye be chosen, A trifling diuision of the decretals. but bastards oughte to be reiected, except with dispensation, as it is had in the title de electionibus. For these couloures and deceates the Romayne Byshoppes haue inuented to amplyfye theyr dominion. But the sentence whiche I haue allowed, agreeth with charitye: and we may gather the like of it out of the ciuil law, wher it is entreated of Decuriones, for these wer ciuill Iudges for priuate cities and townes. Bastardes might be made Decuriones. Wherfore it is decreed that bastardes might be made Decuriones, if necessity so required. In the Digests de Decurionibus in the lawe generaliter, paragrapho. Debet enim. The lawe therefore woulde haue that order namely of Decuriones to be ful. Howbeit if an other legitimately borne, were a suter to gether for the same, he shoulde be preferred before the bastard. So thinke I must we do in the churche, that if anye man be as good and as apte for the ministery, being legitimately borne, let vs haue no regard vnto the bastarde, who muste geue place in that lawefull case. It is added in the lawe: If they be honest and good, the faulte of the byrth nothinge hindereth them. In the same tytle in lawe Spurios, and in the lawe followinge. These thynges haue I therefore mencioned that we myghte vnderstande, by what ryghte Iiphtah was of hys bretherne thruste oute, and to see howe the Cyuyll lawes agree with the law of God.
¶Whither the sonne shall beare the iniquity of the father.
BVt in this place ariseth a question wayghtier and farre more hard, bycause it seemeth that the sonne beareth the iniquitye of the father. For he that is borne, playd not the whoremonger, but the father, whom he could not let. More ouer in Deutronomy the .5. chap. it is writen, and also the same thinge is founde [Page 179] in Exodus, I wil visite the sinnes of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third and fourth generatiō. And the same did God repeate vnto Moses, when he passed before him. For among his Prophetes this also is added: visiting the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third I say, and fourth. And it semeth meruelous, by what meanes that may be numbred among the titles of mercy. This thing the Heretikes, as the Martionites, Valentinians, and Carpocratians, What y e Heretikes reproue in the old testament. left not vnspoken of, who for that cause reiected the old testament, and affirmed the author therof to be an euil God, as he whiche spared the fathers that sinned, and punished the innocent children, being so far from mercy, that he can not forget sinne, but reserueth anger, euen to the third and fourth generation. The Iewes also tooke that in euill parte, who in Ezechiel the .18. chap. sayd: Our fathers haue eaten sowre grapes, & the childrens teeth are set on edge. That was as much as if they should haue sayd: Ieroboam erected calues, Manasses setforth idolatry, & must we be punished for them? But the Lord aunswered by the Prophet: Al soules are mine, both the soule of the father, & also the soule of the sonne. The soule that sinneth, it shall dye, and the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father. These thinges seme not very well to agree together.
Some thinke that here must be vsed a distinction of euils and punishmentes. A distinction of punishmentes. For there are some punishementes say they, whiche pertayne vnto eternal damnation: and there are other, whiche dure but for a tyme. And they vnderstand the place of Ezechiel before alledged of the first kinde of punishementes: for as touchyng eternall saluation or damnation, euery one shall beare his owne burthen. And agayne the soule whiche hath sinned, it shal dye. Neither do they otherwise vnderstād a place of Ieremy in the .31. chap. But as touchyng punishments which dure but for a tyme, as are sicknes, pouerty, banishement, death, &c. they affirme that it is not agaynst the iustice of God, but that w t these kinde of punishmentes he maye punishe the sonne together with the father, and the people with the princes. And in that sort they expounde that which is sayd in the law: I will visite the sinnes of the fathers vpon the children, vnto the thirde and fourth generation. Augustine semeth sometymes to haue allowed this distinction. Augustine. For in his questions vpon Iosua the 8. question, when he reasoneth concernyng Achan, whiche had hidden some of the thinges that were cursed, for whose sinne all the Israelites were miserably afflicted, and for the same cause not onely Achan was punished, but also his sonnes and daughters were put to death together with him: Augustine (I say) sayth there, that those punishmentes may both profit, and also hinder, which thing God hymselfe knoweth, and therfore he tempreth them accordyng to his iustice. For god so moderateth thē, that they do both afflicte the wicked, and are not hurtfull to the good. For such is his prouidence, that those thinges whiche seme euill, he can make good: but as touching eternall punishementes, bycause they alwayes are hurtfull, euery man worthily suffreth them according to his euil desert. No man (saith he) suffreth these punishments for an other mans faulte. The same Augustine writeth agaynst the aduersary of the lawe and the Prophetes in his .1. boke and .16. chap. A diuision of men into regenerate and into those that are not yet regenerate. There is no doubt (sayth he) but that in this life one is vexed for an other. And agaynst Iulianus the Pelagian is his .6. booke the 12. chap. he maketh a diuision of the estate of people, and sayth that some are regenerate in Christ, but other some are not yet regenerate. And the sinnes of those that ar regenerate, are visited vnto the third and fourth generation, that is, vpon all their posterity. And he alludeth it vnto originall sinne, whiche was by Adam sowed into all his posterity. But thou wilt say, why is it visited vnto the third and fourth generation? The same father aunswereth, in his 42. question vpon Deut. bycause thre ioyned with fower make seuen, whiche is a number of fulnes, so that to say vpon the third and fourth generation, The nomber of seuen is a tokē of fulnes. is all one, as if he had sayd vpon all generations. Which kind of speakyng Amos vsed, saying: For three transgressions, and for foure I will not turne to it. Wherfore [Page] Augustine vnderstandeth these woordes of the lawe, for visityng the iniquityes of the fathers vpon the children vnto the thirde and fourth generation, as touching those that are not regenerate. For the lawe (sayeth he) entreated of those whiche were vnder the lawe. But Ezechiel and Ieremy entreate of menne regenerate, and of the gift of regeneration whiche should be geuen by Christ. But men that are regenerate shalbe iudged euery mā according to his own desertes, and not accordyng to other mens synnes. And so y e sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the father, but the soule whiche hath sinned, it shall dye. But before regeneration, originall sinne infecteth and destroyeth all posterityes.
This distinction of Augustine I disalow not, but I doubt whether it be sufficiently applyed vnto the meaning of Ezechiel and Ieremy. Ezechiel and Ieremy wrote both the selfe same wordes in sundry places. Both those Prophetes wrote these selfe same wordes. The fathers haue eatē sower grapes, and the childrens teeth are set on edge, when as yet the one was in Iewry, and the other caried away into Babilone. Whiche is a manifest argument, that they spake both with one and the selfe same spirite. But Augustine sayeth that the exposition of Ezechiel is to be sought for in the .31. chap. of Ieremy. For there after the same wordes it is added: Beholde the dayes will come, and I will make a new couenaunt, &c. Wherfore that place is wholy to be applied vnto regeneration: and therfore by these wordes of Ieremy, the wordes of Ezechiel are to be interpreted of those that are regenerate. In this manner that father thynketh this question is fully aunswered.
But when I more attentyuely doo weighe the chap. of Ezechiel, I thinke that he speaketh of the punishmentes and afflictions of this lyfe. For why complayned the people, saying, that the fathers had eaten sower grapes, and the childrēs teeth were set on edge? Did they complaine of the payne of hell? No vndoubtedly, but bicause they were led away captiue into Babilone and lyued in seruitude. They complayne that God semeth to deale to hardly with them: bycause for as much as their fathers were idolaters, yet they which had not sinned, were punished. For those punishementes the people lamented: wherfore it was necessary, that the Prophet should aunswere them of the same punishementes. The soule of the father is myne, and the soule of the sonne is myne. The soule whiche hath sinned, it shal dye. These wordes therfore haue a respect vnto the punishmentes of this lyfe. Although I do not deny, but that it may also be transferred vnto spirituall punishmētes: Argumentum a minori ad maius. but not, vnles it be by an argumēt from the les to the great. And that after this maner, God doth not for an other mans sinne punishe, with paynes which dure, but for a tyme, those whiche are vtterly innocent, therfore much les will he punishe them with spirituall and eternall punishmentes.
Ierome. Ierome when he interpreteth this place of Ezechiel, hath the solution, which Augustine also afterward followed, as in his place we shall declare. But the interpretations do vary, bycause it is a thing obscure, and the difficulty hereof ryseth, bycause it can not be denyed, but that God doth vexe some for other mens sakes. For although Cham vncouered the filthines of his father, yet the curse was transferred to Chanaan his sonne. And when the Sodomites had grieuously sinned, the children were also burnt together with the fathers. And when Dauid had committed aduoutry, God caused that the sonne whiche was borne of y e aduoutry to dye. Wherfore in a thing so obscure Ierome bringeth his owne interpretation, but he declareth also other mens iudgementes as touchyng this question. An Allegorical exposition of some. First he sayth that there were very many, which did vnderstand this place of the lawe. (That God will visite the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children vnto the third & fourth generation) allegorically of euery singular soule, or man. 1 For there are in vs certayn naturall passions, Foure degrees of sinnes. impulsions and violences to euil, 2 or (as other say) first motions. [...]. Then followeth deliberation, when a man determineth 3 with himselfe to do euill. Thirdly is performed that whiche was determined. 4 Fourthly, followeth boastyng of the wicked acte, when he reioyseth and hath a pleasure in his sinnes. So in a maner are numbred foure generatiōs: but [Page 180] God is so gentle, that in the first and second generation, that is in the first motions, and in deliberation he sayth nothing, and winketh at it, but the third and fourth, that is the perpetrating & boasting he punisheth, when a man both doth euill, and gloryeth in his sinnes, and will not repent. Wherefore they say that God reuengeth vpō the bowes and not vpon the rootes. For mā, as they thinke, if he neither do euill, nor boast of his euil, may be saued, althoughe otherwise he both lusteth, and deliberateth to commit euill. And in that maner they interprete Paul vnto Timothe, when he sayth that the woman shalbe saued by procreation of children, so y t they abyde in the fayth, &c. that is: The soule shalbe saued, if it worke that which is good, althoughe it haue euill motions and cogitations.
This interpretation do not I allowe: first bycause it is Allegoricall, The impulsiōs and first motions of y e minde are sinnes. when as God especially in the law speaketh simply and manifestly: moreouer bycause if the wordes of God should be applied vnto allegoryes, they should be made vtterly vncertayne: lastly, bycause that whiche is sayd is not true. For these impulsions, and first motions are sinnes, bycause both they are agaynst the law of God, and also they are condemned of Christ, when he sayth in the Gospell: He whiche seeth a woman and lusteth after her, hath committed fornication already in hys harte. And he whiche is angry with his brother, is worthy of iudgement. For God doth not so regarde the [...]ctes, but that he much more hath a respect vnto the mynde. Moses at the waters of contention sinned grieuously, and yet if we diligently weighe that hystory, we shall finde nothing that he committed euill outwardly. But God saw the incredulity of his heart, and tooke great vengeance of hym. Wherfore those motions and deliberations of the minde are not onely sinnes, but also are grieuously punished of God. Wherfore let vs leaue this interpretation, whiche Ierome also bringeth not as his owne.
But now to make the matter playne, as touchyng punishmentes of this lyfe, As touchyng punishementes which dure but for a tyme y t no man suffreth whiche he hath not deserued. no man can say he suffreth that which he deserueth not: bicause no man is pure, no not the childe that is but a day old: there is none whiche hath not deserued euē death, why then should men say: Our fathers haue eaten sowre grapes, &c. whē as euery man shall beare his owne burthen, either as touching this lyfe, or as touchyng eternall lyfe? But God doth not alwayes send these euils which dure but for a time, as paynes and punishmentes, God doth not alwayes send those euilles which dure but for a tyme as punishements. but hath very oftentymes a respect vnto others endes, as Christ in Iohn aunswered of the man borne blynd: Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parentes, that he should be borne blynd, but y t the glory of God should be made manifest. Also Peter and Paul, when they were put to death, could not complayne that they had not deserued death. Although God, when they were killed, had not a respect vnto this, to punishe thē, What God regardeth in the martyrdome of his sainctes. but that by their bloud might be left a testimony of the Gospell of his sonne. Wherefore seing the matter is so, and we be al subiect vnto sinnes, there is no cause why we should complayne, that God dealeth to seuerely with vs, if we be afflicted for the sinnes of our parents. For God can so directe those troubles, The scourges of the children, profite sometymes the parentes. that they shall pertayne not onely to hys glory, but also to the saluation of our parentes. For oftē tymes he punisheth the parents in the children, and the prince in the people. For the parentes are no les grieued for the punishement of their childrē, then if they themselues wer afflicted. If the children dye for the parētes cause, they haue no wrong done vnto them: for death, is also dew vnto then, & they should otherwise haue dyed. Wherfore if God will so vse their death, he may doo it iustly. The grieues of the children are the grieues of the parents. Which thing also we may affirme of other calamityes. For if the sonne be vexed with sickenes, he deserued the sickenes: & if he haue lost money, thē hath he lost thinges transitory and vnstable, and which were geuen hym on that condition, that they mought easely be taken away agayn. God as touching the regenerate turneth punishmēts into medicines. Wherfore if god will with these kindes of calamityes punish the parentes in the children, he can not be accused of iniustice.
Wherfore Augustine in his questions vpon Iosua the 8. question: by originall sinne (sayth he) many punishements are dew vnto vs, which yet God conuerteth [Page] into certayne medicines, and maketh them very much to profite vs, although they seme vnto vs euil. For if the sonne had lyued, peraduēture he would haue followed the euill steppes of his father, or els committed woorser things. Wher fore if God take him out of this life, he can not complayne that he is ill delt with. For through the benefites of god his death redoundeth to his profite. For he is taken away, least by malice his heart should chaūge. And vndoubtedly we must suffer easy euils, to atteyne vnto great good thyngs. For so the Phisitions with a bitter purgation trouble the throte, to restore the sicke person to hys former health. In lyke maner when we haue deserued punishmentes, God yet turneth them to good. By this means discipline is kepte in the worlde. And by this meanes (saith Augustine) a certayne discipline is established in the world. For vnles it were so, men would continually proue worse and worse. A certayne coniunction also and society of mankinde is declared, whē one after this maner is punished for the sinne of an other. For they whiche pertayne vnto one kingdome or City, or Churche, are after a sorte one body among themselues. And in the body one mēber suffereth for an other. Wherfore seyng thys is so in the body, it is not absurde, that the same do chaunce also in the society of men.
Plutarche. Plutarche in his booke de Sera numinis vindicta, hath very well taught this: The eye (saith he) is sicke, & the vayne of y e arme is cut, so the father hath sinned, and the sonne is punished: the prince hath behaued himselfe ill, and the people is vexed: and such compassion or suffring together is there in things humane. That author iustly accuseth the rashenes of men, [...]. whiche as often as these thynges doo chaunce, do complayne that God dealeth cruelly. For the father (sayth he) is either good or euill. If the sonne of a good father be peraduenture afflicted with euill, straightway they crye out that God doth vniustly, neither is it meete that the sonne should be so miserably handled, which had so good a man to his father. But if the father be euill, and the sonne come into misery, agayne they make exclamation, that here also god is vniust. For the sonne ought not to haue ben punished, when as the father sinned, wherfore the common people thinke that the sonne should by no meanes be afflicted. But what if the father be euill, and yet all thinges go prosperously with the sonne? here also they cōplayne (as he sayth) of the iniustice of god. For they deny it is iust that then the sonne should lyue prosperously, whiche hath so euill a father. These thinges this man, thoughe he were an Ethnike, writeth very godltly.
Children are certayn partes of the parentesMoreouer we must consider, that children are as certayn partes of the parētes, and haue somewhat of the parentes in them. Wherfore it is not absurde if God punish y e part of the parentes in the children. But I will returne to Augustine, who saith, y e god by this meanes setteleth discipline in the world, in the publique, wealth in the Churche, and in the famely. Whose saying in any iudgement can not be discōmēded: for if the children be punished for the sinnes of their parētes, they haue nothing wherof to complayne. They owe vndoubtedly this duty vnto their parentes: for of them they haue that they are. Wherfore if they leaue theyr lyfe for them, they haue no wrong done them. For they render vnto them that whiche they receaued of them. If god shoulde saye vnto them: I will vse your punishment to the saluation of your parētes, they can by no right refuse it. Iohn sayth: that euery one ought so to loue his brother, to be ready to lay euen his life for him. And if we must geue our life for our brother, how much more ought we to geue it for our father? God vseth sundry instrumentes, wherwith he draweth men vnto him. Why then should he not vse either the sickenes, or death of the children either for the chastenyng, or for the saluation of the parentes? Augustine in his .8. Augustine. The lesser part iustly suffreth punishment for the greater. question vpon Iosuah, whiche I haue oftentymes alledged, sayeth: That it is iust, that the lesser part suffer punishement for the greater, as in that hystory it happened, bycause of the sacrilege whiche Achan committed. A fewe fel in the battaile, and the whole multitude was absolued. Hereby we vnderstād [Page 181] how great the anger and vengeance of God would haue bene, if the whole multitude had sinned, when as the sinne of one manne was so excedingly punished. And Plutarche in that booke, whiche a little before I brought: This thing (sayth he) also the Capitaynes doo in their hostes. If there be any thyng commonly committed of all, they put the tenth manne to death, that by the punishment of a fewe, the rest may be absolued: and so one is punished for an other mans faulte. The maner of punishing the tenth souldier. But GOD, as it is sayde, doth no manne iniurye: for he whiche dyeth, was subiecte vnto death, and GOD directeth hys death to a good ende, namely to helpe other, that is, that by thys meanes, eyther the parentes or the prynces maye bee reuoked vnto repentaunce, or to establyshe discipline. But those thynges whiche we haue sayde, can by no meanes bee vnderstande of spirituall and eternall paynes. For as touching them euery man shall suffer for hys owne faulte.
Nowe lette vs expounde the woordes of the lawe. I (sayeth he) am a Ielous God, visityng the iniquity of the Fathers vpon the chyldren, vnto the third and fourth generation, of them that hate me. Ierome. Augustine. These last woords Ierome vppon Ezechiel the .18. chapter diligently noteth. And Augustine vpon Iosua in the question before alledged. Of those, sayeth GOD, which hate me: as though he should haue sayd, I wyll not touch the innocents, but will take vengeaunce of their iniquity, which imitate euill Fathers, and hath me. After the same manner he promiseth to doo good vnto children, and chyldrens chyldren, euen vnto a thousande generations. But to what chyldren? Euen to those, (sayeth he) that loue me. Wherefore thoughe the Father bee vngodly, and the sonne good, the iniquitye of the father shall nothyng hurte hym. But if the father bee good, and the sonne wicked, the godlynes of the father shall nothyng profyte hym. And therefore Ierome sayeth: He auengeth the iniquitye of the Fathers vpon the children, not bycause they had euyll parentes, but bycause they imitate theyr parentes. The woordes themselues doo sufficiently declare, that the lawe is not to bee vnderstande of Originall synne, but of that synne whiche they call actuall. For then shall the sonne beare the iniquitye of the Father, when he lykewyse synneth as dyd the Father. Also the wordes of Ezechiel can not bee vnderstande of Originall synne, as that whiche followeth easely declareth. Although thys sentence, that the soule whiche sinneth, it shal dye, maye bee vnderstande of Originall synne. Euery manne hath in himself his proper originall sinne. For euery manne hath in hymselfe a corrupte nature, and a prones vnto euill. Wherefore euery manne beareth hys owne synne. For althoughe that vice were by originall drawen of the parentes: yet nowe is it made ours.
But thou wilte saye: seyng in the lawe it is sayde, Of them whiche hate me: and infantes, for as much as they hate not God, therefore it can not pertayne vnto them. I aunswer. That in act in dede they hate not God, but by corruption of nature, and prones vnto euill. So a woolfe that is at full age deuoureth a sheepe. A younge woolfe whiche is but a whelpe doth it not, not bycause it hath not the nature of the father, but bycause it is not able. And thus muche as touching the wordes of the lawe.
But why it is sayde vnto the thirde and fourth generation, and not vnto the fyft and sixt, we haue hearde what Augustine hath aunswered. But in my iudgement we maye saye muche more commodiously, that the parentes may lyue vnto the thirde and fourth generation. GOD woulde therefore so punyshe the Fathers in the thirde and fourth generation, that by that punyshement of theyr posterity, some feelyng myght come vnto them, they beyng yet on lyue, & that they myght see the miseryes of theyr neuewes & childrens chyldren. For thys cause the holy Scripture extendeth those generations no farther. When the posteritye are euill, and are punished of GOD, there is no doubte but that the parentes are punyshed also in them. Chrisostome vpon Genesis the. [Page] 29. Homely when he interpreteth these woordes: Cursed be Chanaan, &c. But he synned not (sayeth he,) but hys father Cham. That is true in deede, he aunswereth: but Cham was a greate deale more sharpely touched with that curse, then if it had bene pronounced agaynste hymselfe. Thys is the powre and fatherly affection, to bee more vexed with the afflictions of theyr chyldren, then with theyr owne. Wherefore Cham dyd not onely see that hys sonne should be euill and subiecte vnto the curse: but also he sawe that he hymselfe shoulde bee punished in hym.
This nowe resteth to bee declared, why amonge the Proprietyes of the mercye of GOD, this also was recited before Moses: Visityng the iniquitye of the Fathers vpon the children, when as this seemeth rather to pertayne vnto seuerity. But it is not so, yea rather if we looke more narrowly vpon the place, we shall vnderstande that it is a pointe of mercy. For where the sinne was firste committed, he myght strayghtwaye if he woulde, iustly bee reuenged. But he is so good that he wyll defer the vengeaunce vnto the thirde and fourth generation, and in the meane tyme calleth backe the father to repentaunce, by admonitions of the Prophetes, by sermons and benefites, and many other wayes. At the laste, when the thirde and fourth generation is come, and he made neuer a whitte the better, he goeth to stripes, and yet he doth not then vse affliction, as the laste punishement, but rather as a medecine. Who seeth not that all this is a woorke of greate mercye? Wherefore iustly and woorthily are these wordes numbred amonge the proprietyes of mercye. And it can not bee denyed, but that the Prophetes were oftentymes afflicted together with the people. For Ezechiel and Daniel were led awaye into captiuity, and Ieremy was caste into prison, and wonderfully vexed in the tyme of the siege: and afterwarde goyng with the Hebrues into Egypte, he was slayne. For God will haue the thyng in thys manner ordered, that good men, may not onely ryghtly gouerne their own lyfe, but also in suffryng thynges greuous, they may admonishe and bryng to amendement the euill. For they are conuersant together with them in the same publique wealth and Churche, and are after a sorte members of one body.
It profiteth the iust y t they are wrapped in the same punishmentes with the wicked.Wherfore the good ought thus to thinke with thēselues: If God afflicte the euill, we also shalbe vexed together with them: we shall all be wrapped with the selfe same punishement. Therefore we must see, that we labour for them, in reprouyng and prayng for them: for theyr saluation beyng neglected, shall bryng euilles also vnto vs. After thys sorte we muste vnderstande Augustine, when he sayeth, that GOD by thys meanes establysheth discipline amonge men. Bycause if the people bee afflicted for their kynges, and the sonne for the father: then must they labour and trauayle one for an other. Neither yet do good men so lyue without sinne, that God can finde nothyng in them to punishe. Althoughe the afflictions whiche happen vnto the godly, The afflictiōs of the godly ar not properly punishmentes. can not as it is sayde, be properly called afflictions: but rather excercises of fayth. For so God trieth theyr fayth, and whatsoeuer he doth in them, he turneth it to their good. Moreouer he wyll haue thē to expresse in themselues their first begottē brother Iesus Christ, whiche suffred in hymselfe other mens synnes. For this also is a certayne portion of the Crosse of Christ, althoughe they are not so innocent, as Christ was: neither serueth their crosse any thing to redeme sinnes. Daniel in his captiuity after this manner confessed hys sinnes. We haue sinned (sayth he) and done vniustly, &c. He sayd not: They haue sinned, but we. And Esaye sayeth: All our righteousnes are as a cloth stayned with floures of a woman. There is in deede in holy menne a certayne ryghteousnes, but not such a righteousnes as they can boast of, before the iudgement seate of God. Wherfore if they suffer any thing, they haue no iust cause to complayne.
But thou, wilt saye: Why is it sayd y t God in thē punisheth the sinnes of other mē, when as they also sinne? We should say rather y t he punisheth their sinnes, [Page 182] and not the synnes of their parentes. I answere: Bycause when god hath much and longe tyme wayted, that their father should repent, and it nothing profited, and in the meane tyme it is come vnto the third and fourth generation, at the length he poureth out his anger vpon the children, whiche therefore are sayd to suffer for their fathers, bicause vnles the malice of their fathers had gone before, their affliction might haue ben deferred till farther time. But now bycause they haue fallen into the third and fourth generation, the consideration of the iustice of god wil not suffer the punishement to be deferred any longer. And althoughe they themselues also haue deserued those euils, yet bycause they are so corrected in the third and fourth generation, they owe that dewty vnto their parentes.
And so God feareth the parētes, that they should temper themselues from wicked actes: and thoughe they will not for gods sake, or for their own, yet at the least for theyr posterities sake. It also maketh the children afrayde to imitate the sinnes of their fathers, least the punishmēt due vnto their fathers be required of thē. Neither is it vniust that y e children suffer somthing for their fathers sake: for by their fathers they receaue inheritances, and are aboue other honored and exalted. For god did not onely make fortunate Dauid, but also for his sake fauored his posterity. For the kyngdome perseuered in his famely y e space of .400. yeares. But as touching eternall life, As touchyng eternall life the childrē are not punished for y e sinnes of the fathers. neither shall the father be punished for the sinnes of y e children, nor the children for y e sinnes of y e fathers. Howbeit children obteine many spirituall giftes by good fathers. For Paul in his .1. Epist. to the Cor. the .7. chap. sayth: Otherwise your children should be vncleane: but now they are holy. Wherfore the children haue of holy parentes, some holynes, and some spirituall gift, as that place teacheth. And on the contrary part, Childrē obtein some spirituall giftes for their parentes sake. by euil parentes many such good giftes are hindred: neither are they heard of God beyng euill, and not repentaunt, when they desire spirituall giftes for their children. Yet by the prouidence of God it oftentymes commeth to passe, Euil parentes doo sometymes hinder theyr children of god spiritual gifts. that of good parentes are borne noughty children: and of euill, good, as Ezechias a good kyng, had to his father Achaza a wicked kyng. And contrarywise the same Ezechias beyng a very godly prince, begat Manasses a very vngodly and cruell kyng. The same also myght I saye of Iosias. Thys therefore commeth so to passe, least wickednes shoulde increase without measure, Why good childrē ar borne of euil parētes, & euill of good. if of euill parentes shoulde continually bee borne euill children. God putteth to hys hande, and maketh the sonne borne of an euill father, a member of Christe. And therewith all he sheweth that his goodnes can not be hindered by the parentes, thoughe they be neuer so wicked. Farthermore euill children, are borne of good parentes, that grace should be the better knowen. And that the goodnes of the childrē should not be attributed vnto nature, whiche they haue drawen of their parentes. For god will haue it knowen to be his gifte, that we are saued.
This one thyng onely is to bee added vnto the foresayde question: It is not lawfull for men to punishe the sinnes of the parentes in the children. That it is in dede lawfull for god (as it is sayde) to punishe in the children the synnes of the fathers: but y t is vtterly vnlawfull for men to doo. For in Deut. the .24. chap. it is commaunded: That the fathers should not be punished for the children, nor the children for the parentes. Whiche is to be vnderstande, so that the father consent not vnto the sonne, or the sonne vnto the father. Wherefore Achan if he had bene called vnto tryall and to the iudgement seate, he should be the ordinary lawe haue peryshed alone, and not hys chyldren with hym. But GOD hath thys hys proper law, who would haue it otherwyse done, although sometymes he obserueth thys also. For in the booke of Numbers: the 26. chap. When Core conspired agaynste Moses, he was destroyed: but hys chyldren were not together with hym extinguished, Samuel came of the posterity of Core. yea rather they were kepte for the holy ministerye, and of their posteritye was Samuel borne. Amasias the kynge was praysed, who slewe the murtherers whiche killed his father, and slewe not their [Page] children: for he had a regard vnto the law of God. The cause of this prohibition Augustine bringeth: Augustine. God (sayth he) may punishe the sonne for the father: bycause although he afflicte hym in this worlde, yet he can saue hym in the worlde to come. And this can not man doo. Farther, god seeth that the children are not innocentes: but man seeth not that. Although the ciuill lawes are herein a great deale more seuere, and do punishe the children for the fathers sake, as it is in the digestes, In treason the children are punished for the fathers. and in the Code, ad I. Iuliam maiestatis: yet they put not the sonne to death for the father, but depriue hym of all hys fathers goods, dignityes, and honours. Howbeit they lefte some parte for the doughters, whiche parte was called Falcidia, to mary them withall. Otherwise the ciuile lawes agree with the lawe of god. For in the Code de paenis in the lawe Sancimus, it is commaunded that the punishement be not transferred vnto other, either to kinsfolkes by affinity, or to kinsfolkes by bloud, but onely to be layd vpon the author of the crime. And yet as wel this law as the other before, were ordeyned both of the self same Emperours Archadius and Honorius. But the cause why it was so seuerely decreed agaynst treason, seemeth to be this, to feare men away from this kynde of wicked crime. Yet the lawes of god decree no suche thing of that matter: but this by expresse woordes they commaunde, not to kyll the sonne for the father. But for goods they ordayne nothyng. But our aduersaryes haue transferred thys ciuill lawe of treason vnto Heretikes. For they doo not onely punishe the father whiche is an Heretike, but also they depryue hys children of all his goods: howe iustly, I will not nowe tell. Of these thinges I haue made mention the more largely: bycause Iiphtah was thrust out of hys fathers inheritaunce, and thereby seemed to beare the iniquity of hys father. Nowe wyll I returne vnto the Hystory.
3 Then Iiphtah fled from his brethren: and dwelt in the lande of Tob: and there gathered idle fellowes vnto Iiphtah, and went out with hym.
4 And in processe of tyme the chyldren of Ammon made warre with Israell.
5 And when the Ammonites began to fyght with Israell, the Elders of Gilead went to set Iiphtah out of the land of Tob.
6 And they sayd vnto Iiphtah: Come and be our captayne, that we may fight with the children of Ammon.
7 Iiphtah answered the Elders of Gilead, did not ye hate me, and expell me out of my fathers house? and why then come ye nowe vnto me, when ye are vexed.
8 And the Elders of Gilead sayde vnto Iiphtah: Therefore we turne agayne vnto thee now, that thou mayst go with vs, and fight agaynst the children of Ammon, and be our head, ouer all the inhabitantes of Gilead.
9 Then answered Iiphtah vnto the Elders of Gilead: If ye bring me home agayne to fight against the chyldren of Ammon, and if the Lord deliuer them before me, shall I be your head?
10 And the Elders of Gilead sayd vnto Iiphtah: The Lord heare betwene vs, if we do not according to thy woord.
11 Then Iiphtah went with the Elders of Gilead, and the people made him head and captayne ouer them. And Iiphtah spake al his woordes before the Lord in Mizpah.
The land whereunto Iiphtah fled, was called Tob, Why the land [...] was called Tob. namely of the name of the possessor therof, otherwise Tob signifieth good. But here it is the proper name of the Lord of that land.
Idle men. That is vaine. This woord signifieth poore men, and such as were oppressed for debte. So also there came vnto Dauid, when he fledde from Saule, men that were in debt, and heauy of harte.
And they went out with him. Namely to warre agaynste the enemyes of the people of God: and they liued of the spoyle. For Iiphtah beyng a man banished and dryuen oute of hys countrey, hadde nothynge wherewyth to maynetaine souldiers.
And the children of Ammon foughte. We haue tolde that the Ammonites made warre agaynste the Israelites, whiche is vnderstande to haue beene after Iiphtah departed from his fathers house: and when he shoulde goe into the land of Tob, he moued warre agaynste those Ammonites, and oute of theyr borders tooke praies and booties. Therefore, when the Gileadites wer oppressed, they came vnto Iiphtah, to bringe him home agayne, and by hys conducte to defende the city from theyr enemyes. They desire to haue him to be theyr head: bycause when they wer grieuously oppressed of theyr enemies, they iudged it expedient, that there shoulde be one to gouerne their thinges. And firste they had decreed among themselues, (as we haue heard) that he shoulde be theyr captayne, which fyrst shoulde fyghte againste theyr enemyes: but whither they did that by theyr owne iudgemente and ciuill reason, or by the oracle of God, the historye mencioneth not. But the act or cōdicion which the Gileadites ordeined, was fulfilled by Iiphtah: for he with a few souldiours assayled his enemies. Therefore they seyng that they were bound to stand to theyr couenant, came vnto Iiphtah and chose him captayne, bicause he fyrste of all beganne the battayle agaynste the Ammonites.
This is worthy to be marked, that the Gileadites call not Iiphtah kinge, Iiphtah a [...]oli [...] ted captayne, & not kinge. but only captayne or ruler. Wherfore they are not to be accused as the Sechemites were. For they did chuse Abimelech kinge, but these men constitute Iiphtah captaine, to fight against theyr enemies now for the presente time, and also hereafter when oportunity should serue. And vndoubtedly they do wel and wisely in choosing Iiphtah: for he was a man expert and valiant in warres.
But god had with himself before in secret decreed, that he shoulde be iudge ouer all Israell, whiche manifestlye appeareth by those woordes whiche we shall afterward heare: And the spirite of the Lord came vpon Iiphtah. Farther, we must consider, that Iiphtah therfore fled, bicause his bretherne had thrust him out of his fathers inheritance, neither left they him any thing to defend his life with all: wherfore he had rather fly, and liue in exile, then to liue with ignominye in his country. This vndoubtedly came of a noble stoute courage, that he woulde not liue there, where he continuallye hearde his byrth vpbraided vnto him, and where al men counted him for a bastard. Therfore he got him to an other place, and exercised the arte of warrefare. It is also possible, that that matter came in controuersy, and the Iudges, to gratify the legitimate bretherne, did not onely iudge that he should be depriued of his fathers goods, The law commaunded not to banish bastardes. but also be thruste oute of the citye, and seemeth to me verye probable. For when the Gileadits came vnto hym, and of theyr owne accorde offred vnto hym the pryncipalytye, he aunsweared: Did not ye expell mee oute of the citye? These woordes declare that Iiphtah was handled more seuerelye, then the lawe commaunded. For the law commaunded not to banishe bastardes. The Gileadites aunsweare that they did so in dede, but as before they coulde expel him, so also nowe it was in theyr power, to call him home againe and make him ruler. But nowe, sayth [Page] Iiphtah, you call me agayne when ye are in miserye. As thoughe he woulde haue saide, otherwise yee woulde not haue called me againe. It is so, saye they, and therfore we come vnto thee, that thou maist fight against our enemies: bicause we are afflicted.
But in that it is written we are turned againe, we muste not so vnderstande it, as though they had before bene with Iiphtah, but to turne again, is in this place to be referred vnto the mind: as though it should haue bene sayd, we haue chaunged our counsel & purpose. Then Iiphtah, like a wise mā, would not be satisfied with these words, but required the couenants of the principality to be cōfirmed If I sayth he, shal put my selfe in daunger, and god shal geue vnto me the victory, shall I be your hed? He did not streyght way geue credite to theyr firste woordes: bicause he feared least they would not kepe promise, which had before doone him such hurt: nether worketh he these things priuely with them, but in a place most famous, What place Mizpa was. namely in Mizpa. There in the olde time the kinges of Chanaan assembled against Iosua, whom when he had vanquished, & returned w t the victory, he built in the same place an aultar to the Lord. Whefore it was a custom frō that time, that they which should take warre in hand should assemble thither: wherevnto this also is to be added, y t Iiphtah (as we shal afterward vnderstand) dwelled there. He would also haue them to sweare, that the promises might be the more certayne, as by that appeareth whych foloweth: God heare betwene me and you. For to sweare is nothinge els, then to call God for a witnesse of those thinges, which eyther we affirme, or deny.
But the requeste of Iiphtah is not ambicious. For that vice then hath place, when the office of a magistrate is sought by bribery, Iiphtah is not guilty or ambicion. deceite, corruption and euil artes. But when a man seeth himselfe to be called vnto it, and that he may profite the pub. wealth, and vnderstandeth that he can obtayne the office of a magistrate vpon an honest condicion, it can not be sayde that he doth it ambiciouslye. Iiphtah is now chosen, to endaunger himselfe for his country, to fight agaynste the enemies of god, A comparison betwene Abimelech and Iiphtah. he vseth no bribery nor deceat: Wherfore he is far from ambition. But Abimelech did far otherwise behaue himselfe, he slew his bretherne, did violence vnto the Sechemites, and tooke away the holy mony.
But Iiphtah although he were reprochfully handled of his owne friendes, yet he slayeth them not, neyther didde he sollicyte the Gileadites to create him ruler, onely he promiseth that he will go to the battayle, so that they woulde performe that which of theyr own accord they offred.
A question, whether these mens doyinges were lawfull.But here may iustly be demaunded, how it was lawfull for them to geue the principality vnto Iiphtah, or for him to take it vpon him, being Mamzer. For the law commaunded that no Mamzer should not enter into the congregation of god which was, eyther to take vpon him any sacred ministery, or els the office of a magistrate. Vndoubtedly none of the Hebrewe, Greke and lattin interpreters, that I know of, once marked this doubte. But I thinke herein may two reasons be alledged. Firste, although the lawe seemeth to be violated, yet god, who was the author of the law, would at thime time by this priueledge haue infringed. And we may vnderstand that they wer admonished by an oracle, to chuse him prince, which should fyrst set vpon the enemies, whatsoeuer he were. This if they receaued by the inspiration of god, then were they free from the lawe: for they myghte thinke with themselues, that God made the lawe for men, and not for hymselfe. This is a singular priueledge of god, wherein he commaunded that whosoeuer fought first, should be made the head. Iiphtah fought: Wherfore by the couenant and iudgemente of God, it was necessarye that he shoulde be chosen the heade. [Page 184] But what if without any oracle they had determined this thing onely by iudgement among themselues? Sinned they or no in making a bastard their captain? No verely. For this is to be obserued in all preceptes, What is to be done when two preceptes for one time are cō trary one to an other. aswell ceremoniall as iudiciall and morall, when two preceptes of god do seme to be contrary one to an other, so that the one is a let vnto the other, that they cannot both be obserued at one time, yea rather it is necessarye that the one of thē be for that time omitted, then that which shalbe iudged to be more weyghtye and better is to be retayned. And yet in the meane time is not that other which is counted of les value violated: because there in is nothing done against the will of god. The law commaundeth euery man to defende the helth of his neyghbour, & if a man be magistrate, A similitude. to defend his city by municions. The same law commaūdeth not to labor on the Sabaoth day. The enemye beisegeth the city and that on the Sabaoth daye, bycause he knoweth that that law is layd vpon the citizens. Here seemeth contrariety of preceptes: for on the one parte health is to be defended, and on the other part the Sabaoth is to be obserued. The Machabites iudged it best to fighte, bycause the health of the publike wealth seemed greater and of antiquitye, An other similitude. then the ceremony of the Sabaoth. Also the law is to feede the hungry, and an other law commaūdeth, that the shew bread should be eaten of none, but of the priests onely. Dauid being hungry cometh vnto the priest, he hath nothing but the shew bread: wherfore two contrary preceptes come together. But the wise priest followeth and obserueth that which is the greater, namely to feede the hungrye, and bringeth forth the shew bread, and helpeth Dauid. Also ther is an other law, The iii. similitude. that we muste minister weapons vnto the Magistrate, For he muste be holpen of his subiectes. And it is contrarily ordeyned that thinges consecrated vnto god shall not be transferred to other vses. Dauid the kings sonne in law, and his captayne which made warres for him, as the chiefe of his warrefare, was then vnarmed, the priest had no wepon at hand, but onely the sword of Goliath. Here ar two precepts which seme contrary, the priest followeth the one, & geueth vnto the magistrate the sword, bycause he iudged it better to arme the magistrate, then to obserue the ceremony. There is also a law that the church shoulde not be without ministers, so that it shoulde be destitute of them. The fourth similitude And there is an other lawe in Paule that Neophytus, that is, a man newelye entred into Christian relygion, should not be made a byshop. The church of Myllan was without a byshop, neyther could it finde a mete bishop, which was both pure from the sect of the Arrians, and there withall had also greate authoritye and doctrine of god. There is none but Ambrose, but he is Neophitus & Catechumenus. Ambrose a Neophite and newly instructed in religiō is made a byshop. Here doo twoo lawes mete together, which in shew seme contrary: but it was mete that the lesse law should geue place vnto the greater. For Christ so taught, when by the sentence of the prophete he sayd: I will haue mercy and not Sacrifice. And yet he doth not say that he will not haue sacrifice, but if two preceptes meete together, whereof the one is of mercy, and the other of sacrifice, he testifieth that he had rather haue mercy then sacrifice. So it seemeth was now don as touching Iiphtah, that whē two lawes vrged, the one to defend the city from straungers: and the other that a bastard should not be made a Magistrate, that law was to be obserued, which serued best for the safety of the city.
12 Then Iiphtah sent messengers vnto the kinge of the children of Ammon, sayinge: what haste thou to doe with me that thou arte come agaynst me, to fyght in my land?
[Page]13 And the kinge of the children of Ammon aunsweared vnto the messengers of Iiphtah: bicause Israell tooke my lande, when they came from Egipte, from Arnon, euen to Iaboc, and vnto Iarden, now therfore restore them with peace.
14 Yet Iiphtah sent messengers agayne vnto the kinge of the children of Ammon.
15 And sayd vnto hym: Thus sayth Iiphtah, Israell tooke not the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon.
16 But when Israell came vppe from Egipte, and walked thorowe the wyldernesse, euen to the Sea Suph, then they came to Cades.
17 And Israell sente messengers vnto the kinge of Edom sayinge: Let me, I praye thee, goe thorowe thy lande. But the Kynge of Edome woulde not consente. And also they sente vnto the Kynge of Moab, but he woulde not. Therefore Israell abode in Cades.
18. Then they wente thorowe the wildernes, and compassed the Lande of Edome, and the Lande of Moab, and came by the Easte syde of the Lande of Moab, and pytched beyonde Arnon: neyther came they wythin the coaste of Moab. For Arnon was the border of Moab.
19 Wherefore Israell sente messengers vnto Sihon kinge of the Ammorhites, and king of Hebron, and Israell sayde vnto him: Let vs passe, we pray thee, by thy land into our place.
20 But Sihon trusted not Israell, to go thorough his coaste, but Sihon gathered together all his people, and pitched in Iaaz, and fought agaynst Israell.
21. And the Lorde GOD of Israell gaue Sihon and all his people into the handes of Israell, and they smote them: so Israell possessed all the lande of the Ammorrhites, the inhabitantes of that countrey.
22 And they possessed all the coaste of the Ammorhites from Arnon euen to Iaboc, and from the wildernes euen vnto Iordan.
23 Nowe therefore the Lorde GOD of Israell hath caste oute the Ammorhites before his people Israell, and shouldest thou possesse it?
24 Wouldest not thou possesse that whiche Chemos thy God geueth thee to possesse? So whomesoeuer the Lorde our God driueth out before vs, them will we possesse.
25. And arte thou now farre better then Balac the sonne of Zippor king of Moab? Did not he striue with Israell? Did not he fyght agaynste them?
26. When Israell dwelte in Hesbon and in her townes, and in Aroer, and in her Townes, and in all the Cities that are by the coastes of Arnon .300. yeares? Why did ye not then recouer them in that space?
[Page 185]27 Wherefore I haue not offended thee: but thou doest me wrong to warre agaynst me. The Lord the Iudge be Iudge thys day betwene the chyldren of Israel, and the chyldren of Ammon.
28 Howbeit the king of the children of Ammon hearkened not vnto the woordes of Iiphtaph, which he had sent hym.
When Iiphtah by his messengers saith vnto the king of Ammon: what hast thou to do with me? he vseth a phrase very much vsed of the Hebrues. He inquireth the cause, as though he woulde haue sayde: why inuadest thou our landes? what discord or iniuries are there betwene thee and me? The king of the Ammonites answered, that he therefore made warre, bicause the Israelites did hym iniury, which tooke away his landes, namely from the borders of Arnon, euen to Iaboc and Iarden. He complayneth that all that coast was taken from hym, which was betwene those riuers. This he pretendeth to be the cause of the war. And he desired that they would restore peaceablye, that is, without warre, that which they had taken away from him. He seemeth to promise that he will leaue of from warre, if the Israelites woulde performe this. Iiphtah denieth that the thyng is so: VVe haue not taken away (sayth he) your land. And bringeth a reason: Bicause when the Israelites came vp out of Egipt, they of their owne wyll sent messengers vnto the kyng of Edom, that they might haue leaue to passe throughe his borders: which thing he would not let them doo: so farre is it of that wee dyd them iniury. The people abode in Cades: so muche tempered they themselues frō violence and weapons. They went on the syde of the land of Edom: for the Edomites would not permit Israel, to go straight through the middest of their country. Wherefore my people rather iourneyed with great labour, then that they were troublesome vnto any man. And pitched beyond Arnon. There were the endes of Moab Wherefore ye can not complaine that we did anye man iniurye. Therfore when the Israelites saw that they could not leade their host throughe the borders of Edom or Moab, they sent vnto Sihon king of the Amorhites: But he would not: neither did he onely denye them passage through his borders, but also assembled an host, and pursued them. And the battaile beyng ioyned, God deliuered him in to the handes of the Israelites. The Israelites possessed y e land by the righte of warre. Wherefore (sayth he) we haue done thee no wrong: for this land we possesse by the right of warre. Sihon assayled vs with his power, and the victory fel on our syde: wherfore both he, and all his land by the right of warre came into our power.
And the Lord delyuered. Wherfore, forasmuch as Israel by the ryght of war succeded Sihon, that land which thou desirest, is not thine, but in the olde tyme pertained vnto Sihon the king. Therfore when we occupied this land, thou diddest not possesse it, but the Amorhites.
Neither do we possesse this land by the right of warre onely, They also possessed it by the gift of God. but also by the gift of God: for the Lord our God, which is Lord of al kingdomes, hath geuen it to vs, and deliuered it into our power. This is the second reason that Iiptah vseth: for by the first he onelye sheweth that those places came vnto him by the right of warre, without any wrong doing. But some man might say: It is well perceiued that god gaue it bicause he draue out the Ammonits. how knowest thou y t God gaue thee this land: Bicause (saith he) he expelled the old inhabiters the Amorhites before vs: and wylt thou succede the Amorhites? as though hee would say, by what right? He bringeth an argument a simili, that is from the lyke. You (sayth he) worship the God Chemos, and you thinke you haue your lād by his benefite, and ye beleue that ye possesse it by very good right: So we haue receiued our land, not from an idole as you haue, but from the true God, Chemos the god of he Ammonites. and we retayne it by very good ryght. He calleth not Chemos god, bicause he beleued that idole to be a god: but speaketh in this maner, bicause they iudged that it was so.
Art thou better then Balac the sonne of Zippor? They possessed also by the right of prescription. Thys is the thyrde reason. We possesse it (saith they) not onely by the right of warre or gyft, but also [Page] by the right of prescription: for we haue had it nowe in our handes this .300. yeares, and Balac though he were a mighty Prince, and other also, neuer required it againe: wherfore then doest thou demaund it againe, especiallye seing we haue had it so long time? That which we translate, Art thou better? in Hebrue it is Tob tob. For bicause they want the comparatiue degree, they vse in steede of it a repeticion of the positiue degree.
Why Balac fought agaynst the Israelites. Balac of whom he speaketh, was he which hired Bileam to cursse the Iewes. And when he fought against the Israelites, he did not therefore fight, bicause he would wrest from them that land: this was onely his entent, that they shoulde not enter into his borders.
Hesbon. Hesbon was the kingly Citye of Sihon. There dwelled Israell and in all her townes .300. yeares, and now at the last demaundest thou it agayne? If a man wyl count the number of the yeares euen to this time, he shall not fullye finde .300. yeares, but onely .270. But so vse they to doo which prescribe any thing by time, to adde somwhat aboue the iust number. Although the scripture also is wont in supputacions, many times to follow the greater number. And .270. yeares come nere vnto .300. yeares, then to .200. yeares. And for that cause it seemeth that the number should be put whole.
Wherfore Iiphtah concludeth after this maner: I haue not offended thee. Bicause thou art the occasion of the warre, and haue shewed thee my reasons: now resteth to put the matter in Gods hand, he wyll iudge best. Thys was the message of Iiphtah.
We must fyrst entreate by messengers, before we go to weapons. Titus Liuius.This Oration, as farre as it appeareth, pertaineth vnto the iudicial kynde, and entreateth of possession, and the reasons are layde foorth. But nowe let vs marke that Iiphtah before he moueth battail, sendeth messengers before. That is a custome verye laudable: For Titus Liuius writeth in his first booke, that it was the maner of Rome, that before warre was proclaymed againste their enemies, messengers were sent to complaine of the iniuries, and to require againe the thinges taken away. And if by their message they nothing profited, they returned vnto the Senate: who vnderstanding the matter, proclaimed war by the publike assent. For wise men iudged it not best, rashlye and sodainlye to fall to warres. So Iiphtah, though he were a warlike and valiant man, yet woulde he gouerne the matter wisely and moderatlye: For he was not so light brained as many now adayes are, who firste prepare them selues to battaile, and make a bragging, before any man know that there is any warre proclaimed. God thus ordained in the .27. chap. of Deut. when thou shalt come to any Citye, thou shalt firste offer peace. So Iiphtah assayeth firste to compose the matter by woords, before he goeth to hand strokes. The king of Ammon alledgeth a cause in dede, but it is but a fained cause: for first it was not the lād of Ammon, but of Moab, and the Amorhites draue them out, as the second chap. of Deut. testifieth. For Israel had none of their landes. For God had before said that he woulde geue nothing vnto the Israelites, of that which pertained either to the Edomites, or to the Ammonites, or to the Moabites: and when they offred no wrong vnto anye man, Sihon the king of the Amorhites pursued them with an host, and assayed to destroy them: but God gaue the victory, wherin both Sihon was slain, and his kingdome came to the Israelites. Wherfore it can not seme that they did wrong vnto the Ammonites: for that land at that time longed to the Amorhites, which they before had taken away from the Moabites.
Whither the Israelites sent messengers vnto the Moabites or no.But in this place ariseth a doubt: for it is written that the Israelites sent messengers vnto the Moabites, and that is not found in the .21. chap. of Numb. The Hebrue interpreters say, that that may be gathered out of the .2. chap. of Deutr. where it is after this sorte written: I sent messengers vnto Sihon the king of the Amorhites with woordes of peace, saying: Let vs passe throughe thy lande, and we wil go by the high way, we wil not decline neither to the right hande nor to [Page 186] the leaft. Sel vs meate for money, for to eate, geue vs water for money to drink. Onely, geue vs leaue to passe through, as did the children of Esau, which dwell in Seir, and the Moabites which dwel in Arre.
Ther are three principal pointes in this message: What wer the chief points of I phtahs me [...] sage. for first Iiphtah answereth that he possesseth this land by the right of war, secondly by gift, & lastlye by prescription, I thinke it good to examine these thinges singularly and aparte.
¶Of things whych are taken by the ryght of warres.
AS touching the first, we learne that it may be, that some thing may be claymed by the right of warre, which maye be confirmed both by mans lawes, and by the lawes of God. But I wyl begyn with mans lawes. In the Digestes de captiuis et postliminio reuersis in the law Postliminium: Postliminium, a law by [...] we receaue agayn [...] [...]hich [...] we lost [...] in warres. The thinges that we haue lost in war, or in affaires of war, if we afterward recouer the same again, we shal possesse them by the law Postliminium. For so long as they are not recouered, they are possessed of our enemies. And thys ryghte is towarde those, whyche are declared to bee enemyes. But suche were declared to bee enemies, against whom the people of Rome publikelye proclaimed warre, or they which publikely prohibited warre against the people of Rome, as it is had in the same title, in the law Hostes. For Pirates or theues cannot by this meanes attaine to be owners, or possesse any thing by the law of warre. For warre ought to be made, to the ende to attaine something by the right of warre. And in the Digestes de acquirendo rerum dominio, in y e lawe Naturale, paragrapho the last. Such thinges as are taken from enemies, by the common law of all men, agreing vnto naturall reason, are straightwaye made theirs which take them. And thus the lawes of man as touching this thing, are very manifest.
So is it also by the lawes of God. Abraham, as it manifestlye appeareth in the booke of Genesis the .14. chap. made warre against the .v. kinges, whiche had led away Lot prisoner. The battaile being finished, theyr praye came into the handes and power of Abraham: which maye easelye bee proued, bicause of that pray he gaue tithes vnto Melchisedech. But it had not bene lawfull for him to haue geuen tithes of an other mans goods: therfore they wer his own, of which he gaue. Wherfore we must beleue that that pray was truelye in his possession. For in that he gaue it to the king of Sodom, it was of his mere liberality: for he was not therunto compelled by the law. I coulde make mencion, what thinges Iosua, Othoniel, Dauid, Salomon, and manye other mo possessed by the ryght of warre. For when those Princes had the victory, Warre is a iust woorke to attayne possessiō the thinges taken from their enemies, came into their possession. But it is not sufficient to make warre, to clayme something by the right therof, but the warre also must be iust. Bycause vnles it be iust, it is not warre, but robbery.
But how shal we know when war is iust or vniust? Whereby iuste war is knowē from vniust. Augustine. Augustine (as he is alledged in th .23. Question .2. chap. Notandum) writeth that his war betwene Sihon and y e Israelites was iust. For they desired to passe wythout hurt, through his kingdome, which thing by humane fellowship should not haue bene denyed them, especiall seing they had faithfully promised, not to be troublesome to any man. This sentence of Augustine, the Gloser goeth about to defende, and that by ciuill lawes. In the Digestes de aqua pluuia cohercenda, in the lawe in summa, in the Paragraphe item varus, somethyng is permitted in an other mans ground, so that it be done without the hurt of the possessor. And in the Code D [...] Seruitutibus, in the law per agrum, Maximianus and Diocletianus doo thus ordaine: That no man can prohibite thee to vse the common high waye. And that thing onely did the Israelites desire: wherfore being repulsed, they iustly tooke warre in hand. So much sayth the Gloser, Whither a wa [...] ought to be geuē vnto an ho [...]t whose reason doth not so fully satisfy me. For that which Augustine speaketh of priuate men, may easely be admitted, and these thinges which are brought out of the ciuill law, do seeme also to [Page] be written concerning priuate men. But if a man wil leade an host through an other mans country, and if they faithfully promise, not to be troublesome, yet, whether a way ought straightway to be graunted him, or whether he ought to be beleued, it is not certaine. They promise (thou wilt say) that their host shal do no harme, but if they stand not to their promises, then shall the lande be in theyr power. Vndoubtedly Iulius Cesar would not permit the Heluecians to passe thorow his Prouince, although they promised, that they woulde passe without doing iniury or hurt. The Israelits tought iustly against Sihon. But I say that the warre which the Israelites made against Sihon, was iust, but not therfore bicause he denied them leaue to passe throughe his country, but bicause he came out of his borders with his host, and willinglye offred wrong vnto the Israelites. For euery man ought to defend both himself and his against violence. That which Augustine bringeth, hath some shewe, yet his reason is not firme. For how could Sihon know certainly, whither the Isralites would do him no hurt, especially they being so many in number? For ther were sixe hundred, three score & sixe thousand armed souldiours, & wel appoynted to the battail. He might peraduenture haue permitted them to haue passed. and that safely, although not al of them together, but by bandes. But seing the first reason before alledged is sufficient, wee must not muche labour for Augustines sake.
What maner of warre is iuste.But now I wil generally declare, what maner of war is counted iust. Such a war is counted iust, whiche is taken in hande at the commaundement of the Magistrate, either to demaund things againe, or els to put away iniuries, or to reuenge them, as it is had in the .23. question, the .2. chap. iustum, and they ar the woordes of Isidorus. Isidorus For first we must beware that war be not taken in hande by the authority of a priuate man. But the causes wherfore war may iustlye be made, are these, to require thinges taken away, or els to repulse iniury. Wherunto is agreable that which Augustine writeth in the same place in the chapter Dominus: Augustine. Iust war is that which is taken in hand to reuēge iniuries. After this maner war is iustly proclaimed against Cities, when they wyll not either render thinges taken away, or amende those thinges which of theirs was vniustly done. For if they wil not punish the guilty, it is lawful for other to make warre against them. So al Israel tooke war in hand against Beniamin, that a most filthy wicked crime should not remaine vnpunished. But Augustine addeth, that those warres also do in especial seme iust, which are taken in hande by the commaundement of God, as are many which were done in the old Testament. For if God commaunde once to make warre, wee muste not seeke for anye other cause of iustice. For God knoweth very well what is to be rendred vnto euery man. For then both captaine and souldiours are not so muche to be counted authors of the warre, as ministers of God & of his law. And therfore when the people are after this maner called to war, they ought not to neglect the cōmaundement. Augustine Wherfore the same Augustine in his .205. epistle to Bonifacius the Earle, a mā of war, which at that time gouerned Affrike vnder Cesar: Thou oughtest not (saith he) to thinke, y t they which with weapons serue the publik wealth, cā not please God. This was the propositiō, wherof afterward he bringeth reasōs. For Dauid saith he, made many wars, and yet was he dearely beloued of God.
And vndoubtedly I could bring forth very many examples out of the old testament. But the Anabaptistes cry, that the old Testament pertaineth nothing vnto vs. I wil therfore make mencion of those thinges whych Augustine alledgeth out of the new Testament. The Centurion came vnto Christ, and desired him to heale his seruant which was sicke: but Christ said he would come to hys house. The Cēturion said: I am not worthy that thou shouldest come vnder my roofe: but onely say the woord, & my seruant shalbe healed. And other woordes which are red in the .8. chapter of Mathew. At the last Christ answered, that he founde not so muche faith in Israel, no not in those whiche seemed most holye. [Page 187] And the same man was a Centurion, and had soldiours vnder him: vnto whom for all that Christ ascribeth a very good and most excellent faythe. In the Actes also of the Apostles, the .x. chapter, it is written that Cornelius so lyued in warfare, that the Angell testified of hym, that hys prayers wer heard of God. Yea & God also so regarded hym, that at Peters hande he hearde the Gospell, was baptised, and receaued the holye ghost. And the Soldiours when they came vnto Iohn, to be baptised of him, as it is in the third chapter of Luke, asked what they should doo. Iohn aunswered, ye shall doo violence vnto no man: bee ye content with your wages. Neyther called he them backe from warfare, but rather confirmed them, when he commaunded them to be content wyth their wages. The same Augustine againste Faustus in his .xxii. booke, and .lxxiiii. chapter saythe: The Lorde was tempted of the Herodians, whither it were lawfull to geue tribute vnto Cesar, and he aunswered: Geue vnto Cesar that whych is Cesars, and the thinges that are of God, to God. By which woordes he woulde signifye nothing els, but that tributes are to be geuen vnto Princes. And tributes are geuen, that Princes should vse the swoorde, defend the right of the publike welth, and make warre, when neede shall require. Which thing if it had not bene lawfull, the Lord would neuer haue commaunded them to pay tributes vnto them.
But to returne to the Epistle of Augustine. In making of iust war, saith he, What thynges are to be taken heede of in iuste warres. many thinges are to be taken heede of. For it is not sufficient that the warre be iust, except also the warre be iustly handled. Wherefore he admonisheth hys Earle: when, saythe hee, thou puttest on thyne armour, remember that thy strength is the gyft of God, and determine wyth thy selfe not to abuse that gift against God. Yea rather doo thys, fyght for hys lawes and name, let promises be kept euen with enemies, but muche more with friendes, for whom thou makest warre. By which woordes hee reprehendeth those Soldiours, whiche are more grieuous in Cities, then the very enemies, of which we see in our dayes a great many mo then we would, which when they are in their places where they wynter, it is wonderfull to see how they handle the Citezens, and the men of the country: it is horrible to see what filthy and abhominable things they commit. He addeth also the thirde caution. Thinke with thy selfe that warre must not be made but for necessity. Wherefore let the minde alwaies be enclined vnto peace. Make warre, bicause thou canst not otherwyse doo: but if thou canst make peace, refuse it not.
Warre is taken in hand onely to amende thinges amysse. Yea, and the Apostles afflicted certaine, that they might become the better. Paul sayd vnto the Corrinthians, deliuer suche a one to Sathan to the destruction of the fleshe, that the spirite may be saued. And to Timothe he sayth of Hymeneus & Alexander, I haue delyuered them to Sathan, to learne not to cursse. So oughte they also to restrayne Princes, that they maye bee made better. Augustine also in his .xix. Augustine. booke De ciuitate dei, sayth, that warres though they bee neuer so iust, yet vnto godly men, they seeme both troublesome and grieuous: for besydes other things which the nature of man escheweth, they shall see the iniquity of their aduersaries syde, for which they are compelled to fyght: and they cannot but be sorye for it. And in the Epistle before alledged: Rage not, saythe hee, nor waxe not insolent agaynst those that submyt them selues, but shewe mercye to those that are ouercome. Wherefore Virgil sayth: Spare them that submit them selues, Virgil. and destroye the proude.
Moreouer he admonisheth the same Earle, to beware of vyces, whyche are wont to followe hostes, namelye of fylthye luste, of rauenous pyllynge, and of dronkennesse. For it is a thyng moste vyle for thee therefore to make warre, to amende the vices of others, when as thou in the meane tyme art a great deale more vicious, and muche more art ouercome bothe wyth affections [Page] and diseases, then they are whyche are ouercome.
For in warre we reproue not the ende, but the desire to hurt, the crueltye of auengement, the outragiousnesse of rebelling, and the lust of bearing dominion. These thinges saith he, are condemned. For they, which forsaking suche vices doo make iust warre, are the Ministers of God and of the lawes. The same father against Faustus Manicheus: This order saith he, is to bee kept, that the war be proclaimed, either of God, or of Princes, to breake the pryde of man, and to came the stubburne.
Farther, the Souldiours oughte to bee perswaded, that the warre is iustlye made, and not taken in hande againste the woorde of God: otherwyse let them not fight. Neither doo I to this ende speake these thinges, bicause I woulde haue Soldiours to vnderstand the secretes of Princes, but that knowing & wittingly they suffer not themselues to fight against true and iust causes. Yet it may be (saith Augustine) that the Prince may make warre againste his conscience, and yet his Soldiours nothing offende, so long as they obey the ordinarye power. For the people must obey their Prince. And in their so doyng, it may be doubtfull vnto them, whether their Prince make warre contrarye to the commaundement of God. But they are excused, so long as they obey their owne Prince in a doubtful cause, their own Prince I say, and not a straunge Prince. Wherefore those hired Soldiours can not be excused, which hauing no respecte vnto the cause, Againste hyred Soldiours. but onely for mony and rewardes sake do serue straunge Princes. Wherefore Iiphtah thus reasoned, as touching the first point of his Oracion, we haue taken the land by the right of warre: therefore thou vniustly requirest the same of vs.
The next poynt is, our God hath geuen it vnto vs, whiche is the Lorde and distributer of all thinges humane. He brinketh his argument from the gyfte of God. God is y e distributer of kyngdomes. Virgil. And that God might geue and distribute kingdomes, the verye Ethnike authours also sawe. And therefore in Virgil Eneas doth so often boast, that hee by the commaundement of God went into Italy, and for that cause would not abide either at Carthage, or in Sicilia, when he mought haue obtained either of those kingdomes. Augustine Augustine in his .v. booke De ciuitate dei, the .xxviii. chap. Of kingdomes sayth he, and Prouinces it is certaine that God distributeth them, both when, and how muche, and to whom hee wyll: and that by secrete iudgementes, but not vniust. In the booke of Genesis, God promised vnto Abraham and his posterity, the land of Chanaan: but hee promised it after foure hundred yeares. Now, saith he, I wyl not geue it, for as yet the synnes of the Chananites are not full. I wyll not cast them out now, but I wyll tary tyll their iniquitye be come to the hyghest: afterward I wyll bring you in. Also in the seconde chapter of Deutronomy, it is written that the Horites dwelled in mount Seir, which were men experte in warres and very valiant, whom God sayth he draue oute of those mountaynes, that the Chyldren of Esau myght possesse the lande. And in the same chapter he testifieth that he dyd cast out the people of Emim, & gaue their kingdomes vnto the Ammonites, and draue out Zanzumim oute of theyr places, and placed the Moabites there.
If thou wylt say, that thys was done by God peculiarly agaynste these nacious, bycause the Edomites had their ofspring of Esau, the Ammonites and Moabites of Lot, which was kynsman vnto Abraham, and had together with hym accomplished most daungerous viages: I aunswer, the same may be saide also in the same place of other nacions, which came not of Abrahrm. The Capadocians draue out the Heuites whyche were the first inhabiters, who going out of Capadocia, How regions are sayde to bee deuided by lot. destroyed them, and in their place inhabited those Regions. And in Deuteronomy the .xxxii. chapter it is wrytten, when God by lot deuided the Gentiles, and the people according to the number of the Chyldren of Israell. [Page 188] In that it is sayde to be done by lot, al that is to be referred vnto our vnderstandyng, whiche see not the causes of thinges. But wyth God nothing is done by lot. God hath distributed the nacions according to the number of the chyldren of Israel. For the Israelites were not yet increased, when God put the people in those Regions, who at the laste gaue place vnto the Israelites when they came.
Neyther ought we to be offended, if by this distribution oftentimes fertil and fat landes happen vnto the vngodly. For Augustine in hys .4. Augustine. booke De ciuitate dei, the .xxxiii. chapter, sayth: That giftes whiche dure but for a tyme, happen both to the iust and vniust. For God maketh his sunne to shyne, both vpon the good and the euyll, and rayneth vpon the iust and vniust. But by this common benefite the godly haue this commoditye onely, that they vnderstande that these thinges are not the chiefest gyftes which wee oughte to looke for, bycause these are common both to the good and to the euyll. But the godlye wayte for other more excellent, which are not common to the good and euyll. Yea and Danyel saith: The name of the Lord be blessed for euer: for it is he whiche transferreth kingdomes, and driueth out the first inhabiters, and bringeth in other. Neither doth he onely bring men into Prouinces, but also setteth Aungels to rule ouer them, as we there reade of the Prince of the Persians and Grecians. And he hath not onely deuided men by landes, but also by tounges and manners. Farther, we must remember that these mutacions were not done onelye at the begynning, but also in the latter times. For the Frenche men possessed Gallia, and the Englishe Saxones Britane. but the Britanes heing cast out by them, found new places in Gallia by power and violence, and that part whiche they obtayned, they called Britane of them selues. The men of Gallia also of late, going out of their own borders, possessed a great part of Italy. The Hunnes subdued vnto themselues the Pannonites, and called the Countrey Hungaria. So God distributeth kyngdomes, casteth out some, and bringeth in other some, as it seemeth good vnto his iust iudgement, which is secrete. For the earth is the Lordes, and the fulnes thereof. This distribution chaunced euen from the beginning to the sonnes of Noe, and afterwarde to those whych builded the Tower of Babel: for God dispersed them throughout the whole world.
Now I wyl declare by what meanes God is wont to geue kyngdomes. God distributeth kingdom [...] of his mere liberality. He geueth them of his owne liberalitye, no right compelling him thereunto. That is the true manner of gifte, which otherwyse is not a gift, vnlesse it be free. And yet nothing letteth, but that God by the dutyes and obedience of godlye men, may be prouoked to geue. He geueth in deede often tymes manye thinges vnto godly men, but yet of no dutye. For there hath bene none at anye tyme so godlye, that he coulde desyre any thing of God, as his owne by right. For hee muste doo hys dutye, though God geue nothing. And yet is a gyft a certayne reward, which although it be free, and geuen wythout any right compelling thereunto, neuerthelesse, bicause it is after a sorte bestowed vpon duties, it hath a shewe of a rewarde. So in Ezechiel God gaue a gift vnto the king of Babilon. Bycause (sayth he) he laboured in the siege of Tire, I wyll geue vnto hym the lande of Egipt.
Ther ar also amongest men recompences, A gift in way [...] of reward, when one office is recōpenced with an other office. These also are voluntarye, neyther can they bee demaunded by iudiciall action, and therefore they are counted among giftes. But we haue nothing which we can geue vnto him. We haue nothinge to geue vnto God. Wherfore if we attempt to bring any thing vnto him, we render vnto him his owne. And therfore there is no respect of merite to be referred in vs towarde him. Wherefore God geueth liberally, no law compelling hym thereunto.
Giftes maye be reuoked.But it may be demaunded, whether suche giftes maye bee reuoked? Why should they not? when as the giftes of men also are sometimes reuoked, as it is in the Code De reuocatione donacionum. First, if they haue condicions annexed to them, whych haue not bene performed. And after that manner vndoubtedlye God gaue the lande of Chanaan to the Chyldren of Israell, namelye that they shoulde woorshyppe hym, not onely in ceremonies, but also in good manners and holynes. But seing thys condicion was not performed, God iustlye reuoked hys gyfte, and ledde them awaye captiue, and gaue the lande vnto the Babilonians, Assirians, Egiptians, and Romanes.
A great ingratitude also of hym that is endued wyth the gifte, debilitateth the gyft: for if he be so ingrate, that he wyll bee contumelious and reprochefull vnto the geuer, the gift is then reuoked. So God in Ezechiel complayneth: I haue clothed thee with vestures and garmentes of sundrye coulours: thou haste made those proper vnto Idolles, and haste geuen them to Baal. Therefore wyll I take away my garmentes from thee, Giftes of God are wythout repentaunce. and my clothings of sundry coulours. &c But thou wylt say, the giftes and vocation of God are wythoute repentaunce, as it is wrytten to the Romanes. I graunt that: but the chaunging is in vs, and not in God. For if we shall continue thankefull, and stande to the condicions, the gyft shoulde be firme and ratefied. Farther, Paule in that sentence spake of gyftes and calling, whych come vnto men by the eternal predestination of God, and not of those which are geuen but onely for a time. Wherefore seing God had not for the causes before rehearsed, cast out the Israelites from the lande of Chanaan, the gift remayned ratefied and whole. And Iiphtahs argument drawen of it, hath his strength and sure foundacion. Moreouer it may also seeme that God gaue that lande vnto the Israelites in the name of a dowry: for he woulde after a sorte wedde vnto hymselfe the Churche of the Iewes, The land was geuen vnto the Israelits with out any iniury to the Chananites. and geue vnto it somewhat for a dowry. And yet gaue he not that lande vnto them, to the iniury of the Chananites. For they were vngodly, and defiled with most grieuous wicked actes, as it appeareth in the .xx. chap. of Numbers. Neither coulde they complaine that they were cast out wrongfullye: wherefore Iiphtah doth verye well make his argument from the gift of God.
He addeth farther the third argument, deriued from prescription: VVe haue now (sayth hee) possessed thys lande three hundred yeares. Therefore thou doest vs iniury, in requiring it now of vs at the last.
¶Of Prescription.
Why the lawe of prescription was brought in HEreby we gather that the right of prescription is no newe thing, but a thing grafted of God hymselfe in the hartes of men.
But why it was founde out, I wyll in fewe woordes declare. It may be, that a man may possesse an other mans thing vnwittinglye. As for example: There is an heyre whiche succeedeth him that is deade, and among hys goodes he findeth somethinges that were vsurped by the former, while he lyued, or receaued for a pledge, which he being ignoraunt of, possesseth all those things with a good mynde. And so being ignoraunt and vnwitting, possesseth an other mans thing as his owne. What then? shal the heyre neuer seeke for the iust possession thereof? If the true owner doo neuer require his thing, ought the ignoraunt to defraude the heyre for euer, that he shoulde neuer possesse againe that thing as hys owne? For if the owner neuer demaunde hys owne thing againe, that is to be ascribed vnto his owne slothe and slouggishe negligence. Wherefore in detestacion of suche slouggishnes, and in commendacion of an vprighte fayth, and lastly for publike peace sake, the lawe of prescription was found out. Iiphtah nowe vseth thys lawe agaynst the Ammonites.
We saith he, haue possessed thys land this three hundred yeares. Why then doest thou make this garboyle and tumult agaynst vs? Except some certayne time were appointed, within the space whereof, and not beyonde, thinges myght be demaunded agayne, the possession of all thinges should be vncertaine: but from that humane thinges doth wonderfullye abhorre. Wherefore this euyll is remedyed by the right of prescription. The difinition of prescription. And it is defined in the Digestes de vsucapionibus, law .iii. that it is an addiction or claime of dominion by continuacion of possession, by the time appointed by the lawe. The difinition is plaine and manifest. But in these daies they make a difference betwene prescription and vsucapione, when yet in the Digestes, and among the olde Lawyers they wer not seperated.
In the tyme of Antonius Pius (as I remember) these beganne fyrst to bee seperated, so that vsucapio taketh place in thinges moueable, What differēce is betwene prescription and vsucapio. and prescription in thinges vnmoueable. But thus much by the way. But in our historye this is to be marked, that Iiphtah doth wisely deuide his argumentes: for he doth not first place the lawe of prescription, but before all thinges hee obiecteth the right of warre, afterward the gift of the true God: and his cause beyng so confirmed, at the last he vseth the lawe of prescription. And that hee doth therefore, bicause a possession continued, doth not by it selfe and alone prescribe: What thynges are required to the right of prescription. but it hath neede of a good title, and an vpright faith. A good title is, that the thing bee gotten by right order and lawfull manner. For he that hath gotten anye thing by theft or rapine, although he haue long possessed it, yet it prescribeth not. But if both the title be good, and his faith vpright, and continuance of tyme bee added, the prescription is firme and good. If we haue gotten any thing, eyther by bying, or by gift, or by inheritaunce, or suche lyke wayes, the tytle is good: but farther wee haue neede of an vpright fayth, whereby we are assured in our selues, that no mans right is iniured, and that we know that there is nothing which maye by iust meanes let vs. Wherefore Iiphtah hath a good tytle, the ryght of warre, and the gyft of God. He possesseth also with an vpryght fayth, bycause hee meaneth neyther fraude nor rapine. Wherefore he very well vseth the lawe of prescription.
But the tyme of prescription in thinges moueable, Of the tyme of prescription. is as touching our ciuill lawes three yeares: but in thinges vnmoueable, tenne or twentye yeares, if ignoraunce happen not. For if the owner knowe that it is his owne thyng which is possessed of an other, and he hold his peace so long, hee cannot afterwarde demaunde it againe. And the lawe seemeth iustlye to punishe suche negligence. But if the owner be ignoraunt, the tyme is farther proroged, namely to thirtye or fortye yeares. And this is done when ignoraunce happeneth, and that he possesseth it for himselfe, and not for an other: otherwyse it is no prescription. Howbeit thys we must knowe by the waye, that the Ecclesiasticall Canons, as touching prescription, doo differ from the ciuill lawes. For they, as we haue sayde, doo appoynt thirtye yeares, though the possessor be of an euyll fayth. For they determine that euyll faythe cannot let prescription. But as it is had in the .vi. De regulis iuris, chapter Possessor. A possessor of an euil faith, prescribeth by longnes of tyme. For we should haue a respect vnto the woorde of God, and wyth what conscience a man may possesse any thing. These thinges haue I alledged, that we might vnderstand, how Iiphtah vseth the law of prescription.
¶Of Custome.
NOw bicause althinges are certaine and manifest, I might returne vnto the history. But yet I thinke it good somwhat to speake, although briefelye, of Custome, bicause it hath great affinitye with prescription, and bicause our aduersaries doo styrre vp great tumultes, bicause of it, and woulde vtterlye oppresse [Page] vs with Customes.
What custome is firme.Custome (as it is had Extra. de Consuet. chapter the last) ought to be agreable vnto reason, and lawfully prescribed. The ciuil lawes assigne vnto custome ten or twenty yeares, the Canons, thirty or forty yeares. But most firme is that custome, Custome against the word of God, is of no force. the memorye of whose beginning is not extant amonge men. And this ought to be firme, that those thinges which are against the woord of God, do by no meanes prescribe. Wherfore that which the Papistes affirme, namelye that the Communion hath bene geuen but vnder one kinde thys foure hundreth or fyue hundreth yeares: bicause it is manifestlye against the woorde of God, they cannot proue that it is prescribed by custome. For suche a thyng is not (as you would say) prescriptable. By whiche selfe same meanes they can not bring the custome of the sole lyfe of Ministers, as prescript: for it was at the begynning extort by violence, Hostiensis. and it is against the woorde of God: althoughe Hostiensis saith, that the power of Custome is so great, that it compelleth Priestes to sole lyfe, What custome is vicious. in the distinction .xxiii. chapter Placuit. But, as the ciuill lawes determine, that Custome is vicious, which eyther is against nature, or els agaynst the common lawe. But that which I haue affirmed, hath hys foundacion in the holye Scriptures. For when Christ sayd vnto the Phariseis: Hipocrites, why violate ye the commaundement of God, bicause of your own tradicion? For God saith: Honour thy father, and thy mother. But you say: whosoeuer sayth to father or mother: The gyft. &c. they might haue prescribed vnto hym custome, but it was not lawful, bicause it was manifestly against the woord of God.
In the country of Taurus there was a custome, to kyll straungers and gests. The Persians had a custome, neuer to deliberate of waighty matters, but in feastes, and when they were dronke. Among the Sauromates there was a custome, that when they were drinking, they solde their daughters. These prescribe not, when as they are manifestly vicious and euyll. But that custome prescribeth, which is neither against the woord of God, nor the law of nature, nor the common law. For the right of custome commeth of the approbation, and secrete assent of the people. Otherwise, why are we bound vnto lawes? but bicause they were made, What differēce is betwene a lawe and a custome. Aristotle. the people consenting and agreing vnto them? For this is the difference betwene a custome and a lawe, bicause in the one is a secrete assent, but in the other an open assent. Wherfore such customes cannot be reuoked wythout daunger. Aristotle in Politicis admonisheth, that men which haue learned to doo sinister thinges, ought not to be compelled to do thinges dextere. Wherefore in thinges indifferent, and of no great value, custome is to be retayned. It is an old Prouerbe, [...], that is, Law and Country. For euery region hath certaine customes of their owne, which cannot easelye be chaunged. But as it is sayde, when they are againste the woorde of God, or againste nature, or the common lawe, they do not prescribe. For then are they not customes, but beastly cruelties.
It is very wel read in the Digestes, De legibus & Senatusconsultis, in the law de quibus: Augustine. Custome without reason, hath no force. And in the decrees, distinction the .viii. chapter Veritate, Augustine sayth: The truth being founde out, let custome geue place: let no mā presume to preferre custome before truth and reason. And in the next Canon, Christ sayd: I am the way, the truth and the life, he said not, Ciprian. Aquarii were they whiche in the Eucharist, vsed water in steede of wyne. I am the custome. Ciprian against y e * Aquarii. Let al custome, thoughe it be neuer so auncient, geue place vnto the truth, otherwise Peter when he was reprehended of Paul to the Galathians, myght haue claymed custome, but he assēted rather, that custome should geue place vnto the truth. Ciprian in the same Epistle agaynst the Aquarii: Custome (sayth he) without truth, is the auncientnes of error: and the more it obteyneth, the more grieuous it is. Let the Papistes therfore cease to bragge of their customes, which are altogether ful both of error and also of vngodlines.
Moreouer to establish a custome it is not sufficient, that some men do a thyng, or that a thing be often done, vnles it be so done, that it be receaued into a vse, What establysheth custome. & an institucion to be obserued. For many thinges are done either rashely or of necessity, which yet we wil not haue drawen into a custome. In the digestes de Itinere, & actu priuato, in the law .1. and last. Graunt that I go thorough the fielde once, and agayne, and the thyrd tyme, bycause peraduenture the hyghe way is so foule, that a man can not passe thoroughe it. Whither, bycause I sometymes go and returne thorough thy field, do I therefore get vnto my selfe in it the right of dominion & seruitude? No: for I entended not with that mynde to go thoroughe thy field, but bycause I was of necessity compelled thereunto. In the decrees distinction the .1. chap. Consuetudo: Custome is said to be a certain right, instituted by manners, whiche is taken for a law, when a lawe fayleth. What custome is. When in the first tymes of the Churche, when tyrannes persecuted Christian religion, godly men thorough feare were cōpelled to assemble together in houses and caues by night, and in the darke, thys assembly was by a certaine right & maner then instituted, counted lawful. But if we would, now that the Church is constituted, worshyp God after the same maner, we should both be derided & laughed at, & also it wer not to bee suffred. For they vsed not that manner, to the end they would haue it drawen into a custome, or that it should be an institutiō which other men should followe. Ambrose beyng Catechumenus, that is, newly conuerted to the Christian faith, and not baptised, was chosen Bishop of Millan, and Nectarius of Constantinople and peraduenture other. Yet is it not lawfull for vs now to followe the same custome, and to elect a Bishop, which neither hath seene sacred seruices, nor hath ben washed with the water of Baptisme. But they did so. They dyd so in deede, but compelled by necessity: bycause they had no other, which were both learned & endewed with authority, whō they might oppose against the Arriās.
So is that easely confuted, An answere to an example of Eusebius. whiche they are wont to bryng out of the Hystory of Eusebius, for the communicatyng vnder one kinde, that Serapion sent a child, and commaunded the bread to be dipped in the wyne. I could in deede expounde that place otherwise: but at this tyme it shalbe sufficiēt to say, that that was not therfore so done then, thereby to bring in a custome which should be imitated of others. Wherfore custome is not made by examples, but by the assent, approbation, and institution of the people. Otherwise ther are in many places dronkēnes and night robbynges. But these things, bicause they are not allowed of the people, as institutions to be obserued, haue not the power of a custome.
And that the thing may the better be vnderstand, An other definitiō of custome. Hostiensis. I wil bring a definition of custome, which I foūd in Hostiensis, in the title de Consuetudine. It is an vse (saith he) agreing with reason, allowed by the cōmon institution of them that vse it, whose begynnyng is tyme out of mynde, or whiche is by a iust tyme prescribed and confirmed, so that it is by no contrary acte interrupted, but allowed with contradictory iudgement. This is (as he thinketh) a full definition. But in that he saith: That that vse ought to be agreeing with reason, it is not sufficient, but first it is to be sayd, that it ought to agree with the worde of God, for that is to be counted for the chiefest reason. Afterward, it must be allowed by the institution of the people: for as much as it is not sufficient, that it be done ether rashly, or of necessity, or for some other cause, but it ought also to be allowed by the assent and institution of the people, and of whose beginnyng there is no mention, or that it is prescribed by a iust tyme, and appoynted by the lawes, neither is interrupted by any contrary action. For if the iudge or prince shal geue iudgement agaynst it, the custome is broken, as it also happeneth in prescriptiō, when a mā is cast out of his possessiō, or y e matter is called into law, & the matter is in plead, the prescription is broken. Also the allowyng of the contradictory iudgement ought to be had, that is, that when one part alledgeth the custome, and an other part denyeth it, if it be pronoūced on the custome side, that doth confirme it. But [Page] all these thynges, as I haue before sayde must be reuoked vnto the rule of the woorde of God.
A custome that is burdenous to the Church is not to be suffred. Augustine.Now this onely is to be added, whiche is had, Extra de Consuet. chap. 1. that a custome can not be suffred, if it be burdenous to y e Church. Augustine also cōplayned, that in his tyme were so many new ceremonyes & rites brought in, that the Church was greuously burdened, and the state of Christians, at y e tyme was nothing at all more tollerable then in the old tyme the state of y e Iewes was. That also we laye agaynst our aduersaryes: that the Churche should not be burdened. This is their owne lawe. Why do they not acknowledge their owne wordes? These things haue I therfore mencioned that we might vnderstand how firme an argument Iiphtah vsed of Prescription, namely that the Israelites possessed that land .300. yeares: whiche is much more firme and of greater force, then if they had possessed it but .30. or .40. yeares. Now let vs go to the other part of the chap. wherin Iyphtahs victory agaynst the Ammonites is described.
29 Then the spirite of the Lord came vpon Iiphtah: and he passed ouer to Gilead, & to Manasseh, he passed ouer also Mizpa Gilead, & from Mizpa Gilead he went to the children of Ammon.
30 And Iiphtah vowed a vowe vnto the Lorde, and sayd: If thou shalt deliuer the children of Ammon into myne hand.
31 Then that thing that commeth out of the dores of my house to meete me, when I returne in peace from the children of Ammon, shall be the Lordes, or I will offer it for a burnt offring.
32 And so Iiphtah went vnto the children of Ammon, to fight agaynst them, and the Lord deliuered them into his handes.
33 And he smote them from Aroer, euen till thou come to Minnith, twenty Cityes, and euē to Abel, a very great region of vineyardes: Thus the children of Ammon were humbled before the chyldren of Israell.
Two Mizpas Mizpa Gilead, is an other City, differyng from that Mizpa whiche lay in the tribe of Iudah. The spirite of the Lord, which is sayd to haue come vpon Iiphtah, was the spirite of strength. For there are sundry gifts of the spirite, as of Wisedome, of Vnderstandyng of Counsell, &c. Among which, also is reckened the spirite of strength. Wherfore the Lord gaue vnto Iiphtah this spirite, that is, all warlike might, as well of the minde as of the body, that he might valiantly execute that warre. But we knowe that those giftes, whiche in schooles are called gratuita that is free giftes, Fre gifts iustify not. do not iustifie: for they happen as well to the euill as to the good. But the spirit of god is three maner of wayes in men. First, in that he is god: for so he is infinite, & is euery where. Secōdly he is in men by fre gifts, namely of miracles, The holy ghost is thr [...] maner of wayes in mē wisedome, strength, &c. And these two wayes he is as wel in the euill as in the good. But the third way he is men by sanctification, and renouation. And this dwellyng of the spirite of God is to be wished for of all the godly. God had before ordeyned Iiphtah to he head ouer al the people of Israell: but y t was vnknowen vnto the people. And y e Gileadites when they made Iiphtah theyr captayne, thought nothyng of a Iudge whiche should gouerne all Israell. Here God sheweth his iudgement, when he inspired hym with the gift of strength, y t all men might vnderstand that God had chosen him to be captayne. Neither yet do I thus say, that Iiphtah had the spirite of strength, as thoughe he had not also the spirit of sanctification, for as much as he might haue both. But being moued with this spirite of strength, he went out with a great courage, and finished the thing valiantly. Captaines w [...]r wont to vowe. But before he went to handstrokes, he vowed a vow vnto god, as the History declareth. It was the maner of Captaines, that when they should [Page 191] make any great warre, they vowed something to God, so that they got the victory. In Leui we rede oftētymes, y t the Romayne Captaynes vowed riche spoiles, prayes, temples, and such like, either vnto Iupiter, or vnto Apollo, or to other Gods. So the people of god (as it is written in the boke of Numbers:) when king Adar inuaded them, they vowed to make his land Cherem. Nowe also Iiphtah voweth: but his vowe is confused, and defineth no certayne thing.
VVhat soeuer (saith he) shall come forth, that shalbe the Lordes, and shalbe sacrificed. There are some expositors, whiche thinke this letter Vau otherwise a copulatiue, to make in thys place a disiunction: as thoughe he should haue sayd: Either it shalbe sacrified vnto the Lord, if it be of that kynd, that it may be sacrificed: or if it be not, yet it shalbe the Lordes, that is, it shalbe dedicated vnto the Lord. And in deede D. Kimhi is of that opinion. Kimhi. The like manner of speakyng is there in these wordes: If a man strike father and mother, he shall dye the death: for there also Vau is a disiunctiue. And the meanyng is. If a man strike either father or mother, &c. Herein what I thinke I do not declare, I will afterward intreate more largely of this matter. It is not gathered by these wordes, Iiphtah vowed not by the inspiration of the holy ghost. y e Iiphtah made this vowe by the inspiration of the holy ghost. The spirite in deede moued hym, valiantly to atchieue the enterprise, yet we rede not that it moued hym, to make a vowe.
The Latine translation hath: That whiche shall first come forth, but y e worde first is not in the Hebrew, but must nedes be vnderstand: otherwise he had bound all thinges that should come forth of his house. But as I haue said it is an ambigous & confused vowe. For what if such a thyng should haue met him as myght neither haue ben sacrificed, nor dedicated to the Lorde? What if a dogge had met Iiphtah at his returne, as it is a louing beast, and oftentymes meeteth his Lord returnyng home. But it is an vncleane beast, neither may it be sacrificed, nor redemed with any price. It is wonderfull that so great a Captayne was so ignorāt of the law of God, that he vowed not more distinctly. It may be sayd that the Israelites had so longe tyme worshipped Baal vnder the Ammonites, and other nations, that they had forgotten the worshipping of the true God. But especially Iiphtah which was both a bastard, and a banished man, and also a man of warre, which kinde of men do not so much thinke vpō the lawes. Wherfore he voweth, but not according to the prescript of the lawe. It was lawful to vowe mē also vnto God. But we must knowe that it was lawfull for the Iewes to vowe menne also vnto GOD, and to dedicate them vnto hym. Yea and the redemption of manne is seased in the lawe by the variety of kynd and age. Hanna the mother of Samuel dedicated him from a childe to the deuine worshyppyng, and it is very likely that Helkana her husbande allowed the vowe.
But that which Interpreters say of the virginity of the daughter of Iiphtah, it cannot be gathered by the woordes of the history. Yea rather it is not true: although some Rabines were of that opinion, but yet without example and testimony of the woord of God, I know that that Hanna, of whom Luke maketh mē cion, was dayly in prayers, and other women for praiers sake, watched continually at the Tabernacle, and that the sonnes of Hely accompanied with diuers of them, but the scripture testifieth not of any that vowed chastity, neither did God in the olde Testament euer speake anye thing of thys kynde of vowe. Wherfore this sentence: And I wyl offer it for a burnt offring, is an interpretacion, for it expoundeth and contracteth the first part of the Oration: It shalbe the Lordes. How shal it be the Lordes? He declareth howe, when hee addeth: And I wil offer it for a burnt offring. Other make Vau a disiunctiue, The vowe of Iiphtah was vnwarly made as I haue before touched. But that is not certayne. Neither is the vow therfore excused, but that it was vnwarely made. For there mought easely haue met him a dogge (as I before admonished) whiche could neither be sacrificed vnto GOD, nor dedicated vnto hym.
He went forth and smote. The victory is not here onely described, but also amplified, namely that there fell many in that battayle, and that he ouerthrewe twenty Cityes, and subdewed vnder him the Ammonites.
34 Then Iiphtah commyng to Mizpa to hys house, beholde hys daughter came out to mete him with timbrels and daunces which was his onely child, and of hym selfe he had neither other sonne nor other daughter.
35 And when he sawe her, he rent his garmentes and sayd: Alas, Alas my daughter, thou hast brought me lowe, and thou art amōg them that trouble me. For I haue opened my mouth vnto the Lord and can not go backe.
36 And she aunswered hym: My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth vnto the Lord, do vnto me as thou hast promised, seyng that the Lord hath auenged thee of thine enemies the childrē of Ammon.
37 And she sayd more ouer vnto her father. Do thus much for me: suffer me two monethes, that I may go downe to the mountaynes and bewayle my virginity, I and my friendes.
38 And he sayd. Go: And he sent her away two monethes. So she went with her frendes, and lamented her virginity vpon the mountaynes.
39 But after the ende of two monethes she returned to her father, who did to her accordyng to the vowe, whiche he had vowed. Wherfore she had knowē no man, and it was a custome in Israel.
40 The daughters of Israell went frō tyme to tyme to lament the daughter of Iiphtah the Gileadite, fower dayes in a yeare.
When he had gotten the victory agaynst his enemyes, he returned home to Mizpa: for there he dwelled. And therfore we heard before how he made the couenant with the Gileadites before the Lord in Mizpa. Here let vs note with howe great a moderation godly princes in those tymes made warres, they prolonged them no longer then necessity required, but as soone as their enemyes wer tamed, they strayghtway returned home. So also the dictator among the Romaynes, his enemyes beyng vanquished and all thinges accomplished accordyng to his minde, he straight way forsooke his office of a Magistrate. Iiphtah is sayd not to haue had other children of himselfe: bycause peraduenture he had by his wyfe children in lawe. Yea and he might haue children whiche were adopted. Of him selfe he had begotten onely this daughter. And this is put in, that we might vnderstande howe hearde and bitter it was vnto hym, to slaye hys onely daughter. Things nobly done of princes wer publiquely songe. She went out to mete her father by the waye with timbrelles and daunces, to reioyse for hys victory, and to singe a songe of victorye, for so were the thynges that were nobly done by prynces wonte to be celebrated with daunces and songes. The mayden also when Saul returned, came and met hym with reioysing. And vndoubtedly suche reioysinges were nothyng elles then publique geuyng of thankes.
In that it is sayd, thou hast brought me lowe, In Hebrew it is expressed by this verbe Caraa: as thoughe it should haue ben sayd, thou hast thrust me done or thou hast humbled me: of late I was puffed vp with the victory whiche I obteyned agaynst myne enemyes, but thou hast thrust me downe, yea rather thou hast vtterly destroyed me and brought me to nothyng, for as muche as my posterity is vndone, myne enemyes did grieuously vexe me: and now thou my daughter also [Page 192] art one of them whiche trouble and afflicte me.
I haue opened my mouth. This is a circumscription or description of the vowe. He tare hys garmentes, after the manner of the Hebrues, when they sawe that they were ouerwhelmed with any greuous calamity vnlooked for, What the fearyng of garmē tes signifieth. they tare theyr garmentes, signifyeng that they were now subiect vnto the anger of God, and not worthy to be couered with garmentes. I haue opened my mouth (sayth he.) The lawe of God in the booke of Numbers, the .30. chapter intreatynge of Vowes, vseth such a forme of speakyng, whereby myght be vnderstande, What to open the mouth in vowyng signifieth. that the vowe was conceaued, not onely in mynde and purpose, but also outwardly expressed by wordes. Wherefore they were called calfes of the lippes, whiche a man had promised to God, not onely in mynde, but also in voyce. And I can not go backe (sayeth he.) It is meruelous why he should say so. For in the last chapter of Leuiticus are many thynges wrytten of the redeemyng of vowes, whiche I wyll thus gather into a fewe. If any had vowed a man, it was lawfull to redeme hym with a pryce, and there was an estimation set. And therefore it was called the vowe of estimation. For they vowed either themselues, or theyr seruauntes, or theyr children, and it was lawfull for euery manne to vowe them which he had in hys power. From twenty yeares vpwarde to sixty, they payd for the male fifty sicles, for the female .30. From fyue yeares vpwarde to twenty, for the male they payd twenty sicles, and for the female tenne. If a manne had vowed a house vnto GOD, and would redeme it, the house was estemed, and the redemer added the fifth parte besides the pryce. If a manne had vowed a fielde, the estimation was taken of the seede thereof, an Homer of Barly was esteemed at fifty sicles of Siluer. And how much nearer the yeare of Iubile was, so muche the more was there abated of the pryce. A cleane beast beyng once vowed ought vtterly to be sacrificed, neither mought it be redemed: but if it had ben vncleane, it might haue ben redemed.
Wherefore seyng GOD did so diligently prouide for the redeemyng of vowes, howe doth Iiphtah saye, that hys vowe can not be reuoked? This maye bee aunswered two wayes. Firste it myght bee, that Iiphtah as he was a man of warre, so was he ignoraunte of this manner of redeemyng of vowes. Note the two manner of vowes. An other waye it maye bee aunswered, that he promised not the vowe of estimation, but Cherem, that is a curse. And thys kynde of vowe neuer returned to hys owner, neither could it be conuerted to a prophane vse. Two kynds of the vowe Cherem. A fielde after thys manner dedicated, was alwayes appoynted for the tabernacle: yea and asses and horses serued the Lorde, neyther could they be redemed. So if a man had vowed to be a Nazarite all hys lyfe tyme, he was neuer redemed: althoughe that were not in vse. And vnto thys kynde of vowe pertayned, if a man had made himselfe 1 Cherem, bycause he neuer returned into libertye. With suche a vowe was the City of Iericho bounde, neyther was it lawfull for the Iewes to touche any of the thyngs that were without life, pertaynyng to the City whiche were vnder this vowe. Therefore Achan sinned most grieuously, whiche tooke to hymselfe some parte thereof. But there was an other kynde of Cherem, whiche was not vowed but vowed to the death vnto the Lorde, and what soeuer was after this 2 maner vowed vnto the Lord, the same ought without redemption to be slayn: so were the Amalekites vowed, and Saul most bitterly reprehended, bycause he had spared Agag their kyng, and saued some of their oxen on lyue. Wherfore it may be that Iiphtah vowed, that whatsoeuer thing met hym firste out of hys house when he returned, should be slayne. But he was very much deceaued: for thys kynde of vowe had not place, but in wicked men, and such as were declared to be the enemyes of God: therefore he was not bounde by this lawe of vowes to slaye hys daughter. Wherefore in that he sayeth, I can not call backe, if we vnderstande it generally of vowes, it is not true, bycause it was lawful to redeme them, but if we haue a respect vnto Cherem, the person vowed ought to be slaine, [Page] if the vowe had ben of force: whiche thing could not haue place in this mayden, bycause she was not declared to be the enemy of God.
My father, If thou hast opened thy mouth. The godlynes and obedience of this doughter is very much commended: she obeyeth her father, and confirmeth the vowe. Do (sayth she) as thou hast promised. For this was a great obedience, and therefore she is praysed of the fathers, Augustine. Ambrose. Augustine I saye and Ambrose. She mought haue iustly not obeyed, seyng her father had vowed so rashely, but it easely appeareth, what she had a respect vnto, for it is added: Seyng the Lord hath auenged thee of thine enemyes. She had a regard onely to the glory of GOD, as thoughe she should haue sayd: Seing the Lorde hath geuen thee the victory ouer thyne enemyes, it is not greuous to me to dye. And God, seyng he hath heard thee, seemeth to haue allowed the vowe.
But here aryseth a doubt: Why God heard this vowe, when as it was vnaduisedly vowed. I aunswere. I doubt not but that God gaue the victory: but that it was geuen for the vowe, it is not founde by the wordes of the Hystory: otherwise we should be compelled to allowe this vowe. The daughter doth in deede obey the father, but in the meane tyme she requireth a litle space, namely of two monethes, that she might together with her fellow virgins comfort her self, and bewayle her virginity. But how is it sayd: That she would discend to the mountaynes? For we go vp to mountaynes, & not go downe. Peraduenture Iiphtahs house was situate vpon a mountayne, and the mayden desired leaue to discende to the litle hilles vnder it: or peraduenture she asked leaue to go to an other moū tayne, vnto whiche she should go by a valley, and so we must vnderstande that she first discended, What was the bewayling of virginity. and then afterward ascended. She bewayled her virginity. Bycause that seemed a heuy and lamentable thing, that a virgin should dye, leauing no children behynd her. For it was a certayne curse, if any dyed without children. God had at the begynnyng commaūded men to multiply and fill the earth. Farther, the Hebrues endeuored to augment the holy publique wealth. They hoped also that Messias should be borne of their stocke.
Ambrose. Two frendes of Pithagoras schoole. She returned at the tyme appoynted. Ambrose sayth: That those two Pithagorians were muche to be praysed, of whiche the one gaue hym selfe for a pledge for hys fellowe, whiche was condemned to death: and the other for hys friendes sake faythfully returned to death at the tyme appoynted: but muche more is thys mayde to be commended, whiche after two monthes returned to her father, to be slayne, bycause she seemed to do that onely of a zeale to godlynes, and the worshippyng of God.
And it was a custome in Israell. The Hebrewe woorde is Choke and it signifyeth a lawe not written, but a custome vnwrytten.
From tyme to tyme. That is from yeare to yeare: for it was a certayne yearely assemblye. This Hebrewe woorde Littenoth signifieth to speake, to mourne, and to comforte. The doughters of Israell went euery yeare and bewayled, and seemed to lamente, bycause that mayden was slayne: for they would not haue so great a thing to be put in obliuion. And peraduenture they did it to admonish the parentes, not to binde themselues hereafter with such a vowe.
¶Of the Vowe of Iiphtah.
Whether Iiphtah sinned in vowyng.HEre seemeth to be demaunded, whether Iiphtah sinned in so vowyng, and in fulfyllyng hys vowe. It is a heard question, bycause it pertayneth not to the lawe, but to the acte. We knowe that in those tymes it was lawfull to vowe, but what is to be thought of this acte, nothyng can be gathered by the woordes. It is possible that he so vowed by the inspiration of GOD, whiche being a singular example, ought not to be dryuen into imitation. As there are very many of this kynde in the holy Scriptures. There are whiche contend that Iiphtah dyd [Page 193] not in very dede offer his daughter, but only punished her w t ciuile death, namely in separating her frō the cōmon cōuersatiō, so y t she liued onely to god, geuing her selfe to prayers onely, and liuing a parte from other men. And they seeme to affirme that y e vow was Cherē, but not such, that the maydē should be bounds to be killed: but y t she should lyue dedicated to God, and should continually geue her selfe to y e worshipping of god. And euen as a field or house vowed with this vowe Cherem, could not be reuoked vnto the first owner: so say they, thys maydē being once dedicated vnto the Lord, could not returne to her old estate.
Dauid Kimhi in defēding this sētence bringeth these reasōs. First he weigheth the wordes of Iiphtah, what soeuer cōmeth out of my house, shalbe y e Lordes, & I will offer it for a burnt offring. This letter Vau being a cōiunction copulatiue, as we haue before said, he thinketh to make a propositiō disiūctiue: as if it should haue ben sayd: If it be such a thing as may be sacrificed, it shalbe sacrificed: but if otherwise, it shalbe the Lords, & it shalbe dedicated vnto him. Farther he sayth y t y e maydē desired space, to bewayle her virginity: neither is it written to bewayle her soule or life. Wherfore it seemeth y t she bewayled this onely, that she should wāt a husbād & childrē. But if she should haue ben offred vp, she ought chiefly to haue lamēted for her life. Lastly saith he y t y e very wordes of y e history declare this thing. For it is not sayd y e Iiphtah sacrificed her: but did accordyng to hys vowe. If he had killed her, it should haue ben writtē, And he offred her a burnt offring to the Lord. Of the same opiniō is R. L. ben Gerson, & he addeth, R.L. ben Gerson. y t it is written in the texte, And she knew no man. As though hereby might be vnderstād, what kind of sacrifice y t was. And he thinketh y e Iiphtah builded a house for her, where she should liue a lone, & he permitted her fellowe virgines once in a yeare to go and se her, and bewayle her virginity together with her. And afterwarde he addeth that a man so dedicated, ought not to lyue without a wyfe, bycause the man is not subiect vnto the wyfe. Samuel, although he were dedicated vnto the Lord by the decree of hys mother, yet had he wyfe and children. But a woman beyng so dedicated coulde not marry: bycause it was necessary that she shoulde serue her husbande, and if he remoued any whether, she should go together with hym. And therefore it is written, that Iiphtah dyd vnto her accordyng vnto hys vowe, and she knewe no man.
The same sentence Lyranus embraceth, Lyra. and there are of the newe wryters whiche are of greate learnyng, whiche doo followe this interpretation. But Lyranus pondereth these wordes. And the spirite of the Lorde came vpon hym, and he sayth. That that spirite would not haue suffred Iiphtah to committe this murther. Farther he wryteth, that there were two monethes space geuen, so that he mought aske counsell of the Priests. But it is, not very likely, that he asked not then Counsell of so weighty a matter, or that they tolde hym not that he myght haue redemed hys vowe. Neither is it probable that thys Iiphtah constituted any thyng rashely. when as the Epistle to the Hebrues calleth hym holy. If thou wilt saye: He did vnto her as he had vowed, but he had vowed a Sacrifice, and to offer what soeuer mette hym, they wyll aunswere: He vowed in deede, but vpon this condition, so that it were lawfull. But when his daughter met him, either he learned, or els he vnderstood y t it was not lawfull. Wherfore if he had killed her, he had not accōplished his vowe, but should haue contaminated hymselfe. But on the contrary part it seemeth wonderfull that he was so abashed, and rente hys garmentes, if the mayden shoulde not haue bene offred vp. Farther, what shoulde the virgines haue lamented her? For if she shoulde not haue bene slayne, there seemed no iuste cause of mournyng. Moreouer if her virginitye shoulde haue bene offred vnto GOD, it shoulde haue bene geuen wyth a wyllynge mynde and not wyth an vnwyllyng mynde: What is chiefly regarded in vowes. and in rendryng vowes thys thyng was chiefely regarded, to render them wyllyngly and with a chierefull mynde. Besides these thynges, Iiphtah had no example [Page] in the scriptures, y t it was lawfull for the father to binde his daughter by a vow, to kepe her virginity: but God contraryly promiseth aboundaunce of children vnto the obseruers of the law, in Deuteronomy the .7. and Exodus the .23. Wherfore that which God promised in the place of a great benefite, the same could not be hyndred by a vowe. Farthermore, the arguments of the Rabines are cold and weake, as afterward shalbe more aboundantly declared.
Paul in his .1. Epistle to the Corinthians the .7. chapter writeth: If the father shall determine firmely in his hart, hauing power ouer his owne will, to keepe his virgine vnmaried, he doth well, &c. Why writeth he hauing power ouer his owne will? If the mayden her selfe will, the father may kepe her vnmaried, so that she consent. But Iiphtah knew nothing of the will of his daughter, whē he vowed, wherfore he ought not to thinke his vow to be ratified, when his daughter met him. And if this kynd of vowe was not firme in the new testamēt, it was of much les value in the olde Testament, where the vowe of virginity was not knowen. But of this thing I haue spoken more in my litle booke of Vowes.
There were other whiche thought that Iiphtah did in very dede offer y e mayden, which in these tymes ought not to seme so new and vnaccustomed a thing. For God required of Abraham to offer his sonne, and such a vow was thought of many to be most acceptable vnto God, and that opinion also did spread abrode among the Ethnikes wherfore, this sentence is often spoken: Thou hast asswaged the windes with bloud, & with y e virgin slayne. There are workes of Poetes whiche make mencion of Pollixena & Iphigenia: & also Historyes of the Curtians and Decians. And vndoubtedly with this exposition agreeth the Chaldey Paraphrast, which among the Hebrues is in a maner in the same estimation and authority that the holy scriptures are in. That Paraphrast sayth, that the mayden was immolated: & reproueth Iiphtah, bycause he asked not counsell of the hyghe priest. And the same thing do al the auncient Rabines thinke, which also reprehēd the highe priest, bicause he of his own accord went not vnto Iiphtah. Iosephus also is of their opinion. Iosephus. Chrisostome. Ierome. Chrisostome also writeth many thinges of this matter, but altogether farre from the History: he followeth allegories, so that in a maner no certaynty can be gathered out of him. But Ierome writeth agaynst himselfe. In his Epistle to Iulianus, he sayth that Iiphtah was numbred among the sayntes, bycause he offred his daughter. But in his .1. boke agaynst Iouinianus he writeth, after the minde of the Hebrues, that bycause he made an euil vowe by the dispensatiō of god, he felt his error in y e death of his daughter. For there mought haue met hym either a dogge, or an asse, whiche had hen wicked to haue offred: and so in one place he prayseth that, whiche in an other place he dispraiseth.
Ambrose. Ambrose in his .3. booke de Virginitate sayth, y t the mayden was in very deede immolated, & he writeth y e Iiphtah vowed not before the battaile, but in the fight, & in the very conflict, when things were doubtfull. And he addeth: I do not allow y e murther, but I se a laudable feare, y t he would not violate his promise y t he had made. And he saith moreouer, y t this act is to be cōferred w t the worke of Abrahā. For Abrahā, when he was about to kill his sonne, the Lord cried out vnto him: Now I know, y t thou louest me. And he concludeth, y t after the same maner may Iiphtah be praised, bycause he shewed by his example, y t the oracle of god, wherin he cōmaunded y e vowes should be performed, was to be preferred before childrē, although the onely begotten child should be killed. But he demaūdeth, whether God haue a respect vnto persons, whiche letted Abrahā, y t he should not offer vp his sonne, but with stoode not Iiphtah. He denieth y e God accepteth persons, but it behoued (saith he) to declare vnto Abrahā, y t he delighted not in humane sacrifices. Afterward succeded the law, which in Deut. & Leui. prohibited the immolatiō of children. Wherfore the will of god was already declared both in Abrahā, & in the law, wherfore there neded no new oracle, or new prohibition. Farthermore, he noted that in Iiphtah was not that perfection whiche was in Abraham. [Page 194] For Abraham wept not, tare not his garmentes, deferred not two monethes, but strayghtwaye went, and Isaac followed hym. Therefore it is no meruayle (sayth he) if God prohibited not Iiphtah, for so muche as he woulde punishe hys longe taryeng.
And in his thyrd booke de officiis the .12. chapter, he writeth: I will neuer be persuaded but that Iiphtah vowed vnaduisedly, for so muche as he afterwarde repented. And he addeth that in deede he alloweth not the acte, but he sayeth that in a godly feare he fulfylled his vowe, but in suche sorte, that he appointed his posterity to lament it. He sayeth farther, I can not accuse the mā, bycause it was necessary for hym to paye that whiche he had vowed, but it is a miserable necessitye (sayeth he) whiche is payed with parricide: and it is better not to vowe, that thyng whiche he wyll not, vnto whome thou vowest. And strayght way he saith: All promises are not to be kept: for euē god also sometymes chaungeth his will. By which wordes he alludeth vnto the place whiche is written in Numbers the .14. chapter, of the prayers of Moses.
Wherfore Ambrose is vtterly of that sentence, to thinke that the mayden was offred: and for that cause (as I haue sayde) preferreth her before the two Pithagorians. And of her he sayeth in hys exhortation to virgins: She payed with her bloude the vnaduised vowe of her father. And vpon the firste Epistle to the Corinthians the .15. chapter he sayth: In a thyng whiche could not be acceptable, he was founde faythfull, offryng his daughter, as he had foolishely vowed. And agayne. The acte is not allowed, but the perseueraunce of fayth is worthy to be brought foorth for an example to followe.
But these wordes of Ambrose are not so lightly to be passed ouer: What thynges are to be noted in the woordes of Ambrose. for they can not be simply allowed, and as they be spoken of hym. Yet haue I brought them, to shewe that he thought that the mayden was offred in very deede. But in hys woordes thys firste I marke, that he affirmeth a certayne godly feare to be in Iiphtah, whereby he was led to performe his vowe: and that children were not to be preferred before Religion: thirdly that Iiphtah was found faythfull in that thyng, whiche coulde not be acceptable vnto God. Lastly that hys perseuerance of fayth is brought foorth for an example to followe.
As touchyng the first, I knowe not, how that may seeme a godly feare, which 1 driueth a man to parricide: for he calleth that kyllyng parricide, Godly feare driueth not a man to commit parricide. and that three or foure tymes. Ther are in dede affections in vs which are grafted by god, but yet to vertues, and to do well. A feare, to eschewe sinnes. An anger, to punishe wicked actes, &c. Wherfore feare, when it is applied vnto vertue, may be called godly: but if it serue for vice, it can not seme godly, yea rather, What affections are to bee coūted godly. it hath a certayne maner of vngodlines. Otherwyse y e endeuor of Idolatrers might be praysed: for we see them diligently labor to worship god, but bycause they apply not themselues to the sincere worshippyng of God, their endeuour can not be called godly. So when that feare of Iiphtah draue him to commit parricide, howe could it be godly? If thou wilt say that by parricide he vnderstādeth not the sinne, or the wicked acte, but y e immolatiō of his daughter: I will demaūd, why he sayth y t he alloweth not the acte? vndoubtedly if he cā not allowe it, then perceaueth he y t it is sinne.
But in that he sayth: That the loue of children is les to be estemed them Religion. That is true: but that was no religion, but a foolishe vnaduised, and rashe vowe. Neither is the loue of children to be les estemed then such religion.
Thirdly he sayeth, that he was founde faythfull. But what fidelity is there in that thyng, whiche coulde not be acceptable to God? If my seruaunt should do that whiche I had forbidden hym, can he therin seme faythfull?
But in that he calleth the vnchaungeable mynde of Iiphtah constancy, in my iudgement he erreth, when as rather it was wilfulnes, wherby he would nedes fulfill that whiche he had vnaduisedly vowed: neither can perseuerance in an euill thyng bee called constancy. He attributeth vnto hym a feare, whiche also he [Page] calleth a godly feare, and yet afterwarde he sayth that he repented. If he repented hym, he dyd agaynst his conscience: but no man ought to doo any thyng agaynst it. For what is not of fayth, is sinne. Farther, if he repented, why amended he not hys faulte? For if any thyng had ben done rashely, that ought to haue ben amended. If GOD (as he sayeth) doo sometymes chaunge his sentence, why then is it not lawfull for vs to chaunge a sentence that is not ryght? Afterwarde he sayth: he can not but prayse Iiphtah. But what will he prayse? An vncircumspect vowe? But that ought rather to bee reprehended. What, wyll he prayse the performaunce of the vowe? But that he calleth parricide, neyther can that bee praysed. I saye therefore that Ambrose affirmeth, that the mayden was in very deede immolated: and yet are not al hys wordes to be allowed.
Augustine.Let vs heare nowe what Augustine sayeth of thys thyng. In hys question 29. vpon thys booke he writteth that out of this place, the enemyes of the olde Testament, snatche occasion to speake euill of GOD the creator of the world. For they called hym both an euyll GOD, and a cruell. Suche were the Maniches, Valentinians, Marcionites, and suche lyke pestilences. When he delighteth (saye they) in the bloude of manne, howe can he not but bee cruell? Augustine aunswereth: God reioyseth not in bloud. So farre is it of that GOD reioyseth in the bloude of man, that he reioyseth not euen in the bloude of beastes: onely he suffred for a tyme that sacrifices of beastes shoulde be offred, by lytle and lytle to instructe men. But what the Sacrifices of the Elders signified, whiche serued to theyr erudition in that place, What the sacrifices of the Elders signified. he declareth not, but I will in fewe woordes shewe it. First was set foorth in those Sacrifices, that the rewarde of sinne is death. And that dyd he after a sorte testifie, whiche brought the Sacrifice, namely that he had deserued to be kylled, but by the goodnes of GOD hys death was transferred to the Sacrifice. By thys meanes were the Elders instructed, that they should eschewe synnes. Farther, those Sacrifices directed the myndes of menne vnto Christe, and they were certayne visible sermons of hym, and taught that Christ shoulde bee that Sacrifice whiche shoulde take awaye the sinnes of the worlde, and vpon whom our death and damnation should be transferred.
God mought haue required humane sacrifices.Wherefore GOD of hymselfe delyghted not in bloude, but by thys schoolyng he instructed his people. Yea if he had delyghted in Sacrifices, he mought haue required them of the number of menne. For what should haue letted hym, or what iniury shoulde he haue doone vs, if he woulde haue had Sacrifices of menne offred vnto hym? For manne must needes sometymes dye. Wherefore to preuent the tyme one yeare or two, it woulde not haue bene so grieuous, neither shoulde he haue doone vs any iniurye, chiefly when we shoulde vnderstande that with hym we shoulde lyue for euer. Vndoubtedly in thys thyng no manne coulde haue accused GOD as cruell. But nowe seyng he hath remoued all those holy seruices, he manifestly teacheth that he reioyseth not, neither in the bloude of menne, God woulde haue the firste borne of menne redemed, and not sacrificed. nor in the bloude of beastes. Yea the firste borne of menne, when they were bounde vnto hym, he woulde not haue them Sacrificed, but redemed with a price: whiche he woulde not haue doone, if he had taken any pleasure in bloude. In Deuteromy the .12. chapter he sayeth: The Nation whiche I wyl expell before thee, doo Sacrifice theyr sonnes and daughters: but see that thou do not so.
Certayne kyllynges of men are acceptable vnto God.But Augustine demaundeth farther, whether there be any slaughter of men whiche is acceptable vnto GOD? Hee aunswereth that there is. But what slaughter? When menne (sayeth he) are kylled for ryghteousnes sake: not that the death of Martyrs of it self pleaseth GOD, but bicause faith towardes God & piety is by that, Martyrdomes are lyke sacrifices. both declared and also kept. And the death of Christ so pleased God, that it redemed the whole worlde: and the death of Christians whiche they suffer in Christes name, may be called after a sorte a Sacrifice. Wherefore Paul in the .2. to Timo. the last chapter writeth, [...], that is, I sacrifice, &c. in [Page 195] whiche saying he calleth his death an immolation. And to the Phil. the .2. [...] that is, The martirdomes of men make not satisfaction for sins. but if I offre in an oblation and seruice of our fayth. And yet do not such sacrifices make satisfaction for sinnes: for that doth the death of Christe onely. But the death of Martirs are acceptable, because the cause is thankefull. Augustine was baptised of Ambrose: and being wōderfully affectioned toward him, he followeth his opinion as his Scholemayster, asmuch as he may, but somwhat more warely. He cō pareth Iiphtah with Abraham: but he putteth a difference, whyche Ambrose noted not. Abraham, saythe he, had the woorde of god to sacrifice his sonne, so had not Iiphtah, yea rather he had the law against him, that he shoulde not sacrifice. And in Abraham not the death pleased god, but the faith. Farther, there is great difference, for a man to do any thinge of himself, and to haue a will to doo those thinges that are commaunded him. And Augustine doth subtilly admonish, Iiphtah vowed an human [...] sacrifice, as Augustine thinketh. that Iiphtah vowed an humane sacrifice, not deceaued, but willinglye. Whatsoeuer sayth he, shall come out of my house, I will offer it for a burnte offringe &c. Doo we thinke that beastes woulde come forth to meete him returninge home? Men vse to go and mete such as haue the victory, and to reioyse. Wherfore he vowed an humane sacrifice.
The scripture only maketh mencyon of this acte, but praiseth it not: as also it is there written that Iudas had to do with his daughter in law, but it is not allowed. So there can nothing be gathered by these wordes, The rashenes of the father is punished in the death of the children. why the acte of Iiphtah should be praysed. Farther Augustine thinketh with Ierome, that god woulde punish the rashenes of the vow in the father, by the death of hys daughter. But there are two places, sayth he, why I cannot reprehend Iiphtah. Because in the Epistle to y e Hebrewes he is numbred among the saints, & in this place it is written, that the spirite of the Lord was vpon him. But those holy men which are rekoned vnto the Hebrewes, did they neuer sinne? Vndoubtedly their sinnes also ar set forth in the holy scriptures. Gideon, who is in y e number, a little before his deth made an Ephod, which was y e destructiō both of himself & of his house. But as touchinge the other place: The sprite of the Lorde came vpon hym. But this nothing letteth, but that afterward he might fall. But Iiphtah thou wilte saye had the victory, but Gidion after that acte, nothing went well with him. Yea rather sayth he, Gideon did before after a sort tempt God, & yet he had the victory. So much of Augustine.
But I would say otherwise. For I agree not with Augustine, to thinke that Gidion tēpted God. Therfore I would aunswere after this maner: Dauid cōmitted aduoutry, & straightway afterward obteined y e victory, & toke y e city Rabath-Ammon, in whose siege he prepared that Vrias should be slayne. Saule persecuted Dauid, in the meane time there were brought him messengers from the Philistians. He leauing Dauid, went to war, and obteined the victory. Moses sinned at the waters of strife: the people also hadde sinned many waies, and yet they obteyned the victorye agaynste Sihon and Og moste myghtye Kynges. Wherefore wee will graunte that Iiphtah was numbred amonge the Sayntes, and yet he mighte sinne, and althoughe he synned, he obteyned the victorye. And we wil graunt that the sprite of the lord came vpon him, but we haue alredy interpreted that it was the spirite of strength. And although the sprite of the Lord was vpon him, yet is it not of necessitye that he did all thinges by that spirite. For we also which are Christians, haue the sprite of Christ, when as yet none of vs is renewed in all partes, yea rather we all very oftentimes sinne.
Augustine addeth moreouer, that although the fathers sometimes sinned, yet if nothinge letteth, but that god maye vse theyr sinnes, to signifye those thinges whych myght instructe the people. For god is so good, that euer of sinnes he picketh out laudable commodities, and maketh them alligorically to declare what [Page] semeth profitable vnto hym. As in that Iudas played the whoremonger with his doughter in law, it signified that god would couple vnto himself y e church, which before was an harlot: so also maye it be, that by this acte of Iiphtah he signified, that god so loued mankinde that he would geue his onely begotten sonne vnto the death for it: for he did not in vaine, and without any cause suffer such a thing to be don by the fathers. Although they greuously sinned, yet god could vse their actions to the instruction of his people. They were amased at the sacrifices of beasts, neither did they as it was mete, lift vp y e eies of their minds vnto christ. Wherfore god would by this meanes stirre vp the sluggish, that they should be enduced by the humayne sacrifice of Iiphtahs daughter to thinke vpon Christ. For he should geue his lyfe, and be made a sacrifice for mankinde.
Farthermore, Augustine toucheth a reason whereby he defendeth the acte of Iiphtah. It may be said, saith he, that he was moued by the sprite of god to make a vow, and led by the same spirite to performe it. Wherfore he is the more worthy of prayse, so far is it of, y e he shoulde be reproued. But y e cannot be gathered by the wordes of the history. But that whych some saye, as we haue before touched, he wepte, tare his garments, and was excedingly sorye: therefore he was not moued by the sprite of God: God so requireth obedience that he withdraweth not affections. this I saye doth not muche moue me. For god so requireth of vs the duties of piety, that yet he withdraweth not frō our minds humayne affections. Christ himself when he should willingly go to dye for our sakes, sayd for all that: my soule is heauye euen to the death. He prayed also, father, if it be possible, let his cup go from me. But Augustine intendeth to declare how Iiphtah might be defended: which I also would gladly do, if I had any part of the history to helpe me. But that which followeth in Augustine, is spoken to imitate Ambrose. The error of Augustine. For he writeth: The error of Iiphtah hath some praise of faith, which thinge (as I haue before shewed) can not be receaued. For if it were an error, then can it not be ascribed vnto the mocion of the holye ghoste. Farther, if it were sinne, what praise of fayth can there be in it? Because he feared not to render that which he had promised. What if the vowe were not lawfull? Can fayth be there praysed? Moreouer he saith: He declined not from the iudgemēt of God, and he hoped that he would haue prohibited him, frō killing of his daughter. He would rather vtterly performe the will of god, then contemne it. These thinges were well spoken, if he had bene assured of the wil of God. But he was not assured of it: yea rather god had otherwise prohibited it in his lawe. Wherefore if it were an error, it ought not to be praysed. But if the spirit moued him, then was there in it no error. That which he afterward addeth is moste true, and maketh on my syde. Firste he sheweth, that it was prohibited that a man shoulde kill his childrē, both by the example of Abraham and by the law. Farther, why the maidens wept, he bringeth the same reason that I brought, namely, both that the fathers should beware, not to bynd themselues with such a vow, and that so great an obedience of this mayden should not be put in obliuion. These thinges wee haue out of Augustine, by which woordes appeareth, that he thoughte that this virgin was in very dede immolated, and not compelled by the vowe of chastitye to liue alone. Which sentence I my selfe also do altogether allow.
They which think otherwise, haue not passing two or three authors, but I haue many which are on my side, and especially the auncient Rabbines, whyche liued at that time, wherin the Chaldey Paraphraste, and the writinge of the Thalmut was made. Reasons which confirme the interpretation. For the Chaldey Paraph. affirmeth, that the mayden was slayne. Iosephus, Ambrosius, and Augustin are of the same opinion. And we haue reasons 1 not to be contemned. First, bicause there was no law in the old time, that maydens should vow chastity: yea rather it was a curse, if a womā had died without children and baren. Yea and god promised vnto the hebrewes, if you obserue my law there shalbe no barren woman among you. Neyther is it very lykelye, that 2 holy men would by theyr vow hinder this promise. Farther in all the scriptures [Page 196] reueled by god, there remayneth no example of such a thinge. Also by this interpretacion, 3 we should seeme after a sort to confirme monasticall vowes, which ar playnly against y e holy scriptures. For Paule admonisheth y t he which cannot containe, 4 should mary a wyfe. I wil not speak how Iiphtah taried not for the consēt of the mayden before he vowed, without whiche (as I haue before shewed) the vowe of Virginity could not be ratified. I haue opened my mouth (sayth he) vnto the Lord, and I cannot go backe. Wherefore he vowed not the Virginitye of the mayden, when as he asked not counsell of her. To this also serueth the weeping 5 of the Virgins, and therewithall the weepinge of the mayden herselfe. For she desired, that shee mighte with her fellowes bewaile her Virginitye. But if it were a vow, why should she haue lamented it? We vse to bewayle our sinnes, & not our vowes. But the cause that moued the Rabbines, Kimhi & Ben Gerson, was this, because they wil eyther allowe or excuse the acte of Iiphtah. But wee must not labor for that: not that we would willinglye vncouer the defaultes of the fathers, but because we see that thinges whiche are not well doone, are not to be excused. Moreouer, also this doth not a litttle moue me, bicause y e Iewes at 6 this day haue not this vowe of Virginity among them. Wherefore al these reasons lead me to think that the daughter of Iiphtah was in very dede immolated.
But if it be demaunded, whyther he sinned or no in doing this, The question aunswered two wayes. it may be aunswered two manner of wayes. Firste, bycause as he was a man, so moughte hee seme, as very many of the elders fel. Secōdly, it may said, y t he did this by the impulsion of the holy ghost, not as though god would haue other men to imitate this act, but that men might by it vnderstand, that Christ should dye for their saluation. It is indifferent for euery man to chose eyther of these aunsweres. But I thinke rather he fell. Nowe resteth to confute the argumentes of the Rabbines.
In that they say the mayden was not killed of her father, but only punished w t ciuil death, namely that she should liue a part from the followship of men with out a husband and children, it is not wel sayd: bicause it can not be proued by the holy scriptures that there was any such kind of vow in the old time. I know that there were Nazarites, whiche abstained from wyne and stronge drinke, and all drinke which would make one dronke: but they abstained not from matrimony. Samuel and Sampson beyng either of them a Nazarite, had wiues, and Samuel had children, as the holy history declareth. But departinges from the companye of men, are not altogether to be disalowed, so that of them come some fruite vnto the church. Christ departed .40. dayes, and fasted: How departings from the company of men are allowed or disalowed. but afterward he returned to instruct the people. Iohn Baptiste went a parte, but yet for certayne dayes, & baptised and preached. So some of the fathers went sometime a part, wher they gaue themselues both to prayers and godly meditations, wherby they might returne the better instructed to preach. But I can in no case allow the perpetuitye of solitarye life: for wee are not borne to oure selues, but to other also. But that in the olde time there were some whiche were Nazarites for euer, that was not don by the institution of man, but by the commaundement of God: which thing is written to haue happened to Sampson and Iohn Baptist. Otherwise Nazarites vowed but onely for a time. Wherfore that which the Rabbines clayme, is false: for there was no ciuill death by the law, whereby men or women were for euer depriued of matrimonye.
Kimhi sayth that this letter Vau maketh somtimes a proposition disiunctiue. I graunt that the same is found in certayne places of the scripture. But it is not a fyrme argument, if we shall say: It is thus founde in some places, therfore it is so also in this place. But rather for the most part Vau maketh not a disiunctiue proposition, but a copulatiue. And vndoubtedly here it is brought in by exposicion. It shalbe the Lords sayth hee. After what manner? For I will offer it for a burnt offringe.
Farther they reason: The mayden desyred space of time, wherin to bewayle her virginity: neither saith she, her soule or life. This argument hath a shew, but no strength. For if death be to be lamented, vndoubtedlye then is it muche more to be lamented when it hath a bitter condicion annexed wyth it. The mayden was sure to dye at some certaine time, but that seemed vnto her very hard, that she should dye without childrē. Therfore that condicion is expressed, which made the cause more miserable. He sayth moreouer: It is not writen that Iiphtah offred her for a burnte offringe, but onelye that he dyd accordynge to hys vow. I aunswere. That there is sufficientelye sayde, when it is sayde that he did according to his vow. And it is often sene, that in narrations the sharpest thinges are not expressed. And althoughe the woordes be not all one, yet is it sufficient, if they be equall.
Leui Ben Gerson reasoneth of this, that it is written, and shee knewe no man. Therfore sayth he, she liued, but maried not. But this reason hath no force. For this sentence is an exposition of the wordes that go before. For why did the virgins bewayle her? Because she was vnmaried, and was not coupled to anye manne.
But Liranus sayth: The sprite of the Lorde came vpon Iiphtah, wherefore he vowed not his daughter for a burnt offring. This reason Augustine (as we haue hearde) aunsweareth. That spirite vndoubtedlye was the sprite of strength and warrelike knowledge. Neither can al that Iiphtah afterward did, be said to haue come from the same spiryte. Moreouer sayth Liranus, ther was twoo monethes space betwene, wherin he asked counsel of the priestes, and thei gaue him counsell to saue his daughter a Virgin. Yea but the auncient Iewes affirme that he was so stubburne that he woulde not aske counsell of the priestes. And for that cause he is reproued by the Chaldey Paraphrast. Neither is it any newe thinge, that men somtimes sinne, because they thinke not that they haue nede of counsel, and that is wont most of al to happen vnto princes. For they haue a high mind and proude stomackes, wherfore they think that they haue counsell inough. But he is numbred among the sayntes. To this Augustine aunsweareth also, that other were also numbred amonge the Sayntes, whiche yet greuouslye sinned. Lastly he saith: If he had sacrificed his doughter, he should not haue fulfilled, but contaminated his vow. I graunt that. Neither is it any maruaile, that he erred, seyng he was a man, and might fall.
Now shoulde remayne to declare what I thinke of vowes in vniuersall: but bycause of that matter, I haue written aboundauntly in an other place, namely in my Apology against Smith, therefore I remitte the reader to reade ouer that booke,
¶The .xii. Chapter.
1 ANd the men of Ephraim gathered themselues together, and passed ouer Northward, and sayd vnto Iiphtah: Why haste thou passed ouer to fyghte agaynste the children of Ammon, and haste not called vs to goe with the? We will therfore burne thee and thyne house with fyre.
2 And Iiphtah sayde vnto them: I and my people were at greate strife with the children of Ammon, and when I called you, ye deliuered me not out of theyr handes.
[Page 197]3 So when I sawe ye delyuered mee not, I put my lyfe in myne handes, and went vpon the children of Ammon. And the Lord hath deliuered them into myne hande. But why are ye come vpon me thys day, to fight agaynst me?
4 Then Iiphtah gathered all the men of Gilead, and foughte agaynst Ephraim. And the men of Gilead smote Ephraim, bycause they sayd: Ye Gileadites are abiectes among the Ephramites, and among the Manassites.
5 And the Gileadites tooke the passages of Iordan before the Ephramites. And when the Ephramites that were escaped sayd: Let me passe, the men of Gilead sayd vnto him: Art thou an Ephramite? If he sayde, Nay:
6 Then sayde they vnto hym: Say now Schiboleth: but he sayde Siboleth: for he coulde not so pronounce. Then they tooke him and slewe hym at the passages of Iordan, and there fell at that tyme of the Ephramites twoo and fourty thousand.
HEre is a sedicion set foorth vnto vs: The Ephraits wer veri proud the cause whereof was the pride of the Ephramites, whyche was so great, that they thought there was nothyng which was not due vnto them. Euen the lyke did they vnder Gideon, as wee haue before heard in the .viii. chap. But nowe are they more insolent, for they would not be content with Iiphtahs defence. These Ephramites also did the like when they instituted Ieroboam king, against the house of Dauid. They which ar infected with pride, doo euermore endeuour themselues to be aboue other, Cicero. and to excel them in dignity and other commodities. Cicero in his booke de Particionibus, sayth that Pride followeth the loftynes of the minde, in aduauncing of his own thinges. They which are proude, are swelled like bodies that are puffed vp, which haue not sounde fleshe and sinoes, but consist of a vaine swelling. So the proude, although they excell not others in vertue, Pride & noblenes of minde accompared together. yet do they aduaunce them selues aboue them. The true noblenes of the mynde consisteth herein, that we should contemne thinges vile, and be occupied about those thinges, whych ar in deede great thinges. But they that are proude haue not a noble minde, but a vayne, for they study not for true glory, but for vaine glory, wherefore they are iustly called vaynglorious. [...]. Aristotle. And they which are infected with this disease of the mynde, the same men are enuious, as Aristotle teacheth in his .2. booke of Rethorikes, and he declareth that both the ambicious persons, and the vayne glorious are enuious. Which thing Paul also to the Galathians confirmeth, wher he saith: be not ye made desirous of vayne glory, prouoking and enuying one an other. Of enuy doo straightway spring sedicions. Wherfore by these two vices the Ephramites fel into sedicion.
VVere gathered together. Not vndoubtedly by any order. For no lawful Magistrate assembled them together, but they were tumultuouslye styrred vp. And they passed ouer Northwarde. For they passed ouer Iordane, to inuade the Galaadites.
¶Of Sedicion.
BVt that of hautines and pride doo arise sedicions, the Apostle in the .2. Pride is ioined with sedicions. to the Corrin. the .xii. chap. very well declareth, [...], where hee ioyneth hautynes with sedicions. In what thng this vice chiefly consisteth, appeareth by the Code de sediciosis, in law .1. where it is thus had: They are counted sedicious, which doo gather the people without anye certayne commaundement, and doo defende them against publike discipline. Yea & also many things [Page] hereunto belonging, may be had out of the Digestes, ad l. Iuliam de vi publica. In summe, thē chiefly is sedicion, when by a tumult, they which ar of one & the selfe same company and body, doo mete out of sundry partes, to fight together. This vice is in especial contrary to peace and ciuil concord. For in sedicion there are manye partes of one people, and the vnitye of Citizens is troubled and endaungered.
Wherin the vnity of citizens consisteth. Augustine.But that we may know in what thing the vnity of the people consisteth, let vs geue eare vnto Augustine in his seconde booke De ciuitate dei, who in hys xxi. chapter bryngeth something out of the bookes of Cicero de Repub. that are woorthy to be knowen, where Scipio thus speaketh: Wyse men called not euery company a people, What compani may be called a people. but a company associated together by consent of the law, and communion of vtility. Wherefore there are twoo handes of the people, one is that they agree in the same lawes of thynges diuine and humane: the other is, that they haue among themselues a communion of publike vtility. Whosoeuer ryse vp agaynst these thynges, maye iustlye be called sedicious. Suche tumultes when they happen for doctrines of religion, or Ecclesiasticall matters, are woont to be called schismes. And they are more grieuous offenders in thys wycked crime, namely of sedicion, which first haue sowed the matter, the cause and seedes thereof, althoughe the other also which are adherentes vnto the authours thereof, are not vnguilty.
And although the people are twoo partes at the least, which runne together in a sedicion with contrary mindes, yet are not both parties guiltye of sedicion: but onely that part is to be accused of so great a wicked crime, whyche inuadeth the bondes of vnity, that is, common lawes and publike vtility. But they which resist such troublesome men, are not to be counted sedicious, but good Citizens. And hereby it is manyfest, We are falsely accused of the Papistes as sedicious. how falsely we are accused of the Papistes as sedicious, when as in very deede we desyre to haue the lawes of Christian Religion, which haue bene euen from the beginning receaued by the woorde of God, to remayne safe and perpecte: and we by all meanes procure to reedify the publike vtility of eternall saluation, and of the woorshipping of God, which are on euerysyde fallen in decay, which two thinges vndoubtedly, pertaine (as it is sayd) vnto good Citizens. But they haue to their power ouerthrowne these good thinges, and do continually hinder them. Wherfore they are iustlye and woorthely both to be accused. and also to be condemned of sedicion.
What are the punishmentes of sedicious persons.But with what punishmentes this wicked crime is to be punished, it is easely gathered, both out of the lawes of God, and the lawes of man. God punished Dathan and Abiran with the opening of the earth, vpon Core and his fellowes he sent fyre, sometimes also he vsed the stinging of Serpentes, and at length for this wicked crime aboue al other of the number of the Israelites, which wer sixe hundred, three score and sixe thousand, when they came out of Egipt, there diminished so many in the space of .40. yeares, that twoo onely, namely Iosua and Chaleb entred into the land of Chanaan. Also by the iudgement of God Absolon came vnto an euyl ende, and Syba the sonne of Bichry, and Adonias, which moued sedicion agaynst Dauid. But the Romanes, as farre as we can gather out of Liui and Plutarch, dyd put to death the tenth man of sedicious Soldiours. The Ciuill lawes, as it is had in the Code, in the title De Sedicionibus, l. 1. punished thys wycked cryme with extreme punishment, that is to saye, with cutting of the head: or if they had a respect vnto the dignity or condicion of the person, they that were sedicious, were somtymes hanged on a forke, and somtimes throwne to wylde beasts, or banished into an Ilande, as it is written in the Digestes, De paenis, in the law Si quis aliquid.
The ingratitude of the Ephramites against IiphtahWherefore nowe that wee haue brieflye shewed the causes of thys troublesome commocion, and haue defined the cryme of sedicion, and declared the grieuousnesse thereof by the punishmentes, nowe lette vs see howe ingrate the [Page 198] Ephramites were against Iiphtah. Hee, seing he had excellentlye well deserued of Israel, they ought vndoubtedly by the lawe of iustice and honestye, to haue gone and met him, to haue soong songes of victory, and with great honour and prayses haue exalted and commended him. For as much as iustice and honestye do require this, that we should geue thankes vnto them, which haue bestowed benefites vpon vs. Nature followeth this order, that we shoulde conuert the effectes into their causes, for as much as they haue their conseruacion and increase from thence, from whence they spring.
This therefore was due vnto Iiphtah, The degres of benefites. for as muche as he shoulde haue had either the highest place, or next vnto the highest, among those that had well deserued of the publike wealth. For first thou seest some, whiche when they bestowe 1 benefits, haue onely a respect vnto them selues. So doo shepeheards, neateherds and swineheardes, when they prouide pastour for their cattel, which they haue charge ouer: for there they hunt onely for their owne gayne and commoditye. Otherwise they haue no loue to Oxen, shepe and swine. There be others which 2 in doing good, haue a regarde both vnto themselues, and also vnto them whom they doo helpe. For the poore doo serue ryche men and Princes, partlye bycause they loue them, and partly to get some commodity at their handes. They 3 are to be placed in the third degree, which doo in suche sorte bestow a benefit vpon any man, that they looke for no recompence of him. It oftentimes happeneth that when we see one in misery, we are touched with mercy, and we helpe him: which without doubt proceedeth of humanity. For as much as we are men, we thinke that nothing that is humane, but it pertayneth vnto vs. They are counted 4 in the last and chiefest place, whiche benefite others euen with their owne griefe, hart, and losse. After which maner Christ did towardes vs: Iiphtah touched almost the chiefest degree of good beneuolence. he redeemed mankinde, with the losse of his owne lyfe. Vnto whom Iiphtah after a sorte is lyke, who brought the Israelites into liberty, & that to his great daunger, which he declareth by this forme of speaking: I haue put my lyfe in my handes, that is, I haue not refused to endaunger my lyfe. Wherefore the Ephramites wer most ingrate, towardes so great a benefite.
The firste place of ingrate men is, The degre [...] of ingrate men. when they recompence not againe good 1 thinges bestowed vpon them. The seconde is, when they praise not, neyther allow 2 those thinges wel of good men, which are wel done vnto them. The thyrde 3 is of them which doo forget the benefites that they haue receaued. The fourth 4 and woorst of al is, when for benefites, iniury and hurtes ar rendred. After this maner the Ephramites behaued them selues towardes Iiphtah, who bicause hee had gotten the victory, would haue burnt him and al his. What other thyng is this, then to contemne both the benefites bestowed, and also the benefit geuen? But these men are most of all vngrate, forasmuch as in so doing, neither ar men 5 onely or other creatures despised, but God himselfe is contemned. For whatsoeuer benefites we receaue of men, we haue them of God, which vseth the labor of men to relieue the miserable and afflicted. Wherfore they which are ingrate, are voide of charity, aswel towardes God, as towardes men.
But thou wilt say: when men that bestow benefites, Whyther benefites are to bee withdrawē frō the vnthankful doo somtimes light vpon ingrate persons, what ought they to doo? Shal they straight way withdraw their benefites from them? Vndoubtedlye they deserue this: but we must not so doo straightway, bicause men, by reason nature is corrupt, are slow, neither are they without difficulty moued to doo their duty. Therfore we must go forward in wel doing: for he which is not moued to be thankefull with the first henefite, shal peraduenture be styrred vp with the second, third, forth, or fift. But if he al together stycke in his ingratitude, we may iustly withdraw from him our benefites, not moued therunto by hatred or desyre of reuengement, but that he may be corrected, and that he doo not continually reproche the benefites, which ar the giftes of God. This thing doth God also, who by Hoseas the Prophet sayth vnto [Page] the vnthankful Hebrues: I wyl geue vnto you a heauen of brasse, and an earth of yron. I wil take awaye from you my wooll and my flaxe. &c. bicause ye haue made them Baals thinges.
Thou wilt aske perdauenture: why did Christ commaund vs, that we should be perfect like our heauenly father: which maketh his sunne to aryse as well vpon the euil, Twoo kyndes of benefites of God. as vpon the good, and as it is written in Luke. 6. chap. He is good towardes the ingrate? I answer: That this sentence of the Lord, is not against the 1 definicion now declared. For God hath two kindes of benefites. There are certaine which are principal, as the reuelacion of the Gospell, fayth, iustification, & 2 lastly glorification or eternal lyfe. These he geueth onely to his. There are certaine other temporall and common giftes, whiche yet are in especiall geuen for the electes sake: but bicause without a miracle it is not possible that they shoulde come vnto the good, vnles the euil be also made partakers of them, therefore he geueth them as wel to the one as to the other. How should a showre be prohibited, that it shoulde not moysten the fieldes of the wicked? God might doo it in deede: but yet not without a miracle. And for as muche as he wyll not alwayes woorke miracles, he wil rather, that the vngodlye also shoulde bee partakers of these benefites, then that the good should be destitute of commodities necessary for the lyfe. A similitude. Kinges also doo not make euery Citizen a Ruler, a President, or other officer longing to a Magistrate, but onely them that are iust & wise: which thing if they doo not, they execute not their office. But when they geue vnto their people lyberall giftes, or a banquet, or distribute corne, bicause withoute great labour and griefe they cannot seperate the good Citizens from the euyll, therfore they bestow such thinges which are of this kinde, miredly vpon al men, and chose rather to deserue wel of euyl citizens, then to defraud the good of their liberality, for whose sakes they are chiefly moued to be bountiful towardes the people. How we shuld behaue our selues toward the ingrate. Let vs also imitate this, that when we bestow priuate thinges, although we light vpon one that is ingrate, let vs not straightway withdrawe from hym our humanity, but let vs behaue our selues in such maner, as we haue before declared, that if he stubburnly proceede to be ingrate, let vs at the length cease for his correction, to bestow any benefite vpon him. But such benefites as are common and publike, let vs continually bestow them, yea euen vpon y e vngrate, as we are of God commaunded, and let vs rather chuse to haue our good thynges distributed to godly and holy men, then to cease of from doing good, y t the euyll should not be made partakers of them.
But now let vs returne vnto Iiphtah, whom the Ephramites offended most grieuously. First, he is accused of them, bicause he went to the battail and called not them. This seemeth to be the coulour of their complaint, bicause people confederated together, ought not to take in hād any warre, before they haue called theyr fellowes, and made them of counsell. Iiphtah purgeth himselfe of this false accusation, and sayth that they haue a false grounde, bicause he called them, but they denyed to come. But these men when they sawe that by iuste meanes they coulde not defende that whiche they obiected, they pleade not againste him at the iudgement seate, neither by the order of law, but make a tumult, and sediciously brag of suche complaintes. The saintes ar alwaies wrapped wyth newe troubles. And here we see the state of holy men sufficiently expressed, how they are alwayes wrapped with new troubles, so that they ar almost no sooner passed out of one, but an other is at hand. But by the goodnes of God, euen that woorketh to good in vs: for we ar so corrupt and viciate, that when thinges go prosperously with vs, we are wonderfullye puffed vp, so that by our insolency we are made intollerable: which thing that it shoulde not happen, God vseth agayne to exercise the elect with troubles, after that he hath graū ted them some prosperity. Wherfore let none of vs thinke, when we haue obtained any good successe, that straightway we must fight no more. Yea rather wee must prouide that then chiefly we may euen weary God with prayers, wherby [Page 299] he may bring to a perfect and absolute ende, the good woorke that he hath already begone in vs.
We must also marke the wysdome of Iiphtah, how first he woulde proue all thinges, before he woulde take weapons against his brethren. First he maketh hys Apologie, wherein he sayth that he did not rashlye moue warre, but bycause there was a very grieuous contencion betwene him and the Ammonites, and that he was muche oppressed by them, and therefore he could not abstayne from weapons. Farther, he denyeth that he called them not. I cryed vnto you (sayth he) but when ye saued me not, I tooke in hande warre my selfe, to mine own great daunger. Wherefore he addeth, that God delyuered the Ammonites into hys handes, which myght haue bene a token that God disalowed not his act. Which kynde of argument is in this place of force, for as much as he attempted no vniust thing: otherwyse there can bee no firme reason deriued of it, bycause God sometimes fauoureth the enterprises of the vngodly, by reason of his counsels, which are alwayes iust, but sometimes hidden from vs. Ieroboam the sonne of Nabat was by a sedicion created king ouer the ten Tribes, and obtayned that which with naughty conscience he desired. Nabuchad-Nezar also fought tirannously and ambiciouslye agaynst the Hebrues, and obtayned the victorye, when yet no man can allowe those doinges as godly, bicause of the successe of them.
The Ephramites were not content with this Apology. Wherefore Iiphtah fought against them, neither ouercame he his enemies onely, but also followed the victorye, and that they shoulde not escape, he preuented them, and possessed the passages of Iordane.
He found out by a phrase of their speeche, who were Ephramites. They which would passe ouer, might peraduenture be either Rabenites or Gadites, or of half the tribe of Manasses. Therefore least they should be deceaued, Diuers properties or speche [...] one and the [...] same toung. he tryed them by experience of their toung. Neither neede we to maruayle at the diuersity of pronunciation among the Hebrues, when as euery nacion, althoughe they vse one common toung, yet haue they some differences in diuers partes therof. All the Grecians spake Greke, and yet among them the Iones, Attici, Dores, Acoles, and such lyke, had some difference in their speaking, and that a notable difference. The Prenestines also which dwelt not farre from Rome (as we reade in Plautus) for Ciconia sounded Konia. In Italy also there are at this day very manye differences of properties of speche. But it may be doubted wherof they should come. From whence the diuers [...]ty [...] the [...]roper [...]es in sp [...]che is. Some answer that it commeth of custome, which is not sufficient inoughe: bycause we wil demaund againe why the firste inhabiters of these places beganne so to speake or to talke. Therefore there are other which being led by naturall reason, doo referre that diuersitye vnto the ayre, water, and sundrye aspecte of heauen. But we ascribe the beginning of this thing to haue bene from the building of the Tower of Babel. For in the booke of Genesis it is written, that the differences of tounges sprang thereof, which as they are perfect & very great betwene nacion and nacion, so are they found to haue begon in euery nacion.
They chosed this woorde Schiboleth, not rashly, but suche a one as made very muche for this present matter. For it signifieth both an eare of corne, and also a passage of a Ryuer, as it is wrytten in the .xxi. chapter of Esay. Wherefore when they were at the passages of Iordane, they put foorth this word, whereby they would proue whither the Ephramites should passe ouer, which word should signifye the passage it selfe. They might in deede haue tryed the same in many other woordes, if they would: but they proued it in a woorde, whose signification was agreable wyth the place.
Wherfore Iiphtah made ciuill war, but yet not vniust warre. Al ciuil war is not vniust. For he had the sword, wherwith his duty was to punysh not onely the enemies, but also the citizens, when they offend either against the lawes of man, or the lawes of God. [Page] God had geuen him the victory. The Ephramites contemned it. God woulde haue the Galaadites pertaining to Manasses to possesse y e land: the Ephramites endeuoured to driue them out from thence, and to destroye them. They inuaded their borders, they reproched them, and called them the runnagates of Ephraim. As though they were to be counted as certaine fugitiue bondsclaues, if they were compared with the moste noble Tribe of Ephraim. Or els they so called them, as thoughe at some other tyme they had made warre, and they as fugitiues escaped out of the battayle. But in the holye Scripture there is no suche battayle founde.
They also violated humane ryght and the lawes: for wyth weapons they inuaded those that were condemned by no ryght, and they woulde take awaye the dominion ouer the Galaadites whych was geuen vnto Iiphtah. The gift which was geuen vnto Iiphtah, could not be reuoked. But gyftes can not be reuoked by anye humane ryght, vnlesse peraduenture there happen any ingratitude. But that Iiphtah was not ingrate, the benefites whiche he bestowed on his, doo declare. Yea and also in the Digestes ( De donacionibus, in the lawe last saue one, in the Paragraphe Si quis) it is hadde, that a gyft geuen vnto a man, for that that he hath delyuered the geuer from theeues, coulde not be reuoked not for ingratitude, if any shoulde happen. But Iiphtah delyuered hys, not onelye from theeues, but also from moste grieuous enemies, from the Ammonites I say.
Wherefore the principallitye of hys Countrye being geuen hym, he coulde not iustly be spoyled of it. Whereunto thou mayest adde, that he was instituted a Iudge by God. Therefore he ought to defende both hym selfe and hys in punishyng wycked men. Let vs in this place note the seuere iudgement of God, vpon sedicious and ingrate persons.
7 And Iiphtah iudged Israel syxe yeares: then dyed Iiphtah the Gileadite, and was buryed in the Cities of Gilead.
8 After hym Iibzan of Bethlehem iudged Israel.
9 And he had .xxx. sonnes, and .xxx. daughters, whych he sent out, and tooke .xxx. daughters from abroade for his sonnes. And he iudged Israel seuen yeares.
10 Then Iibzan dyed, and was buryed in Bethlehem.
11 And after hym Elon a Zebulonite iudged Israell, and he iudged Israel tenne yeares.
12 Then Elon the Zebulonite dyed, and was buryed in Aialon, in the lande of Zebulon.
13 After hym Abdon the sonne of Hillel the Pirathonite iudged Israel.
14 And he had .xl. sonnes, and .xxx. sonnes sonnes, that rode on. 70 Coltes. And he iudged Israel .viii. yeares.
15 Then died Abdon the sonne of Hillel the Pirathonite: and was buryed in Pirathon, in the lande of Ephraim, in the mount of the Amelachites.
The Hebrewes fable that Iiphtah for hys wycked cryme, in kyllynge hys daughter, Nowe hee was buryed in the cities of Gilead. was so smytten of God that hys members rotted, and wasted away. And that when he walked throughe the Cities of Gilead, he lost in euerye one of those Cityes some part of his fleshe. And therefore it is not sayde that he was buryed in any one certayne place, but in the Cities of Gilead.
Other say that he was very desirous of glory and renowne, and therfore he prouided to haue monumentes made for him in manye Cities of that Prouince. These ar thyngs friuolous and ful of fables: which other Interpreters seing, do thus expounde that forme of speaking, that In the Cityes of Gilead, is nothyng els, then in some one certayn of the Cities of Gilead. But I thinke that it might be that the principal Citye of the Gileadites was so builte, that it seemed to bee not one Citye, but many. Wherefore it myght bee sayde in the plurall number Cityes. So in Hungary is a Citye called Quinque ecclesiae, whyche is fyue Cyties, and Siracusae a Citye in Sicilia. So that Are Gilead was the proper name of one Citye.
After hym Iibzan iudged Israel. This man counted to be Boaz. Some coniecture that thys mā was that Boaz whych maryed Ruth: but that cannot be confirmed by any authoritye of the scripture. He had thirty sonnes, and thirty daughters. And that we shoulde perceiue that they remayned long on lyue, it is sayd that they were all by hym coupled in matrimony.
But bycause the actes of this Iudge, and of the other twoo, whych are afterwarde mencioned, were not (as it is to be thought) notable: therefore they are not spoken of. But thys Iudge was of the Tribe of Iuda, whych thyng Bethlehem hys Countrye declareth.
Elon, whych was Iudge after hym tenne yeares, was of the Tribe of Zabulon.
Abdon the sonne of Hillel the Pirathonite, as the name of his country declareth, was an Ephramite, and he also was famous by his posteritye: for he had fourtye Sonnes, and of them thirtye Neuewes. It is declared that they all came to rype age, for it is sayde that they were all horsmen, who (as it is to be thought) in ryding compassed the sydes of their father. To haue many Children is an excellent gift of God. Vnles a great number of children were an excellent gift of God, it shoulde not so diligentlye haue bene mencioned of in those places. God promised vnto his friend Abraham, that hys seede should be increased lyke the starres of heauen, and sand of the sea. Yea and Dauid also syngeth: Thy wyfe shall bee lyke a fruitfull vyne in the sydes of thy house, and thy children lyke Olyue braunches, rounde about thy table. Priamus also is renowmed of the Poetes, bycause he had fyfty chyldren. The lawe of chyldren [...]ē the Roma [...] The Romanes made a lawe, called the law of three Chyldren. For if anye at Rome had three chyldren a lyue, they were excused from personall offices. Throughout Italy, to obtaine that liberty, foure were sufficient. But in a Prouince, fiue wer required, as it is in the Code, of those which haue deserued an excuse by the number of Chyldren, in the lawe de Personalibus, and Eosvero. But there are some whych doo hate plentiful fruite, bycause they haue no confidence in the goodnes of God, and doo dispaire that they shoulh be able to nooryshe them. They synn [...] whyche hat [...] plentifull issue. And there are other whiche are infected with this wicked affection, bycause they desyre to auoyde the troubles of bryngyng them vp, and are afrayde that they shall leaue their Chyldren beggers behynde them. But thys thing happeneth vnto them, bycause they doo euyll esteeme the benefites of God, neyther vnderstande they what great honour and dignity he geueth them, What is the dignitye of the Parentes. as often as they haue issue. As God is the Father of men: so also would he haue men to be the Parentes of men, that they should vnderstande by the fatherlye loue or affection, what mynde and beneuolence God beares towardes vs.
¶The .xiii. Chapter.
1. BVt the Children of Israel continued to cōmit wickednes in the syght of the Lorde, and the Lorde deliuered them into the handes of the Philistines fourtye yeares.
2 And ther was a mā in Zorah, of the family of the Danites, named Manoah, whose wyfe was barren, and bare not.
3 And the Angel of the Lord appeared vnto the woman, and sayd vnto her: Behold nowe thou art barren, and bearest not. But thou shalt conceaue, and beare a sonne.
4 And now therfore beware that thou drinke no wyne, nor strong drinke, neyther eate any vncleane thyng.
5 Bicause lo thou shalt conceaue and beare a sonne, and no rasor shall come on hys heade: for the Childe shalbe a Nazarite vnto God from hys byrth, and he shall begyn to saue Israel out of the handes of the Philistines.
This affliction of the Israelits is longer then the other.GOd afflicted the Israelites, and deliuered thē to their enemies, bycause they returned to their old nature, and forgetting the Lord their God, woorshypped Idoles. And this affliction dured fourtye yeares. We reade of none longer then this. From the death of Abdon the last Iudge, euen almost vnto Hely this affliction endured: bicause Samson did not fully deliuer the people. He in deede smote the Philistines, but he did not vtterlye repell them from oppressing of the Hebrues. This woorde Zorah is a name of a place, and not of a famelye, as we shal afterward vnderstand, towardes the ende of the chapter.
Of the Tribe of Dan. The learneder sorte doo to this place referre those thinges which are written in the booke of Genesis the .49. chapter. There Iacob when he was ready to dye, The prophecie of Iacob as touching Samsō. foretolde what should happen vnto his children after long time. And when by order he came vnto Dan: Dan (sayth he) shall iudge hys people, and he shal be a Serpent in the way, and an Adder in the pathe, byting the horses heeles, so that his ryder shall fall backward. For Samson after a sorte did byte the foote of the horse, when he ouerthrew the pyller, that is, the foote of the parler, & laid the rider on the ground, that is, the company of the Philistines, with the fal of the wal. These thinges I therfore make mencion of, that it might appeare, that they were no small or vulgare things, when as Iacob so long time before prophecied of them. Samson was of the Tribe of Dan, when as the nexte Iudge before him was of the tribe of Ephraim. God vsed not at y e tyme any ordinary Magistrate, Onely Samsō appoynted a Iudge before hys byrth. neither dyd the Children succeede the Parentes in this kynde of gouernment. There was no Iudge vnto this tyme of the Tribe of Dan. And there was none of all the Iudges, but onelye Samson, whom God appoynted, and as it were published a Iudge, before he was borne.
And hys name was Manoah, whose wyfe was barren. When God decreed to sende any notable and excellent man, Many excellēt mē borne of baren mothers. he verye often tymes styrred hym vp out of a barren woman, whiche thing also wee see came to passe in Samson, lykewise in Samuel, and in Iohn Baptist, and in very many other, that it myght manifestly appeare to be altogether the woorke of God. Barrennes among the Hebrues was a thyng ignominious: but God bycause he woulde declare, that of thynges most contemptible, he can bring foorth thinges excellent, hath very often tymes done after thys manner. And that faulte of barrennes was in thys place in the woman, and not in the man. For sometymes it may be in both: but [Page 201] the scripture here pronounceth it of the woman, and not of the man.
He shall beginne (sayth he) to saue Israel. Here is signified that Samson should not fully deliuer the people: for Israell did not vnder him fight in battayle against theyr enemies: he alone assailed thē, & somtimes greuously afflicted them. The Aungell appeared vnto his mother a part, when her husband was awaye, and shewed her of the sonne which she should beare. Also the Aungell appeared vnto Mary the mother of Christ when she was a lone.
Iosephus in his bookes of Antiquities addeth, Iosephus. that thys Manoah somewhat suspected his wife: and thought that it was not an aungell, but some man, & that his wifes chastity was assaulted, but eyther doubt was taken away, whē as at the last when he made sacrifice, y e angel vanished away in the flame. So Ioseph, whē he somwhat suspected Mary, herd of the Aungel: Ioseph, be not aferd to take Mary thy wife, for that which is conceiued in her, is of the holy ghost. God woulde haue his, not onely borne lawfullye, but also cleared from all suspicion. But in Samuel there could be no such suspicion: for when Hanna prayed softely, Heli the priest rebuked her, and counted her for a dronkard, who yet when he vnderstode how diligently and earnestly she prayed at the tabernacle of the Lorde, he promised vnto her issue.
But here besides the promise of the sonne, is added also a precepte. For the Aungell commaundeth her to abstaine from wine, and stronge drinke, Why such an abstinence was commaunded the moth [...]s. and all thinge that might make her dronke. There is also a reason added: Bicause he shal be a Nazarite vnto the Lord. Wherfore the mother also is commaunded to abstayne from wine, stronge drinke, and euerye vncleane thinge, that the childe shoulde not be nourished with thynges vnlawefull, no not in the wombe of hys mother.
¶Of the vow of the Nazarites.
ANd as touching the vow of the Nazarits it is manifestly set forth in the .6. of Numb: But those thinges whiche are there written, The summe of the vow of the Nazarites. maye all be reduced to three principall poyntes. The firste was, that they shoulde drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, nor any thinge that might make them droonke. An other was, that they should not pole theyr hed: but all that time the Nazarite shoulde let his heare grow. The third was, that they should not defile themselues with mourninge for buriales, no not at the death of theyr father or mother. These thinges were to be obserued, but not for euer, but onelye for some certayne time. For he vowed to bee a Nazarite, but for certayne number of dayes, or Monethes, or yeares.
But why did God institute these thynges? Why god gaue the institution of the Nazarites. There may be many causes geuen. Fyrste, because menne were so prone to chuse vnto themselues certayne kindes of lyfe, whereby they mighte easely fall into superstition. Therfore God would after this maner bridle them, as though he should haue sayd: Forasmuch as ye are so prone to your own studies, and to inuent newe woorshippings, yet shall ye not do what ye liste your selues, but what I prescribe vnto you. And so geuinge vnto them the lawe of a Nazarite, hee kepte them in doynge theyr dewtye.
But what mente these thinges? 1 They ought to keepe theyr heare growinge till the ende of theyr vow. For then in offring sacrifice, and burninge the fleshe in fire, they did cut of the heare, and burned it in the same fire. And frō that time they were free and returned to theyr old manner of life, which was common also vnto other.
Some referre these thinges vnto an Allegorye, that when the heares were [Page] increased, the Nazarites should consider, that vertues also oughte to increase in the minde. But me thinketh there may be an other cause rendred, namelye that men should abstayne from to much trimming and deckinge of the body. For the clipping of the eare much adorneth the body. For Paule sayth in his 1. Epistle to the Corrinthians the .11. Chapter, that to menne it is vncomelye if they let theyr heare growe. Althoughe other reasons of other menne are not to bee contemned.
Cyrillus Procopius. Cirillus and also Procopius vpon the booke of Numbers, say that these thinges were instituted of God, to reuoke men from the idolatrous worshippinges and rites of the Ethnikes, that that which they gaue vnto idols, y e Iewes should geue vnto him. So also whereas they sacrificed vnto Idols, he would haue these men rather to sacrifice vnto himselfe, not that god so much regardeth sacrifices, but to wythdrawe them from idolatry. We reade that the Ethnikes sometimes suffred theyr heare to growe, that they mighte afterward consecrate it, ether vnto the Nimphes, or to Apollo. Wherefore Apollo was by them called [...] that is a nourisher of the heare. Yea and Theseus (as it is written in Plutarche) went to Delphos there to dedicate his heare vnto Apollo. Plutarche. And children at Rome when they were paste childehode, offred theyr heare and beardes to some God. Sophocles writeth that Oreftes put his heare in the tombe of his father. Sophocles
There may also be an other cause rendred, and that not vayne. For the Nazarites ought alwayes to be pure, and although they were not of the tribe of Leui, yet they so behaued themselues all that time, as if they had beene priestes of the tribe of Leui. And the Leuites and priestes were prohibited in the .21. chapt. of Leuiticus from polinge theyr head. Which thinge maye also be perceaued by the .6. chapter of Baruch. Ye shall see (sayth he) priestes in Babilon with theyr heades shauen, The priests of the Hebrewes shaued not theyr heades. and theyr garmentes cutte. And they were priestes of idoles. Wherfore we see that by the commaundent of God, the priestes of the hebrewes had not theyr heades shauen.
In the booke of Numbers the 6. chapter, god calleth the heares of the heade a crowne, or as other translate, it a seperatiion. But contrarilye the Papistes call theyr shauing of the head a crowne: so do they peruerte all thinges as they liste themselues. But what shoulde a man speake of them? They care not what they doo. They will haue lights and censing in the temples. If thou aske them why? Because say they God vsed them in the olde testamente. But in the olde lawe priests had wyues: these wil haue none. They suffred the heares of their head or beard to grow: but these men shaue both theyr head and beard. Although at this day there is a great contention among thē about a long beard, bicause the counsell of Carthage in the .44. Concilium Carthaginense. chap. is sondry waies alledged. For in exāplers it is writen Comam non nutriant nec barbā that is, They shal not suffer theyr heare to growe, nor theire beard, but in others it is red: Nec barbam tondeant, that is: They shall not clip theyr beardes: whether of these two sentences will these men follow? For they wil not suffer to haue a long beard, least any part (as they say) of the sacrifice should stick in it. O holy mē: they fel y t theyr sacrifice for thre halfe pens, Why the sacrificing Papists will haue no beardes. & then least it should stick in the beard, they diligently prouide. Is not this to streyne at a gnat, & to swalow down a Camel? Howbeit some of them, leaste they should seme to do not very wisely nor with any reason: The cutting of (say they) of the heares, signifieth that a priest muste cutte of all superfluous thinges. This is the religion of these men, to haue the signes, when as they haue not the thinges signified. But I rather referre that shauinge of our papistes to softnes or wantonnes. Suetonius. For Suetonius in the life of Otho sayth that he was wont oftentimes to shaue his beard, and to behold his face in a glasse, whither it were trim inough. I wil not speake of other which did not shaue the heares, but plucke thē [Page 202] out, to haue the softer skinne.
2 The next thing was, that the Nazarites should abstayne from wyne, and not from wine onely, but also from vineger, from grapes, and from strong drinke, called Sicera. What Sicera is. Ierome. This Sicera (as Ierome writeth to Nepotianus) was a kind of drink much like vnto wyne, which was made eyther of wheat, or of apples, or of dates, or els of other fruites. Farther they were prohibited to eat the huskes of grapes or kernels, which are taken out of the wine presses. They wer also commaunded not to drinke Mishereth, which was nothing els then the washing of the grapes. For the wine being pressed out, there was water powred vpon the grapes that were pressed, which when it was purified, retained som sauor of the wine. That we call the second wine. But the Chaldey interpretation caleth Sicera old wine. And it is manifest inough, why the Nazarites wer forbidden to drinke both wine and strong drinke: for these thinges trouble the heade, and stirre men vp to lust, as Salomon in his 20. chapter of Prouerbs admonisheth, wine maketh a mocker, and strong drinke a troublesome fellow, and whosoeuer is deceaued therby, shal neuer be wise. Paule saythe also to the Ephesians the 5. chapter: Be not dronke with wine, wherin is excesse: but be filled with the sprite. Farther the priestes in the old law were prohibited to drinke wine before they came to holy seruices. Wherefore the Nazarites, forasmuch as they were like priestes, ought also to abstayne from wyne.
3 The third thing was, that they shoulde not defile themselues with any mourninge for the deade. For as we are with ioy to muche lifted vp, so sometimes are we greuously troubled with heauines and mourninge. But God woulde haue his ministers to be voyde of affections, especiallye of the vehementer affections, when as by them men are more greuously moued then is mete. Neyther yet wer these obseruations merites, wherin they constituted righteousnes, but they were rites onely and excercises, whereby they should after a sorte be kepte in doinge theyr deuty. For the vow of a Nazarite was a certayne seperacion from other mē. But what they did in the meane time, it is not prescribed: howbeit many thinke that they were commaunded, to endeuour themselues to the contemplacion and knoweledge of the lawe, and to worshyppe and call vpon God purelye and sincerely.
We se that god by this kind of vowe would instruct the people with singuler wisedome. The Philosophers write that a manne muste contende, to be able to beholde highe thinges, and wyth his knowledge to embrace whole nature. And that they saye canne neuer be done, vnles the affections in vs be tempered, otherwise we are verye often caried awaye by anger and luste. Wherefore God would haue his to be voyd of these affections, namely of mourninge, pleasure, to much care and vexation about the decking of the bodye. For these do not a little hinder the tranquility of the mind, and spirituall cogitations therof. Wherfore in the olde lawe he instituted in a manner to prepare his, that they shoulde not come vnapte and vnmete to higher thinges. Vndoubtedly they which are indewed with the knowledge of God, oughte to frame and prepare themselues, before that they come to heare the woorde of God, or to receaue the Sacramentes. Ieremy in his 4. Chapter hath very wel admonished vs: Breake vp your fallow ground, and sow not among the thornes. And they vowed this kind of vowe (as we haue sayd) for a certayne time, either for a yeare or for a moneth, or as euery man thought it most profitable for himselfe: for the natures of menne are oftentimes chaunged, and the studies of piety do waxe feable. Therfore they oughte by some meanes to be restored. Hereof sprange the departures of the Elders, into solitary places for a time. So they whyche gouerned the publike wealth, when they were wery with matters, kept themselues close oftentimes [Page] in fieldes or manors, not to sleepe, or to geue themselues to sluggishnes and idlenes, but to refresh theyr mindes, and that they might returne the more prompte and better instructed to accomplish thinges. And the most noble Rhethoricians being wearied with pleading causes of the law, went sometimes into the country, to heare, to talke, to reade somwhat, to peruse ouer the oracions before herd, and so by that meanes to returne more learned and readye to the place of iudgement: So the Nazarites for a certayne time departed from the companye and felloweshippe of other menne, that they mighte be the better and holier afterwarde to execute the duties of life. Chryste also in the nyghte tyme departed to the mountayne: But in the daye tyme he returned vnto the people. And when the Apostles returned, whom he hadde sente foorth to preache, he led them a way for a little while into a deserte, that they mighte there be quiet, and refresh themselues.
The instituciō of Lent.For this cause peraduenture was Lent first instituted, that men which had al the yeare bene occupied with ciuill businesse, might at the leaste at that time renew piety. This is the pretence of the Papists.
But graunt that the thinge was at the first institued for this cause, let them consider what it is now fallen to at the lengthe, vndoubtedlye into mere superstition, whereby nothing els is obtruded vnto the people, then choise of meates, olde wyues fables, vngodly songs, and pilgrimages (whych they commonly call stations) very prophane and idolatrous. In the meane time there is no mencion made for the abolishinge of couetousnesse, luste, lecherye, and other wicked actes. Farther, menne oughte by so longe a fast to haue beene made better, but they are made much worse after Easter.
Paul tooke vpon him y e vowe of a Nazarite.But to returne to the vowe of a Nazarite, Paule seemeth to haue vowed it, when as in the .18. chapter of the Actes of the Apostles, he poled his heade in Cenchre. And in the .21. chapter he was perswaded of the Elders to doo it. There are here (say they) foure menne, whyche haue a vowe: Thou shalte bee with them. There the shauinge of the head declareth, that that vowe pertained vnto a Nazarite. For as it is wrytten in the lawe, if it had happened that the Nazarite in the time of the vowe whyche he hadde taken vpon hym, hadde defyled hymselfe vpon the deade, or by anye other meanes, then the vowe was violate. And the Nazarite oughte to come vnto the Tabernacle, and to declare vnto the priestes what hadde happened, and to cutte of hys heare, to offer sacrifice, and so to begynne the vowe of a Nazarite a newe agayne. For what soeuer he hadde before obserued, it was counted as defyled and of no force. So Paule, as thoughe some thynge hadde happened vnto hym amonge the Gentiles where he had beene conuersant, woulde be purified in the Temple, as thoughe he shoulde haue begonne the obseruation of hys vow agayne.
A fayned tale of the Moonkes.The Papystes crye that by this vowe of the Nazarites, there was a certeyne shadowe at that tyme of theyr religious Moonkery, neyther consider they that the vowes of the Nazarites were instituted by the woorde of God. Let them shew on theyr side the commaundement of God for moonkry, which thing if they cannot do, then resteth there nothinge but that we may say, that the institutions of Moonkes are not the vowes of Nazarites, but of superstitious men, and a certayne ridiculous imitation or an euill zele of the olde vowe of the Nazarites. So also in the olde tyme superstitious men, when they sawe that Abraham would haue offred his sonne, Whereof began drawing of children throughe the fyre. and that for the same cause he pleased God very well: They also would nedes offer their sonnes, and draw them thorough the fire. By whiche most wicked institution they greuously offended God. But our worshipping ought to leane vnto the worde of God. In dede ciuill institutions, yea euen without the expresse word of God, may be receaued, so that they be not [Page 203] agaynst the worde of God: Agaynst the vowe of religious men. but worshipping and religion ought not to come frō any other thyng, but onely out of the word of God. But I pray you, let them tel, whence they haue that vowe of perpetuall sole life, or how can it agree with the Nazarites? First it is contrary to the creation of man, when as it was sayd vnto the first parentes: Increase and multiply. Farther, it is agaynst the oracle, which Paul wrote: He whiche contayneth not, let him mary.
They vowe pouerty also. But what manner of pouerty? forsoth to lyue of beggyng. A trimme vow, to be maintayned with the labours of other men. Vndoutedly that is agaynste charitye, when as Paul sayeth vnto the Ephesians: He whiche stole, let him steale no more, but let him labor rather with his handes, that he maye haue wherewithall to geue vnto hym that suffereth necessitye. But thou wilte say that of the Monkes ther are some which are riche. I graunt that, but they also do contrary to the word of god, wherin it is commaunded: He whiche laboreth not, let him not eate. Farther, they vowe obedience. But to whom? To certayne men, when as Paul expressedly writeth: Be not ye made seruauntes of men. But they say: I am of Frances, I am of Dominike, I am of Benedict, where as Paul would not suffer that Christians should saye: I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, and I of Cephas. They agr [...] not but are contrarye to the Nazarites. Why then do they cry that they agree with the Nazarites? Let vs diligently examine euery thyng. The Nazarites shaued not the heare: but these men do shaue it. The Nazarites did drinke no wyne: but these mē glot themselues with wyne. The Nazarites came not to funerals: but these men desire nothyng so much as the funerals and obsequies of the dead. But I will ouerpasse these things. One thing only wil I adde: Although in the Iewish religion the vowe of the Nazarites was the principall vow, Origene. yet were they not forbidden to mary. In other vowes (sayth Origene) they gaue either a shepe, or a a gote, or an oxe, or some other thing. But in this kynde of vow, they offred thē selues, and yet their state agreed well ynough with matrimony.
But let vs returne vnto Samson. He proued a most strong young man. Who would haue thought that this could haue come to passe? The parentes were not cōmaunded to instruct hym in the arte of warfare, or to send him forth to warre. A mā would thinke much rather that he should be brought vp as a Monke, & not as a souldier. But God would shewe, that all the strength whiche should be in Samson, should be deriued from his spirite. But that he should be a Nazarite all his life tyme, as Samuel also was, it was peculiar, and aboue the common institution of others, by the deede I say and not by the ryght or vowe of the parentes. Samson ought to haue obeyed, althoughe he had not vowed, Whether it was lawful for Hanna [...]o vow for her sonne. bicause it was done by the word of god. Howbeit of Hanna the mother of Samuel it may be doubted, how it was lawfull for her to vow for her sonne. For it may scarse seme iust that the sonne should be bound by the vowe of the parent. It was demaunded in the tyme of Benedict, whether the children offred by the parentes vnto monasteries, when they came vnto mans state, might mary. Gregorius. Gregorius Magnus to Augustine a Byshop of England, aunswereth, that it is vtterly vnlawful. Whiche is a verye hard saying, and agaynst the word of god. For Paul sayth, it is better to mary then to burne. And he whiche can not conteyne, let him mary. Conciliū Carthaginense. In the counsell of Carthage the .3. wherat Augustine also was present, it was decreed, that childrē offred vnto y e Church, when they came to mans estate, should either mary, or els vow chastity. This also was rough ynough. For who shuld require this at y t age, being vnskilfull of thinges, & not certayne of his own strēgth? But these things I speake, that we might knowe that decrees are contrary to decrees. But to returne to the matter, I saye that Hanna mought vowe for her sonne: for as touching the performyng of the vow, as longe as he was brought vp by his parētes, she might easely prouide, that he should not drinke any wyne, nor cut of hys heare, nor be at any funerals. But after he came to lawfull age, it was Samuels duty to obserue these things, not in dede in respect of the vow, but bycause of the [Page] obedience whiche he ought vnto his parentes. For children ought to obey theyr parentes in all those thinges which are not agaynst piety & the word of God. So the Rechabites (as it is in Ieremy) whē they obeyed their father Ionadab, The Rechabites. who cō maunded them to drinke no wine all their lyfe tyme, or to dwel in Cityes, were for the same cause praysed of God. Howbeit Hanna vnles she had had a peculiar inspiration from God, she could not haue vowed, that Samuel should all his lyfe tyme haue ministred at the tabernacle of the Lord: for as much as the law of god absolued mē frō the ministery at a certaine space of yeares, namely in y e .50. yere.
Magister sententiarum.But that which I haue sayd, that it was lawful for Hanna to vowe the vow of a Nazarite for her sonne, it semeth not to be firme with y e definition of a vow, whiche is thus brought of the Master of the Sentences: A vowe is a testificatiō of a willing promise made vnto God, The definition of a vowe. of things which pertayne vnto God. But a vowe which is vowed by the parent for the sonne, can not seme willing. Yea but it is: bycause the parentes vowed not being compelled, but of their owne fre will: farther, it is mete for the children to obey the will of their parentes freely & of their owne accorde, especially when they commaunde no vngodly thyng, or contrary to the worde of God.
By this place some gather that Samson was sanctified in the wombe of hys mother: whiche selfe same thyng is beleued both of Ieremy and also of Iohn Baptiste. How some are sayd to be sanctified frō the wombe. And they will haue him so to be sanctified, that afterwarde he committed no mortal sinne, as they call it. But this is false and vayne. Neither to sanctifye in this place is anye thyng els, then to appointe one to the execution of some certayn worke. Samson therefore was sanctified, that is, appoynted of God to deliuer his people. So was Ieremy ordeyned to Prophesie. And Iohn to be the voyce of a crier in the wildernes. Neither of this kinde of sanctification doth it follow, that these holy men neuer sinned. For euery mā is a lyer, & also there is no mā sayth Salomon whiche sinneth not. Farther, what shal we say of Samson: Did he neuer sinne? He fel vndoubtedly, and that greuously. Paul also, who sayth to the Galathians that he was himselfe separated from his mothers wombe, and yet he persecuted the Churche of God. Moreouer the children also of Christians are called holy, for as muche as God is not our God onely, but also the God of our seede, according to that saying of Paul to the Corinthians: Your children are holy, who yet no man doubteth, but y t they afterward fal and grieuously sinne.
If the vow be against charity it is to be broken.One thinge remayneth to be spoken of, and afterwarde I will returne vnto the history. When the father voweth, and the sonne desireth to performe y e vowe of the father, what if the vow be a gaynste the health of the sonne? He shall peraduenture fal into some disease, and he must nedes drinke wine, or cut away his heare, what is to be done in this case? I haue in an other place admonished that the preceptes of god ar of diuers sortes, so that some ar greater, and some easier. As touching god whiche is the commaunder, all are equall and like one to an other. But as touching y e thinges which are cōmaunded, there is some difference. Wherfore the lesse precept must geue place vnto the greater. For whiche cause Christ sayth by the wordes of the Prophet, I will haue mercy and not Sacrifice: not as thoughe God vtterly contemned Sacrifices, which he had commaunded, but bycause he more estemed mercy. And Christ also admonisheth in the Gospell in the .5. chapter of Math. that if thou offer thy gift at the alter, and there remēberest that thy brother hath somewhat agaynst thee, thou must go first and reconcile thy selfe vnto thy brother, and then returne, and offer thy gifte. Whereby he declareth that he altogether wil haue the les precepte geue place vnto the greater. Wherfore we must thus aunswere vnto the question. God commaūdeth the Nazarites to absteyne from wine: he also commaundeth euery man to defend his life by good meanes. Here when as the sicke man can not preserue both the preceptes, it is necessary that he preferre the greater before the les. For so dyd the Rechabites the sonnes of Ionadab behaue themselues. For althoughe theyr father [Page 204] cōmaunded them, that they should not dwel in Cities, neither drinke any wine, and were also commended of God, bycause they obeyed the preceptes of theyr father, yet at that tyme when Ieremy wrote these thinges of them, they dwelled at Ierusalem, contrary to the precept of their father. For the Chaldeyans had wasted all the fieldes. Wherefore they perceaued that there was then no place for their fathers precept. But in monasteryes they doo contraryly. For if the father be sicke, the sonne is so bound by religion, that he can by no meanes helpe him.
6 And the wife came, and tolde her husband saying: A man of God came vnto me, and the looke of hym was lyke the looke of an Aungell of God very terrible, and I asked hym not whence he was: neither tolde he me his name.
7 And he sayde vnto me: Beholde thou shalt conceaue and beare a sonne. Now therfore thou shalt drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, neyther eate any vncleane thyng: for the chylde shalbe a Nazarite to God from his birth, to the day of his death.
8 Then Manoah prayed vnto the Lord, and sayd: I praye thee my Lord let the man of God whom thou senttest, come agayne vnto vs and teache vs what we shall do vnto the childe when he is borne.
9 And God hearde the voyce of Manoah. For the Aungell of the Lorde came agayne vnto the wife, as she sat in the fielde, but Manoah her husbande was not with her.
10 And the wife made hast and ranne, and shewed her husbande, saying vnto hym: Beholde the man hath appeared vnto me, that came vnto me to daye.
11 And Manoah arose and went after hys wyfe, and came to the man, and sayd vnto him: Art thou the manne that spakest vnto the woman? And he sayd: Yea.
12 Then Manoah sayd: Nowe let thy saying come to passe. But what shalbe the iudgement of the childe, and his worke?
13 The aungell of the Lord aunswered vnto Manoah: The womā must beware of all that I sayd vnto her.
14 She may eate of nothyng that commeth of the wine vine tree, that is, she shall drinke no wine nor stronge drinke, nor eate any vncleane thing: let her obserue all that I haue commaunded her.
The woman thought that it had bene some godly man whom she had sene, or a Prophete: for she knew not that it was the aungell of God. His looke (saith she) was terrible. The Hebrewe worde is ambiguous: for it may be turned both terrible and wonderfull. And vndoubtedly the thinges whiche are wonderful, especially deuine things, doo strike into men a feare. She faythfully sheweth vnto her husband these thinges, and doth the dewty of a good wife. What matrimony is. For Matrimony is an vnseperable society, hauyng the communion both of thynges deuine & humane. And this matter pertayned partly to thinges deuine, bycause it was shewed in the name of God, and partly vnto humane thynges, bycause it was a matter as touchyng the receauyng and education of a child.
She sayth, she asked him not whence he was: bycause in such visions men are so amased, that they are attentiue onely vnto the thynges which are spoken, neither haue they any leasure to enquire of more thinges. So the mother of y e Lord, when the Aungell saluted her, asked hym not what his name was, or from whence he came. Gideon also when he receaued the oracle of the Aungell, for [Page] the delyuering of the people, was altogether so astonished, that he was nothyng inquisitiue, what his name was. But the woman speaketh these thynges by anticipation: for she thought that her husbande woulde heare, and inquire of hym the truth. Althoughe Iosephus in hys booke de Antiquitatibus (as I haue before admonished) sayeth, that when he hearde the wordes of his wife, he somewhat suspected her of euill. Ambrose. Howit Ambrose in hys .70. Epistle, where he very diligently entreateth of this Hystory, denieth that to be very lykely. For if (sayeth he) he had ben gelious, God would not haue sent an aungell vnto hym. But me thinketh Ambroses reason is not firme. For Manoah might otherwise be a good man, although he were touched with suspition. Very good men also haue oftentymes some suspition of such things. For euen Ioseph the husband of Mary, whō the holy Scripture testifieth that he was a iust man, somewhat sinisterly suspected hys Spouse, to whom yet the Aungell appeared.
Wherefore I rather beleue that Manoah, was eyther altogether without gelousy, or elles not very muche gelous. For he accused her not abroade, her repudiated her not, neither vsed he the publique remedy of the lawe: For then was in force that lawe whiche was geuen by GOD, that if a manne suspected his wife of aduoutry, he should bryng her to the doore of the tabernacle, where the Priest should searche out the honesty of the woman by solemne waters, and by a bitter curse. The cause of the lawe of gelousy. For God would that maryed folkes should lyue together with a mery, quiet, and not suspitious mynde. But Manoah dyd not onely not vse these remedyes: but also he by no meanes rebuked his wyfe. But strayghtwaye prayed vnto the Lorde, that that man of God would returne the seconde tyme, wherby he myght vnderstand, how the child should be brought vp. Neither dyd he tempt god by hys prayers. In deede no man ought to desire a signe, y t he may beleue the articles of fayth. For those thynges whiche are contayned in them, are already before sufficiently proued and confirmed by the worde of God, and by miracles. But if there happen any newe and singular reuelation, bycause there may bee deceates and guiles of deuilles, who transforme themselues (yea euen into the aungelles of lyght) if we require a signe of the Lorde or instruction, we sinne not. That a baren woman shoulde beare, or that a childe shoulde set the people at liberty, it was a certayne singular thyng. Wherefore Manoah prayeth for nothyng curiously, and therefore GOD hearde hym. He afterwarde demaunded the name of the aungel, but bycause he demaunded it curiously, he was not hearde.
The aungell came agayne vnto the woman the selfe same daye, as all interpreters doo agree. And vndoubtedly it might be, that first he came in the mornyng, and the second tyme, either at noone, or about the sunne set. Manoah asked, VVhether he were the manne whiche spake with hys wife: whiche thing whē he affirmed vnto hym, he sayde: Let thy sayinge come to passe. It maye be an oration of one that wisheth, as if he shoulde haue sayde: I woulde to GOD it myght come to passe. Or it may by supposition, as if it shoulde haue bene sayd: If it come to passe as thou haste sayde, VVhat then shalbe the iudgement of the child? When he saith iudgement, he asketh not Counsel of Astronomers, which aunswere by the starres, what shall come to passe of a childe. He onely demaundeth what GOD had decreed of the childe. Neither ought the decree of GOD wherof he inquireth, to be referred vnto the merites of the child, but onely vnto the mercye of GOD. For Mischpat is very well turned a decree, for a decree is of mercye and not of merite. The Aungell repeateth vnto hym all those thynges, whiche he had before commaunded the woman to take heede of. She maye not eate (sayeth he) of any thynge that commeth of the wyne grape. Certaine wine [...]rees beare not wine. These woordes declare, that there are also other kyndes of vynes, out of whiche is not gathered wyne. But when the Aungell sayeth: Neyther shall she drynke [Page 205] wine, nor stronge drinke, hys aunswere seemeth not to make muche to the purpose. Manoah demaundeth of the childe, and the aungell aunswereth of the mother. But it is all one, as if he had sayd: That whiche I haue sayd of the mother, I haue sayd it bycause of the childe: Wherfore seyng god wyll haue the mother obserue these thynges, muche more ought the childe to keepe the selfe same things. Howbeit the cōmon trāslation (I cā not tell how) referreth these things vnto the childe, but yet not rightly: bycause in the Hebrewe the feminine gender is kepte still. Augustine is his questions vpon this booke demaundeth, Augustine. why the mother is commaunded to absteyne from all vncleane thynges, when as that was already before sufficiently forbidden by the lawe of God? He aunswereth: After that the Philistines possessed that lande, Religion among the Iewes was feabled, and the people did without choyse eate thyngs vncleane and forbydden by the lawe. By these wordes Manoah easely perceaued that his wife did rightly vnderstande the wordes of the angell, and that the child should be a Nazarite as longe as he lyued.
15 And Manoah sayd vnto the aungell of the Lorde: I praye thee let vs retayne thee, and we will make ready a Kid for thee.
16 And the angell of the Lord aunswered vnto Manoah: Though thou make me abyde, I will not eate of thy bread: and if thou wilt make a burnt offring, offer it vnto the Lorde: for Manoah knewe not that it was an aungell of the Lorde.
17 Agayne Manoah sayde vnto the Aungell of the Lord: What is thy name, that whē thy saying is come to passe we may honor thee?
18 And the aungell of the Lorde aunswered hym: Why askest thou thus after my name, whiche is secret?
19 Then Manoah tooke a Kid and an oblation, and offred it vpon a stone vnto the Lord. And he wrought a miracle whilest Manoah and hys wife looked on.
20 For when the flame came vp toward heauen from the alter, the aungell of the Lord ascended vp in the flame of the alter. And Manoah and his wife beheld it, and fell on their faces to the ground.
21 So the aungell of the Lord did no more appeare vnto Manoah and hys wyfe. Then Manoah knewe that it was an aungell of the Lorde.
Whē they had heard these wordes, they would haue retayned this mā of god, & haue made him a banquet. Vnto whom he aunswereth: Although ye make me to abide, yet will I not eate of your bread. This Hebrew worde Lechē signifieth not onely bread, but sometymes meate in vniuersall, yea & sometymes flesh also. Hereof was inuented y e subtility of y e Papistes: to whō when we say, y t the bread remayneth in y e Eucharist, & proue it by y e which Paul writeth: The bread which we breake, is it not y e cōmunicating of y e body of Christ? They answere: y e bread in that place may signifie fleshe, as it doth oftētymes in the holy scriptures. But they ought to remember y t Paul wrote these words in Greke & not in Hebrew. But [...] y t is, bread in Greke, cā not signify flesh, as Lechem may in Hebrew. Farther in the holy supper the flesh of Christ is not broken, but they ar simboles or signes whiche are broken.
VVe will make a Kid. So some reade it, and doo thynke that to make, Sondry readyng. is in this place nothyng els then to Sacrifice. Peraduenture Manoah thought that that aungell was a Priest. And in peace offringes one parte was burnt vnto God, an other parte was geuen vnto the Priest, the thirde parte they dyd [Page] eate which offred the sacrifice, and so they banqueted together before the Lord. Wherfore they would entertayne the Aungell with a banquet. But other rede in this place, not to make, but simply to prepare.
If thou wilt make a burnt offring, offer it vnto the Lord. He declared that he looked not for a banquet, bycause in burnt offrings, al things were consumed with fire. But in y t he saith: Sacrifice it vnto the Lord, he putteth him in remēbraunce of the true God: bycause the people at that tyme woorshypped the Gods of the gentiles. The wilynes of y e Papistes, whereby they affirme that y e Masse is a sacrifice. The Papistes cry that to make, is to sacrifice: & that this worde Facere, that is to do or to make, is properly applied vnto sacrifices. And therby they labour to proue, that their Masse is a sacrifice, bycause Christ sayd in the Supper, Hoc facite, that is, do or make this, which they thinke is nothyng els, thē sacrifice this. Neither do they cite these places onelye, but also very many other, whiche are founde in the olde testament. They say also that the Latin Poetes vsed this word after this maner, Virgil. as Virgil when he sayd: When I make a calfe for corne, come thou. Amitte it be so. But how shall we vnderstand the certayne signification or strength of this word as ofte as it cōmeth? And whē shal it signifie this, & when that? From whence significatiōs of wordes ought to be gathered. For otherwise to make a garment, shalbe to sacrifice a garment, and to make a fire, shalbe to sacrifice a fire: if that word as oft as it cōmeth shal signify to sacrifice, vndoubtedly what y e worde signifieth may be easely be vnderstād by the thyng it selfe, and circumstances of the place, as that in Virgil which they haue alledged, where it is read: When I make a calfe, it is certayne that there is mention made of haruest Sacrifices. And so it oftentymes happeneth in the olde Testament. But in the supper, what was it that Christe would Sacrifice? what oblation? what bloud? Take (saith he,) eate, drinke. Do this whiche I haue sayd, namely to eate and drynke, for a remembraunce & monument of my death. But the Papistes bring forth these vayne & friuolous things, bycause they haue no better, as they whiche haue no wood vse to burne strawe.
Whether it were lawfull to sacrifice in any other place, besides the tabernacle.But to returne vnto the Hystory, this semeth wonderful, when as the law cō maūdeth that sacrifice should be done but onely in the place which the Lord had chosen, how it should be lawful for Manoah to sacrifice at his own house. Dauid Kimhi answereth, that this was done by the authority of the man of God, by a certayn extraordinary meane. For Elias also sacrificed when he was among the ten tribes, y t is, in the kingdome of Samaria. But those things he saith were peculiar, neither might they be drawē into an exāple of others. But I thinke y e whilest the arke of the Lord was yet wandryng, & whilest it had not yet founde any certayne place, y e precept of the Lord had not yet his full strength. For thus the Lorde had cōmaunded, after that I shall bring you into the lande whiche I haue promised you, ye shall not sacrifice vnto me, but in y e place which I wil shew vnto you. Wherfore although before it was permitted to sacrifice any other wher, yet after y e Salomon had built the tēple, it was not lawful to offer out of it: wherfore the highe places were to be takē away, & they should sacrifice no where but at Ierusalē. But of al the kings, onely Iosias & Ezechias toke away y e high places: so hard a thing was it to leade y e people to y e true obediēce of god. But Elias was moued by a certayne peculiar inspiration of God to Sacrifice other where.
Manoah demaundeth after the name of the Aungell, neyther dyd he that so simply as hys wyfe dyd. But that he should not be thought to demaund it curiously, or without a cause, he addeth a reason of hys request. That if that come to passe whiche thou hast sayd, we may honour thee, that is w t some reward. But I cā not recōpence thee, vnles I know who thou art, & where thou dwellest. This Hebrew worde Peli is ambiguous to the Hebrues, R. Salomon. Aungels ar named of those things whiche they worke. & signifyeth both wonderful, and also secrete. R. Salomon sayeth that the names of aungelles are secrete, so that they themselues knowe not their owne names. And he addeth also that the Aungelles haue no names of their owne, but onely haue surnames geuen [Page 206] them of those thynges whiche they are sent to take charge ouer. Whiche thyng also the Epistle to the Hebrues toucheth, when it calleth them ministryng spirites. R. Salomon bryngeth examples out of the holy Scriptures. An Aungell was sent vnto Esaye, and bycause he dyd put a burnyng coale to his lyppes, he was called Seraphim, of this verbe Seraph, whiche signifieth to burne. So maye we saye of Raphaell, that he was so called, bycause he had healed Tobias, as thoughe he were the medicine of GOD. Gabriell also, after the same manner, was called the strength of GOD. Also thys woorde Peli signifieth wonderfull: for therefore came the Aungell, to woorke a miracle. And vndoubtedly it was very wonderfull, to bryng fire out of a rocke, whiche shoulde consume the Sacrifice. And it may bee y t the Aungell would not open hys name, bycause menne at that tyme were prone vnto Idolatrye, and they would easely, when they had hearde the name of an Aungell, peraduenture haue woorshypped it to muche religiously.
That which we haue called an oblation, in Hebrew it is Minchah. But what manner of oblation that was, is vnderstoode by the .2. chapter of Leuit. There wer diuers kindes therof, but it euer consisted of corne, but yet not alwayes prepared after one manner, & it was so offred, that some part of it was burnt vnto the Lord, the other part was left for the Priestes. The Papists babble that Minchah was a shadowe of their bready Sacrifice, whiche thinge they haue fayned most impudently. But hereof we will intreate in an other place.
Manoah layd the Kid and Minchah vpon the rocke. Manoah myght not Sacrifice vnto the Lord by the lawe, bycause he came of the tribe of Dan, and not of the tribe of Leui. Wherefore he deliuered the fleshe vnto the aungell, whom he thought to be a Prophete, that he should sacrifice it. For Prophetes had an extraordinary vocation, that althoughe they were not of the famely of Aaron, yet it was lawfull for them to sacrifice: as we rede of Helias and Helizeus. For whē religiō was decayed in y e Priests, god suffred others to minister their office. But the aungell, when the fleshe was put vpon the rocke, wrought wonderfully. He raysed vp fire out of the stone, whiche consumed the offring. Whiche thing we rede also was done in Gideon. Althoughe it be not herein expressedly shewed that fire was drawen out of the rocke, as it was openly sayd in Gideon, yet is no mention made of fire y t was brought by Manoah, & at the last it is sayd that the angell vanished away in y e flame, therfore it is credible y t fire was striken out of y e stone. The angell ascended into heauen, as though he vsed the flame for a chariot. He dissolued the body whiche he bare, and vanished away into the flambe: whiche was a notable miracle. They fell to the ground for feare: for they were wonderfully amased and astonished, when they sawe that it was an aungell, whom before they thought to haue ben a man.
22 And Manoah sayd vnto his wife: We shall surely dye, bycause we haue sene God.
23 But hys wife sayde vnto hym: If the Lorde would kill vs, he woulde not haue receaued a burnt offryng and an oblation of our handes, neither would he haue shewed vs all these thinges, nor at this tyme told vs such thynges.
24 And the wife bare a sonne, and called his name Samson. And the childe grewe, and the Lord blessed hym.
25 And the spirite of the Lord began to strengthen hym, in the host of Dan, betwene Zora and Esthaol.
In dyeng we shall dye. That is, we shall moste assuredly dye. For the Hebrues in doublyng the woordes doo earnestly affirme.
Bycause we haue sene the Lord. Whereof this opinion sprang, I haue tolde in the Hystory of Gideon, where also I haue declared, how God was sene of the fathers. The opiniō of R. Leui ben Gerson. Wherfore it nedeth not to repeate them in this place. But this will I not ouerpasse, that R. Leui ben Gerson writeth, that this was not an aungell, but a man of god, and a Prophet, namely Pinhas the sonne of Eleazar. But he was called angel bycause Manoah and his wife thought hym to be so. For after the same maner Ezras, although he was a man, yet was he called an aungell. And Christ whiche is very man, is called the aungell of the Testament. But how he being a man vanished awaye in the flambe, Leui ben Gerson declareth not. But I more simply doo iudge him to haue ben an aungell in dede. For Pinhas had not a secret name, but a name well knowen in his tyme, and the wordes of the texte do tend to this, Of the name of Elohim, to teache that it was an aungell. VVe haue sene the Lord. In Hebrewe it is Elohim, which althoughe it be the name of GOD, yet is it communicated to aungelles, yea and also to prynces and Prophetes, accordyng to that saying: I haue sayde, ye are Goddes. And Christe in the Gospell sayeth: If they are called Goddes, vnto whome is come the woorde of GOD, why doo ye meruayle. &c?
This woman seemeth to be of a stouter courage them the man: for she comforteth her husband. Whose Oration is grounded vpon two argumentes. The first is, I do not thinke we shall dye, bycause God would not haue accepted our sacrifice, if he would haue destroyed vs. Wherfore seyng our sacrifice was acceptable vnto him, he counteth not vs as enemyes. But whereby knew she that that sacrifice was acceptable vnto GOD. Firste, bycause the Aungell had commaunded it to be done, which vndoubledly he would not haue don, vnles he had vnderstoode that it should be acceptable vnto God. Farther, bycause the flambe had consumed the Sacrifice, and the angel therewithall flewe away, as though he caried vp the sacrifice with him into heauē. An other argument is: He would not haue taught vs so many and such thyngs, if we should perishe. He came vnto vs once or twise, and instructed vs of thynges whiche we should doo. Wherfore be of good comforte, we shall not dye.
¶Of Sacrifice.
The offerer is more acceptable vnto God then the Sacrifice.VNdoubtedly the womans argumentes are good: out of whiche may some thynges be gathered, whiche are not vnprofitable. And firste that God more accepteth hym that offreth, then he doth the Sacrifice: yea the oblations please not hym, but for the offerers sake. This sentence Irenaeus proueth by the scriptures in his fourth booke, and .34. chapter. For God had a regarde vnto Abel, and to his giftes, but vnto Cain and his giftes he looked not, bycause of the disposition of them that offred. For looke what manner of will he that offreth hath towardes God, the lyke will hath God to the oblation. Christ also sayth: If thou bryng thy gifte vnto the aulter, and remembrest that thy brother hath somwhat agaynst thee, go and reconcile thee first vnto thy brother: and then come and offer thy gifte. As thoughe he should say: If whylest thou art euill, and enemy vnto god, thou doest offer, thyne oblation shall not be acceptable vnto God. Wherfore Irenaeus concludeth, Irenaeus. that they are not sacrifices whiche sanctify, but the conscience of him that offreth. And he addeth a reason: bycause God nedeth not our Sacrifice. Among men, the euill may oftentymes be absolued: bycause men are sometimes couetous and nedy, and are easely wonne with money. But if it happen the Iudge to be both iuste and good, he will reiecte the money, neither wyl he suffer his equity after that manner to be blotted. So God, bycause he can not be wonne by flattery, obserueth the mindes of men, and not the Sacrifices. In Esay the .66. chapter, he sayth: He that sacrificeth a shepe, is as if he slewe a dog: not that god hateth sacrifices in vniuersal, but bycause he alloweth not y e oblations [Page 207] of euill men. I haue the largelier spoken thinges, bicause the papistes boast, that in masses they offer Christ vnto God the father: which thinge if it should be graūted, then must god the father more esteme a noughty sacrificer, then he doth his sonne. But this woman reasoneth most wittely. God hath receaued our sacrifice, therfore he is not angry, neyther wil he destroy vs.
We count the sacrifices of christians to be a contryte heart, prayers, The sacrifices of Christians. geuinge of thankes, almes, mortifienge the affections of the fleshe, and suche like. These are lefte vnto vs after the abrogation of the carnall sacrifices, that wee shoulde offer them as the fruites of our faythe, and testimonies of a thankefull minde. But as touching the pacifieng of God, Christe offred himselfe once vpon the crosse, neither is there any nede that any man should offer him againe. For by an oblation he accōplished al thinges. Now remayneth, that we embrace his sacrifice with fayth, and we shall haue God mercifull vnto vs, who of his goodnes will by Christ accept those sacrifices which we haue now made mencion of. But Augustine contra literas Parmeniani, in his .2. booke and .8. chapter seemeth at the fyrst sight to make agaynst vs. Augustine. For the Donatistes woulde not communicate with the other Christians, because they counted them defiled and vnpure, and they cited a place out of Iohn: Wee knowe that God heareth not sinners. Your men, sayd they, haue betrayed the holye bookes, haue burnte incense vnto Idoles, haue denied god, how then wil god heare them? Augustine aunswereth, that it may be, that an euill minister, although he be not hearde for his owne cause, yet when he prayeth for the people, he maye be hearde. And he confirmeth his sentēce by the example of Balaam: for he being a most wicked man, prayed vnto god and was heard. But if a man diligentlye examine these thinges, he shall finde that Augustine is not against vs, although at the first sight he semeth a little to presse vs.
When he had sayde that the euill ministers also are heard, The publike prayers of the minister are the prayers of the Church. hee strayghteway addeth, that y t is not done for their wickednes sake, but bicause of the fayth and deuotion of the people, whereby wee gather, that althoughe the minister be the guide in woordes, yet are they not his prayers, but the prayers of the Churche. For there muste bee one certayne manne, whiche maye conceaue the prayers for the reste, leaste in the multitude shoulde rise a confusion or tumulte, if euerye manne shoulde by his owne woordes poure out prayers aloude in the Church. Wherfore the minister is a certayn mouth of the church. The Myniste [...] is the mouth of the church. Therefore if he bee euill, it is not he which is heard, but the faythfull people, which speake by his woordes. This thinge taughte Augustine when he writeth that an euill minister is hearde, not for his wickednes, but for the fayth and deuotion of the people. Hereby are we admonished, that whilest we are presente at publike prayers, wee muste take verye diligente heede, and determine that those prayers whyche are recited, are ours. How it is sayd that Balaam was heard. But Balaam by a certayne forme of prayer prophesied, and therefore his woordes are called a blessinge, bycause he prophesied happye thinges vnto the people of god. And hee was not moued vnto these prayers of his owne will, but by the sprite of god. Wherfore hee was not hearde, but the holye ghoste was the true authour of hys woordes.
That whiche is alledged out of Iohn: God heareth not sinners, Augustine sayth that that was not the saying of Christ, Whyther God heareth sinners but of the blind mā which was no [...] yet fully illustrate. Wherefore he affirmeth that sentence not to be true in vniuersal. For (as they define) the prayers of peruerse ministers ar somtimes hard, because they are of the church. But as touching the oblation of Christ, I do not think that the papists wil graunt, y t the whole church offreth it, whē as they wil [Page] haue that to be peculiar to the massemongers. And though they should graunte that, yet is not the whole Churche greater or more acceptable vnto god, then Christ: bicause he is not acceptable vnto god for the churches sake, but the church is acceptable vnto god for Christes sake. But to returne to the saying of Iohn, that God heareth not sinners, addinge a profitable distinction, we maye thus expound it. A distinction of sinners. There are some sinners whiche fall of weakenes, or sinne of ignorance, which yet afterward acknowledge themselues, are sory, and repent faythfully. But there are other, which sinne without conscience, want fayth, neyther are they led with anye repentance. The fyrste sorte, bicause they haue fayth, are heard, the other, forasmuch as they want fayth, do in vayne poure out theyr prayers. What manner of one the publicane was when he prayed. But if a man will obiecte the Publicane, who being a sinner, prayed vnto god and departed iustified. I aunswere, that that publicane was in suche sorte a sinner, that yet when he prayed, he was not without fayth, yea rather he prayed with fayth, otherwise god would not haue heard his prayers. And vndoubtedly Iames doth right wel admonishe vs, when he sayth: Pray, hauing faith. In sum, that sentence is firme and perfecte wherin it is sayde: whatsoeuer is offred vnto God for a sacrifice, the same is acceptable vnto him, if faythe and iustification of him that offreth, go before.
A verye subtile cauilacion.Some do cauile of the fyrst acte of fayth, whereby we begynne fyrst to assente vnto god, and they doubt, whither it be acceptable vnto god or no. Vndoubtedly before it, he is an enemy, which now beginneth to beleue. Then say they, if that fyrst consente be acceptable vnto God, then accepteth he the gifte of an enemye. But if it be not acceptable, then it iustifieth not. To this I aunswer two wayes: Fyrst that men are not iustified of the worthinesse of the acte of fayth, but of the firme promise of god, which faith embraceth. Farther, when any man first assenteth, and beleueth, then is he first made of an enemy a friende, and although before he was an enemy, yet so sone as he beleueth, he is made a friend, and ceaseth to be an enemy. Plato. But that which we haue before concluded, that he which offreth is more acceptable vnto God, then the gift, the Ethnikes also sawe. For Plato in Alcibiade maketh mencion, that the Athenienses vpon a time made war againste the Lacedemonians, and when they were ouercome, they sente messengers vnto Iupiter Ammon, by whom they sayd that they marueiled for what cause, where as they hadde offred so greate giftes vnto the Godes, and theyr enemies on the contrary side sacrificed sparingly and sclenderly, and yet had they the victorye ouer them. Ammon aunswered, that the gods more estemed the prayers of the Lacedemonians, then the moste fatte sacrifices of the Athenienses. For when they burnt Oxen vnto theyr Gods, in the meane time they thought nothinge of theyr soules. So in Homere Iupiter speaketh, that the Gods are not moued with the smoke and smel of sacrifices, when as they hated Priamus and the Troyanes. Wherfore the Ethnikes vnderstoode, that which the Papists at this day see not, which thynke that theyr blinde sacrificer, though he be neuer so vnpure and vngodly, doth yet with his hands, offer vp Christ vnto god the father.
Now let vs see the other argument of this woman. God would neuer haue shewed vs these thinges, if he woulde haue killed vs: Forasmuche as hee is not wont to make hys enemies of his coūcel. Thus the wife of Manoah comforteth her fearefull husband. But this argument seemeth somewhat obscure, when as Balaam, althoughe he were vngodlye, was not ignorante of the Councelles of GOD. Chryste also sayth: Manye shall saye vnto mee in that daye, haue wee not Prophesyed in thy name? To these thynges I aunsweare, that GOD didde not onelye foretell vnto them thynges that should [Page 208] come to passe for the deliuerye of the people, but also of the childe whiche they should receaue, and of his education. Wherefore seying he vsed them as fellowe workemen, it was a certayne argument, that god had not appointed strayghteway to kyll them. Neyther speaketh she here of eternall life, but of this earthlye and corruptible life.
And the childe grew, and his name was called Samson. Hereby we know that Zorah was the name of the place where Samsons fathers was borne. Samson. This Hebrew word Shemesch signifieth the sunne, being therefore so called, as though he wer of the sunne: but for what cause he was so called it is not known. I meruaile that Iosephus interpreteth Sampson for stronge or mightye, Iosephus. vndoubtedly such an Etimology agreeth not with the Hebrew word. But he oftentims goeth from the historye. And in this place also he sayth that the woman prayed, when as that is not founde in the text. God blessed Samson. That is, bestowed and heaped benefites vpon hym.
The sprite of God. That is the sprite of strength and mighte began to strengthen him. In the host of Dan. The history speketh thus by reason of those times. The tribe of Dan had not yet obteined possession in the land of promes, but they wer in tents, and fought against theyr enemyes. R.D. Kimhi. R.D. Kimhi sayth that they did thē besiege the city of Lais. Wherefore he being a younge man, was together w t thē in the hoste. The Hebrew worde is Paam, and it signifieth to be moued, & to be striken at certayne tymes, not perpetually, but by courses. He being a yonge man was moued, and waxed hote, to fyght the more vehemently against his enemies. And his impulsions, bycause they were of God, therefore are they ascribed vnto the spyrite. But bicause wee are alreadye come vnto the ende of thys chapter, before we enter into the next, there are certayne thinges whych are to be marked.
Fyrst, hereby we gather a most sure argumēt with how singuler a care god gouerneth his church. For although the Iewes had greuously sinned, yet had god a regard to theyr health, & sendeth thē a captain, which should deliuer them, & foretelleth what things should come to pas, least they should seme to haue happened by chaunce. Farther he woulde haue the childe to be a Nazarite, Outward thynges are not to be neglected. and to haue his heare to grow, and to abstaine from wine and stronge drinke. Wherefore we are taught that these outward thinges are not vtterly vaine, but may be applied vnto the glory of god. Men are wont sometimes to say, when they are admonished of outward thinges: What, doth god regard these thinges? In dede we know also that in those thinges is no holinesse to be put. Howebeit we muste take heede that both in liuinge, and in apparell, and in going also in all gesture and in habite, we behaue our selues comely, both before God, and also before the churche, not superstitiously but holily, that our modesty may aduaunce the kingdome of Christ and his holy Gospel. Farthermore let vs here consider that the wife helpeth the husband with her councell. For although by the ordinarye lawe it is not lawfull for women to preach and teache in an assembly: yet are they not so destitute of the gratious gifts of God, but that they may instruct theyr husbands with good counsels.
¶Of the visions of Aungels.
THe nexte thinge, is that I somewhat intreate of the visions of Aungels. For as we haue now heard an Aungel appeared vnto Manoah, and oftentimes [Page] in other places (as the scriptures declare) aungels haue bene sene of men, But it may be demaunded, howe they appeared, whither with any bodye, or els onely in phantasye? And if it were with a bodye, whither it were with theyr owne body, or with a straunge body? & if they toke a body, whither they were for a time or for euer?
The opinion of Platos secte.Of these things, there are diuerse opinions of men Platos sect do say that the mindes, that is, the intelligences are so framed, that certayne of them haue celestiall bodies, some haue fyry bodies, some ayry, some watry, and some earthlye. And some they affirm to be darke Demonia, which do continually abide in darknes and mist. Of these thinges Marcilius Ficinius hath gathered many things in his. The Peripatetikes. The schole deuines men. 10. bookes de legibus, and in his argument of Epinomides. The Peripatetikes affirme that there are certaine intelligences which turne and moue the celestiall orbes, neyther make they mencion of any other. But the scholedeuines, do determine that those mindes & intelligences are altogether spiritual, and y t they haue no bodies. And this is the reason that leadeth thē thus to think, bycause these intelligences must nedes excell the soules of men, whose most perfect faculty consisteth in vnderstanding. Wherefore as they thinke, in this acte of vnderstanding it behoueth that these intelligences do much excede thē, and y e commeth to passe for that these heauenly mindes haue no nede of images, or of senses: and bicause the case so standeth, they shoulde haue bodies in vayne.
The fathers Origene.But of the fathers there are some which affirme farre otherwise. Origene in his bokes [...] (as Ierome hath noted in his Epistle ad Pammachium, de erroribus Ioānis Herosolymitani) saithe that those spirituall mindes, as often as they do offend, slide and are thrust into bodies, but yet not straightway into the vilest bodies, but fyrst into starry bodies, then into firy and ayry, afterward into watrye, and lastlye into humayne and earthlye. And if then also they behaue not themselues well, they are at the laste made deuils. But if they will at least wayes then repent, they may by the selfe same degrees come to theyr olde estate. And this we ought to vnderstand (saith he) by that ladder, wheron Iacob saw aū gels ascending & descending. Ierome. And Ierome also to make the thinge more plain, addeth a similitude. A Tribune (sayth hee) if hee gouerne not well, is deiected from his degree, and is made the princes chief Secretary, afterward a Senatour, a captayne ouer 200. men, a ruler ouer fewer, a watcheman, a horseman, and afterward a souldier of the first degree. And although a Tribune were once a commō souldier, yet is he not made of a tribune a younge Souldier, but the Princes chief Secretary. But these thynges are absurde, and very worthye to be laughed at. And vndoubtedly Origene in those thinges speaketh more like a Platonian, then a Christian. Against the translation of soules into bodies after Origines faining. That which he first taketh that soules are thruste into bodies, as into punishmentes, is manifestly false, for as much as god hath adioyned the bodye vnto the soule for a helpe, and not for a punishmente. Neither doth he well to geue hope of saluation to come vnto the deuil, when as Christ hath contrarywise taught, saynge: Go ye cursed into euerlasting fyre, which is prepared for the deuill and his Aungels. Neyther can we interpreate it that this word eternum is ther set for this word diuturnū, that is euerlasting, for a long seasō. For Christ most apertly expoundeth his sentence, when he sayth: Their worme shall not dye, and theyr fire shall not be quenched. Neither doth he truly affirme that the soules fyrst offend before they come into bodies, when as Paule writeth of Iacob and Esau, before they were borne, and had done neither good nor euil, it was said, Iacob haue I loued, and Esau haue I hated: The greater shall serue the lesser. Wherefore thys sentence of Origene is woorthely to be reiected of all menne.
Augustine seemeth in many places to attribute bodies vnto Aungels, Augustine. namely in his second booke De trinitate. chap. vii. and in the third booke, chap. 1. which thing the Schoolemen perceauing, haue excused him, saying that he spake not according to his own opinion, but after the opinion of other men. Which thing I also could well allow, for as muche as I see that that father (in his. viii. booke De ciuitate dei, the .xvi. chap.) after the opinion of Apuleius, Madaurensis, & Porphyrius, defineth, that Demones are in kinde animalia, that is, hauing sense, in soule passiue, in mynde reasonable, in body ayry, in time eternal. Vndoubtedly, herein he followeth the doctrine of Platoes sect. But in the places before alledged he semeth to speake altogether of himselfe. Yea, Bernhardus. and Bernhardus also vpon Cantica Canticorum, as it appeareth, is of the same opiniō. Wherfore the schole men are compelled to inuent an other excuse, and they say that Aungels, if they be compared with men, are spirites: but if with God, they haue bodies, bycause they fayle from the vnity and simplicity of God. Tertulian de carne Christi, Tertulian. affirmeth that Aungels haue bodies. But that is not so much to bee marueiled of him, for he attributeth a bodye also vnto God him selfe. But he calleth a bodye whatsoeuer is. For he had to do with vnlearned and rude men, whych thynke y t whatsoeuer is not a body, is nothing. But the schoolemen say that Aungels are in very deede spirites, but when they come vnto men, they take vpon them ayrye bodies, and thicken them and make them grose, whereby they may be sene, touched, and felt aboue the nature of ayre. Ther are some also which say, that some earthly or watrishe thing is mixed with them: and yet wil they not that there is there a perfect mixture, that they should not be compelled to put generaciō ther. There were some also, which thought that Angels sometimes tooke vpon them dead karcases. But this seemeth vnto the greater parte a thing vnworthy, so to thinke of holy Angels.
Here some man wil say that it is absurde, Whither it bee conuenient for Angels to take vpon them the shape of man. to ascribe vnto Angels fayning & lying, as to faine thē selues to be men, when as in very deede they are not men. Yea and this seemeth also to weaken the argument of Christ, whiche he vsed after his resurrection, to teache that he had a true body. Feele (saith he) and see, for a spirite hath not fleshe and bones, as ye see me haue. For the Apostles being afrayde, thought that they had seene a spirite: wherfore Christ to put them out of doubt, bad them to handle and feele his body. But the Apostles might haue said: That which we feele is a fansye: it seemeth in deede to be Christ, but peraduenture it is not. For Angels also seeme to haue bodies, and to be touched and felt, when as yet in very deede they haue no bodies. Also this sentence may debilitate the argument of the Fathers, as touching the flesh of Christ, against Marcion. For he did eate (say they) he dranke, he was hūgry, he slept, he did sweate. Wherfore he had a true and humane bodye. Vnto these thinges might be aunswered: that these selfe same thinges haue happened vnto Aungels, when as yet they had not bodyes.
I answer: That which they first say, Not whatsoeeuer is fayned, is a lye. that it is absurde to attribute lyes vnto Angels: they ought to consider, that not whatsoeuer by anye meanes is fayned, is straightway a lye. Christ appeared vnto his Disciples as a straunger, and yet he lyed not: he appeared also vnto Mary lyke a Gardiner, and for al that he lyed not. So Aungels, althoughe they semed men, when as they were not men, yet wer they not lyers. For they came not therfore, to proue them selues to be men, but onely that they might come to men, and talke with them.
To the argument of Christ touching his own body, I thus answer. Aungels when they semed mē, lyed not. First the apostles thought it had ben a gost which had appeared. And Christ to refel that, saith: feele and see, bicause a spirite hath not flesh & bones. By the feeling might be perceaued, that it was a true and perfect bodye which was present, and not a vayne fansy. But thou wilt say, that it was a true body in deede, but yet taken for a tyme, and suche a bodye, as sometimes Aungels are wont to put on. But [Page] how coulde it be taught, that that was the same body, which laye before in the sepulcher? In this thing the authoritye of Christ and of the scriptures ought to be of force. For the scriptures teache manifestly inough that Christ shoulde dye, and afterwarde rise againe the third daye: Tertulian. Thomas Aquinas. but nothing can rise againe, but that which before fel, as Tertulian hath most learnedlye written. And this thing the schoolemen vnderstoode: wherefore Thomas Aquinas sayth, that vnles certayne other thinges were added, this is no firme argument. The same thing maye be answered vnto the reasons of the fathers against Marcion. Many in dede of the actions before alledged, may agree with Aungels, or with the bodies taken, but yet not all. For to be borne, to be nourished, and to dye, and to feele, happen neither to Angels, neither to bodies that are taken. But the scripture most apertly testifieth that Christ was both borne, and that he grew till he came to age, that he was hungry, that he dyed, and was true man. But of these thinges I wyll speake more largely afterwarde.
There are very many other thinges in the schoole deuines, as touching these matters: What maner of bodies the angels take vpon them. but bicause they are not so profitable, therfore I ouerpasse them. But this thing I demaund, whither Angels may take vpon thē true bodies, & that natural, which bodies also had their being before, & vse them at their liberty, as the Deuyl did put on the Serpent, and by him deceaued Eue, the Angell also spake in the Asse of Bileam. Why then can not an Angel after the same maner, possesse an humane body, and speake in it? Vndoubtedly it is written in Zachary the prophet: The Angel of the Lord which spake in me. Wherfore it semeth that Aungels may vse the bodies of men and beastes. Augustine. Augustine in his .2. booke De Trinitate the .1. chapter, sayth that this is a very hard question, whether Angels vnto their owne proper bodies ioyne other bodies, and chaunge them into sundrye formes, as we are woont to doo garmentes, or also to chaunge them into verye nature, as we reade that Christ chaunged water into wyne. This thing he saith is not impossible. For thus he writeth: I confesse it passeth the strengthes of my capacity, whither Angels retayning stil the spiritual quality of their own body, very secretely woorking by it, doo take of these more grose inferiour elementes, any thing which being framed vnto them they doo chaunge, as a garment, and turne it into al corporal formes or shapes, yea euen into the true thinges themselues, as true water was turned by the Lord into wyne: or whether they transforme their own proper bodies into what they wyl, being framed to that which they haue in hand to doo. But whether soeuer of these it be, it pertayneth not to thys question.
But I say, if the bodies of Angels were true bodies, then was Christes argument firme, and I wil willinglier graunt to this, then to saye as some doo, that Aungels deceaued the senses of men. A subtiltye of the Papists cō cerning trāsubstantiacion. For after this sorte they striue agaynst vs, when we say that in the Eucharist remayneth bread, which is both sene and touched, they answer that it seemeth bread in dede, but it is not, as the Aungels semed men, when as they were no men. For I deny not, but that the senses maye sometimes be deceaued. A distinction of sensible things. When the senses maye be deceaued, & when not. But I affirme in the meane time, that there are twoo kindes of those thinges, which are perceaued by sense. For there ar some things common vnto many senses, and other are proper to some one sense. For figure, magnitude, and number, are perceaued of manye senses. And vndoubtedlye in such thinges the sense may sometimes be deceaued, as Carneades was woont to dispute of an ore in the water appearing broken, and of the bygnes of the bodye of the Sunne. But in sensible things proper vnto one sense, the sense is neuer deceaued, vnles there be some fault in the body, or ouer much distaunce, or some suche lyke let. Wherfore seyng in the Eucharist the sense iudgeth that the bread remayneth, there is no neede to fayne that the sense is therein deceaued.
But to appoynt a certayne compendious way of this disputacion, there are 1 three maner of wayes, whereby Angels may seme to haue appeared. For either [Page 210] they were sene in fantasy, so that they were thought to haue bodies, when they had them not. Which reason cannot be firme, for they illuded not the senses, neither were they sene of any one onely, but very often times of many, & they were so sene, that Abraham washed their feete, and Iacob wrastled with an Angel the whole night. Or els they appeared with a true body in dede, which yet was not 3 such a body, as it was thought to be. Either els they had the self same body truly 2 and in very deede, which they semed to haue. Tertulian Of this thirde kinde Tertulian hath written most learnedly in his booke De carne Christi. Thou hast sometyme red and beleued, saith he, that the Aungels of the creator were turned into the shape of man, and that they caryed suche a truth of a bodye, that both Abraham washed their feete, and also Lot was by their handes deliuered from the Sodomites: an angel also wrastled with a mā, and desired to be losed from the wayght of the body, by whom he was holden. That therefore, which was lawfull vnto Angels that are inferiours vnto God, that they being turned into the body of a man, not withstanding yet abode Angels, doest thou take away thus from God which is more mightie, as though Christ putting on man in very dede wer not able to remayne God? Thus Tertulian fighteth against the Marcionites: The errour of y e Marcionites for they affirmed that Christ seemed to haue a humane bodye, but in verye deede hee had none. Tertulian obiecteth against them: and if ye graunt this (saith he) vnto the Aungels, that they had true bodies, why doo ye not rather graunt it vnto the sonne of God? And he addeth: Or did those Angels appeare in fantesy of fleshe? But thou darest not say so: for if it be so, that thou count the Angels of the creator as Christ, then shal Christ be of the same substance as the Aungels are, and the Angels shal be suche as Christ is. If thou diddest not sometimes of purpose reiect, and sometimes corrupt the scriptures which resist thy opinion, the Gospel of Iohn shoulde haue of this confounded thee, Of the Dooue wherin the holi gost appeare [...] whiche declareth that the spirite comming downe in the bodye of a Dooue, sat vpon the Lorde, which spirite being that he was, was as truly a Dooue, as he was a spirit: neither the contrary substance taken, destroyed the proper substance.
I know there are some of the schoolemen which thinke that it was not a very Doue, which discended vpon the head of Christ, but onely that it was an ayry & thicke body, which appeared to be a Dooue. Augustine. Yet Augustine de Agone Christiano writeth the contrary, namely that it was a very Doue: for to expresse the property of the holy ghost, a thing (sayth he) serueth better then a signe, euen as Christians also are better expressed in Sheepe and Lambes, then in the lykenes of Sheepe and Lambes. Also if Christ had a true bodye, and deceaued not, then t [...]e holy ghost had in very deede the body of a Dooue.
Tertulian addeth: Thou wilt demaund where the body of the Doue became, What beca [...] of the Doue wherin the holy go [...] appeared. when the spirite was taken againe into heauen, and likewise of the Aungels. It was by the same meanes taken awaye, whereby it was made. If thou haddest seene when it was broughte foorth of nothyng, thou shouldest also haue knowen when it was turned to nothing. If the beginning was not visible, no more was the ende. Farther, he remitteth the reader to Iohn. Was he also (sayth he) a fantasy after his resurrection, when he offred his handes and feete to be seene of his Disciples? saying: behold that it is I, for a spirite hath not flesh and bones as ye see me haue. Then Christe is brought in as a Iugler or Cuniurer. And in his third booke against Marcion. Wherefore his Christ, that is, Christe of the true God, bicause he should not lye, neither deceaue, and by that meanes paraduenture should be counted the Christ of the creator, was not that which hee appeared to be, and fayned to be that thing which he was, flesh, and not flesh, man and not man, wherefore Christ is also God, and not God. For why shoulde he not also cary the fantasy of God? Shall I beleue him as touching this inwarde substance, that is ouerthrowen as touching his outward substance? Howe shall he be counted true in a secrete thing, that is found so false in an open thing? And [Page] afterwarde: It is inoughe for me to affirme that whiche is agreing vnto God, namely the truth of that thing, which he obiecteth to three senses, to sight, touching, and hearing. Againe in the booke de carne Christi: The vertues (sayth he) proue the spirite of God, the passions proue the flesh of man. If vertues are not without spirite, neither shal passions also be without flesh. If the flesh with his passions be fayned, the spirite also with his vertues is false. Why doest thou by thy lye take but halfe Christ? He is al whole truth.
The opinion of Apelles. Apelles the heretike, being in maner ouercome with these reasons, graunteth that Christ had in dede true flesh, but he denieth that he was borne, but brought from heauen: and he obiecteth that the bodies, which were taken by Angels, wer true bodies, but they were not borne. Suche a body (sayth he) had Christ. Tertulian answereth hereunto: They, sayth he, which set foorth the fleshe of Christ, after the example of the Aungels, saying that it was not borne, namelye a fleshye substaunce, I would haue them to compare the causes also, as well of Christ as of the Aungels, for which they came into the flesh. No Aungel did at anye tyme therefore discende to be crucified, to suffer death, and to rise againe from death. If there was neuer any such cause why angels should be incorporate, then haste thou a cause why they tooke flesh, and yet wer not borne. They came not to die, therefore they came not to bee borne. But Christe beyng sent to dye, it was necessarye that he shoulde bee borne, that he might dye: for none is woont to dye, but hee whiche is borne. He addeth moreouer: And euen then also the Lorde himselfe appeared among those angels vnto Abraham without birth, namelye with flesh, for the same diuersity of cause. Afterward he addeth: That the Aungels haue their bodies rather from earth, then from heauen. Let them proue saith he, that those angels receaued the substance of flesh of the stars. If they proue it not, bicause it is not written, then was not the flesh of Christ thereof, to whych Christ they apply the example of Angels. And in his third booke against Marciō: My God, saith he, which hath reformed it, taken of the slyme in this quality, not yet of seede by mariage, and yet flesh, might as wel of anye matter haue framed flesh also vnto Angels, which also framed the world of nothing, into so manye and suche bodies. Againe in his booke de carne Christi, hee saith: It is manifest that angels cary not flesh proper of their own, as substāces by nature spiritual, and if they haue any body, yet it is of their owne kinde, and are transfigurable for a time into the flesh of man, that they may be sene, and haue fellowship with men. Farther, in his third booke against Marcion: Know thou saith he, that this is not graunted vnto thee, that the flesh in Angels was putatiue, or by imaginacion, but of the very and sound substance of man. For if it were not hard to geue vnto that putatiue flesh the true senses and actes of flesh, much more easyer was it to geue a true substance of flesh, to true senses and actes, euen for that he is the proper authour and woorker therof. For it is a harder thyng for God to make a lye, then to fayne a body. Last of al, thus he concludeth: Therfore are they truly humayne bodies, bicause of the truth of God, who is far from lying and deceate. And bicause they can not humanelye be handled of men, The summe of the opinion of Tertulian. but in the substaunce of men.
I could rehearse mo thinges out of Tertulian, but these seeme sufficient for this present purpose. In summe, he thinketh that Aungels haue bodies, but yet straunge bodies, and not their own. For their proper bodies (as he thinketh) pertaine vnto the spirituall kinde. Secondlye, he sayth that those straunge bodies which they take, are created either of nothing, or els of some matter which shall seme good vnto God. Thirdly he affirmeth that they were true, perfect, and humane bodies, and not vayne or fayned, but of a true flesh, and not of a flesh onely appearing, so that of men they might be both touched and handled, to the end he might both remoue dissimulation from God, and also confirme the veritye of humane flesh in Christ. Wherby is concluded, that the humane senses wer not [Page 211] deceaued concerning these thinges: as the Papistes contende that the senses are deceaued concerning the bread and wyne of the Eucharist.
But Origene in hys booke [...] (as he is cited of Ierome agaynste Iohn byshop of Ierusalem) thought farre otherwise. Origene. For wher we say that the visions of Aungels may be imagined three maner of wayes, namely either in fantasye, or in body, but not humane, or lastly in a true and humane body: he taketh a certaine meane, and sayth that the bodies of Aungels wherein they offer them selues to be sene, are neyther perfect nor humane, nor also fantasticall, but onelye bodyes, and that he applyeth to them that ryse agayne. For in the resurrection sayth he, we shall haue bodies, but yet onely bodies, not bones, not synewes, not fleshe. And in deede there is some difference betwene a bodye and fleshe: Al flesh is a body, but not euery body is flesh. for all fleshe is a body, but not euery body is flesh. Suche a difference touched Paule to the Collossians, saying: Being reconciled in the body of hys fleshe. And in the seconde chapter: In the spoyling of the body of the flesh of synne. And in the Symbole also we say, that we beleue in the resurrection of the fleshe, and not of the bodye.
Origene sayde that he sawe twoo extreme errours. One was of them which sayde there is no resurrection, suche as were the Valentinians and Marcionites, suche also was Alexander, who as Paule testifieth, taught that the resurrection was already done: and suche also as at this day the Libertines are sayde to be, who babble I cannot tell what of that matter, both vngodl [...]ly and vnlearnedly. An other errour is of those which thinke that the perfecte and true bodyes shall ryse agayne with fleshe, synewes, and bones, whych thing (as hee saythe) is not possible: bycause fleshe and bloode shall not possesse the kyngdome of heauen. But Origene ought to haue considered what followeth afterward in Paul. For he addeth: Neyther shall corruption possesse incorruption. Wherefore hys sentence is, that the corruptible body cannot possesse the kingdome of God. But Origene to retayne that hys meaning, confessed that the bodyes shoulde ryse in deede, but not thycke and with bones, but spirituall, as Paule hath sayde: The body shall ryse spirituall.
But Origene in those woordes marketh not that Paule calleth it a spiritual bodye, not bicause it shoulde vtterlye bee chaunged into a spirite, but bycause it should haue spiritual condicions, namely incorruption, and most cleare brightnes. But bycause he perceaued that the body of Christ, which after his resurrection he offered vnto hys Disciples to be touched and to be felt, was against hys doctrine, therefore he sayth: Let not the bodye of Christe deceaue you, bycause it had manye synguler priuiledges, whiche are not graunted vnto other bodyes. Farther, that by this dispensacion he might prooue that he verelye was rysen, he would after hys resurrection haue a true bodye, not that other bodies in the resurrection shoulde be lyke. But he shewed the nature of his spirituall body in Emaus, when he vanished awaye from the sight of hys Disciples. And an other tyme when he entred to his Disciples, the doores being shut.
Ierome thus opposeth himselfe agaynst these thynges: Ierome. If Christe (sayth he) after hys resurrection dyd eate in verye deede, then had he also a true bodye: but if not, how prooued he by a false thyng the truth of hys body? But in that he vanished awaye from the syght of the Disciples, that was not by the nature of the body, but by the deuine power. For in Nazareth when the people woulde haue stoned him, he wythdrewe himselfe from their eyes. And that whiche might bee done of a Cuniurer, shall we thynke that the Sonne of God cannot doo? For Apollonius Thianaeus, Apollonius Thianaeus. when hee was brought into the Counsell before Domitian, foorthwyth vanished awaye. And that that thyng in Christe was not by the nature of the bodye, but by the power of GOD, it is declared by that whyche wente before in the same Hystorye. For when hee was in the [Page] way wyth hys Disciples, their eyes wer holden that they coulde not know hym. But in that Origene sayth, that the body of Christ was spirituall, bicause he entred in, Now the body of christ entred, the dores being shut. the doores being shut, Ierome aunswereth that the creature gaue place vnto the Creator. &c. Wherefore the bodye of Christe pearsed not throughe the myddest of the boordes and postes, so that twoo bodies were together in one, and the selfe same place, but herein happened the miracle, bicause the very boordes of the doore gaue way vnto the body of Christ. The bodye of Christ wēt not out of the sepulchre, it beyng shut. Leo. Farther, that which some obiect, that the body of Christ went out of the Sepulchre, it being shut, that also is not of necessitye to be beleued, but wee maye thinke that the stone was roled away before he went foorth. And least a man shoulde thynke that I fayne those thynges, lette hym reade the .lxxxiii. Epistle of Leo, ad Episcopos Palaesthinos. The fleshe, sayth he, of Christ, whych went out of the Sepulchre, the stone being roled away. The bodyes of angels wherin they appeared, were true and humane. &c. Nowe to returne to the purpose, bycause I haue sayde that the bodyes of Aungels may be thought to haue bene eyther fantasticall or spirituall, or els perfect and in verye deede humane, & the twoo first partes are reiected: then resteth that the bodies of Aungels wherein they appeare, are true and humane. Whiche thing I affirme onelye to bee true, for as muche as Aungels were so sene, The visions of Prophets wer somtime imaginatiue. that they wrastled wyth men, and offered their feete to be washed. Neyther doo I iudge that it is lawfull there to saye, that the humane senses were deceaued, when as the thinges were outwardlye done. But I doo not denye, but that there somtimes happened imaginatiue appearinges vnto the prophetes, when as they sayd that they sawe God, or the Cherubin, or other suche lyke thinges. For that, for as muche as it was in their mynde or imaginatiue faculty, it might well be done by formes, images, and visions.
Angels appearing in humane bodyes wer not men.Nowe remayne there twoo thynges to be diligently wayghed. One is, whither Aungels, when they after this sorte put on humane bodyes, maye bee called men. I thynke not. For if we vnderstande humane fleshe, whiche is formed and borne of a reasonable soule, vndoubtedlye Aungels after that maner cannot be sayd to haue humane fleshe. What then, wyll some man saye? Were the senses deceaued when men sawe them? Not so. For the senses iudge onelye outwarde thinges, and suche thinges as appeare. But what inwardlye impelleth or moueth those thinges which they see, they iudge not. That longeth to reason to seeke and searche out. Thys also is to be added, that Aungels dyd not continually retayne these bodies, bicause they were not ioyned vnto them, in one and the selfe same substaunce: So that an Aungell and a bodye were made one person.
The holy ghost was not the Dooue, nor the Doue the holye Ghost.The holy ghost also, although it was a true Dooue, where he descended, yet was not he together one substaunce with it. Wherefore the Dooue was not the holye ghost, nor the holy ghost the Dooue. Otherwyse Aungels may (as we haue before taught) enter in deede into a bodye before made, and whiche before had hys being, as it is read of the Aungell whiche spake in the Asse of Baalam, and of the Deuyll, which by the Serpent talked wyth Eue. But at thys present we dispute not of that kynde, but onelye saye, that Aungels woorking in thys manner in the bodies of creatures, are not ioyned vnto them in one and the selfe same substaunce. Wherefore the Asse coulde not be called an Aungell, neyther was the Aungell an Asse, euen as the serpent was not in very deede the Deuyl, neyther was the Deuyll the Serpent.
The sonne of God, is God & man.But the Sonne of God, for as much as he tooke vpon him humane nature, was man, and man was God, bycause of one and the selfe same substaunce, wherein were twoo natures. But before when he appeared vnto Abraham, and to the Fathers, although he had true fleshe, yet bycause it was not ioyned vnto hym in one and the selfe same substaunce, he could not be called fleshe, neither was flesh, God. But afterwarde, when he tooke vpon hym both fleshe and [Page 212] soule, so that there was onely one substance or person, then man was God, and God, man. Whereby it came to passe, that he shoulde trulye bee borne, that hee should dye, and redeeme mankinde. Wherefore he dyd truely call hym selfe the sonne of man: and in Iohn he sayth, ye seeke to kyl me, a man, whiche haue tolde you the truth. And in the Scriptures it is sayd: Made of the seede of Dauid. And Peter in the Actes: ye haue kylled, sayth he, a man appoynted you of God. And Esay: Behold, sayth he, a virgin shall conceaue and beare a Sonne. These words haue great force. For vnlesse Christe had bene true man, a Virgin coulde not haue conceiued him, neither haue brought him foorth, nor called him her sonne. This thing Tertulian prudently marked. If he had bene a straunger, sayth he, Tertulian. a Virgin coulde not either haue conceaued him, or borne him. The Aungell also saluted Mary after this maner: Be not afraid sayd he, thou shalt conceaue. &c. Elizabeth sayd: How happeneth this to me, that the mother of my Lorde shoulde come vnto me? If she had Christ onely as a Straunger, she coulde not be called hys Mother. The Aungell also sayde: Blessed be the fruite of thy wombe. But how could it haue bene sayde, the fruite of her wombe, if he had brought a body wyth hym from heauen? And in Esay it is wrytten: A rod shall come oute of the roote of Iesse, and a floure shall ascende out of his roote. Iesse was the stocke, Mary the braunch, but Christ is the floure which tooke his body of her. Mathew also thus beginneth his Gospell: The booke of the generacion of Iesus Christe, the sonne of Dauid, the sonne of Abraham. If Christ brought a bodye from heauen, how was he the sonne of Abraham or Dauid? Farther, the promise made to Abraham of Christ, is in this sorte: In thy seede shall all nacions be blessed. Paul intreating of these woordes to the Galathians: He sayde not, sayth he, in seedes, as though in many, but in thy seede, whych is Christe. And in the Epistle to the Romanes wee reade: Of whom is Christe according vnto the fleshe. All these thynges prooue most apeartly, that Christ was true man, and in hym was one substaunce of God and man. These thinges cannot be sayd of the Aungels, neither of the Sonne of God, before he was borne of the Virgin: although whylest he appeared, he had true fleshe (as we haue before sayde:) but yet not ioyned vnto hym in one and the selfe same substaunce: neither could it be sayde of the holy ghost, that he was in very deede a Dooue, althoughe that wherein he once appeared, was a true Dooue. And in this sense wrote Tertulian those thynges whych we haue before cited, whych thinges being not wel vnderstoode, might breede either error or offence vnto the Readers.
Now resteth the other question: Whither Aungels did in very deede eate & drink whē they appeared. Scotus. Whyther Aungels clothed wyth bodyes taken, dyd in verye deede eate and drinke. Of the Schoolemen some thinke that they dyd eate in verye deede, and other denye it. Scotus thynketh that to eate is nothyng els, then to chawe meate, and to conueyghe it downe into the bellye. And thys thyng dyd the Aungels, wherefore he gathereth that they dyd eate in very deede.
Other thynke that to eate, is not onely to chawe the meate, or to conueyghe it downe into the bellye, but moreouer to conuert it into the substaunce of hys bodye, by concoction thoroughe the power of vegitacion. Thys, for as muche as the Aungels dyd not, therefore they dyd not eate in very deede. The booke of Thobias. The booke of Tobias is not in the Canon of the Hebrewes, but yet it might be applyed vnto our purpose, but that there is variaunce in the copyes. For in that booke which Munster set foorth in Hebrue, in the .xii. chapter, Raphael the Aungell sayth: I seemed to you to eate and to drinke, but I dyd not eate, neyther drynke. The common translacion hath: I seemed to you to eate and to drinke. But I vse inuisible meate and drinke. Neyther text denyeth, but that the Aungell dyd after a certayne maner eate.
Augustine.But whatsoeuer may be gathered of those woordes, me thinketh the interpretacion of Augustine is to be receaued, in his .iii. booke de Trinitate, the .22. chap. where he thus writeth: The Angels did eate in very dede, but not for neede, but to contract custome and familiarity with men. Wherefore when in the one text it is said that Raphael did not eate, What is the meate & drinke of Aungels. it must not so be vnderstand, as thoughe he did not eate at al, but bicause he did not eate after the maner of men. But thys is there chiefly to be marked, when the Angel answereth that he vseth spirituall meate and drinke, that spiritual nourishment was nothing els, then an apearte and manifest knowledge of the true God, and execution of his will, as Christ also sayd, that that was his meate, to doo the will of his father. The same also is our meate, although it be not after the same maner. For they see God manifestly, but we see him by a glasse, and in a riddle. Whereunto thou maiest adde that they which beleue in Christ, Who eate and drinke the body and bluode of Christ. The fleshe and blood of Christ are neither included nor poured into the simboles or signes. Augustine and doo assuredly perswade them selues, that he died for their sake, they I say, doth both eate the flesh of Christ, & drinke his blood, to which vse the simboles or signes, for that they styrre vp the senses, are verye much profitable: not that the flesh and blood of Christ are poured into the bread and wyne, or are by any meanes included in those elementes, but bicause those thinges are of the beleuers receaued with a true faith. For they are an inuisible noorishment, which is receaued onely in the mynde, as Augustine hath faithfully admonished, saying: Why preparest thou the teethe and the belly? Beleue and thou hast eaten.
¶The .xiiii. Chapter.
1 ANd Samson went downe to Thimnath, and saw a woman in Thimnath, of the daughters of the Philistians.
2 And he came vp and told his father and his mother, & said: I haue sene a womā in Thimnah, of the daughters of the Philistians. Now therefore geue her me to wyfe.
3 Then his father and his mother sayd vnto him: Is there neuer a wyfe among the daughters of thy brethren, and among al my people, that thou must go to take a wyfe of the vncircumcised Philistians. Samson sayde vnto hys Father: Geue me her, for she pleaseth me well.
4 But hys Father and hys mother knewe not that it came of the Lord, that he should seeke an occasion agaynst the Philistians: for at that tyme the Philistians raygned ouer Israel.
NOw are we come to the warlike feates of Samson, whiche he wrought for the health of his people, and first is set foorth vnto vs, how he sought hym a wyfe. He went downe to Thimnath. But why he went thither it is not written. Some say that he went down to a certaine solēnity or feast day. But it is more likely y t ther was thē some assembly, either ciuil or warlike, as it is accustomed. At that time the Philistians raygned ouer the Hebrues. And he saw ther a mayd, and desyred earnestly to haue her geuen hym to wyfe. This thing to doo he was moued by fayth: for the woord of the Lorde did to that styrre vp his minde. For (as we shal afterward know) these thinges were done by the wyll of God. The Epistle to the Hebrues numbreth Samson among those whiche pleased God by fayth. This is notable and woorthye to be marked, that a young man, although he exceedinglye loued the mayden, yet durst he not speake anye thing of matrimonye, wythout the knowledge and wyl of hys Parentes. He returneth home, he prayeth them to geue her hym to wyfe. Thys was to honour hys Parentes.
Some thinke that Samson was minded to marye this mayden, but vpon this condicion, to make her first a proselite, otherwise it had not bene lawfull for him to haue maried with a straunger. But in our history there is no such thinge red: vndoubtedly this seemeth to me to be a certaine singuler thing, and done by the instinction of god, as shalbe afterward more apertly vnderstand. Wherefore we must not curiously search for that matter.
But Samson neded no longe Oration to his parentes. They obiected vnto him the kinred of the woman, and admonished him, that he ought rather to seke a wife in his owne nacion: Howbeit they fulfill his mind, and wente forwarde with the mariages, as it shal afterward be sayde. But contrarywise amonge Christians it oftentimes happeneth, that the children take them wiues againste theyr parentes wil: Of which thinge Esau remaineth as a most wicked example, who against the will of his parent, maried wiues of the Chananites, whose sight and conuersation they could not abide. We must not regard that which is commonly sayd, we mary wiues for our selues, and not for our parentes. But we muste rather thinke that God woulde after this manner prouide for miserable younge men, that theyr rashe and vnaduised age should not deceaue them. Howbeit parentes on the other side ought to see that they vse not tirannycall power towardes theyr children, or marye them to suche whome they canne not abyde. But of these thynges wee wyll speake more aboundantlye afterwarde.
Moreouer wee muste note, that the Parentes of Samson when they call the Philistians vncircumcised, doo after a sorte vpbrayde vnto their sonne, that hee would mary a wife borne of strangers and idolatrers. Yet they speake nothing roughlye vnto him, they thrust him not out of the dores, nor cast him out of their fauor. For that they saw his minde very fyrme and bente to that purpose. And although it be not written in the history, yet is it probable that Samson shewed vnto his Parentes the misterie, namely that he was by the impulsion of god instigated to this mariage: otherwise it had not bene lawfull for them to haue assēted vnto theyr son, to mary one of a contrary religion. His father & his mother knewe not at the beginninge, that this was the will of God, that he shoulde seeke occasion against the Philistians. That is, that by them some begynninge of iniurye myghte springe, whiche he afterwarde myghte seeme by good ryghte to prosecute.
5 Then went Samson and his father and his mother downe to Thimnah, and came vp to the vineyardes of Thimnah, and behold a Lions whelpe roared vpon him.
6 And the sprite of the Lorde came vpon him, and he deuided him, as one shoulde deuide a Kidde, neyther was there anye thinge in his hande. And he tolde not hys Father nor his Mother what he had done.
The Parentes when they knew and vnderstode their sonnes wil, and paraduenture had knowledge of the instinction of god, do not onely assent, but also follow him, that the wedding might be the more honestly accomplished, the parentes not onely requiring, but also being presente. In this place appeareth the will of God both hidden and manifest. The will of God was declared by the law that a Iewe shoulde not take to wife a straunger, The will of god hid and manifest. but by his secrete and hidden wyll he contrarily decreed of Samson. But we must followe the will of God expressed by a common rule, and sealed by his lawe: to that will wee muste directe both life and manners. For the other will we must not be to much carefull, vnles [Page] we feele it most apertly. And we must with great diligence take heede, that when we thinke we are ledde by the impulsion of the holy Ghost, we be not led by our affections. Of the secrete wil of God Paule intreated, when he made mē cion that of Iacob and Esau, before they had done any good or euill, it was sayd: Iacob haue I loued, but Esau haue I hated. This will of God is obscure and hidden from the eyes of men: therfore no man can rendre a reason of it. Wherfore when we heare any thinge of it, we muste say with Paule: O the depth of the riches of the wisedom and knowlege of God, &c. But by the will reueled we may vnderstand that we are acceptable vnto god, when we trust in him, when we detest vices, and renew our life and manners by the grace of god, not bicause these thinges are the causes of the goodnes of God towardes vs, These two willes in god are not in very dede seperated. but bicause they are certayne sure tokens therof. But how these two willes are not in very deede seperated in God, but are one and a simple will, we shall declare more oportunely in an other place,
In that it is now written that Samson, or rather God soughte occasion of the Philistians, Of the occasion which God sought. it seemeth verye obscure. And what occasion was there to bee soughte for? Was not this cause sufficient inough, that they by violence withhelde the land promised vnto the Israelites, and had put them to Tributes and taxes? Liranus Liranus thinketh that betwene the Hebrewes and the Philistians there were certayne couenauntes made, whiche were not rashlye to be violated. I also adde this, that Samson was a priuate man, as farre as anye man knewe of hym then. And therefore God woulde haue an honester occasion for hym to fyght, so that if he being by them contumeliouslye handled, shoulde againe somewhat endamage them, he shoulde seme to reuenge his owne priuate iniuries, and not the publike.
And vndoubtedlye it seemed that matrimonye after this manner contracted, should rather haue caused peace to follow. But contrarywise there ensued greuous war, which happened not by the default of matrimony, but of men. So also now are not a few found, whiche to possesse kingdomes and to gette them other mens riches, do abuse matrimony. Wherefore we ought not to meruayle, if suche mariages haue verye ill successe. For oftentimes by them doo happen both warres and also ouerthrowinges of publike wealthes. But by whose fault (thou wilt say) sprange this warre? What sinnes happened in this matrimonye. By the faulte of the woman whiche was maried, and also of her parentes, and corruption of the publike wealth. And these woulde God vse to bringe to lighte theyr sinnes and to punishe them. The mayden ought to haue estemed her husband aboue all men. But she betrayed him, and shewed his riddle to her citizenes, so that Samson was fayne to paye vnto them a greate rewarde. His wiues father also did him no small iniury, for he tooke away from him his wife, and gaue her to an other. Thys thynge oughte he not to haue doone, for matrimonies oughte to be firme and ratified. But the coruption of the publike wealthe of the Philistians maye hereby bee knowne, bycause suche a wycked offence was not openlye reproued and punyshed, as thoughe it hadde euerye where bene lawefull to haue doone it.
By the waye Samson turned a syde from hys Parentes, whome a roaringe Lion mette, and mette hym beinge vnarmed: so that he myght easely haue killed him. But that we should vnderstande, that Samson by the power of the sprite of God preuayled agaynst that wild beast, it is added: And the sprite of the Lorde came vpon him, Fowre names of Lions amōg the Hebrewes. and he deuided the Lion, as one shoulde rente a kidde. There are foure names of Lions amonge the Hebrews according to the diuerse decrees of theyr age. The first is Gor, when hee is yet a whelpe, The seconde is [Page 214] Cepher, when he is somewhat growen in age. The third is Ariath, when he is strong and myghty. The fourth is Liba, when he is waxen olde: althoughe he bee called also Lisch, when he is very olde. That whiche is now written, is called Cephir, that is growen in age, & fyerce ynough, to thend a man should not think that he was a whelpe of the first age. Neyther was he tame and gentle, as sō times they are wont to be, but he ranne roaring to inuade Samson. Why God would haue Sāson to fight with the Lion. God would geue vnto Samson an experience of the strength that he had geuen him, that he shoulde enterprise greater thinges afterward. So also he excercised Dauid from his youth, before he shoulde fighte agaynste Goliath. Wherefore he sayde vnto Saule: There came a Beare and a Lion, and thy seruant rent them. Plini. Lions ar very common in Siria as Plini affirmeth.
¶Whither it be lawful for children to mary without the consente of theyr parentes.
NOw shall it be good to see, whither it be lawful for children to contract matrimony without the consent of theyr parētes. Vndoubtedly Samson would not, and it is a matter of much honestye and gratitude towardes the parentes, if matrimony be not contracted without theyr consent and knowledge. Examples of the Elders. At the beginninge Adam did not chuse himselfe a wife, God was his father and broughte vnto him Eue. Abraham when Isaac was now a man, sent his seruant to his kinred, to seke out a wife amongst thē for his son. Isaac also sent Iacob into Masopotamia to his vncle, to the end he might get him a wife there. The law of God. Afterward succeeded the law geuen of God by Moses, that Children should honoure theyr Parentes. But the honour which is to be geuen vnto them, is not only to vncouer the hed, to geue the vpper hand, and to rise vp (although these thinges also are to be performed, but yet ar they not sufficiēt) but they must also norish theyr progenitors if nede shalbe, and shew themselues humble and diligent towards them. Wherfore the power of the father is defined to be a bonde of piety, What is the power of a father. wherewith the children are bounde vnto the parentes, to performe the offices of humanity and gratitude. If children in other things ought to obey theyr parentes, vndoubtedlye they ought chiefly to do it in contracting of matrimony.
Of this thing there is a peculier law in Exodus, the 22. chap. If a maidē which is not betrouthed, shalbe deceaued, hee that hath defiled her oughte to geue her a dowry, and to take her to wife. But it is added, if the father will: otherwise hee shall onely geue a dowry, neyther shall he haue the mayden to wife againste the fathers will. And in the booke of Numbers the .30. chapter, if a mayden vowe a vowe, and the father heare it, and letteth it not, the vowe shalbe firme: but if he gainsay it, it shalbe in vain. But what is a vow? A promes made vnto god. But matrimony is a promise which is made vnto mā. If god permit a vow made vnto him to the iudgement of the father, much more wil he permit matrimony vnto hym, when as it is a promise made betwene men. In the seconde booke of Samuel, Thamar aunswereth vnto Ammon her brother: If thou desire me of my father, he will not deny me vnto thee? The custom was then that the doughters were desired of the parentes. Here I dispute not whither it was lawfull for Dauid to geue to Ammon his sister to wife. This shalbe entreated of in his conuenient place. Farther Paule sayth to the Ephesians: Children obey your Parentes in all thinges. He excepteth nothynge when he wryteth so, but he sayth in all thynges, namelye whyche they commaunde not against the woorde of God. [Page] And in his first Epistle to the Corrint. the 7. chapter is most manifestly declared, that it longeth to the Parentes to place theyr daughters to husbands. And that was known not onely by the law of God, but also by the light of nature, which thinge also the Comedies of Terence and Plautus manifestly declare. Euripides And in Euripides a mayden aunswered: Of our mariages my father shall haue charge, for that iudgement pertayneth not vnto vs.
Ambrose.Whiche verse vndoubtedlye so pleased Ambrose, that he rehearsed it in hys booke of the patriarches. Farther it serueth very much for domesticall peace: for the daughter in law ought to be to the father in law in stede of a doughter: Contrarily of rash mariages rise great discords at home. And forasmuch as the father ought to helpe the sonne with his goods, it is right, that the son agayne in contractinge matrimonye obey the father. In other ciuill contractes the sonne can doo nothynge wythout the consente of the Father, as appeareth in the Digestes De mutuo, ad senatus consultum Macedoniarum. Wherefore in a thynge farre greater it is meete that the iudgemente of the Father be had.
What the ciuil lawes iudge in mariage of children.The ciuill lawes haue decreed this selfe same thinge. Iustinian in his institutions, in the title de Nuptiis, wil not that mariages should be firme, without the consent of the Parentes. And in the Digestes De statu hominum in the Lawe Paulus: If a sonne mary a wife against the will of his parentes, the childe which shalbe borne of those mariages, shall not be legitimate, &c. And in the Code De Nuptiis in the law Si proponis, the case is diligentlye to be marked. The daughter marieth by the consent of her father, shee afterward complayneth of her husband, and departeth from him. Afterward he cōmeth into fauor agayne, and shee marieth him againe against her fathers will. It is aunswered, that that matrimony is not lawfull. Hereby appeareth how much the lawes estemed the power of the father. Afterward in the law Si furiosi: Children, if peraduenture their parentes bee mad or bestraught of theyr wittes, bycause they cannot vse their consent in contracting of matrimony, shall vse the consent of theyr tutors.
What the cannons iudged.Wherfore it semeth meruelous, how Christians at this day determine that mariages are lawefull without the consente of the parentes, and for that thinge they lay for an excuse the Cannons: of which I thinke it good brieflye to declare some. And firste I will make mencion of the better Cannons whiche were more aunciente: For the later they were decreed, the more corrupte they were.
In the decrees .30. quest. 5. chap. aliter: Matrimonies are then lawfull, when the maydens are desired of their parents, and deliuered openly. Otherwise they are not matrymonies, but whooredomes, vnhonest companieng, aduouteries, and fornications. Euaristus. Nicolaus. Thus decreed Euaristus. Nicolaus also at the consultacion of of the Bulgares in the .30. quest. 5. chap. nostrates. Those matrimonies are firme which are ioyned with the consente of those that contracte them, and of those in whose power they are. Leo also the fyrst in the .30. quest. 5. chap qualis: Then it is to be counted matrimony, when the mayden is by her parentes deliuered vnto her husbande. Leo And in the 31. q. 2. chapt. non omnis. A woman whyche marieth by the consente of her father, is without blame, if anye man afterwarde shall fynde faulte withall, Gratianus And thus Gratianus concludeth that place, that he sayth, in contractynge of matrimonye, the consente of the Parentes is alwayes required.
Ambrose.Farther, Ambrose entreating of a place of Genesis wher it is writen, that the seruaunte of Abraham came into Mesopotamia, and founde a wyfe for hys [Page 215] masters sonne, the parentes of y e mayden, when they labored to retayne hym longer, & he would not abyde, they called y e mayden, & asked her whether she would go with him. After this maner he sayth, as also it is declared, in the, 23. q. 2. chap. honorandum. They asked not her (saith he) touching y e weddyng, but onely whether she would go with him. For it pertaineth not (sayth he) to maidenly shamefastnes, to chuse vnto her selfe a husband. And the same thing affirmed he of wydowes which are yonge. Althoughe to speake the truth, I can not in this thing graunt vnto Ambrose, y t the mayden was not demaunded the question whether she would mary hym, neither do I doubt but that she was asked the question of either cause. For in the .30. q. 2. chap. vbi non est, it is had: The consent of childrē is required in spousages. That there can be no matrimony, where is not the consent of those that contract, yea in mariages of children, which are but .7. yeares of age, bycause at that age they are thought to vnderstand somewhat of matrimony, the consent of those that contract is necessary. And bycause there is mention made of spousages, this semeth good to be noted by the way, y e children so contracting, ought to be seuen yeares of age, otherwise the parents can promise nothing for thē. The same children, if afterward, being of more yeres, they shal contract an other matrimony, the same is of force, and not the spousages: whiche yet is to be vnderstand if the parentes consent to the second matrimony. Moreouer in the .31. quest. 2. chap. tua, Hormisdas answereth, that children when they contract after this maner, ought to stand to y e will of their parentes. And Extra de sponsatione impuberum. chap. tua, it is ordayned that children when they come to ripe age, ought to obey their parentes, for as much as also they gaue their faith, and consented.
I thought it good also to bring somewhat of the counsels. Counsels. Concilium Toletanum the fourth .32. q. 2. chap. hoc sanctum, decreeth: If widowes wil not professe chastity, let thē mary to whō they will: and the same thing it decreeth of a mayden, but it addeth, so y t it be not agaynst the will of y e parentes or her own. Such an addition we se that Nicolaus the second added, as it is had in the .27. quest. 2. chap. sufficiat, where he writeth after this maner: To ioygne matrimony, the cō sent of those whiche contract, is sufficient, & it followeth, according to the lawes matrimonyes of children are not acknowledged, if they be made without the cō sent of y e parentes. Yet the glose referreth not those wordes vnto y e ciuile lawes but to the Canons, bycause (as the Canonist say) the ciuill lawes are sometimes corrected by the Canons. But oftentymes happeneth that those Canons are in very deede [...], that is rules without a rule, as, Extra de coniugiis seruorum, A discord of the Canons and of the ciuill lawes as touchyng y e matrimony of bondemen. chap. 1. if bondemen contract, yea agaynst the will of their Lordes, such matrimonyes shalbe ratified. Beholde, sayeth the Glose, the Canons amende the ciuill lawes. For in them it is forbidden, that a bondemā should mary a wife agaynst the wil of his Lord, yea if a free man haue very much resort vnto an others mās bonde woman, he is made a bondeman, & a free woman if she haue much accesse vnto an other mans bondeman, she also loseth her liberty. The glosse saith more ouer, that more is attributed vnto matrimony, then vnto holy orders: bicause it is not lawfull to bring a straunge bondeman into orders, but it is lawfull to cō tract matrimony with him. Wherfore it manifestly appeareth that y e latter Canons were viciated and corrupted, whiche tooke away from mariages the consent of parentes, as necessary.
But nowe let vs see what reasons they pretend. Extra de sponsalibus, chap. cum locum, it is sayd: There ought in contracting of matrimony to be most full liberty. And in the same chap. veniens: If there should be there any feare, the matrimony ought to be voyde, and there is geuen a reason, bicause she can not long please hym of whom she is hated. And bycause such contractes haue oftentymes an vnlucky end, and also bycause that is easely contemned whiche is not loued: Yea the Canons seme so to haue loued liberty in contracting of matrimony, that the Counsel of Paris (as it is had in the .30. quest. 2.) decreed: That it is not lawful [Page] to desire a wife by the letters of a kyng. Although the same thyng also be decreed in the Code de Nuptiis, in the law .1. chap. si nuptias ex rescriptio. The reason is, bycause the letters of princes are in a manner commaundementes and threatninges. Neither do I dissalow that: althoughe I do not a litle meruayle, that the Canons haue proceded so far, that they haue decreed that matrimonye may be cōtracted betwene hym y e steales away a mayde, & her that is stolē. Extra de Raptoribus & Incendiariis, chap. cum causa. A mayden that was stolen awaye out of the house of her father, had contracted matrimony with hym that stole her, y e father withstandeth such a mariage. Here the good Pope aunswereth, for as muche as the mayden consenteth, she can not seme to bee stolen. Wherefore he decreed that matrimony to be good. And in the next chap. Accedens: If a man had stolen away a mayden, not onely agaynst the wyll of her parentes, but also agaynst her owne wil, whiche mayden yet, if she afterward consented with hym that stole her, he decreed that firme matrimony may be contracted betwene thē. The same thyng seemeth to be decreed in y e .36. q. 2. chap. in summa, where is entreated of the stealer and her that is stolen, & it is decreed: If she y e is stolen shall consent with y e stealer, matrimony may be contracted betwene them; but yet in such sorte, that first they do some penance. But bycause some Canons make against this decree, therfore they thus moderate the matter, that wheresoeuer they rede that matrimony cā not be contracted betwene such persons, that they vnderstand to be sayd for some one of these thre causes, either bycause she that is stolen did not consent, or els bycause she was betrouthed before vnto an other by words (as they vse to spake) of y e presēt tense, for I say not of y e future tense, for y e husbād was not cōpelled to mary one defiled, or bicause she was not marigeable.
But in the Code it is farre otherwise decreed for stealers away of virgins, namely that matrimony can by no meanes be contracted betwene those persōs, yea althoughe the father cōsent vnto her that is stolen, and Iustinian also in his Authentiques, Collation .9. in the title, que raptoribus nubunt, decreeth the same to the detestation of so great a crime. But our Canonistes, in gods name do thinke that matrimonyes are lawful euen against the parētes wil, wherfore in the .32. q 2. chap. Mulier, the glose sayth, y t the power of the father is broken as touchyng an othe and matrimony, when rype age cōmeth, which sentence the schoolemen also haue followed. Of this matter they dispute in the .4. boke of Sentēces dist. 28. where they define that a man, euen the sonne of the father of the house, hath a certayne dominion ouer his owne body, neither is so bound to his parentes, but that he may at his owne liberty dispose of it, as touching matrimony. And when they rede in the Canons that the consent of the parentes is required for the contractyng of matrimony, they by theyr interpretation corrupte them, and say that Euaristus, How the Papistes require the consent of the Parentes. Nicolaus, and Leo when they so decreed, dyd iudge that the consent of the parentes is required as touchyng the honesty of matrimony, but not as touchyng the necessity: whiche thynge peraduenture they drewe out of the glose Extra de desponsa. impuberum, in the lawe tua, whiche is after this sorte: That the good will of the parentes is to be required, but rather for the comelynes of the mariage, then for the necessitye, so that if the parentes will not assent, yet are the children free, and maye contracte matrimony at theyr owne liberty. Yea and the Master of the Sentences also in the distinct .28. The master of the scholemen. The consent of the parentes (sayeth he) serueth for the comelynes and honesty of mariages, and not for necessity. And he bryngeth the woordes of Euaristus, but he sayeth there is a difference betwene those thynges whiche are required to the substaunce of mariages, and those thynges which serue for the honesty and comelynes. And the good will of the parentes as he sayeth, pertayneth not to the substaunce of mariages, he thynketh that without it chyldren maye lawfully contracte. And for as muche as hee maketh matrimonye a Sacramente, hee wylleth that [Page 216] in such mariages should be the vertue of matrimony, and not the honesty.
But bycause they very much presse the wordes of Euaristus, when he writeth that mariages contracted without y e good will of the parentes, are whoredomes, fornications and aduoutries: the master of the sentences aunswereth that that is true, not bycause such mariages are in very deede such, but bycause they assemblyng together secretly among thēselues, & priuely without the parents knowledge, are wont to be counted as whoremongers and adulterers, but yet the matrimony abideth ratified and is firme, bicause of the wordes of the present tense which wer therin vsed. Also Thomas Aquinas in the same place, Thomas Aquina [...]. is of the same iudgement, and vnto that whiche is brought out of Paul vnto the Ephesians (where he sayth, children obey your parentes in al things:) He answereth that that is to be vnderstand of those things, wherin the children haue not any liberty, namely as touching familiar and domesticall things. And this reason he addeth: bycause matrimony is a certayne kynde of seruitude, which the childe is not compelled to take vpon him agaynst his will. And in that it is written of Abraham, that he sought his sonne a wife out of hys kinred, he aunswered that that happened, bycause he knewe that that lande was promised vnto hys posterity, and that God had decreed to take it awaye from the Chananites. Wherfore he would not haue hys sonne contract matrimony with them.
These fellowes in deede speake many things, but they bryng not so much as one word out of the holy scriptures: they stil contend that children ought to haue most ful liberty left them, as touchyng mariages. But that is a mere inuention of theirs, whiche by no meanes hath his foundation vpon the worde of God.
The old fathers were of our opinion: but of them it happened, as of the Canōs, What the olde fathers iudges Tertullian. for the more auncient they were, the more sincere they were, and the more new, the more corrupte. Tertulliane in his .2. booke to his wife, as touchyng the mariages of Christians with Ethnikes, writeth very wel, neither alloweth he mariages betwene persons of a contrary religion. God sayth he, deliuereth thee to a spouse. And he addeth: No not in earth cā daughters right and iustly mary with out the consent of the parentes. How therfore wilt thou mary without the consent of thy heauenly father? Chrisostome vpon Genesis and vpon Mathew, Chrisostome. when he entreateth of mariages, remitteth the matter vnto the exāples of the fathers in the olde Testamēt: neither is it of great necessity to rehearse his wordes, whē as the same father vpon the first Epistle to Timo. in his .9. Homely, entreateth very manifesty of that matter: there he exhorteth parents, bicause of the slippery age of their childrē, to ioyne them in matrimony, but he exhorteth not the children that they should chuse vnto thēselues husbandes or wyues, but by Apostrophes he conuerteth his oration vnto the parentes, that they should prouide for them as touchyng matrimony: & he addeth a very notable sentence: If (saith he) they begin to playe the whoremongers before they be maryed, they wil neuer be faithfull in matrimony. I wil note also by the waye, what he writeth in y e place of weddyng crownes or garlandes. For euen at that tyme they vsed crownes or garlandes in weddinges. What (saith he) signifieth the crown or garland? Forsoth that the husband and the wife should declare, that euē to that tyme they had ben vanquishers of lustes: if thou hast ben an adulterer or whoremonger, howe wearest thou a crown or garlād? Augustine in his .133. Epistle, Augustine. beyng desired to make y e mariage betwene a manchilde & a womāchild, I would do it (sayth he,) but the mother of the child is not present, and thou knowest that to contract the mariage, her good will is necessary. In this place Augustine writeth more seuerely then the ciuill lawes. For they will not haue the childe to be in the power of his mother. Of Ambrose I will speake nothing nowe: I haue sufficiently spoken of hym before. Wherfore seyng the lawe of God and the law of nature, the ciuill lawe and eoconomical lawe, the fathers and sincere Canons do affirme, y t the consent of the parentes is necessary, and the examples of the faintes declare [Page] the same, what should let but that we should be of y e same mind? Neither ought this to seeme griuous vnto children: for it was for theyr commodity so appointed by God and by lawes. For young persons in such thinges, and specially wemē, prouide very yll oftentymes for themselues. It is mete the children should require the consent of their parentes. Wherefore it is written in y e Code de sponsalibus in the law si pater: When a father hath betrouthed his daughter, if he afterward dye, y e gouerner or tutor cānot vndoo the couenant of the father, and a reason is added: bycause tutors sometymes are wonne with money, and women thorough weakenes fall to their owne discommodity. The example also of Christ ought to moue vs, whiche was geuen of his father a husbande vnto the Churche, and he alwaye sayd that he did not his own will, but the will of his father, of whō he was sent. Farther, how great a discorder ariseth in y e publique wealth of this deprauation and abuse? how great a window is opened vnto fylthy lustes? He that can first haue carnall fellowship with y e mayden in some places, hopeth to obteyne her to wife, yea euen against her parentes good wil.
To the reasōs of the aduersaryes.But now must we answere the reasons whiche the contrary party alledge for themselues. First, as we before sayd, they cry that in contractyng of matrimony, there ought to be full liberty. But I pray you what liberty? Of the fleshe, or of the spirit? Vndoubtedly that liberty of the spirite is the greatest, when we obey the cōmaundemētes of god, The chiefest liberty is to obey the commaundements of god who if he would haue vs obedient vnto our parētes in other thinges, why not also in contractyng of matrimony? Wherefore they breake the lawe of God, which obey not the parents also in this thing. Farther, if they will haue the liberty of contracting of matrimony to be so great, why doo they themselues prohibite so many degrees of mariages, whiche God neuer prohibited? Once the Popes would not suffer matrimony to be cōtracted, euē vnto the seuenth degree, but now they contayne within the fourth: moreouer why do they forbid mariages vnto the ministers of the Churche? Farther, why did God himself forbid matrimonies betwene persons of contrary religion, if in mariage there ought to be so great a liberty as they fayne to be? But they adde: Children for feare of their parentes will saye that that matrimony pleaseth them, whiche pleaseth them not. But the sonne is not compelled so to say: nothyng letteth but that he may answere, that that wife pleaseth him not, and that such a matrimony he can not abyde. And in deede without his consent matrimony can be by no meanes contracted. In the digestes de ritu nuptiarū, in the lawe non cogitur, we rede y t the sonne cā not be cōpelled to mary a wyfe, & de sponsalibus, in the lawe sed ea, if y e doughter hold her peace, she seemeth to cōsent vnto the father: & there are two causes ascribed wherfore the doughter may resiste her father, if either y e father offer her a wicked husband, or a disfigured husbād. Otherwise, if there be none of these causes, it is required of her to loue him whom the father hath chosē. If she wil not assent, when the husbād hath neither wicked maners, nor is mishapen, The punishement of ingratitude. she incurreth the crime of ingratitude: whiche is so great that the father may disinherite her for it. And in y e title de ritu nuptiarum, in the law si cogente patre. Although the sonne haue assented for feare of the father, yet bicause he had rather assent then offend his father, such a matrimony ought to be firme and ratified. I would adde vnto the former cause the third, if the father offer a husband whiche is of a contrary religion: and I would euer counsell the parentes to gratifie their children, What may bee done against to streight parēts vnles they see them to obstinate and vniust. But when the parentes deale to tyrānically with their children, & compell them to mary wiues whom they cā not abyde, the matter ought to be brought before the Magistrate, whose office is to heare the cause, and to delyuer the sonne from iniury, if he be to cruelly oppressed. Then if the sonne mary a wife by the authority of the Magistrate, yea agaynst the will of the father, he can not seme vtterly to haue maried without his fathers cōsent. The Magistrate is the father of the coū trey. For the Magistrate is the father of the coūtrey. The same thing semeth to be decreed de ritu nuptiarū, in the lawe qui liberos. And methinketh the schoolemen haue not well sayd, that the children of the householde [Page 217] haue dominion ouer their owne body. For as much as they owe vnto their parentes that they are. They ought not to be compelled to mariages agaynst their wil, but that they should mary without the consent of the parentes, it can not be graunted thē. And when they so often obtrude vnto vs liberty, The doughters of Zalphead. & alledge y e dominiō of their body, we lay against it y e answer of god as touching y e daughters of Zalphead, who sayth of them: Let them haue heritage among their brethren, but let them mary in their own tribe. These wemē are compelled to mary their nyest of kynne, neither had they that liberty whiche these men fayne. And the brother was sometymes compelled to mary the wyfe of his brother beyng dead, neither could she mary an other: therfore so great liberty is not necessary in mariages, as these men pretend. And by the ciuill lawe, It is permitted vnto the parentes to sell theyr children. so great is the power of the father ouer the sonne, that he may sell hym if he fall into greuous necessity. And least that should seeme barbarous vnto any man, the same thyng is permitted by the lawe of God in Exodus the .21. chap, but yet adding certayne cautions, whiche I thinke not good here to repeate. Wherefore they did not rightly argue, when they sayd, that matrimony is a kynde of seruitude, which the sonne ought not to take vpon him at the appointement of his father.
5 And in that they saye, that the consent of the parentes is required for the honesty 3 of matrimony, and not for necessity, it is friuolous and vayne. For what greater necessity can there bee, then that whiche the lawe and commaundementes of God bryng with them? Children are commaunded to honour father and mother. Also Paul the Apostle prescribeth them to obey their parentes in all thinges. And the same thyng writeth he vnto the Phillipians the .4. chapter. That whiche remayneth brethren: What soeuer thynges are true, whatsoeuer are honest, whatsoeuer iuste, whatsoeuer pure, whatsoeuer profitable, whatsoeuer lucky, these thinges do ye. &c. By these woordes appeareth that the thynges whiche are honest, muste not bee separated from the commaundementes of God. Wherefore looke howe necessary it is to obey the commaundementes of God, so necessary is it not to mary without the consent of the parentes. And that whiche they adde that the consent of the parentes is in deede 4 required, but yet if they will not consent, the matrimony may be firme: That is nothyng elles then to deride the parentes. For what contumely is it, for the sonne in suche sorte to desire the consent of hys parentes, that thoughe he be agaynst it and gaynesay it, yet notwithstandyng will he abyde in hys purpose, and execute it? It were muche better not to desire it, then to desire it with that mynde. This also seemeth wonderfull vnto me, that the master so peruerteth the woordes of Euaristus: that when Euaristus sayeth that matrimonyes contracted without the consent of the parents are whooredomes, and fornications, and not matrimony, he dare expounde that the matter is not so in deede, but bycause they so assemble rogether, as whooremongers and adulterers vse to doo. But the sentence of Euaristus is manifest. They are not (sayeth he) matrimonyes, and he addeth what in deede they are, namely fornications, adulteryes, and whooredomes. And he sayeth not that they seeme to be these thynges, but that they are.
6 There are other whiche obiecte vnto vs the booke of Genesis, where it is wrytten that Esau maried Chananitishe wyues, whiche his parentes tooke in very yll part, for he had maryed them contrary to their cōmaundement. And yet the Scripture calleth them wyues. Wherefore it seemeth that matrimony may be contracted euen agaynst the parentes will. I graunt in deede that in the holy Scriptures they are called wiues. But yet for that cause, bycause he so coūted thē, & bycause the nations amōg whom he dwelled, counted thē for wyues. But hereby is not gathered, y t the scriptures do confirme such matrimony. The same forme of speakyng vsed Paul in the firste to the Corinthians the eyght chapter: Euen as there are many gods and many Lordes. He sayeth that there are many [Page] gods, not y e there are so in deede (for there is but one God,) but bycause the most part so beleued, and publique persuasiō thought y t there was an infinite nūber of goddes. Therfore he sayth many goddes, but to vs that thinke rightly, there is but one God, The scripture so calleth thīgs as they are cō monly called of men. & one Lord Iesus Christ. It is no vnaccustomed or straunge thyng in the scriptures so to call thinges as men vse cōmonly to speake: yet in an other place, when they speake properly, they call euery thing by his owne name. But thou wilt say, we neuer rede that y e children of Esau were not legitimate. I answere, that Esau had in dede a greate posterity, but whether it were legitimate or otherwise the Scripture declareth not. Wherunto adde, that with those nations among whome he dwelled they were counted legitimate. For they had not the worde of God, wherein it is commaunded that that should not be doone: and they had wonderfully corrupted the lawe of nature.
7 Other crye: What shall we thinke of our elders? what also of many whiche lyue nowe, and haue contracted matrimonyes without the consent of their parentes? Shall we call them mariages or adulteryes? And shall we counte theyr children for legitimate or for bastardes? I aunswere, when such mariages were had in those darkenes before the new light of the Gospell, those men were not in dede excused from synne (for it was not lawfull for them to be ignoraunt of the law of God) but yet bycause they were done publikely, & the Magistrate permitting them, I am persuaded that such contractes are firme and ratified. If they obiect that in such mariages the consent of the parentes wanted, I aunswere that it was there, & not there. For the Magistrates had made their ciuill lawes subiect vnto the Canons, whiche vndoubtedly they ought not to haue done. And in this thing all mē agree. And for as much as the Magistrate hath authority ouer the people, if he consent to any thing, there after a sorte is the publique cōsent of the people. As at this day in assemblyes, when they assēble, that some summe of money should be payd, although some priuate mā of the people do take it in euill part, yet bycause it is agreed vpō by the Magistrate, he ought to seme to haue cō sented: So the father would not that the matrimony of his sonne should be firme without his cōsent, yet bycause he hath made his owne wil subiect vnto the iudgement of the Magistrate, he ought to seme after a sorte to haue consented. But now the truth of the thyng beyng knowen, the Magistrates ought to reuoke the errour. Wherfore the matrimonyes whiche haue bene hitherto, that is in darknes contracted agaynst the will of the parentes, ought to bee firme, and the children borne of them ought to be counted legitimate. But if the lawe should afterwarde bee reuoked, then should they not be matrimonyes, but onely be presumption, but in very deede fornications, whoredomes, and aduoutryes, as Euaristus ryghtly iudgeth. But whylest the lawes whiche are nowe of force, are not abrogated: I doo not dissolue the matrimonyes whiche are so contracted, neyther doo I saye that the children borne of those mariages are bastardes: but I declare what seemeth more agreable vnto the woord of GOD, and vnto honesty. But Euaristus myght iustly write so, bycause in hys tyme the Romane lawes were of force, whiche counted not suche coniunctions for matrimonyes. Farther, I adde that fathers are not to bee obeyed, when they let the mariages of their children, onely for religion sake, bycause in that case God is to be obeyed aboue all thynges, who is the chief father of all men.
7 He went downe I say, and talked with the woman, which pleased the eyes of Samson.
8 And within a fewe dayes when he returned to receaue her, he went aside to see the carkase of the Lyon. And beholde there was a swarme of bees, and hony in the body of the Lyon.
[Page 218]9 And he toke therof in his handes, and went eatyng, and came to his father & to his mother, and gaue vnto thē, & they did eate: but he told not them that he had taken the hony out of the body of the Liō.
10 So his father went downe vnto the woman, & Samson made there a feast. For so vsed the yonge men to do.
11 And when they sawe hym, they tooke 30. companions, and they were with him.
In this place the Lion is not called Cepher as he was before, but Ariah: bycause that difference whiche I haue before shewed is not alwayes obserued. The matrimony of Samson is celebrated: wherein the prouidence of God prepareth occasion, whereby he should doo some violence vnto the Philistines. And that occasion was, bycause as he returned he remembred the Lyon whiche he had slayne. He went a litle aside, to looke vpon the carkase of the Lyon. And he founde therein a swarme of bees, and a combe of hony. And this is such a straunge thyng as hath not bene heard of: for it is in no other place, that I wot of, eyther shewed or red, that bees haue made hony in the carkase of a Lion. Pliny. Virgil. Plutarche. Pliny and Virgil in his .4. booke of Georgiques teache that of dead bullockes or oxen doo come bees, as of a horse Waspes, and of an asse Hornets. Plutarche in the lyfe of Cleomenes saith, euē as of a horse do engēder Waspes, of an asse Hornets, of an oxe bees: so also of the carkase of a man, and especially of the marow & humor which falleth vpon the earth, are brought foorth serpentes. For that cause the elders wer wont to consecrate serpentes vnto noble men. But we neuer rede any such thing of a Lion, wherfore this ought we to iudge, y t this was done by y e singular prouidence of God. Ambrose. Ambrose thinketh that the place where Samson had cast the Lion, was a pleasaunt and fertile place, and the bees flyed thether for flowers, and made hoony in the carkase of the Lion. But I (as I saue sayd) doo attribute all this vnto the prouidence of God. Pliny in his .7. booke sayth, Pliny. that bees vse not to make hony, excepte it be in the hyue, or in a tree, or in caues vnder the earth, & he affirmeth y e aboue al things they flye frō euill sauors. Farther, he saith y e hornets and waspes doo eate dead carkases, but bees touche thē not. Ambrose sayth that Samson turned aside to y e Lion, to take his skinne, that beyng clothed with it, he might come vnto the feast as a great valiant man, as afterward did Hercules. But bycause he sawe that that apparell was not very handsome for wedding apparell, he tooke rather thereout the hoony combes, of the which he myght geue part vnto his parentes, and parte vnto his wyfe.
They tooke thirty companions. Some thinke that these thirty companions were ioyned vnto Samson for to doo hym honour. But some of the Hebrewe interpreters suspecte that the Philistines, when they perceaued that he was a strong and valiant man, brought these men to be kepers for hym, least thorough the shewe of mariage, he should make some commotion.
12 Then Samson sayd vnto them: I wil now put forth a ridle vnto you: and if ye can declare it me within seuen dayes of the feast, I will geue you 30. sheetes, and 30. chaunge of garmentes.
13 But if ye can not declare it me, then shal ye geue me .30. sheetes, and .30, change of garmentes. And they aunswered hym: put foorth thy ridle that we may heare it.
14 And he sayde vnto them: Out of the eater came meate, and out of the stronge came sweetenes: and they coulde not in three dayes expounde the rydle.
The elegācy of y e riddell consisteth in contraryes, for he which eateth, & he y e geueth meate, What the ridle of Samson signified. & he y t is fierce, & he that is swere, are contraryes. Such a ridle was not onely put forth to quicken the wittes, but also the holy ghost would by it signify things to come. At that time the Philistines ruled ouer the Iewes, & oppressed them with tyrāny, & after a sort deuoured them. Therfore by the ridle is signified that at the length they should be ouercome, & be eaten of the Iewes: & for as much as they were most fierce, they should be at y e last not hurtfull, but great cōmodity vnto y e Hebrues. Augustine. Augustine vpon y e .70. Psalme referreth these things vnto an Allegory of Christ & princes of the earth. For when y e Gospel begā first to be preached, princes ran vpon Christiās, like Lions, withal their might to deuoure them. But our sunne, that is Christ, was present, & toke away the Liōs, whom yet he did not so deiect that they should not be, but that for deuourers of the flocke, they should be noorishers of the Church, and defenders of the Gospel. This is a very elegant allegory, and the foundation therof, is the kylling of the Lion, wherby we first vnderstād what should happen in the people of y e Iewes, & then what should come to passe in Christ. Ambrose. Why ridles were put forth in feastes. Ambrose demaundeth the cause why Samson put out this ridle, and he aunswereth: bycause in feastes men are sometymes wont when they haue well dronke, to be somewhat full of talke, & somewhat to intemperatly to rebuke others, which things turneth for the most part into braulyngs & chidinges. And to auoyde that, graue mē wer wont to put forth ridles or problemes, omitting dangerous talke, & turning their mind to the exposition of the things put forth. Whose example Samson followed, & set forth a reward for him, which should expound his question: as though the knowledge and sharpenes of the minde ought to be rewarded, & contraryly punishmēt is instituted for ignoraūce & sluggishenes. The Ethnikes also in the old tyme were wont so to do. A Fable of Sphing. Wherfore the Poets fable that Sphing was wont to set forth a reward, namely if a mā had absolued his ridle, he should haue ben let goo free. But if he had failed, he should haue ben throwen hedlong downe a rocke. What y e Poetes would by this fable signify, I will not at this present declare. This thing euery man may easely vnderstand, that the witte of mā is so composed by nature, that it is not easely stirred vp, but either by setting foorth rewarde, or daunger. Whiche also we may easely see in children. Farther, let vs note that it is one thyng to put a mans money to hasard or chaunce, and an other thing to contend for wyt. But in this contention whiche Samson instituted, there was no place for chaunce, but it was a certayne kinde of play, ciuily, honest, and laudable.
¶Of Playes.
ANd bycause we are fallen into mention of playe, I thinke it good somwhat to speake therof.
Ambrose.Some of the fathers seme to abhorre from all kynde of playes. Ambrose in his 1. booke de officiis, chapter .23. Playes (sayth he,) and pastymes seme sweete and and pleasaunt, when as yet they are contrary to the rule of a Christian. For it is not founde in the holy Scriptures, Chrisostome. howe they ought to be vsed. Chrisostome vpon Mathewe the .6. Homelye, sayeth that GOD inuented not playe, but the deuill. For the people sat to eate and drinke, and rose vp to play, in the honour of a most filthy idole. For when they had worshipped the calfe and incurred idolatrye, they seemed to haue obtayned thys rewarde of the deuill, namely to play. Peraduenture Chrisostome alludeth to that which Plato wrote in Phedro, that Theut the demon of the Egyptians found out Numbers, Geometry, Astrology, Augustine letters, and dyse. But Augustine in hys .2. booke de Musica, sayeth that it is a parte of a wyseman to reuoke the mynde from earnest matters: and that is chiefely done by playe. Wherefore it semeth to be lawfull. But howe so great [Page 219] an oblectation ryseth of playe, it is not heard to vnderstande. Aristotle in hys .2. Aristotle, booke of Rhethoriques putteth victory or hope of victorye among the causes of oblectation. But when we playe, either we obtayne the victory, or elles we are in some hope thereof. Wherefore they whiche defend playe, Play is a cause of defectation. doo determine with themselues, that the mynde ought sometymes to bee no les refreshed, then the body: and as the body is renewed by rest or quietnes, Why play seemeth to be lawfull. so they say the mynde is recreated by playe. By whiche meanes they thinke to proue that there muste some place bee lefte for playes: addyng yet certayne cautions. Firste, that there 1 be no filthy and vnhonest woordes vsed in playes. Cautiōs to be added vnto honest player. It is not seldome sene that in playing both filthy and also blasphemous wordes do happen. We must also take hede, that there be not vsed to muche lyghtnes, and dissolution of grauity 2 and comelynes. For oftentymes it commeth to passe, that men do so vtterly geue themselues to playe, that afterward, they are able to do nothyng grauely. Farther, the circumstances are diligently to be marked, of the person (I say) the 3 place, and the tyme. It is certayn in deede that in the holy scriptures there is no rule or forme prescribed cōcerning playes, The lawe of god entreateth nothynge of playes. although in thē are read many kinds of playes. In Genesis the aungell wrastled the whole night with Iacob. Sara saw Isaac play with Ismaell, which she tooke in euill parte, not vndoubtedly bycause he played, but bycause he played together with the sonne of a bondewoman. Dauid also daunced & played before the arke of the Lord. And the maydens sang in their daunces, Saull hath ouercome in his thousandes, & Dauid in his .x. thousandes. And Christ complayned that the Iewes were like vnto children playing in the streetes and saying: We haue songe vnto you, &c. And although of these thynges there be no certayne rules manifestly wrytten in the holy Scriptures, yet are they set foorth in the ciuill lawes.
But before I speake of them, it shalbe good, A distinction of playes. to distribute playes into his formes and kindes. There are some which are vtterly referred vnto chaunce, as he whiche casteth most, or casteth thys chaunce or that, carieth awaye the rewarde. There are other whereby the powers either of the body or minde are excercised.
Such playes as depend vpō chaunce & are vnderstand by the name of diseplay, Of dyseplaye. Dyseplaye is condemned by ciuile lawes. are both by the ciuil lawes & by the fathers condemned. In the digestes de aleatoribus the Pretor sayth: If a diseplayer be iniuried by his fellowe, I will not geue him iudgement. But if one steale or do violence to an other, I will in deede render right, althoughe they be vnworthy. And afterward: if a mā compell an other to playe, let hym be punished, so that he be cast either into the quarreys to digge stones, or els into the cōmon prisons. By these things it appeareth, y t by y e ciuill lawe to playe at dyse was a thyng very odious. Cicero in .2. Phillip. agaynst Anthonius: His house (sayth he) is full of dyseplayers and dronkardes. Farther, the lawes adde, if dyseplayers lay any wagers among thēselues, they are not firme. Howbeit it is permitted vnto them of the household to play among themselues, for that whiche may afterward be eaten in a feast. But in the Code de religiosis sumptibus funerū, it is more seuerely ordeyned of play, dyse, & dyseplayers. In y e old time souldiers were permitted to play at dise after their busines done. But y e Emperor complaineth that at y t tyme al men played, & in trying of chaūces, wasted all their patrimony, & lastly added blasphemy agaynst God. Wherefore he decreed, that it should not be lawfull for any man to play, nor to loke vpon hym that playeth: & he admonisheth the Bishops, diligently to loke that these things be obserued. The same Iustinian the Emperor in his Authētiques, in the title de sacrosanctis Episcopis, in the paragraphe Interdicimus doth prohibite by name, that no Bishoppe, Priest, or Deacon, should either playe themselues, or looke vpon them that playe. But if they shall doo otherwyse, hee geueth commaundement to thrust then into Monasteryes for three yeares. Nowe let the Popes go and saye, it is not lawfull for Emperours to ordayne of Ecclesiasticall matters. De excessu praelatorum, in the chapter Inter dilectos, bycause [Page] a certayne Chanon was found to be a dise player, & had in play geuen hys money to vsury, to receaue for .x. peeces of money .xii. he was deposed. Also de vita & honestate clericorum, chap. Clerici: Let them not play at dise nor tables, neither let them be present at such playes. The same thing is had in the distinctiōs .35. chap. 1. Either let them cease to play, or els let them be condemned.
Agaynste those whiche defend diseplay.But they whiche defend this kinde of playe are wont to say: What if we will so bestow our money? Are we not Lordes of our own things? We do no wrong to our neyghbour, we take not away other mens goodes. These thinges haue they continually in theyr mouth. But they ought to vnderstande, that it is the dewty of the Magistrate, to see that euery man vse hys owne thinges well. Farther we must cōsider more deepely that God gaue vnto these money, wherewith they might haue to noorishe their family, and to helpe the poore, and not to caste them to chaūce, and put them to the slippernes of Fortune. Farther it behoueth and especially Christians to represent the image of God: who gouerneth and ruleth all thynges with reason. But so to consume money, is not to be a Lord ouer his own things, but a tyranne. This also mayst thou adde hereunto, if any thing be gotten by this meanes, the same both is, and also is called, filthy gayne.
Whether thinges lost by dyseplaye may be recouered.But for as muche as it is counted filthy gayne it may iustly be demaunded, whether those thynges whiche be lost by dyseplaye, may iustly be demaunded agayne. I aunswere, that if he whiche loseth be not in his owne power, but vnder an other man, as are the children of the householde and seruauntes, the lawes do geue recouery, and that euen to .50. yeares. But if they be their owne men, recocouery is not graunted, & the cause is assigned, bycause filthines is on either party. In whiche case the cause of the possessor is the better. In the digestes. In the title de condictione ob turpem causam in the lawe vbi autem, when filthynes is in either party, there is no iudgement geuen. What then shalbe done with the money? They say it must be bestowed vpon the poore, so that he which hath lost, may haue hurte, and he which hath gayned, shall not haue the fruition of thyngs euill gotten. This is to be done when the possession is transferred. Of the same mynde was Augustine in his Epistle .54. Augustine. to Macedonius. Where the possession (sayeth he) is transferred, let the money bee geuen vnto the poore. But where it is not transferred, as if a man take awaye any thyng by thefte, and lose it at dise, let it be restored. Wherfore we must decree, that such playes ought not to be suffred whiche are gouerned by chaunce and rashenes, so that in them, goods and money are endaungered: bycause it longeth to the publique wealth, to see that thynges be ryghtly gouerned: and God geueth goodes, to be spent to good vses. And bycause by it spryng oftentymes horrible blasphemies, and robbyng of our friendes, and couetous desire of other mens goodes is stirred vp, besides the greate losse of tyme. These thynges both the ciuill lawes and also the Ecclesiasticall do see: but at thys day they are not regarded. For the Canonicall lawes are contemned of the Clergy, and the ciuill lawes are despised of the Princes. For there is no where eyther more often or more filthily playe vsed, then among princes, and Ecclesiastical men: whiche in deede were of good iudgement, when they wrote those lawes: but they haue lyued and also do lyue most filthily.
What playes are permitted.But the other kynde of playe, whiche pertayneth to the excersyng of the powers, either of the mind or of the body, is not vtterly forbidden. Iustinianus in the lawe before alledged, when he had taken awaye playes whiche depended of chaunce, substituted this other kynd of playes, as throwing a roūd balle into the ayre, Aristotle. handling of the speare, running, & such like. Yea & Aristotle in his Rhethoriques commēdeth these exercises of the body. And vndoubtedly for as much as a man hath nede of some refreshyng and pleasure to recreate him selfe w tal, those thinges y t are honest, are mete to be graunted vnto him. So at this day publique wealthes do sometymes set forth rewardes vnto such as cā best throw weapons [Page 220] y t they may haue their Citizens y e better exercised. Howbeit it must be takē hede of, y e the kindes of playes be not hurtful or pernicious, so that it be daungerous, least in that playe, they which exercise thē selues, or which assemble to behold, be killed, or miserably torne or lamed. And without doubt this kind of plaies is prohibited ad legem Aquiliam, in the law Nam ludus, and in the decretals de torneamentis. Those thinges which of their own nature are not euil, but are euil bycause of those thinges which often tymes follow, ought to be prohibited. In the old time rewardes were set foorth vnto Syngers, Orators, Poetes, Readers, which are not vniuersally to be dissalowed, if they be done iustly or moderatly. Afterward were added stage plaies, wherof I wil not speake in this place. Daū ses also were added, of which we wyl speake in this booke in his due place. But men could not be content with these plaies: bicause also their mindes, which for sundry causes cannot exercise the powers of the body, are to be recreated wyth some pleasure: therfore they haue founde out an other kinde of play, namely the play of Chessemen, cōmonly called Chesse: neither is this kinde of play thought woorthy to be condemned.
Farther, there is a certaine other maner of playing, Tables. which leaneth partly to chaunce, and partly to industry, as is playing at Tables, and suche lyke, where in deede they cast by chaunce, but the castes are gouerned by industry, Plato. wherfore Plato affirmed that the life of men, is like vnto the play at Tables. For euen as in tableplay, so also in the life of mā, if any thing go not very wel, Terence. the same must by arte be corrected. To which sentence Terence also in Adelphis alludeth: and vndoubtedly these kindes of plaies seeme suche, that sometime they may be permitted, so that they bring no hurt, refresh the powers, and be ioyned with honesty, and that that time which should be spent vpon better thinges, be not bestowed vpon them.
But what shal we answer vnto Ambrose? This vndoubtedly, that that place De officiis yertaineth not to playes, for as muche as there he entreateth of pleasant talkes, tauntes, and skoffes, especiallye such as are ioyned with scurrility. But vpon the .118. Psalme (vpon these woordes: Turne away mine eyes that I see not vanity) he calleth stage playes vanitye, Augustine. Lactantiu [...]. as doth Augustine also together with Lactantius, Ierome and other Fathers. For they had much filthines, & wer at the beginning instituted to the honour of Idoles, Ierome. Why stage playes bee condemned of the Fathers. and therefore they wer odious vnto the Fathers & Christians. But the reason which Ambrose first alledged was, bicause there is nothing found in the holy scriptures how these things ought to be vsed. To that we wil answer, that they are found in the holye scriptures generallye: whither ye eate, or whither ye drinke, or whither ye doo anye thing els, doo al thinges to the glory of God. Wherfore the body and the minde are so sometimes to be refreshed with plaies, that we may afterward be prompt to grauer matters. Farther, there is nothing found peculiarly in the holy scriptures touching Bakers, Cookes, nor Shipmen, and yet neuertheles their exercises are not vtterly to be excluded.
Chrisostome said that the Deuil found out play, and alledged this: Chrisostom [...]. The people sat downe to eate and to drinke, & they rose vp to play. If a man looke more narowly vpon that place of this father, hee shall see that hee spake of those men which would not repent, but were woont to say: I woulde to God I might neuer weepe, but might alwaies play and laugh. To whom, he sayth, Christ preached: Blessed are they which mourne. And forasmuche as we so often sinne, and doo so grieuously offend God, how should we haue leasure to play? He also condemneth those playes whereby we are made sluggish & vnapt to good workes. We doo not in play and laughing (sayth he) imitate Christe or the Apostles: for we neuer reade that they either played or laughed. How beit he addeth a moderation, for as muche as he addeth, I doo not vniuersaly take away al laughter, but the excessiue and immoderate laughter. Lastly he turneth him selfe to stage [Page] playes, and saith that they were inuented by the Deuill: for they containe the wicked actes and whooredomes of the Gods, whereby the consciences of godly men are greuously wounded, and wicked lustes are many waies stirred vp. And in that he saith that these thinges were inuented by the Deuil, he speaketh nothing contrary to the truth: bicause (as I haue admonished) they were instituted in the honour of false Gods. Yea and this thing he addeth also, that the Deuyll builded stages in Cities.
But nowe to conclude, me thinketh that those kindes of playes which serue to renewe strengthes in men, are not vtterly to be forbidden. Neither ought we lightly to be offended, if we se a man play at Chesse, with which play the powers of the body are nothing holpen, but onelye the industrye of the minde exercised. For if through age strength faile, so that they cannot exercise them selues by any other meanes, or that their body be but weake, why shoulde they not be permitted, moderately to delight them selues with this kinde of play? Neither also is he straightway to be condemned, which being sicke or weake recreateth himselfe with that kynde of playe, which dependeth of Fortune or chaunce, so that there in be no daunger of losse of money. To what entēt the lawes restrayned or prohibited playes. For we must chieflye regarde to what entent the lawes forbad that. It was vndoubtedly that a man should not waste his goods prodigally, and therfore it was prouided by the law that a man should not hasard aboue a shilling: as it is had in the Code, in the place before alledged. This was the meaning of the law, that money should not be yll consumed.
But some say they delight not in play, except they play for money. But I wil demaund of them to what vse they entend to bestow that mony? Peraduenture they wil say vpon a feast. Why not rather vpon the poore? But I saye it is much better and safer not to play for any money. For although it maye bee that thou thy selfe art not touched with couetousnes, the other yet with whom thou playest, is peraduenture touched: Let the occasions vnto euyll be taken awaye, which otherwise are very manye which moue vnto euyll. And if there were nothing els to feare vs away from playes, let vs for Gods sake wayghe this, howe greate the penury of time is. The law of God requireth so manye duties, that not our whole lyfe is able to performe them: and yet shall wee bestowe time in playes? We are otherwise sufficientlye sicke with couetousnes of money, wyth ambicion to ouercome and excell other: why do we styrre vp these diseases with playes? But thou wilt say: These thinges are neuer stirred vp in me. But now thou must remember that they maye easelye be stirred vp. And we must see not onely to our selues, but that we bring not other also vnto y e same disease. These thinges are spoken of the honest kindes of playes. If so be there be anye whyche doo play, being entised with couetousnes, let those men knowe that they rather like euil marchauntes trafficke, Male mercari then playe. For they seeke no other thing but filthy gaine. Neither seeke they pleasure, which in honest playes is the chiefest, but they seeke their owne thinges, and that by filthye meanes. And when they which delight immoderatly in playes, doo say: There must be some pleasure in the life, whereby we maye be recreated: Their request is to be graunted, but in the meane time they must bee admonished, that there are other pleasures more honest. Paul to the Ephesians the .v. chap. saith: Speake vnto your selues in Psalmes, Tertulian. Himnes, and spiritual songes, singing and making mery in your hartes. And the same thing writeth he vnto the Colossians the third chap. Tertulian in Apologetico sayth that Christians vsed to assemble together to their moderate shorte suppers, and when they wer refreshed with meate, they sang deuine praises, or recited somthing out of the holye scriptures, prouoking one an other by them. And by this meanes they returned sober home.
Other honest pleasures besides playes.There are also problemes, wherwith the wits may be exercised and refreshed: which problemes if they seme to hard, there are histories, which may wyth lesser labour be learned. Why are not men hyred to reade them vnto them? There is [Page 221] no history so sclender, which is not very much profitable for some part of mans life. There are also histories of plants, of herbes, and of stones. There are lykewise communications of godlye men one with an other, which are sweete and pleasant, wherewith mindes are refreshed, and therewithal edefied. I do not (as I haue said) vtterly take away playes: but I prefer these thinges, as much more honest and profitable. But now let vs returne vnto the play of Samson, whych though it was honest and liberal, yet had it a deadly ende. And if this playe had such yl successe, what is to be hoped of those which are prohibited by the lawes? They which made those lawes, wer wise men in gouerning the publike welth, who seing their faith in other thinges is to be allowed, why is it not also to be allowed in thys thing?
And the young men could not interpreate. The feast indured seauen dayes, and when Samson had put foorth his riddle the first day, they coulde doo nothing in three dayes: wherefore when wyt failed them, they turned themselues to craftines and euyll artes.
15 And when the seuenth day drew neare, they sayde vnto Samsons wife: Entise thine husband, that he may declare vs the riddle, least we burne thee and thy fathers house with fire. Hast thou called vs that he should possesse vs? Is it not so?
16 And Samsons wife wept before hym, and sayd: Surelye thou hatest me, and louest me not: for thou hast put foorth a ryddle vnto the chyldren of my people, and hast not tolde it me. And he sayd vnto her: Beholde, I haue not tolde it my father, nor my mother, and shall I tell it thee?
17 Then Samsons wyfe wepte before hym seauen dayes, whyle theyr feast lasted, and when the seuenth daye came, he tolde her, bycause she was importunate vpon hym. And shee tolde the ryddle to the chyldren of her people.
18 And the men of the City sayd vnto him the seuenth daye, before the Sunne went downe: What is sweter then hoony, and what is stronger then a Lyon? Then he sayd vnto them: if ye had not plowed with my Heifer, ye had not found out my ryddle.
19 And the spirite of the Lord came vpon hym, and he went down to Ascalon. And he smote of them .xxx. men, and taking away theyr vpper garmentes, gaue chaunge of garmentes vnto those whyche expounded the ryddle. And hys wrath was kindled, and he went vp to hys fathers house.
20 Then Samsons wyfe was geuen to hys companion, whom he had associated vnto hymselfe.
The young men come vnto Samsons wife, desire her to intreate her husband, and by al meanes to enquire of him what his proposicion signified. They adde moreouer threatninges, and those horrible, namely that otherwise they would burne her and her fathers house. This is the nature of peruers men, when they can not ouercome by strength and industry, they flee to deceites. This maye be sene in these young men: rather then they would suffer them selues to be conquered or ouercome, they go about fraude and snares. But chiefly they go vnto hys wife, that (both bicause she was a woman, which might easelye be wonne, & bicause she was deare & welbeloued of her husband) they myght vse her labour to wrest and wring out the secrete of her husbande. They make her therefore the betrayer, and that which is most grieuous, of her own husband. This is often [Page] times the ende of playes. The thing for which they contended, was of no great value. For euery one of them were in daunger onely of the losse of one garment and sheete a peece: & yet they say: Hast thou called vs, that he should possesse vs? As though they should lose al that euer they had. These thinges rightlye agree with those which do play to that end, to depriue other men of their goods. They which haue lost, may after this maner complain of the winner: Thou hast with this pretence prouoked me to plai, to rob me, & not to take any pleasure by play. The woman in the meane time (as Ambrose saith) wept, and complained vnto her husband, Ambrose. that he loued her not, neither esteemed her. Thou hatest me (sayth she) for as much as thou wylt not declare vnto me thy secretes. But Samson aunswereth wisely. Yea, but I haue not shewed it vnto my parētes, and thinkest thou that I loue them not? What cause is there that thou shouldest complaine? There are in deede many good and faithful women, but Samson had not yet had anye trial of his wife. It is not expedient alwayes to cōmunicate secrete coūsels vnto wyues. Plutarch. And seing ther are many euil and babling women, which blab out thinges of great importance, to their husbandes great dammage, therefore wise men commit not many thinges to their wiues secrete keeping: for ther are many thinges that are not expedient for them to know. And babling is a vyce in a maner proper vnto women. Plutarche telleth of this thing an elegant hystory of Papirius Pretextatus, which nowe is sufficient onelye to shewe. Many, though they be strong in body, and excel in strength, yet are they weake in hart. Samson had ouercome a Lyon, but yet at the last hee coulde not ouercome the teares of hys wyfe. As long as his wife shewed her selfe sad and heauye vnto him, Samson could not beare it. The holye ghost woulde haue these thinges set foorth in the holy scriptures, whereby we might see the nature and corrupcion of our fleshe.
The seauenth day before the sunne went downe. The end of the daye is the sun set. Ambrose. All they of the East did measure the ende of the day by the going downe of the sunne, which by thys place we may gather, and by many other. They expounded the ryddle after this maner: VVhat is sweeter then hoony, what is stronger then a Lyon? Ambrose sayth that Samson, when hee heard these thinges, strayghtwaye added: what is more vnfaythfull then a woman? This assuredlye which is added in the text, is not much vnlike: Except ye had plowed wyth my Heyfer. To plowe is to dyg, to turne, and to searche the earth. So they searched out the mayden, that by her they might come to the counsell of her husbande. This vndoubtedlye is an easye interpretacion. Leui ben Gerson. For that is not sufficient whych Leui ben Gerson bringeth, that those young men committed aduoutry with the mayden, and by that abuse vnderstoode the ryddle of Samson. For if this thing had happened, Samson woulde not haue retayned her in matrimony.
When they had absolued the riddle, nothing remained but y t Samson should pay vnto them the wager. And that price would he pay vnto the Philistines, of the goods and riches of other Philistines. The miserable woman feared, that if she had not shewed vnto the young men the secrete of her husband, she should with all her famely haue bene burnt. But by thys meanes she did in very deede get vnto her selfe burning. For as wee shall heare, when Samson had inferred grieuous euyls vnto the Philistianes, they not suffring the iniuries, assembled a power, and burnt the house of hys wyues father. So the mayden fell into the pyt which she had made.
And hys wrath was kyndled, namelye against his wyfe. But why did Samson require secretnes of her, which he himself could not keepe? He ought to haue kept scilence, and not haue reuealed vnto her the secrete, if he woulde haue had hys secretes kept close. Farther, as touching the murther of the Philistians, yf we thynke of Samson, as of some priuate man, hee can by no meanes be excused. For it is lawfull for no priuate manne to spoyle and kyll others, to paye hys owne debtes wythall. But bycause (as the hystorye teacheth) he was [Page 222] stirred vp to doo this by the impulsion of the holy ghost, therfore ought he not to be accused. For it is written: And when the spirite of the Lord came vpon hym, he went downe to Ascalon. &c. Therefore we wil not reproue Samson, but yet we wil not draw his act into an example. But this let vs imitate, to suffer our selues to be the instrumentes of the spirite of God, & let vs with a valiaunt and bold minde follow him being our guide. For although Samson should fyght at one time against .xxx. men, yet bicause he was driuen by the spirite of God, hee was nothing afearde. He tooke away the spoyles. Celiphoth, that is, their vppermost & chaungeable garmentes, which he had taken away from them which he had slaine. But ther is mencion made that he payd onely Celiphoth: neither is there any thing spoken of the linnen sheetes, which yet ought by the bargain to be payde. The Hebrues thinke that here is vsed the figure Synechdoche, that by part is vnderstād the whole. Dauid Kimhi saith, he would not pay the whole, bicause they came to the knowledge of the riddle by euil artes, but yet that they should not altogether complaine of his faith, he gaue them part.
There ariseth a doubt, bicause Samson was a Nazarite, & by his profession it was not lawful for him to drinke wine, nor to cut his heare, How it was lawful for Sā son to handle dead Carkases being a Nazarite. nor to touche any dead corps. But he must nedes touch their bodies, whom when he had slaine he stripped out of their clothes. Ther are diuers & sundry answers brought. Some say he was a Nazarite, but not as touching this third condicion. For the Angell onelye admonished his Parentes that he shoulde drinke no wyne, nor pole hys head: but commaunded nothing for touching of dead bodies. But other say that he did in deede kil the Philistians, but yet he stripped of their garmēts, while they were yet breathing and on lyue. And there are some which thinke that hee caused that one or twoo of them which wer left a lyue, should strippe the other, and should go free for their labour. But these seeme mere faininges. The difficultye may be dispatched by one woord: a Nazarite was bound by religion, not of hys owne accorde to touche dead bodies. But this man was moued by the spirite of God: neither did he these thinges of his own wyl. Wherefore the commaundement of the religion of a Nazarite ought in this steede to geue place vnto the holy ghost. I am not ignorant how men doo easely maruaile, that the holye ghost would mingle it selfe with playes and trifles of yong men. For that can scarcely seeme to be agreable vnto the maiesty of God. Let humane reason meruayle at these thinges, as much as it list: The prouidēce of God vseth things, though they bee neuer so lyght. yet is it nothing contrary vnto the maiestye of God, if it mingle it self with thinges neuer so light. For hereby the prouidēce of God appeareth more bright, when men vnderstande that it also conuerteth thinges most base and most light, vnto the glory of the name of God. For, for a man with apt and meete instruments, to bring any thing to passe, it is no great matter: but with thinges vnapt and deformed, to fabricate any excellent thyng, this seemeth to pertaine to a cunning woorkeman. These thinges seme in deede to be light, but what is more light then dreames? whiche yet God vseth to the glory of his name, as the history of Pharao and Nabuchad-Nezar doo manifestly declare. But what doo I speake of Kinges? God would by dreames exalt Ioseph being a prisoner and poore man, vnto a kingdome. So woulde he haue the inheritaunce of Esau turned vnto Iacob, in a maner by a play. And by fraud the blessing was wrested by Iacob from Isaac, couering his handes & necke with Goates skyns. Yea and also the spirit of God mingleth it self somtimes with the plaies and verses of Poetes, when as they (how soeuer they seeme to play) do yet sometimes write true, profitable and graue thinges. And that those thinges are of God, no man ought to doubt. Let this be had for certaine, that all thynges doo obey vnto God, dreames, playes, light thinges, graue thinges, and noble. He is the ruler and gouernour of al thinges, wherefore no man ought to bee offended when hee heareth these thinges. God seemeth more and more to increase the strength of Samson, for before being vnarmed, he fought with a Lyon: which assuredly [Page] was a great thing. But this is much greater, to fight at one time wyth xxx. men. God would so exercise him, that he should geue ouer him selfe wholye to the counsell of the spirite.
Samsō ought not so lyghtlye to haue gon frō hys wyfe. Samson being angrye with his wife, bicause she had vttered the riddle vnto the young men, departed from her: which his fact ought not to bee allowed. For he oughte not so lightlye to haue seperate himselfe from his wife. It was his part to correcte her, and if neede had beene, to chasten her. Neyther had thys departure good successe. For when he was gone, the father gaue his daughter vnto an other husband, namely to the fellow of Samson, and paranimphe, whyche had ioyned himselfe a companion vnto him in the mariage. The mayden sawe she had grieuously offended her husband, wherfore she fearing his fiercenes, desireth her father to prouide her an other husband: For it is not credible (as Ambrose saith) that these thinges were done w tout the good wil of the maiden. Ambrose. But diuorsement should not be made so rashly, and for so light a cause. Christe hath made one cause onely of diuorcement, namely aduoutry. Paul addeth the difference of religion: although he wyll not haue the faithfull to depart, if the vnbeleuing party wil dwel together. Neither permitted he second mariages, bicause man and wife agree not in religion, but bicause the one wil not abide wyth the other. Ther was here no cause of iust diuorcement. In Samsons cause there is neither of these. There was no aduoutrye, neyther did the mayden say she would not dwell with her husband: neither did Samson repudiate his wife, although he then departed from her. For afterwarde he returned vnto her, as we shal heare. And although he so departed, that the wyfe knewe not where he was become, yet ought she not straight way to marye an other. For the ciuill lawes, when any suche thing happeneth, doo appoynt her to tary fyue yeares, as it is had in the Digestes De diuortiis, in the law Vxor. And in the Authentikes De Nuptiis, in the Paragraphe Sed etiam. The Canon lawes in the Decretals would haue amended these thinges, and decreed that it should not bee lawfull to marye againe before some certaine woorde were broughte of the death of the first husbande or wyfe. But with what godlynes and wysdome they did that, I wyll not at this tyme declare.
It is certaine that in this place was iniustice done for the wife to mary an other, being not ignoraunt that her husbande was yet on lyue. But the Father excuseth the act, saying: I thought thou haddest hated my daughter. But why should he haue suffered hymselfe to be perswaded after this sorte? It was conuenient that he shoulde before haue knowen Samsons mynde, Iosephus. and taryed for a booke of deuorcement. Although I see that Iosephus is of this opinion, that hee thinketh Samson dyd repudiate his wyfe. But that is not very lykely, when as he afterwarde descended, to take his wife againe vnto him. Neyther should the Philistians iustly haue burned that mā with his famely. Ambrose. Yea and Ambrose also denyeth that there was any deuorcement. This is in a maner the fruite of those that are ioyned together in an vnequall mariage. We reade the lyke thing in the fyrst booke of Samuel, the .xxv. chapter. Dauid had maryed Michol the daughter of Saul: and when Dauid fled, her Father gaue her vnto an other husbande, when as the first husbande had not yet repudiated her, but afterwarde Dauid demaunded her agayne. In the meane tyme let vs that are Christians, determine thys with our selues, that it is not lawfull to dissolue matrimonies for lyghte causes. Paule saythe: If the wooman depart, let her remayne vnmaryed, or let her be reconciled vnto her husbande. Chrisostome. Which assuredlye hee ment not of aduoutry: for he woulde not amende the woordes of Christ, but as Chrisostome sayth, he vnderstoode these thynges of lyghter offences, for as muche as of them some reconsiliacion may be hoped for: whych is vtterly cut of, if she be maryed to an other.
¶The .xv. Chapter.
1 BVt within a while after, in the time of wheate haruest, Samson visited his wife with a Kyd, saying: I wil go vnto my wife into her chamber: but her father would not suffer him to go in.
2 And her father sayde: I had thought that thou haddest hated her: therefore gaue I her to thy companion. Is not her younger syster fayrer then shee? Take her I praye thee in steede of the other.
3 And Samson sayd vnto hym: Nowe am I more blameles then the Philistines, and therfore wil I doo them displeasure.
THis was the simplicity of those times, that the husbande shoulde bring vnto his wyfe a Kyd. It was a gyft of reconcilement, to pacify hys wyfe withall. In saying I haue sayd. That is, I did fyrmly and constantly thinke. That doubting of woordes with the Hebrues, addeth a vehemency, which selfe thing we maye see in that which followeth: In hating, thou diddest hate her, that is, thou diddest exceedingly hate her. The father in lawe seemeth to lay the fault in the Sonne in lawe. For it is as muche as he shoulde haue sayde: Thou wast the cause, that I gaue her vnto an other.
Is not her yonger syster fayrer then shee? He feared Samson, bycause he was of a strong and mighty body, least he shoulde rage and kyll and slaye the Philistines: therefore he offereth him his other daughter, to asswage his anger. He offereth her, but yet against the law of God, by which it was not lawfull to mary twoo Systers, as it is manifest in the eightene and twentye of Leuiticus. Wherefore the father offereth vnto Samson mariage, but yet an incestious mariage. Neither was it by the Romaine lawes lawfull to marye two systers, It is not lawful to ma [...]y two Sisters. although the first were dead: and vndoubtedly for a iust cause: For, for as muche as man and wife are one fleshe, thereby commeth that the kynsfolkes of the one are ioyned in the same degree with the other. Wherefore the syster of my wyfe must be counted for my sister. Let the Pope therefore take heede what he doth, when he so easely geueth licence in this kinde of mariages. But this is nothing to him which thinketh that all thinges are lawfull vnto hym. But it maye be that the Philistians obserued not these degrees in matrimonies. For when Moses gaue the law before brought: Ye shal not doo (saith he) as the nacions do, which the Lord your God shall subdue vnto you. For therefore hath the earthe syued them out before your face. Samson receiued not the condicion offred hym. Of you (saith he) is sproong the iniury, my cause is the better and more iust, if it should come to iudgement. Wherfore he hath cause to be reuenged of the Philistians. And assuredly it was written before of God.
And he sought occasion. We must not thinke of Samson as of a priuate man. Here the Reader is agayne to be admonished not to thinke of Samson, as of a priuate man. For it is not lawful for anye priuate man, after this maner, to prosecute hys owne iniuries. He must rather go vnto the Magistrate. But Samson was nowe constituted of God as a Magistrate. First hee taketh vengeaunce of the goods of the Philistians, and that after a wonderfull maner.
4 And Samson went & tooke .xxx. Foxes, and tooke firebrandes, and turned them tayle to tayle, and put a fyrebrande in the middest betwene two tayles.
5 And when hee hadde set the brandes on fyre, hee sent them oute [Page] into the standyng corne of the Philistians, and burnt vp bothe the reekes, and the standing corne with the vineyardes and oliues.
6 Then the Philistians sayd: who hath done this? And they aunswered, Samson the sonne in law of the Thimnite, bicause he had taken awaye hys wyfe, and geuen her to hys companyon. Then the Philistians came vp and burnt her and her father wyth fyre.
7 And Samson said vnto them: If ye had done these thinges: but I wyl be auenged of you, and then I wyl cease.
This woord Lampades they haue translated firebrandes, which are easelye set on fire. Samson bounde the tayles of the Foxes two and twoo together, wyth a strong knot, and in the middest he bound a fyrebrande. When the Foxes coulde not agree together in their course (for the one drew this way, and the other that way, so that they could not hide themselues in their holes, but the flame by stirring and moouing was more and more kindled) they ran into the standing com. And at that time was the wheate haruest, and the wheate partlye reaped, and partly grewe still. Wherefore the Foxes running thorowe the corne, dyd them very great hurt. For they lost both their straw and their corne, with their vineyardes and Oliues. Why Samson did chuse foxes. The cōsideration of Samsons pollecy was this: He chose a Foxe to this enterprise, rather then any other beast, bicause it is a craftye and subtil beast, and goeth by crooked and bye passages. But Samson goeth the right way to woorke: otherwise he mought easelier haue bound Dogges together, but he rather vsed Foxes, for the cause before alledged, as Dauid Kimhi affirmeth. Neither would he to euery Foxe alone binde a firebrande: partly bicause they would haue drawen the firebrands along the ground, and so might easely haue put them out, and partly bicause they would soone haue gotten them into theyr holes. But whē two and two wer by the tayles ioyned together, & the one drew one way, & the other an other way, by that mocion was the fire the more kindled, Origene. and when they ranne into the corne, they did very great hurt. Origene vpon Cantica Canticorum, in his .iiii. Homely, as he is euery where ful of Allegories, referreth al this thing also to an Allegory, although he plainely confesseth, that it is hard to apply an Allegorye vnto this History. But I, as I haue often in other places, so do I also in this place omit Allegories.
But if a man aske how Samson got so manye Foxes, he must vnderstande, that as there are sundry regions, so are there also in them manyfolde and sundry increase of thinges. In some place there are manye horses, and those fayre. In some place there is great aboundaunce of Cattell. In Englande there is great plentye of Conies, and so is there in the Ilandes called Baleares. In those Regions a man maye easelye in one daye, and in a lytle grounde, take three or foure hundreth Conies: Siria aboundeth in Foxes. which to some peraduenture myght seeme incredyble. And so is it sayd that there is a very great aboundaunce of Foxes in Siria, and specially in the borders of Iewry. Wherefore Salamon in hys Canticles sayth: Take Foxes for vs which destroye the vyneyardes. Wherefore there was so great number of them, that they also destroyed the vineyardes: for they delight most of all in ripe grapes. Yea and Dauid saith of the vngodlye: They shall bee partes of Foxes, that is, their pray, so that their karkases shall be deuoured of them. And out of the .4. chap. of Nehemias is gathered, that the number of them was so great, that they could in a maner ouerturne the walles of the city. And Samson tooke them either by his own industry, or by the helpe of his friendes. He sent the Foxes, and destroied their corne. Hereby we may gather, that in iust war, it is lawful to vse burninges and spoilinges, to endomage their enemies.
The Philistians sayd: who hath done this? They seeke for the authour, and they doo not onely fynde him, but also they vnderstand the cause why he dyd it, [Page 224] and they take vengeaunce of hys father in lawe and his wyfe, that was maryed vnto an other. If ye had done these thynges. These are the woordes of a man that is angry, and therefore cut of, wherefore we must vnderstand, if ye had done these thinges at the beginning, when my wyfe was first taken from mee, I had bene pacified. But ye haue done it to late, therefore I wyll yet be auenged of you. For that which ye haue done, ye haue not done for loue to iustice and honesty, but for feare of a greater hurt. If iustice had moued them, they woulde at the fyrste haue punished them. But they followe the common nature of men, which are with no other thing more touched, then by the feelyng of present euyls, which we may perceaue not onely here, Men are mor [...] moued by [...]r [...] then b [...] anye other meanes. but also in the historye whyche is found in the latter booke of Samuel. Absolon had long lyued in exile: Ioab obtained of the kyng that he might returne. Wherefore he returned, but hee was not admitted vnto the kynges syght. And when Ioab woulde not wyllinglye come vnto him, Absolon commaunded hys seruauntes to burne the corne of Ioab. Wherefore Ioab beyng mooued with this iniurye, came vnto hym at the last. So also the Philistians, being in a manner compelled, Whi somtimes the syn o [...] a priuate man is the cause of the destruction of a whole citye or kingdome. doo reuenge the iniury of Samson. This also is to be noted, that often times a whole City or kingdome is punished, for the synne of one man, or of one famely. And that sawe the Poetes, when they wrote, that onelye the aduoultrye of Paris ouerthrewe the kingdome of Troy. And vndoubtedly when a publike wealth eyther wynketh at, or defendeth, or punisheth not, the synne of a priuate man, God counteth it all one, as if they had all synned together. If they haue good lawes, and doo followe them in punishyng wycked actes, God wyll not for their sakes punyshe them all.
Hereby also we may see that the sentence of Salomon is most true, wherein he sayth: That which the vngodly feareth shall happen vnto him. The ma [...]den feared least her fathers house should be burnt: Why the vngodlye call [...] those euylls or which they be a feard of. and she by that waye moste of all brought burning, by which shee thoughte to auoyde it. But why happeneth i [...], that the vngodlye doo fall into that, which they feare. Bicause when they fear [...] euyll thinges, they go about to auoyde them by euyll meanes, and not by good. Iosephs brethren feared least he should be preferred before them, when they saw that his father loued him so well. And that they might auoyde his promocion, they sold him into Egipt. But by that meanes chiefly it came to passe, that Ioseph was made ruler ouer them. The Iewes feared least, if Christ should go forward as he began, the Romanes woulde come and take awaye their nacion and place. And to turne awaye that, they gaue vnto Iudas a price, and crucified Christ, whereby they the sooner threwe them selues headlong into those euyls which they feared. The mayden was burned with al her fathers famely. By whō? By the Philistines, at whose handes she looked for fauour.
8 So he smote them hyp and thygh wyth a great plague. Then he went downe and dwelt in the top of the rocke Etan.
What hyp vpon thigh, or hyp together with thigh signifieth, it is obscure, & therfore ther are sundry interpretacions brought. The Chaldey Paraphrast expoūdeth it to be horsmen & footemē, so that thigh signifieth horsmē, bicause they syt on the horse with the thigh bowed, and the hyp signifieth footemen. Peraduenture at that time it was a kinde of prouerb wel knowen of those men. Dauid Kimhi bringeth an other reason, namely that Samson, Kimhi. both slew the Philistians and also did put them to flight, who also as they fled, did fall: as thoughe by thys kynde of speeche might be described the behauiour of them that fel, whereby the hyp is bowed vnto the thigh. Farther, this hebrue woorde Iarach signifieth also a shoulder, and the meaning may be that Samson smote them from the shoulder to the thigh. The rocke Etan is the proper name of a place.
9 Then the Philistians came vp, and pitched in Iudah, and were spreade abroade in Lechi.
10 And the men of Iudah sayd: why are ye come vp vnto vs? And they aunswered, to bynde Samson are we come vp, and to doo to hym, as he hath done to vs.
11 Then three thousand men of Iudah went downe to the top of the rocke Etan, & said to Samson: knowest thou not that the Philistians ar rulers ouer vs? wherfore then hast thou done thus vnto vs? And he aunswered them: as they dyd vnto mee, so haue I done vnto them.
12 Againe they sayd vnto him: We are come to bynde thee, and to delyuer thee into the hand of the Philistians. And Samson said vnto them: sweare vnto me, that ye wil not fall vpon me your selues.
13 And they answered hym, saying: No, but we wil binde thee & delyuer thee vnto their hand, but we wil not kyl thee. And they bound him with two new cordes, and brought hym from the rocke.
14 When he came to Lechi, the Philistians shouted agaynst hym, and the spirite of the Lord came vpon hym, and the cordes that wer vpon hys armes, became as flaxe that is burnt wyth fyre: for the bandes loosed from hys handes.
15 And he found a new iawbone of an Asse, & put foorth hys hand, and caught it, and slewe a thousande men therewyth.
16 Then Samson sayd: with the iawe of an Asse are heapes vpon heapes: with the iaw of an Asse haue I slayne a thousand men.
17 And when he had left speakyng, he cast awaye the iawbone out of hys hande, and called that place Ramath-Lechi.
Thys place is called Lechi by the figure prolepsis: bycause Lechi in Hebrue is a iawbone, and therefore the place is so named, bycause Samson slewe there a number of hys enemyes wyth the iawbone of an Asse. But that was not then done when Samson came thither at the fyrste. The Philistians, to auenge theyr iniuryes, pytched agaynst Iudah: for thyther Samson fled. But the men of Iudah desyre the Philistians not to be angrye, and demaunde of them why they led an armye agaynst them. As though they should haue sayd: we haue not fallen from you, and we haue payed you our tributes: If Samson dyd anye thyng agaynste you, The leaugue of the Woulues with the shepe. Demosthenes. it was not done by our counsell. And they were pacified and sayde: Delyuer hym then, and we wyl depart. Vndoubtedly an vniust and craftye Counsell: for in suche sorte would the Woulues make a league wyth the Sheepe, on that condicion I say, that they shoulde delyuer theyr Dogges, as Demosthenes sayd vnto the people of Athens touchyng theyr Oratours. But why dyd not the Philistians them selues take Samson? Ambrose. Ambrose aunswereth, bicause they durst not. And the men of Iudah were so cowardishe, that they refused not to doo it. There came vnto Samson three thousande men to take hym, and they laye for a pretence the authoritye of the Philistians: VVylt thou (say they) haue vs afflicted for thy sake?
The lyke speeche had the Hebrues in tyme past agaynst Moses: for when the people was oppressed of Pharao: Thou (sayd they) haste made our smel to stinke in the syght of Pharao. Samson vpbraydeth not vnto them their sluggyshnesse and desperatnesse, when as hee myght iustly haue sayde vnto them: Are ye not ashamed to betray hym that hath delyuered you? He handleth hys owne countrey men friendlye, and telleth them peaceably, why he dyd so. They (sayde he) [Page 225] did me iniury first, and the same would I auenge. This is the law of rendring like for like, and it is a common rule of all lawes. But sweare vnto me, Lextalionis that you will not fall vpon me your selues. Why requireth he this othe that they shoulde not kill him? Bycause he was godlye towardes his countrey, neither woulde he shed the blood of his citizens, which vndoubtedly must nedes haue bene done, if the matter had come to handystrokes.
The Philistians mighthy a certain outward shew, seme iuster then Sāson. For when they had burnt Samsons father in law and his wife and all his famely, yet Samson not being content with that auengement, slew very manye of them: and they, though they had so manye hurtes, yet they desire onely the death of Samson. Wherefore they may seme more iust, but it is but in an outward shew onely, The entente of the Philistiās. as we haue sayd. For they would first take away Samson the heade: who being taken away, they myght easely do what they woulde against the people of Israel. And Samson would rather be deliuered vnto his enemies, then that his country shuld for his sake come in daūger: so great a loue had he towards his people, yea rather chiefly a firme and constant fayth towardes God. For puttinge his hope in the mercy of God, he doubted not to commit himself vnto his enemies, and he woulde defende the Iewes, not onely by weapons and strength, but also wyth his greate daunger.
And when he was bound, they made him to ascende. This is so sayde, because that rough rock which Samson possessed, was lower then the mountaines which the Philistians helde. Wherefore wee reade before that Samson discended to the rocke, and that the Iewes descended vnto him. When the Philistians showted against him for ioy, y e spirit of the lordcame vpon Sāson, so that he brake his cords as easelye as if they had beene flare burnte with fire. And he toke the iaw bone of an asse being new or grene. This Hebrewe woorde Teriah signifieth grene or new, & it is so called, either bicause it was newelye drawen out of the asse, or els bicause it was rotten. For rotten thinges the Hebrewes call grene. Wherfore raw sores and wounds ful of matter or corruption, ar called of thē, grene Teriah. These words ( And Samson said, with the iaw of an Asse: and then it is added in Hebrew Chamor Chamerithim) are very obscure and haue sundrye interpretacions. For Chamor signifieth both an asse, and also a heap or gathering together. Wherefore some following the signification of this woord heape, do thus interprete it, there was made heapes vpon heapes of dead bodies, namely of mē which he had slaine. Or I haue made heape vpon heape. And the sense is, that Samson sayth that he had made so greate a slaughter of his enemies, that he gathered greate heapes of them together. But other hauing a respecte vnto this woorde asse, do thus enterpretate it, of an asse, of asses, that it should not be here vnderstand in a metaphore. And they thinke y t a sword which is called by y e name had y e form of an asse. He saith therfore y t it was y e iaw bone of an asse, of an asse I say of asses, as in other places of the scripture we reade, a kidde of goates, and a bullock of Oxen. The Rabbines for the most part interprete this place for heapes and gatheringes together of enemies.
When the slaughter was finished, then first the place was named Ramath-Lechi. Ramam in Hebrew is highe. Wherefore Ramah signifieth a high place. And Ramah-Lechi is nothing els then a hill or toppe of a iaw bone. There may also be geuen an other Etimologye, so that the naminge of it may be deriued of this verbe Ramah, which is to cast away, bicause Samson in that place threw away the iaw bone, when he had fynished the slaughter.
18 And he was sore a thirste, and called on the Lorde, and sayde: [Page] Thou hast geuen this great deliuerance by the hand of thy seruant and nowe shall I dye for thirste, and fall into the handes of the vncircumcised?
19 Then god brake the cheke tooth, that was in the iawe, and water came thereout, and when he had dronke, his sprite came agayn, and he was reuiued. Wherefore he called the name therof Ain Hakorah, which is the fountaine of him that calleth vpon, which is in Lechi vnto this day.
20 And he iudged Israell in the dayes of the Philistians twentye yeares.
Whereas it is written that god opened the cheeke tooth whiche was in the iaw bone, it is in the Hebrewe Aschar Belchi Hamachtich, wherefore the place is darke: for this woorde Machtisch signifieth ether that holownes wherein the teth are fixed, or els by a Metaphore it signifieth a stone or rocke, wherein is a hole cut, Out of what thing god brought foorth water. Iosephus. R. Leui Ben Gerson. like vnto the holes of the cheke tethe. And in fine it is that, which commonly we call a morter. And this latter interpretation Iosephus & R. Leui Ben Gerson do follow. And they thinke, that god brought not forth water out of the iaw bone, but out of a rocke being holow like a iaw bone. But others say that water came forthe of that iaw bone, wherewith he had slayne his enemies. The place was called the fountayne of him that prayeth, bicause God at the prayers of Samson opened the rocke or iawe bone. And this woorde Aim, Leui expoundeth for an eye, for in very deede it signifieth eyther, namelye bothe a fountaine & an eye. And the sense that be gathereth is, that the eye of the Lorde was vpon him, which called vpon him, that is, God had a regarde vnto the prayers of hym that called vpon him. It is added that Samson iudged Israell in the dayes of the Philistianes: whiche is therfore written, bicause in his time the Hebrewes were not yet fully deliuered from the tirranny of the Philistianes, Samson beganne to deliuer them, but he finished not.
In this latter history are certayne thinges which we oughte to obserue. The first is, that Samson was bound with two cordes, and those new, that the miracle mighte be the more wonderfull. New cordes are stronge. For newe cordes are more hardly broken, then old. And it is eligantly described how they brake, namely as flaxe burnt with fire. The cordes might be broken two waies, eyther bicause the strength of Samsons body was encreased, or els because the cordes were weakned by god: and eyther way is apt inough. Farther, when he being naked and vnarmed, was cast forth vnto his enemies, god ministred weapons vnto him of a thing most vile: so can he vse all thinges to setforth his glory: the iawe bone was made onely to chawe and cutte small meate, but God woulde vse it to committe a slaughter. So althoughe sometimes we seeme to be vnarmed agaynste our enemies, yet are we sufficiently armed, when god will. Some to make the thinge more probable, do imagine, that that iaw bone of the asse was a great one, bicause that in Siria are so great asses that in greatenes they may be compared with our horses. Which thing I do not disproue.
The Philistians shoute and reioyce as thoughe a moste deadlye enemye had fallen into theyr handes: But the sprite of the Lord came vpon Sampsō, and there was a greate slaughter made of them. And the songe which he sang was a geuing of thankes for the victorye, [...]. that is, a songe of victorye. But some doubte, whither the whole songe be here written, or onely the beginninge thereof. I thinke here is but the beginning onely: the rest paraduenture was knowen among the Iewes, and soong thorough.
And he was sore a thirst. Iosephus and Ambrose thinke y t god strake Samson w t [Page 226] thirst, bycause he attributed the victory vnto himselfe, and not vnto God, I (sayth hee) with the iaw of an asse haue slaine a thousande men. He sayth not, Iosephus. Ambrose Why Samson was vexed with thirste. God hath slayne, neyther erecteth he an altare or monumente vnto God, nor maketh anye sacrifice: and therfore is he afflicted with thirste. For god would haue him to vnderstand that he was a mā, & would also haue him to know by whose benefite he had obteined the victory. This say they: but bicause those thinges which they alledge are not of the holy Scriptures, therefore I do not geue credite vnto them. Moreouer let vs note that in the old Testament, very manye places haue theyr names geuen them of the benefites of God. For they would haue the goodnes of God kept in memory for thē y t should come after, y t they also should hope that by the same meanes they should be holpen, as they fee theyr fathers in times past were holpen of God. For whych selfe same cause the hebrewes were commaunded to enstructe and teache theyr children of the benefites bestowed on them by god. Wherefore they instructed theyr posterity, not onely by words, but also by such tokens and monumentes, as by some certayne sacramentes. Wherefore the thirste of Samson (as farre as I iudge) was not a punishment for sinne, which he had committed, but a certain caution or prohibition that he should not sinne. He might in deede by reason of ouermuch labour naturally thirste, but god woulde haue him remember that in so greate fortune he was mortal. He had slayne many: but herin was the daunger, least he also should haue died together with thē for thirst. Or it was done, that the power and beneuolence of God towardes his people should be made the more notable, which had not onely deliuered Samson from his enemyes, but also had quenched his thyrst by a wonderfull meanes.
Wherefore Samson turneth himself vnto prayers, whiche God maketh him to expresse both by his spirite, and also by this present necessitye. We are not able to thinke how much God delighteth in our submission. Thou, sayth he, Lord God hast geuen me this victory, and wilt thou now forsake me? Hereby we vnderstand that the remembrance of the benefites past, do excedingly stir vp our prayers, for they encrease fayth, whereby we hope that we may obteyne the like and also greater things. Neither is this a thing to be passedouer, that he calleth him self the seruāt of God. I am (sayth he) thy seruāt. For I haue not slayn these mē at myne owne lust and motion: I haue done thy busines, and I haue executed thy warre. And wilt thou now suffer me to dye for thurst? And by that meanes to fal into the handes of mine enemies? And which is most greuous, into the handes of the vncicumcised? For I vndoubtedlye, whatsoeuer I am, am thine, and I haue set abrode the glory of thyne name. Thou hast promised that I should be a iudge vnto thy people, suffer me not therfore to come into the power of mine enemies, contrary to that promise which thou hast promised me.
¶The .xvi. Chapter.
1 THen went Samson to Azzah, and he sawe there a harlot, and went into her.
2 And it was told to the Azzathites, Sāson is comhither. And they went about, and layde waite for him all night in the gate of the city and wer quiet al the night, saying: Abide til the morning early, and we shal kill him.
3 And Samson slept till midnight, and rose at midnight and toke the dores of the gate of the city, and the two postes, and lift them away with the barres, and put them vpon his shoulders, and caried them vp to the top of the mountaine, that is before Hebron
It is no rare or vnaccustomed thinge, that excellent men, when they haue accomplished thinges after theyr minde, There happen sometimes greuous falles of godly men, & of churches. doe slacke good studies and honest entenprises, as though they had done with labors, & are nowe in that place y t they can not fall. God suffreth them sometimes so to fal, that they shoulde acknowledge thē selues, & be called back to repentance. But that is not done by the merite of the sinners, but by the goodnes and mercy of god. So God suffred Dauid to fal, so Salomon contaminated hymselfe with a most greuous wicked crime: so Iudas the sonne of Iacob, being in good estimation among his bretherne, yet committed incest with Thamar. Neyther do these things happē only vnto singuler mē, but also vnto the church, as well the new as the old. In the time of Byleam whē y e Israelites could not be won by any other meanes, they wer cōquered by harlots. And the church of the Corrinthians, was at the firste so contaminated with whoredomes, that Paule was compelled to shewe by arguments and testimonies of the word of god, that foricatiō was sin. Yet did not god straightway depart from those which I haue mencioned, God doth not straightway after sinne take a way from men hys free gratious giftes. nor from Samson as touching his free gracious giftes, as are strength, gifte of tongues, prophesies, and suche like: bicause they are geuen, not for theire sakes whiche possesse them, but for other. Bileam though he was an euill man, yet had he still the gift of prophesy, yea and he prophesied most excellently of Christ. The Lord also sayth: many shall say vnto me in that day: Haue not we cast out deuils in thy name? And in thy name haue we prophesied: & it shalbe sayd vnto them, verely I say vnto you, I know you not.
Howbeit for discipline sake, free gracious giftes are also sometimes taken away: sometimes I saye, not alwayes. And Samson did not strayghtewaye at the first time when he sinned, lose those giftes of God: yet afterwarde he loste them. But seyng these ar not alwaies taken away, Whither the giftes which follow iustification are firme. what shal we affirm of other gifts, which of necessity follow iustification? Those vndoubtedly ar takē away in sins that ar most heinous, For he which hath committed any greuous sinne agaynst himselfe, holdeth not peace of conscience, neyther the zeale to call vpon God, nor hope towardes God. Fayth also for that time, either sleepeth and lieth still, or (as some think) is taken away, although it be afterward restored vnto the elect, and those that are predestinate, when they repent. Suche fals of excellente men are setforth, How great the verity of the holy scriptures is How the countrey of the Philistians was deuided. that we by them should haue an example, that if at any time we fal, we should not dispayre. And hereby we vnderstand how greate the veritye of the holy scriptures is. For they dissemble not errors and vices in the greatest mē, & in those specially which they haue taken in hand to prayse.
Azza was one of the head cities of y e Philistians. For that coūtry was deuided into prouinces and Lordshippes: of which in euery one of them there was some one excellent and notable city. Our interpretors haue translated Azza into Gaza: for it is written by this letter Ain, whiche our men turne by g: And so the Ammorhites they call Gomorhites. But why went Samson downe hither? bycause now hauing obteined so manye victories, he contemned his enemies: and peraduenture he sought occasion to inuade them. But in this citye he fell: for he had there to doe with a harlot. This woorde Zonah signifieth in Hebrewe a harlot, of whiche thinge wee haue spoken in an other place. Some thinke that Samson did nothing here offend, but onely turned into a woman that kept a vitling house. For by that word is also signified a woman y t kepeth a vitling house, bycause she prepareth meate and other necessarye thinges for gestes. So some thinke that Rahab in the booke of Iosua, whiche receaued the spies, was not an harlot, but onely one that kept a vitling house. But I thinke that Rahab was an harlot. For so is she called in the Epistle to the Hebrewes, which had doone her iniury now being deade, How women that kept vitling houses are called by the Romain lawes if it called her, beinge a chaste woman, an harlotte. The Romaine lawes called such women as kepte vitlinge houses stabulariae, as it is had in the title de furtis stabulariorum. Ambrose sayth that Helena the mother of Cōstātine y e gret was a stabularia after this sort, & he calleth her a good stabularia
He entred into her. This Hebrew forme of speaking signifieth carnall fellowship, namely that he had to do with her. Other think (as I haue said) that he onely lodged in her house. But y e Philistines whē they heard of it, did secretly enuirō the city in the night season, for they would make no noyse for waking of Samson beyng on sleepe, for they durst not set vpon hym in the darke, for that they knew him to be most strong. They taried till it was day, neither doubted they that he could escape, being so on euery side enclosed and besieged. Liranus thinketh, Lyrauus. that the Philistines drew not Samson out of his lodging, bycause peraduēture in that region it was a law, that men should be safe in their lodgyngs. But I meruayle that Ambrose sayth, that the Philistines besieged the house where Samson was, Ambrose. when as in the Hebrew we manifestly rede that they besieged the City. Samson came and tooke the doores, & caried them away with him. So he despised his enemies, neither was there any that durst withstand hym.
Neither yet must we thinke, y t that was the strength of a man, Things are to be iudged by y e worde of God, and not by the successe. but of the spirit of God. But we must not therfore affirme that God fauored whooredome: bycause in iudging of thinges, we must not haue a regard to the successe. Dauid also filthily cōmitted aduoutry, and at the same tyme wherin he grieuously sinned, he conquered Rabbah, the City of the Ammonites. Salomon had fellowship with idolatrous women, and yet all thinges in a maner went with hym as he would desire. Wherfore as touchyng actions, we must not iudge of them by ententes. Wherfore in Ecclesiastes it is rightly sayd, y t the selfe same thinges happē vnto y e euill, that do happen vnto the good, & therfore of thē the loue or hatred of God toward vs is not knowen. Neither by the euentes may we iudge who is godly, or who is vngodly. We must iudge by the worde of God. The things that agree with it are good: the thinges that disagree, are vngodly. But in that God doth not strayghtway take vengeance, he therefore doth it, to call vs backe to repentaunce. Wherfore it is our part to see that we heape not vnto our selues anger, in the day of anger, as Paul sayth vnto the Romaines.
Samson escaped the daunger, & caried away the gates of the City vnto a montayne, that they might be a wonder, and that the Philistines might see how great strength there was in the God of Israel: yea & that the Iewes also might beholde so notable an acte of God. For that montayne was in the middest betwene Gaza & Hebron, whiche the Hebrues inhabited. By that spectacle it came to passe, that the courages of the Philistines were daunted, but the Hebrues wer boldned. We may not (as I haue often admonished) thinke of Samson, as of a priuate man, for he was a Magistrate appointed by God, and not by men. For if he had ben a priuate man, his actes could not be allowed: for it is wicked to violate the walles & gates of Cities. Which thing was also prohibited by the Romaine lawes. In the digestes de rerum diuisione in the lawe sanctum, and in the law sacrum, it is had that some thinges are sacred, some thinges religious, and some thinges holy. Thinges sacred, as the alters and temples of the gods. Religious, as the sepulchers of the dead, holy, as those things which are by lawes defended from the iniuryes of men, as gates & walles. In the same title also it is red. Gates & walls of cities are by the lawes coū ted as holy. These thynges are holy, which are neither sacred nor prophane, but confirmed and defended by lawes, that they should not be violated. As if a man should do this thing or that thing, he should suffer this or that. In the same title in the law Si quis, the violating of the walles is made death. Wherfore Remus was put to death, Why Remus was killed of Romulus. bycause he went ouer the walles of his brother: Which selfe same thing is decreed of prisons, as it is written in the title de Effractoribus in the law .1. And in the title de custodia & Exhibitione in the lawe in cos. Prisons ar not to be violated. Howbeit if the doore were but slenderly shut, and any manne had fled, he was more lightely punished, but yet in suche sorte, that he shoulde be counted for a condemned person, althoughe otherwyse he were innocent.
Socrates when he was in prison, & mought haue escaped, he would not, An example of Socrates. least he [Page] should seme to haue violated the lawes. It was obiected vnto hym: Thou art wrongfully held in prison. But he aunswered: we must not by iniury put away iniury, bycause to do iniury is alwayes euill. He also tooke an argument of an exāple. For wise men ought not to open this window vnto other: Which other would easely imitate, if they should flye out of prisō. Farther if all mā should by thēselues remedy iniuryes, & breakes prisons, what manner of publique wealth would there be at the length? Moreouer hereby we should seme to feare death more then is mete. But we must not so be afeard of death, to violate lawes and rightes. Lastly we must not doubt, but that good men fall into the handes of tyrannes by the will of God. Wherfore they ought not by an vniust way to deliuer themselues thereout. Neither ought any man to obiect vnto vs Peter, for he fled not, but was by an angell brought foorth by the will and commaundement of God. Let vs rather see what Paul and Silas did in pryson: they would not flye when they might. It is not lawfull for bounde seruauntes to flye from their masters. It is not lawfull also for bondeseruants to fly from their masters. And vndoubtedly Paul sent home agayn Onesimus vnto Philemon. What if the bondeseruant feared fornication or murther at his masters hand? It was lawfull for him to flye vnto sanctuary, or to the image of the prince: there was he holpen by the lawes, and the vniust Lord was compelled to sell his bondseruāt. But a Citizen for as much as he is free, Free men may chaunge theyr abydynges for iust causes. neither is held in prison, bycause by the lawes he may dwell where he will, for him it is lawfull to chaunge his abyding & go whether he please. But that whiche Samson did, must not be followed, neither drawen into an example. For he (as we haue often sayde) was appoynted a Magistrate by God, and was most certayne of his vocation.
4 And afterwarde he loued a woman by the brooke Sorek, whose name was Delila.
5 And the Lordes of the Philistines came vp vnto her, and said vnto her: Deceaue him and see wherin his great strength lyeth, and by what meanes we may preuayle agaynste hym, that when we haue bound him, we may afflicte him: And we will euery one of vs geue thee a thousand one hundreth peces of Siluer.
6 And Delila sayd to Samson: tell me, I praye thee, wherein thy greate strength lyeth, and wherewith thou mightest be bounde, to doo thee hurte.
7 Samson then aunswered vnto her: If they bynd me with seuen greene roddes that were neuer dryed, then shall I bee weake, and be as an otherman.
8 And the princes of y e Philistines brought her seuē greene roddes that were not withered, and she bound him therewith.
9 (And she had men lying in wayte with her in the chamber) then she sayd vnto hym: the Philistines be vpon thee, Samson. And he brake the roddes, as a thread of towe is broken, when it feleth fire: so his strength was not knowen.
10 After Delila said vnto Samson: See, thou hast mocked me and tolde me lyes: I praye thee nowe, tell me wherewith thou myghtest bee bounde.
11 Then he aunswered her: If they binde me with new ropes that neuer were occupyed then shal I be weake and be as another man.
12 Delila therefore tooke newe ropes and bounde hym therewith, and sayde vnto hym: The Philistines be vpon thee, Samson: (and [Page 228] men lay in wayte in the chamber) and he brake them from hys armes, as a thread.
13 Afterward Delila sayd to Samson: Hetherto thou hast beguiled me, and tolde me lyes: tell me how thou mightest be bound. And he sayd vnto her: If thou plattedst Seuen lockes of myne hed with the threades of the woufe.
14 And she fastened it with a pinne, and sayd vnto him: The Philistines bee vpon thee, Samson. And he a woke out of his slepe, and went awaye with the pinne of the webbe and the woufe.
15 Agayne she sayd vnto him: how canst thou say, I loue thee, whē thine heart is not with me? thou hast mocked me these three tymes, and hast not tolde me wherin thy great strength lyeth.
16 And because she was importunate vpon hym with her wordes continually, and vexed him, his Soule was payned vnto the death.
17 Therefore he tolde her all his heart, and sayd vnto her: There neuer came rasor vpon myne head: for I am a Nazarite vnto God from my mothers wombe: therfore if I be shauen, my strength will go from me, and I shall be weake, and be like all other men.
18 And when Delila sawe that he had tolde her all his hearte, she sent, and called for the princes of the Philistines, Saying: Come vp once agayne: for he hath shewed me all his heart. Then the princes of the Philistines came vp vnto her, and brought the money in theyr handes.
19 And she made hym slepe vpon her knees, and she called a man, & made him to shaue of the seuen lockes of his head, and she began to vexe hym, and his strength was gone from him.
20 Then she sayd: the Philistines be vpon thee, Samson. And he a woke out of hys sleepe, and sayde: I will go out nowe as at other tymes, and shake my selfe, but he knewe not that the Lord was departed from hym.
By the outrageous loue of Samson vnto women, we easely vnderstand, that the desire of lust is neuer satisfied, so long as we obey it. Samson had played the whoremonger before, & yet not being content with that, he toke vnto him a harlot agayne. Wherfore no man ought to cocker his sinnes, as thoughe he myght afterwarde leaue them at will. Seneca hath ryghtly admonished Lucillus: Senec [...]. That we must not adde to lustes, but rather plucke away from them: otherwise they will grow vnto vnmeasurablenes. We see in this history as in a glasse the peruersnes of mannes nature, when God wynketh, and defereth the punishment, we are made woorse, and the more forwarde he goeth in forgeuyng, so muche the more & more do we go forwarde in sinnyng. Wherfore Paul to the Romaines writeth truly and profitably: doest thou not know that the goodnes of God calleth thee to repentaunce? but thou accordyng to thy hardnes and vnrepentaunt hart, heapest vnto thyselfe wrath in the day of wrath. God seemed to spare Samson, but he was neuer a whit the better.
But what this woman was, whether she were an Hebrewe or a Philistine, R. Leui be [...] Geeson. it appeareth not by the History. It is onely written that she dwelled by the riuer or brooke Sorek. R. Leui ben Gerson thinketh that she was a proselite, and y t she had receaued the profession of the law of the Iewes. But he confirmeth not his opinion by any testimony of the scripture. Howbeit if she had ben a proselite, [Page] Samson had sinned much more grieuously. For he ought rather to haue dissuaded from fornication a woman being a straunger, & peraduenture not thoroughly instructed in religion, then to haue allured her to sinne. For that cause Christ rebuked the Scribes & Phariseys, saying: Wo vnto you Scribes and Phariseis, bycause you compas about sea & land, to make one proselite: & then ye make hym the child of hel, twise so much more then ye your selues. And euen the same selfe thing is also now a dayes practised, and that very often: the Papistes labor very much, to conuerte a Iewe to theyr Christian religion, and then they corrupte him, and make hym woorser then they are themselues. After whiche selfe same manner Monkes leade younge men and maydens to theyr institutions, whom afterwarde by euill artes they make moste corrupte. But these thynges haue I spoken by the waye.
But howe many of the Philistines came vnto the harlot, it is not written. Some thinke, that there were fiue, bicause there are so many pronounces in that region. Euery one of them promised to geue her xi. hundreth peces of Siluer, the whole somme therefore was .5500. peces of Siluer. So the Philistines, when they coulde not conquere Samson by strength, assayed to wynne hym by deceate, and they allure the woman with money to betray hym. By the voluptuousnes of Samson they take occasion, and with large promyses they styrre vp the couetousnes of the woman. Of how greate force the entisementes of women are. But of honesty and vertue, they haue no regarde. And that the nature of stronge men is suche, that by the flatterynges of a woman it maye bee deceaued, we maye vnderstande not onely by this Hystory, but also by many other. But it shalbe sufficient to set before vs Adam for an example: whose nature in that fyrste innocency beyng yet perfecte, was yet by a woman brought into deceate. Wherefore we must continually praye vnto God, that he woulde not suffer vs to be led into deceate, for we muste not trust to our owne strength.
The woman beyng intised by the Philistines, goeth vnto Samson. Wherefore she is not onely an harlot, but also a betrayer. Such an ende ought they to looke for, and be most assured of, what soeuer they be, that haue fellowshyp with harlottes. There are extant examples of many, whiche partely were very euill handled of harlots, and partely betrayed by them to theyr enemyes to be slayne. For she whiche selleth her selfe, will vndoubtedly muche easelyer sell her louer. Wherefore Salomon hath wisely admonyshed, that a harlot is no les to bee auoyded, then the mouth of hell.
And Delila sayd: Shewe me wherein thy strength lyeth. These thynges are here set foorth simply, but it is very likely, that the woman dyd thus flatter Samson saying vnto hym, that she muche meruayled at hys so greate strength, and that she muche reioysed, that she had gotten her selfe suche a louer. And therefore she exceedyngly desyred to knowe thys, wherein hys so greate strength consisted. Samson mocked her two or three tymes. And fyrste he sayeth: If I bee bounde with greene roddes. That is, with boundes made of Osiers and newe twigges, whiche haue not yet bene dryed. The seconde tyme he biddeth her take newe ropes, wherewith Delila afterwarde bounde hym, namely when he was on sleepe. Thirdly he fayneth that seuen lockes of his head should bee platted with the threades of the woufe, to take away his strength: He putteth a certayne nūber for an vncertayn. He would in deede haue ben constant, & hidden y e secret from the woman, but on the other side his weakenes and softenes was so great y t he faynted. For after he dissēbled once or twise, she was so much the more importunate with him. And thoughe she were mocked, yet she geueth not ouer, neither dispaireth she to obteine y t which she sought for. The Hebrew interpreters thinke y t these thinges were not done in one day, straight after an other, but at sondry tymes, y t the woman as occasion serued might repeate the same request. Lastly it is said y t the harlot was greuousome vnto Samson, euen vnto the death. [Page 229] He coulde not suffer to bee reiected of hys louer, it was lyke death vnto hym to be repulsed from hys pleasures and delyghtes. So Samson is taken, bounde, and lead awaye.
¶Of Whooredome or Fornication.
NOw I thinke it good somewhat to speake of whooredome or fornication. For as in the olde tyme there were very many, so also at this daye there are not a fewe, whiche affirme that it is no sinne. But I will proue by Scriptures, and by most certayne reasons that it is a grieuous sinne.
They whiche extenuate thys wicked crime, doo leane vnto sundrye argumentes. Firste in the Actes of the Apostles the .15. chapter, when in those firste tymes, there arose a dissention amonge the Iewes and the Gretians, it was by common assent decreed, that the Ethnikes shoulde absteyne from bloud, from that whiche was strangled, from thynges offred vnto idoles, and from fornication. Here, say they, that whooredome or fornication is reckened with those thynges whiche of their owne nature are not sinnes. Wherefore it appeareth that of it selfe it is not sinne: for these thynges were then for a tyme decreed of the Apostles, that Christians shoulde lyue peaceably together. For there is no creature of GOD euill, as sayth Paul to Timothe: Farther they saye, GOD woulde not commaunde that whiche of it selfe is sinne. But he bad Hoseas the Prophet to take vnto hymselfe an harlot, & to beget children of whooredome or fornication. Wherefore of hys owne nature it seemeth not euill. Farthermore euery sinne is agaynst charity, either agaynst that charity whiche we owe vnto God, or that whiche we owe vnto our neyghbour. But in whooredome or fornication there seemeth nothyng to be committed agaynst God: for his worshyppyng and Religion is not hurt. Neither also agaynst our neyghbour, for there is no violence offred his wife, neither is there any violent oppression. Moreouer Augustine in hys booke de bono coniugali writeth, Augustine that what meate is vnto the body, that is accompaniyng together for procreation. But if a man eate or drinke a litle more then he ought, he is not accused of synne. Wherfore also if a man in accompanieng together doo a litle straye, he is not to be counted guilty of sinne. Lastly, those things which god hath prohibited as sinnes, ar so playn & manifest, that euen by y e light of nature euery man may vnderstand y t they are sinnes: but whooredome or fornication in mans iudgemēt is not so iudged, & many thinke y t it is no sinne. Mitio in y e Comedy in Terēce saith: Beleue me, it is no wicked acte for a yong mā to cōmit fornication. And in y e Church of Corint. there wāted not some which so thought also. Wherfore by these reasōs y e filthynes of whoredom is so extenuated, y t either it is not coūted for sinne, or els coūted amōg y e lest sins.
We must haue a regard not to humane reasons, but vnto the word of god, not what men thinke or iudge, but what y e holy ghost speaketh in y e holy scriptures. And in y e Prophets & in Salomon, there is in euery place detestatiō of fornicatiō. Fornication is prohibited by testimonyes of the scriptures. But in the law they say there is nothing decreed agaynst it. But for asmuch as they will reason by y e law, I will bring testimonies also out of it, wherby it may easely be vnderstand y e fornicatiō is prohibited. In Leuit. in y e booke of Nūb. & in Deut. y e Iewes are prohibited to adioyne vnto thēselues straūge womē. Agayne in Deut. y e .23. chap. it is cōmaūded, y t there shuld be nor harlot nor whore in Israel. Let these places be cōpared together. It was not lawful to haue harlots, neither straūgers, neither Israelites, therfore they were al forbiddē. But some will say: How then had Sāson fellowship with an harlot? Some of y e Hebrues answere y t she was not a harlot, w t whom Samson had fellowship, but one y t kept a vitling house. But for asmuch as that is a weake answere, me thinketh we must otherwise aunswere vnto it. The publique wealth of the Hebrues was at that tyme corrupted. For they lyued nowe vnder the Philistines: neither is it any meruayle if they were imbrewed with any of their vices and corrupte manners. [Page] Wherefore they had some harlottes, but not by their lawes, but by the vse and custome of the Philistines.
Testimonyes of the newe testament.But in the new Testament whooredome or fornication is apertly & manifestly prohibited. To the Hebrues it is thus written: Adoulterers & fornicators the Lord wil iudge: y e Lord is not said to iudge & to auenge, except it be for grieuous sinnes. And to y e Ephesiās, not onely couetous men & idolaters, but also fornicators are excluded from y e kyngdome of God. To the Corinthiās also, where Paul writeth of Excommunication, I doo not speake (sayth he) of all fornicators: but if any be called a brother, and is a fornicator, with such ye shall not so muche as eate meate. But he entreateth muche more manifestly of all this matter in the same Epistle the .6. chapter, and y t of purpose: for many (as it is sayde) were of an euill opiniō, as touching this kynd of wickednes. First, he sayth, meate is ordeyned for the belly and the belly for meate, but God shal destroy both this and that, nowe the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord. For all meate of his own nature is pure: but for the offence of our neyghbour, we ought sometymes to absteyne. But some man myght say: Meate is necessary to lyue by. It is, sayeth Paul, in this lyfe, but in the blessed resurrection, GOD shall destroye both the meate and the belly. Wherefore thou muste not so muche esteme them, that for theyr cause thou shouldest offende thy brother. It is not vniuersally commaunded to absteyne from all meate, but from that onely wherby thy weake brother is offended. But as touchyng fornications (sayeth he) whiche ye contemne, the reason is farre otherwyse. Your body is not geuen for fornication, but for the Lorde. And this is not to bee passed ouer, that Paul with greate prudence sayeth not, not for procreation, but not for fornication. For the body is geuen also for procreations sake. Men are went oftentymes to excuse their faultes and to laye them vpon nature. The nature of the body (sayeth he) is to bee geuen vnto the Lord. Wherfore of it is to be taken the rule of life, and not of euil examples.
The nature of relatiues.This is the nature of relatiues, not onely of suche as in that thyng that they are, are referred vnto other, but also of those whiche are by any meanes referred vnto an other thynge, as the head vnto the body, and agayne the body to the head. For when we see the head, we straightwaye require the body, and agayne when we see the body, we require the head. Suche relatiues (as the Logitians saye) are called secundum dici. The Lorde is the head of the body of the Churche, and it is the body of that head. Wherfore Paul both wisely and pithely disputeth, when he sayth: The body is not made to thys end, and to pollute it selfe with lustes, but to bee correspondent vnto the head, and to bee conformable vnto it. And he addeth, GOD whiche hath raysed vp Christe, shall rayse vs vp also by his powre. The firste argument was taken from relatiues. The seconde is drawen of GOD. For if he wyll rayse vp our bodyes, as he hath raysed vp Christe, why doo we then defile them with ignominy? He goeth on and sayeth, doo ye not knowe that your bodyes are the members of Christe? Shall I then take the member of Christe, and make it the member of an harlot? Vndoubtedly a sore conclusion whiche he concludeth. Shall I take (sayeth he) the member of Christe? As thoughe he shoulde haue sayde: No without doubt, for this were to teare the body of Christe. And it is a thynge moste cruell to plucke awaye the members from a lyuely body, and to ioyne them vnto a rotten or dead body. But the strength of the reason consisteth herein. Christe can not commit fornication: wherefore if thou wilte commit fornication, thou must firste be plucked from Christe. Here is shewed that fornication is not onelye a sinne, but also a deadly and moste grieuous synne, whiche plucketh vs awaye from Christe.
Afterwarde he addeth: He whiche coupleth hymselfe vnto an harlot, is made [Page 230] one body. For they shalbe two in one fleshe. And: He whiche is ioyned with God is one spirite. This place is most full of consolation: for as much as it declareth that we are most nigh ioyned vnto Christ, from whom we must nedes be first plucked away, before we be made the members of an harlot. He whiche cleaueth vnto an harlot is made one body: For they shalbe two in one fleshe. The Apostle seemeth at the first sight to abuse the wordes of Genesis. For he transferreth thē to whooredome whiche are spoken of matrimony. For these wordes were spokē first of Adam and Eue: bycause the fleshe of Eue was before in the flesh of Adam, from whom God tooke a ribbe, and made therof a woman, which he agayne adioyned vnto Adam, to be with hym one flesh. But in very deede the Apostle abuseth not this sentence, for as much as whooredome is a certayne corruption of matrimony: for one thing is common to them both, namely, the coniunction of the fleshe. For bodyes are communicated as well here as there. Wherfore Paul had a respect vnto that whiche is common to them both, when as yet thys difference is there betwene them, that in whooredome the coniunction is agaynst the lawe of God, and therfore fornicators must be plucked a sonder, otherwise there is lefte no hope of saluation for them. But in matrimony, the coniunction is made by GOD, and therfore it is made an indissoluble knot. Wherefore seyng that the coniunction is in either all one and the selfe same, Paul hath ryghtly applyed that sentence to whooredome: He whiche cleaueth vnto God, is one spirite. These woordes serue muche vnto this present matter. For if we be with God in spirite, we muste with earnest labor flye from those thinges whiche he hath prohibited. Wherfore aptly the Apostle hath added flye whooredome.
He sayth moreouer: Euery sinne that a mā committeth, is without the body: but he whiche committeth whooredome, sinneth agaynste hys owne body. If the argumentes whiche I haue before brought do not moue you, yet at the least haue a respecte vnto your owne body, whiche ye seeme in committyng of fornication to hate and contemne.
But it maye be demaunded howe other sinnes are without the body, but by fornication we sinne agaynst our owne body. For we doubte not, but that he whiche is very angry, noorisheth and augmenteth choler, whereby the body is not a litle hurte. Sickenes also doth very muche weaken the body: wherefore Salomon sayeth: A sad spirite dryeth vp the bones. Dronkennes also and glotony doo hynder health, and doo in a manner vtterly destroye the body: yea and enuious persons seeme also to sinne agaynst theyr owne bodyes: For thou shalt see them dryed, withered, and in a manner kylled with leannes. Howe can it be then, that other sinnes are without the body? Some saye, that fornicators doo sinne agaynst their owne body, bycause very oftentymes by hauyng fellowshyp with harlots they are infected with the pockes, & with leprosie. But let other say what they will, I rather thinke, y t the Apostle had a respect vnto those thynges which went before. For he had sayd, y t the fornicator is made one body, with the harlot: & he seemeth to sinne grieuously against y e dignity of his body, A Similitude. which maketh it all one with y e most vyle & filthy body of an harlot. For if a kyng or prince should mary a wife of a base and obscure stocke, it would be said that he had contaminated his kinred. I know that there are some which thinke y t these wordes are spoken Hiperbollically, bycause there are found other sinnes also whiche do hurt the body, but this hurteth it most grieuously and most of all.
The same Paul doth still go on and sayth: do ye not know, y t your bodyes are y e tēple of the holy Ghost? And assuredly he which destroyeth the tēple of God, God wil destroy him. As though he should haue sayd: ye haue not your bodies of your selues, but of god. God hath made them his temple, and the holy ghost dwelleth in them. Ye are not your owne: Wherefore ye doo not a litle violate Iustice in contaminatyng an other mannes thyng. Ye are bought with a greate pryce, [Page] wherefore glorify God in your body. These argumentes of Paul are both most pleasaunt, and also most strōg, which if they satisfy not some, let him loke vpon our Samson. He was no idolatrer, no murtherer, no these, and yet is he taken, bound, his eyes put out, and is compelled to grinde in a prison, euen as if he had ben a foure footed beast.
Paul laboureth by many argumētes to proue whoredome is sinne. And no maruayle: bicause then he wrote vno the Corinthians whiche at that tyme abounded aboue other in fornicatiōs. Wherof came the Prouerb, Nō quiuis Corinthū y t is It is not for euery mā to go to Corinthus. And in vniuersal al y e Ethnikes were in an ill opiniō touching this vice. Eusebius. For which cause, whē y e Church was yet springyng (as Eusebius testifieth in his .3. booke of his hystory the .29. chap.) the Nicolaites did openly & manifestly commit fornication, & layd y e custome of their wicked crime vpō Nicolaus y e deacon: Clemēs Alexandrinus. The history of Nicolaus the deacon. although Clemēs Bishop of Alexādria in Stromatis do excuse Nicolaus: For he sayeth, that he neither thought, nor taught any such thing. But hauing a very fayre woman to his wyfe, and therefore beyng thought to haue ben gelous ouer her, he brought her foorth before the people and said: This is my wife. And y t ye might vnderstand y t I am not gelous ouer her, I am cōtēt for my part that any of you take her to wife. Which thing also he mēt, as farre as the law of God would suffer. But they which were afterward called Nicloaites, vnderstandyng his wordes peruersly, supposed y t he thought y e wyues among Christians ought to be cōmon. Of this Secte it is written in the Apocalips: But this thou hast, bycause thou hast hated y e actes of the Nicolaites, whiche I haue hated. Wherfore it is no meruayle, though Paul tooke so great paynes to teache that whoredome is sinne.
Fornicatiō cō trary to matrimony.This wicked crime is contrary vnto matrimony. For they whiche haunte wandryng lustes and harlots, are farre from contracting of Matrimony. Wherfore Terence sayth: They which loue, can ill abide to haue a wife geuen thē. For whiche cause Clemens sayth: Clemens. whoredome leadeth from one matrimony to many, that is from one lawful coniunction, to many vnlawfull & wicked. The Epistle to the Hebrues ioyneth fornicators which aduoutrers, & testifieth that God will iudge them. And those two vices are so ioyned together, that they are comprehended in the selfe same precept, wherin it sayd: Thou shalt not commit aduoultry.
Fornication is repugnat vnto Christ & the publique wealch.This pestilence also is repugnāt both vnto Charity & to the publique wealth: vnto charity vndoubtedly, bycause the fornicators do iniury vnto their children, whiche not beyng lawfully procreated, are scarsely at any tyme brought vp honestly & vertuously. And they hurt y e publique wealth, bycause they defraud it of good Citizēs. For Mamzer, a bastard I say, & one borne in fornication, is prohibited to be receaued into the Church, not that he is restrayned from the holy cōmunion, or from the misteryes of saluation, but bycause it is not lawfull for him to gouerne the publique wealth, & to be numbred among Citizens. Some thinke y t this euill may be remedyed, if a man should keepe a concubine at home. So, say they shall the yssue be certayn. It may be peraduenture certayne, but it shall not be legitimate. Seing therfore this wicked crime is both agaynst matrimony, and charity, & also the publique wealth, it cā not be denied but it is a sinne most grieuous. A Christiā magistrate ought not to suffer harlottes. And for as much as it is so, why are fornications now a dayes openly suffred in Cityes? I speake not of the Ethnikes: I speake of Christians, and of those Christiās which wil alone seme & be called the successors of Christ. Whoredome or fornicatiō is most impudently mainteyned in their dominion, they not onely willing therunto, but also taking a commodity & tribute therof. That whiche is against y e word of God, against matrimony, against charity, against the publique wealth, is no sinne, or els it is a notable sinne. If it be sinne, why is it not taken away & weded out? Augustine But I know what they will bable, they bring foorth Augustine, who in his booke de Ordine wryteth thus: Take awaye harlottes, and all thyngs shalbe filled w t filthy lustes. But let vs consider in what time Augustine [Page 231] wrote that booke. Vndoubtedly when he was yet Catechumenus, and not sufficiently enstructed in religion. And althoughe he had not beene Catechumenus, yet thys his saying agreeth not with the word of God, neyther with Augustine himselfe, who in an other place affirmeth that the good which commeth of euil, as a recompensacion, is not to be admitted. Which thing also Paule hath taught to the Romaynes: euen as they were wont to say of vs: Let vs do euil thinges, y t therby may come good thinges, whose damnation is iust. We must neuer haue a regard to the end and euent, when we are vrged by the commaundemente of god. Somtimes men say vnto vs: Vnles thou committe sinne, this euill or that will succede. But we must aunswere, let vs do what god hath commaunded vs, he will haue a care of the successe. Neither is it meete, that one onely sentence of Augustine should be of greater authority, then so many reasōs which we haue brought, and so many most manifest wordes of God.
God commaunded absolutely and by expresse wordes, that there shoulde be no harlot in Israell. But some go aboute to wrest this place out of our handes, in sayinge that these hebrewe woordes Kadschah and Kedaschim signifieth not whores or harlots, but rather the priestes of Priapus, which were vowed or consecrated to thinges most filthy. I contrarily thinke that Chadschah signifieth an harlot, and Kedaschim, vnnaturall, and effeminate persons. God woulde haue neyther of these suffred among his people. But in that they obiect the holy seruices of Priapus, it is nothing. For it was sufficientlye before decreed touchinge idolatry: and what nede it agayn to be repeated? But that we may the more manifestly vnderstand that Kadschah signifieth a harlot, let vs reade the historye of Iuda and Thamar in the booke of Genesis, Certaine wordes ar taken both in y e good and euill parte. and there we shall see that Louah & Kadschah are taken both for one and the selfe same thing. For whiche cause we must note that there are certayne wordes whiche maye be taken both in the good and euil parte: of which sort is this word Kadschah among the Hebrewes, which signifieth both holy and also an harlot: euen as among the lattines thys word sacrum that is holye, Virgil. wherefore Virgill sayth Auri sacra fames that is the holy hunger of gold. This Hebrew word Kadasch is to prepare, or to be prepared. Wherof is deriued that word which signifieth an harlot, bycause such women are redy and setforth vnto all men, or els bicause they are wont to go trimly docked and paynted. Wherefore Clemens sayth, Clemens. that the Lacedemonians permitted harlots to weare wroughte garmentes, fine apparel, and golde, whiche thinges were not lawfull for matrones to vse.
Now let vs see what followeth in Deut. And the hire of a whore shall not be brought into the sanctuary. Here again y e law calleth her Zanah, which before is called Kadschah. But thou wilt say: If the law would not haue harlots suffred, what neded it to haue forbiddē their oblactes? What neded this law? they which say this, do seme indede to speake wittely, but yet they speake not sufficientlye. For outwarde nacions also sente giftes for ornamentes and vses of the temple. The Eunuch of the quene of Ethiope came to Ierusalem, to offer in the temple. The Macedonians and Romaines gaue yearelye oblations and sacrifices in the temple. Wherfore the law forbiddeth, that if any thing be offred by straungers, that is gotten by the gayn of a harlot, the same should not be admitted into the sanctuary. Farther, god had commaunded that there shoulde not be harlots in Israell, but he knew that they would not obserue that law. For when the Philistians, Macedonians and Romaines raygned ouer them, they had harlots. Yea & Christe maketh mention of harlottes and publicanes together. Wherefore god doth rightwell first forbid that ther should be no whores among the Hebrewes. And afterward he ordeineth, that if by any chaunce there were any, theyr gayn should not be admited in to the sanctuarye. Whiche thing vndoubtedly he commaunded, bicause of the vilenes and filthinesse of the gaine. In the same place he addeth: The price also of a dogge shall not be broughte into the sanctuarye, bycause that beast is filthy and vncleane.
Caligula otherwise a filthy monster, commaunded (as Suetonius writeth) that harlotes and baudes should be openly punished. Suetonius Hostiensis. Of this thing Hostiensis writeth ridiculously. Harlots indede (sayth he) ar bound to pay and to offer, but the church can not nor ought not to receaue them. Yet the Glose doth much better decre in the decretals, dist. 90. chap. Oblationis, namely that nothing at al should be offred in the church, that is of the gain of an harlot. But priests and monkes when they feared leaste some of their profite shoulde departe, haue inuented an other reason. For althoughe, saye they, the gaine of harlotes cannot be receaued for an oblacion, The Pope doth vniustlye get gaine of harlottes. yet nothing letteth but that it maye bee receaued for almes. But by what meanes doth the Pope receaue the money of harlots? Not vndoubtedly, as an oblation, because he cānot: not as almes, bicause he is not poore. Wherfore thē must he nedes receaue it as a prynce. The lord would not haue this kind of money in his sanctuary: but the pope will haue it in hys treasury, & hath it: & getteth a wonderfull greate gaine by it. Whose vicar then is the Pope? Gods vicar? God refused such a gayn. What, is he Christs vicar? Christ neuer departed from the will of his father. Then must it consequently follow, that he is Antichrist, when as he both teacheth and doth those thinges which are expressedlye & of purpose against the word of god and of Christ. But he wil say y t he exacteth this mony as a prince. Let him then be prince. But I wil demaund, whither he be an euil prince or a good? For a good prince it is not lawful to depart from the lawes of God. Let him then be an euill prince, let him also be euen Caligula.
Paraduenture he will aunswere, that in respect he is a prince, he doth according to the ciuil lawes, which do not take away harlots out of y e dominiō of the Romaynes, yet rather they disdayne not to decree somethinge touchinge theyr price or reward. In the Digestes de Condictione ob turpem causam, in the law idem etsi: it is decreed, that there can be no requiring againe, if thou geue anye thing vnto an harlot. And there is a reason added: bycause although a harlot do filthily in that she is a harlot, yet she receaueth not filthily, in that she is a harlot. These wordes are darke, so that they may seme to be a riddle. Farther, in y e digests in the title de donacionibus, in the law affectionis gratia, it is decreed, y t it is lawful to geueas wel vnhonestly as honestly. It is not lawfull to geue vnhonestly. It is lawful honestly to geue, as vnto parents, kinsefolks friends &c. Vnhonestly, as to harlots. But I would know, by what license that is lawful? Hath god geuen goodes vnto men, to cast them vpon harlots? But here they confesse there is some filthinesse: for although it be lawefull to geue, yet if thou haste promised anye thinge vnto an harlotte, thy oblygatyon byndeth thee not, neyther canne the harlotte require thy promes, as it is had in the glose, in the title de donacionibus, in the [...]awe ea quae. But there is a doubt, if she receaue not filthily, why is it not lawfull without filthines to require it? They aunswere, that that followeth not: bicause many thinges are taken honestly, which are not required honestly. And to that purpose there is cited the law .1. de variis & extraordinariis cognationibus. Wherfore the Pope will by the cyuill lawes not take a waye harlots, but receaue monye of them, which he seeth can not be suffred by the lawes of god. But here I will a little reason with him. Vndoubtedly he professeth that he is ruler ouer the ciuill lawes, and in very dede he hath altered manye of them, as thoughe he woulde amend them: when as yet he hath taken away the good, and for the most part hath set euill in theyr place. Why hath he not amended these lawes for the suffringe of harlots, when as they ar against the law of God? Vndoubtedly the true cause why he hath not taken away the lawes of harlottes, is this, bicause it should be to muche hurtefull vnto the Popes treasorye. For at Rome they measure their lawes by profite, and not by honestye.
But by what ciuill law do they receaue mony of harlots? They aunswer for [Page 232] tribute. But why do they not rather say, for baudry? Assuredly, What the lawes decre of baudry if we wil speake truely, Popes are not as touching this thing, otherwise then bawdes. Let them diligently marke the ciuil lawes, whereby they now go about to defende themselues, and ouer which they boast that they are rulers, and let them looke what they iudge of bawdry. In the Digestes de ritu nuptiarum, in the law palam it is thus written: He which hath bondewomen for gayne, and filthilye setteth them out, & is partaker of the gaine, the same committeth bawdry. Now I demaunde of these men in what condicion they count the harlottes of Rome? For citizens? Nothing lesse. They count them therefore in a manner for bondewomen, and of them they make gaine, wherefore they are in a manner baudes. As much might be sayd concerning vsury. They suffer in their dominions Iewes which ar vsurers, and they take gayne of their vsury, euery yeare a certaine part, at the leaste the twēty part. Wherfore the Pope is not onely a baud, but also an vsurer. And that which I affirme of the Pope, let prophane princes also take heede, leaste the same may be saide of them also, which excercise this kind of gaine of the Iewes. To them vndoubtedlye agreeth that sayinge of Dauid: If thou sawest a theefe thou ranst with him, and thou didst put thy portion with adulterers.
But they say y t these ar tributes. What tribute is. But in y e Code in y e title de vectigalibus & cō mensis, in the law ex prestatione, and in the lawe allegatis: Tribute is defined to be that which is payd for those things which are brought into the publike wealth from outward nacions. For they ar called in lattē vectigalia, that is tributes, of this worde Vehere, which signifieth to cary. And the eight parte of euery thinge was paide in the name of a tribute, Octauarii. wherefore publicanes were called Octauarii of octaua parte, that is the .viii. part which they gathered. But what do harlots I praye you bring into the publike wealth? Vncleanes and filthy lustes, of which thinges the courtiers & sacrificers of the Pope do not gather the eight parte, but the whole. These thinges are called tributes and customes, which are taken of fieldes and landes, but what fields haue harlottes? What lands? None. Wherfore let thē cease to excuse a most filthy thing with an honest title. I know they wil say, if harlots were suffred free and at liberty, they would more licenciously sinne. O godly kind of correction. Can harlots be by no other meanes restrained, but so? They shoulde rather decre that they shoulde not be in the citye, that they should haue filthy and darke houses, that they should cast away al the ornamēts of theyr body, that they should not come abroade openly, and shoulde be dishonested by some markes of filthines, that thereby they might be a mocking stock vnto all men. By this meanes peraduenture they might be reuoked into the righte way. But now good God, how are they restrained? The sumptuous [...]es of harlots of Rome. They haue moste gorgeous houses, they openly ride in Chariots, apparaled like princes, they ride vpō their fine ambling horses, they haue with them as fellowes, men decked with chaines and disguised, yea and sometimes Cardinals, especially in the night, and a most sumptuous flock of waiting maidens. Wil they deny that these things ar true? Let graue and sincere men then, which haue at any time bene at Rome, shew whither the thinge be so or no. If they will not beleue me, I can bringe for witnesses Cardinals and Prelates of Rome.
Paulus .iii. once declared that he entended some reformation of the Church: & he committed the matter to Cardinals and Bishops, which were counted more pure thē other. And what they iudged, it is extant in the .3. Volume of counsels. And they complain y t the power of harlots was greater at Rome, then it was any where els. But hath Paulus .iii. amēded this? In the Sinod also of Trident y e clergy of Rome promised some great reformacion. But they did it not, neither went they about any thing at al. Why do they not rather imitate and folow the lawes of Iustinian? He in is Authentikes, in the title de lenonibus, wil haue harlots [Page] to be vtterly thrust out of the city, and that if they promised any thing vnto bauds, they should not be bound to pay and accomplish the same. Yea rather, if they haue sworn to be harlots for a time, he absolueth them of theyr oth. These things these men dissemble, and suffer and maintaine harlots. Which thing yet ought not to be meruailed at. For, forasmuch as they do so diligētly cetain and encrease spirituall fornication of myndes, that is, superstition and idolatrye, why also shoulde they not mayntaine fornication of the bodye? But seinge they toke away wiues from theyr sacrificers, it was a harde thinge, yea and impossible to want brothel houses. Iustinianus sorowed, bicause he saw brothell houses nighe vnto the Churches of God, but now they dwell in the middest of cities, & not from the houses where holye seruices are ministred: and it nothinge greueth the Pope. But let the Lordes of those houses whiche the harlots dwell in, pleade theyr cause. But such houses pertaine for the most part vnto Bishops and churches, & they will say, we do not take part of the gain of a harlot, but as it is mete, we receaue rentes for our houses: which is not prohibited by the ciuill lawes. For in the Digestes ( de petitione haereditatis in the law Ancillaram) it is sayd, that brothell houses are occupied in the city rents of honest men. And in y e same title in the law possessor, it is ordeined, that if a mā haue vnhonest gaines, he should be compelled to restore thē, least an honest interpretaciō should bring profite vnto the possessor with an vnhonest gayne.
But bicause they will maintain it by lawes, why haue they not a respect vnto the interpretacion of those lawes? That is: If this kinde of gaine bee once exacted of harlots, that ought to be restored vnto the hire: otherwise it is not law full to require them. Neyther can contrariety of lawes be auoided by any other meanes. For these lawes should not agre with those of Iustinians, which ar had in the Authentikes de lenonibus & scenicis mulieribus. But let them marke I pray you the thinges which are had in the title de ritu nuptiarum, in the law palam, and in the title de iis qui notantur infamia, in the law Athletas, namely that that woman is infamous, whiche hath prostituted herselfe, and he also which is partaker of the gaine. And that vniuersally al bawdes are infamous. Let vs also (which is of much more weight) haue a regard to the wordes of god which cō maundeth: Be ye holy, bicause I am holy. What do we gather by these woords? That y t is not to be suffred among Christiās, wherby men are made infamous: wherefore take away baudes and harlots, for asmuch as these kinde of persons ar by the testimonie of the ciuil lawes noted infamous. But they wil say: Men fall very oftentimes, and sometimes cōmit those thinges wherby they are made infamous. I graunt that, yet is not this to be borne withall, wherby wil or nill they, they ar made infamous. But thoughe they had a thousand ciuil lawes on their side, Ierome. yet ought we more to esteme the worde of God. Ierome speakinge of thys thynge, wryteth verye well in hys Epitaphe of Fabiola: Ciuill lawes sayth he, are not so diligentlye to be cited. Pampinianus writeth one thing, and Paule an other. Tertulliane And before Ierome, Tertulliane de anima: Brothel houses (sayth he) are execrable before God.
But if they shoulde be suffred, saye they, there is some hope of theyr conuersion. For Christ sayth: Harlots and publicanes shal go before you in the kingedome of god. How harlots do go before the Scribes and Phareseis in the kingdome of heauen. But let them tel me, whither they can by no other meanes be reuoked into the right way, then to be borne withal? It is true indede that Christ sayd: Harlots and publicanes shall go before you in the kingdome of God. But he vnderstandeth not Harlots as long as they be harlots and ar not conuerted. For what cause then is it said that they shal go before the Phareseis & Scribes in the kingdom of God? bicause they being conuerted, do acknowledge and bewaile theyr sinnes: but the Phariseis & Scribes regarded not their wicked actes, but would seme to be moste holy. If harlots should be suffred bicause they may be conuerted, then shal ther be no sinne so greuous which ought to be punished: [Page 233] for there is none so farre past grace, but there is some hope that he may be reuoked into the right way: and so al lawes shall sleepe.
They adde moreouer: God hath prohibited harlots, In the tyme of Salomon there wer harlots in Israel. as it is had in Deut. which yet were afterward suffred. For Salamon gaue iudgement betwene twoo harlots. First I answer, that it is not certaine that they were harlots, for as muche as this woord Zouah signifieth also her that keepeth a vitling house, and one also which getteth her liuing by sundry kinde of gaine. Farther, though they wer harlots, yet is it a friuolous and most weake argument. For wee must not reason from that which is done, to that which ought to be done. God in deede prohibited harlots, but afterward discipline quailed, and many things were cōmitted against the law. But we ought to haue a regard not to that which is done, but to that which God hath cōmaunded to he done: otherwise if we will liue according to examples, there are euil examples inough euery where. For Popes and Cardinals doo not onely suffer harlots, but also keepe them themselues, as thinges most dainty. Neither are they afearde of the Canons which decree that Priestes for whooredomes should be deposed, in the distinction. 82. chap. Presbyter, when as yet the glose saith there: Now a daies no man is deposed for whoredome. The same is had in the second question .7. chap. Lator: The Apostle excludeth whooremongers from the kingdome of God. But these exclude them not from the Church, neither thinke they, that they ought to be deposed. But that is no maruaile, Aduoutries accounted of the Papistes very light crimes. for as muche as they say that the Bishop may dispense with aduoutries, and other light crimes, as it is had Extra. de Iudiciis in the law At Clerici, they are the woordes of Alexander .3. wherby it appeareth, that these men count aduoutries for crimes very light. Why ought we then to depende on their examples. Philo a Iew saith, that in the publike welth of the Iewes, Philo. harlots could not be suffred. For al when they came to ripe age, ought of necessity eyther to be husbandes or wiues. Widowes in deede ther wer some, but yet wel growen in yeares, and of an approued incontinency. This example should we followe, namely of such an holy publik welth, & not the example of the papisticall court. When I was on a time at Rome, I remembred a wittye saying of Crates. An Apothegma of Crates. He when he came to Delphos, and sawe in the temple of Apollo a golden ymage of Phrynis a very notable harlot, cryed out: Beholde a token of the wantonnes of the Grecians. So I, considering there suche sumptuous harlots, and so gorgiously appareled, said: Behold a token of the wantonnes of the bishop of Romes Prelates. But let vs leaue them, and go on with the woordes of God, and the reasons brought from thence.
Basilius (in his first booke vpon the Psalmes, expounding these wordes: Basilius. And hath not syt in the chaire of pestilence) writeth very wel. Whooredome (saythe he) stayeth not in one man, but inuadeth a whole City. For some one yong man cōmeth vnto an harlot, and taketh vnto himself a fellow, and the same felow also taketh an other fellow. Wherefore euen as fire being kindled in a City, A similitude. if the winde blow vehemently, stayeth not in the burnyng of one house or twoo, but spreddeth far and wyde, and draweth a great destruction with it: So this euyl, being once kindled, spreddeth ouer al the partes of the City. Ambrose. Ambrose also wisely writeth vpon the .119. Psalme, alledging the wordes of the .vi. chap. of the Prouerbs: who can noorishe burning coales in his bosome, and not bee burnt? who saith he, can thinke that harlots can be noorished in a City, and yong men not be corrupted with whooredome? The sentence of Augustine inuerted. And so may we aptly turne that sentence of saint Augustine cleane contrarelye: If thou take awaye harlots, thou shalte fyll all thinges with filthy lustes. Not so, but rather contrarily: Noorishe harlots, and thou shalt fyl al thinges with filthy lustes.
They obiect againe, that the good which commeth of euil, is a recompensacion, and they wil haue brothel houses to be suffered, least violence shoulde be offered vnto honest Matrons. I haue answered before, that euil thinges are not to [Page] be done, that good thinges should ensue. Yea, but (saye they) God himselfe hath ordained that the good which cōmeth of euil, is a recompensacion. For bicause of the hardnes of hart of the Hebrues, that they should not folow greater euils, he graunted them the booke of diuorcement. But these men ought to remēber, that we must not cal God vnto iudgemēt, neither is it lawful to require of hym a reason of his lawes. It is not lawful alwaies to reason by the example of God. Wherfore it is no firme conclusion, God did so, therefore it is lawful for vs to doo the like. We must not looke what God hath done, but what he hath commaunded vs to doo. But as concerning diuorcement, we shal haue occasion in an other place to speake therof. God saw that hatred oftē tymes happeneth betwene man and wife, and daunger of committing murther, which thing rather then it should happen, he graunted the booke of diuorcement. But it is a false argument, God gaue the booke of diuorcement, therefore it is lawful for vs to keepe brothelhouses.
To the reasons of the aduersaries. To the fyrst.Now resteth to confute the reasons of the aduersaries. First they said, whoredome is in the actes of the Apostles nūbred among those thinges, which of their own nature are not euil, as blood, thinges strangled, and thinges dedicated vnto Idoles. For there is no creature of God euil, which is receaued with thankes geuing. Wherfore fornication is no syn, seing it is reckoned with those things. But this is a weake reason, for these thinges are not reckoned of the Apostles, that in them shoulde be like reason of fault, but bicause that all those thinges, if they shoulde haue bene vsed, would at y e tyme haue disturbed the Churche. The Iewes by the custome of their law, abstained from blood, and that whyche was strangled: and the Ethnikes made nothing of whooredome. Wherefore, that peace should be had among them all, they decreed that they al shoulde abstayne from these thinges, wherby it followeth not, that al these thinges are like sins, but rather this we may inferre, that all these thinges were an occasion of disturbing the Churche.
To the second.Farther, they obiected that God commaundeth not sinnes, but he commaunded Hosea the Prophet to haue fellowship with an harlot. I aunswer: Euerye synne, What is the proper nature of synne. is in that respect synne, bicause it is against the word of God. But if God commaund any thing to be done priuately, which otherwise disagreeth with the woord written, the same vndoubtedly is not sinne, bicause vniuersally it repugneth not with the woord of God: for although it disagreeth with the word written, yet it disagreeth not with the woord priuately reuealed. It is synne to take away an other mans good. But God, when the Hebrues shoulde depart oute of Egipt, commaunded that they should borowe stuffe and syluer vessels of the Egiptians, and take them away with them, which thing they did with out sinne. No man doubteth also but that murther is synne, and yet Abraham, if hee had sacrificed his sonne at the commaundement of God, which he was ready to doo, had not synned. So may we say of Hoseas the prophet: If he committed whooredome at the commaundement of God, his whooredome was no synne. I knowe there are some which thinke that Hoseas was not cōmaunded to cōmit whoredome, but to take a harlot to his wife, but that agreeth not: for it followeth, and thou shalt beget of her children of fornication. Children gotten after that maner, namely of a lawful wife, should not haue bene children of fornication. Ierome doth better interprete these thinges Hiperbollically, Ierome. and saith, that by this image was expressed the wickednes of the Iewes, which had forsaken god their common husband, and had committed fornication with the Idoles of the Gentiles, and had begotten vnlawfull and bastard children, as touching the woorshipping and religion of God.
To the thyrde.Farthermore, that is false which they alledge, namely that whooredome is neither against religion, nor charitye. For we haue before declared that it is otherwise, neither is it needeful here to repeate that which we haue sayd.
To the fourth.They bryng Augustine also whiche sayth, what meate is vnto the body, that [Page 228] is accompanieng together for procreation, but to eate or drinke a litle more thē needeth, is not a grieuous synne: therefore neither is fornication also. A similitude is not takē to agree in euery part, but serueth onely for that part for which it is taken. And vndoubtedly, he which eateth or drinketh more then he ought, doth not straightway loose the health of his body, but he which strayeth in carnal fellowship, and committeth whoredome, may easelye straightwaye beget a childe, vnto whom he doth iniury, bicause throughe his fault he is borne a Bastard. Farther, there succeedeth euyl education, and so charity is hurt. I myghte say also, euen as euyl and hurtful meate destroyeth the bodye (yea Adam by eating of the prohibited aple corrupted his posteritye) so whooredome killeth the soule. Lastly, that which they alledged, To the fyfte. namely that fornication is therefore no sinne, bicause it cānot be so iudged by the light of nature, that I say is nothing. For the preceptes of God are knowen to bee iust of nature, but yet of a nature vncorrupt and perfect: when as a corrupt nature doth often times allow sinnes for vertues. For with the Lacedemonians theft was praised, Thucydides. and as Thucydides writeth among the auncient Grecians piracy was counted a vertue. Farthermore it followeth that the preceptes of god may by nature be knowen to be iust and honest, but yet of a nature instructed and formed by the woord of god, otherwise as Paul testifieth: The carnal man knoweth not the thinges whiche are of god. But now let vs returne to the history.
21 Therefore the Philistines tooke him, and put out his eyes, and brought him downe to Azzah, and bound hym wyth fetters: and he did grinde in the pryson house.
22 And the heare of his head beganne to growe agayne, after that it was shauen.
23 Then the Princes of the Philistines gathered them together to offer a great sacrifice vnto Dagon their God, and to reioyce. For they sayd: Our God hath deliuered Samson our enemye into oure handes.
24 Also when the people saw him, they praised their God: for they sayd, our God hath deliuered into our handes our enemye, and destroyer of our countrey, whych hath slayne many of vs.
25 And when their hartes were mery, they said: cal Samson, that he maye make vs pastime. So they called Samson out of hys pryson house, and he was a laughing stocke vnto them, and they sette hym betwene the pyllers.
26 Then Samson sayde vnto the seruaunt that ledde hym by the hande: leade me that I may touche the pyllers that the house standeth vpon, and that I may leane to them.
27 (Now the house was full of men and women, and there were al the Princes of the Philistines: also vpō the roofe wer about three thousand men and women, that beheld whyle Samson played.)
28 Then Samson called vnto the Lord, and sayde: O God I beseche thee strengthen me at this tyme onely, that I may be at once auenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.
29 And Samson layde holde on the twoo myddle pyllers, wherevpon the house stoode, and on whiche it was borne vppe: on the one wyth hys ryght hand, and on the other with hys leaft.
30 Then sayd Samson: Let me lose my lyfe with the Philistines: and he bowed hym wyth al hys myght, and the house fell vpon the [Page] Princes, and vpon all the people that were therein. So the deade which he slewe at hys death, were mo then they whyche hee hadde slayne in hys lyfe.
31 Then hys brethren, and all the house of hys father came downe and tooke hym, and brought hym vp, and buryed hym betwene Zorah and Esthaol, in the Sepulchre of Manoah hys father: nowe he had iudged Israel twenty yeares.
When Samson was kept in prison, hys heare in the meane time grew to the same length that it was before it was shauen by the harlot. God at the lengthe tooke vengeaunce of the Philistines, when yet he had first begone at hys owne house. For Samson for his synne, came into the power of hys enemyes, and hys eyes being put out, he was compelled to grinde in prison, and was vtterly made a mocking stocke. Howbeit the wicked Philistines in the meane tyme escaped not vnpunished. The custom of God in punishing. A similitude. Thus God vseth to doo, first to punish his owne, before he afflict straungers. Phisitions also, when a man hath taken poyson, haue thys as their chiefe care, to driue away the poyson from the hart, from the lyuer, and other principal partes of the body, then they apply medicines vnto the other mē bers of the body. So also the good man of the house firste enstructeth and chastiseth his chyldren, and afterwarde he enstructeth other. Wherfore Paul wryteth of a Bishop: If he cannot wel gouerne his owne family, how shall hee gouerne the church of God? Wherfore it is no maruayle if god chastised Samson fyrst, & afterward grieuously afflicted the Philistines. But in that it is writtē that his heare was growen againe, we must not beleue y t hys strength lay in hys heare, for it was a gift of god geuen him freely, The vowe of the Nazarites being violated, was renewed. but yet God required, that for that gift he should be a Nazarite: vnto which it belonged, to let the heare growe, and not to cut it with a rasor. But if a man had transgressed, he did not therfore straight way cease to be a Nazarite, but ought to let his heare grow, and be clensed, and so begyn againe his institucion, which he tooke in hand. Wherefore Samson repented that he had violated his vow, and returned to the rule of a Nazarite, and when his heare was growen, and he restored both vnto god, and to his olde state and strength, being assured of the helpe of god, he tooke vengeaunce of hys enemyes.
In the meane time the Philistines ascribe their victory against Samson, vnto their god Dagon. What Dagon was. But what this god was, it is not very wel knowen. Howbeit as farre as may be iudged by the Etimology of the woorde, it was some god of the sea. For Dag in hebrew signifieth a fyshe. And that both the Grecians and the Latines worshipped gods of the sea, Gods of the sea it is certayne. For they had Neptune, Leucothea, and Triton. Aboue the belly (as they say) it had the forme of a man, & downward it ended in the forme of a fyshe. Suche a god woorshipped the Philistines. And vndoubtedly the old Ethnikes synned grieuously therin, in that they woulde rather serue the creature (as Paul sayth) then the creator, and chaunged the glory of the immortal God, and transferred it, not onely into the similitude fashioned like a mortal man, but also into the images of birdes, fourefooted beastes, What maner of thinges the Gods of heretikes are. and Serpentes or creeping thinges. Neither did they onely woorship those things, which ar in nature, but also they fained vnto thē selues Monsters, which appeare no where. Such gods in a maner do heretikes woorship. For they doo set before them selues some shape and head of God, when they confesse that they heleue in God the creator of heauen & earth. But when farther they adde their own thoughtes and fansies, they make the inferiour part to ende in a fishe. Of this Dagon there is manifest mencion made in the first booke of Samuel. The Philistines extolled their Dagon, bycause he had deliuered their ennemye into their handes: whiche was nothing els, then to blaspheme the name of the true [Page 235] God. For they attributed his woorkes vnto an idole. Neither considered they that Samson was therfore taken, bicause he had sinned against God. Wherfore our synnes are a cause, why God is blasphemed: for when by reason of them we are destitute of the helpe of God, our enemies, whiche get the victorye againste vs, doo ascribe the same, both vnto their owne strengthes, and to their supersticions.
So happened it in the conqueryng of Constantinople, Horrible examples of blasphemies. where the Turkes when they had gotten the city, caried about in derision the image of Christ, clothed with the apparel of the Turkes, throughout al the host, and throughout all the wayes of the City. And not many yeares ago, when the Emperour Charles the fift lost a great nauy, and many souldiours at Argery, I remember I hearde some soldiours say, that Christ our sauiour was now become a Mahomitan or Moore, How holy men called vpō [...] in tribulacions neither considered they that they them selues wer become farre woorse then the Mahomites. So the name of God is mocked for our synnes. Wherefore holy men were wont not without a cause thus to pray, and to implore mercye, that the name of God should not be euil spoken of among the Gentiles. So delt Moses with God, when he was angry with the people, for making the golden Calfe. The Prophets also sayd: Be mercyful vnto vs Lord for thine own sake, and for thine names sake, least the nacions say, wher is their God? Let vs in the meane time, when we heare or reade these thinges, thus thincke with our selues: Seing God hath for synne so grieuouslye afflicted Samson, so great a man, sanctified from his mothers wombe, and appointed to deliuer Israel: what shall become of vs if we synne? So Paul to the Corrinthians in his first Epistle, setteth foorth vnto vs the examples of the Israelites to consider, whom God sundry wayes chastised. And to the Romanes he sayth: If he hath not spared the natural braunches, take heede that he spare not thee. Marke the goodnes and seuerity of God: his seuerity on those which haue fallen, and his goodnes in thee, if thou abide in goodnes: otherwise thou also shalt be cut of. Wherefore by these cogitacions we may take fruite by the punishment of other.
For this vse are examples set foorth vnto the Churche, What is the fruit of holy histories. that we in readyng them shoulde become better. Paule sayde: what soeuer thinges are before wrytten, are written for our learning, that wee throughe pacience and consolacion of the scriptures shoulde haue hope. Wherefore when we reade that holye men were so corrected, we ought to tremble, least we also fall into the lyke anger of God. If we doo not take suche fruite by reading of the holy scriptures, we then reade them in vayne.
The Philistines geue thankes vnto Dagon their God for the victorye. So were they delyuered vp into a reprobate sense, to geue thankes for those thinges, for whych they ought most of all to haue bene sory. For how obtayned they Samson? By the artes of an harlot, and by most fylthye deceate. After sacrifices followeth a verye sumptuous banquet. For in those holye seruices of Idoles, was set foorth a certaine communion, that the people in that feast, shoulde reioyce together wyth a certaine common ioy.
So also in the olde Testament the Israelites in theyr peace offeringes feasted and reioyced together before the Lord. Neyther is it vnlykely, but that the Fathers also before the law, had suche holy seruices and solemnities. To what ende the Supper of the Lorde was instituted. Christ also our Sauiour instituted a Communion and holye Supper, that wee shoulde there celebrate hys name and healthfull death. But in the Sacrifices of Idols, all thynges were ordayned for ryot and pleasure, and they seldome departed from thence wythout fylthy lustes or murther, as at thys daye doo the Papistes in consecrations of theyr Churches, after Masse they celebrate a feast, afterward they fall to dauncyng and wanton leapinges: whereby oftentymes they fall together by the eares.
The Philistines assembled together aboue three thousande men, and at the length commaunde that Samson shoulde be brought before them, a man myserable, bounde, and blynde. When they had with so many iniuries not sufficientlye fulfylled their hatred, they woulde moreouer make hym a mocking stocke. These thinges were farre more hytter, Iosephus. then if they had put him to death. For as Iosephus writeth in thys place: Death is naturall, and maye after a sorte bee suffered: but for as muche as to bee made a mocking stocke, hath reproche and contumely ioyned with it, that seemeth not possible to be borne wythall. It is a thing very cruell to adde affliction vnto the afflicted. Wherefore, althoughe God seemed to haue smytten Samson, they oughte to haue bene touched wyth some mercye towardes hym, neyther must we be molestious vnto them that are smytten by God, as thoughe we woulde imitate God. Wherefore Amos the Prophet writeth: For three transgressions of Edom, & for the fourth I wyl not be turned. For when the Iewes were dryuen and banished oute of theyr owne countrey, and had escaped to their borders, they handled them moste cruellye. Thys thyng, sayth God by the Prophet, hee wyll not leaue vnpunished. For althoughe the Iewes were for their desertes afflicted of God, yet it was not the duty of neighbours to heape more iniuries vpon the afflicted.
Dauid in hys hundreth and nyne Psalme curseth hym which shoulde persecute him, whom the Lord hath stricken. Set thou (sayth he) the synner ouer him, and let Sathan stande at hys right hand. When hee is iudged, let hym go oute condemned, and let hys prayers be turned into synne. Let hys dayes bee fewe, and let an other take hys charge. Bycause he remembred not to shewe mercye: but persecuted the afflicted and poore man, and the sorrowful harted to kill him. These thynges we reade, A cruel maner towarde those which haue suffred shipwrack and contemne them, and it is horryble to see the maner in certayne regions, for if any that hath suffered shypwracke escape to the shore, theyr goods, if peraduenture they bee cast on lande, are made forfayte. What other thyng is thys, then to adde affliction to the afflicted?
Howe Samson was reconciled vnto God. Samson beyng brought before them, declareth by the successe, howe deare he was to God. Not that the sufferaunce of the pryson had purged hys synnes, it is Christ onelye whych purgeth synnes. Not that by pacience or anye other vertue he had deserued the mercye of God: awaye wyth all consideracion of desert. But in pryson he acknowledged hys synne, hee beleued trulye in Christe, and as it becommeth a godlye man, hee repented, and that so muche the more, howe muche greater the calamitye was, wherewith he was oppressed. Wherefore being endued wyth fayth, whereby he tooke holde of the mercye of God by Christ, Samson is proued to haue had fayth. he was reconsiled vnto God. And that he had fayth, manifestlye appeareth by that, which he prayed. How (sayth Paul) did they cal vpon god, in whom they beleued not? And in the Epistle to the Hebrues, Samson is numbred amōg them, which being excellent in fayth, wrought wonderful thinges.
And he sayd vnto the Ladde: leade me vnto the pyller. As thoughe he had bene wearye, hee made as though hee woulde haue leaned to the pyller. There were there al the princes of the Philistines. They were assembled thether bycause god had appointed to take punishmēt of them al together. In what manner Samson prayed. And Samson prayed: Remember me Lord. These prayers at the fyrste syght seeme not verye godly. For he praieth to haue vengeaunce graunted him of his enemies, bicause they had put out both his eyes. Vndoubtedly if he did it of a stomake or choler, we could not iustly defend his prayers. For he should haue bene no more allowed of god, then if be should expressedly haue sayd: I pray thee Lorde, prosper eyther my theft, Augustine. or my aduoutry. Augustine sayth that Samson dyd these thinges, not of his own wyl, but by the impulsion & counsell of the holy ghost. Farther, (as I haue often admonished) wee muste not thynke of Samson as of a priuate man, but as of a Magistrate, whom God hym selfe had appoynted.
And in deede as a priuate man, it was not lawful for him to reuenge his owne iniuries: but as a Magistrate, he both might & ought. If we haue in hand a priuate cause, that saying of Paul ought to be of force: Geue place vnto anger. To me belongeth vengeaūce, & I wil render, saith the Lord. But in a publike cause the Magistrate ought by the commaundement and authority of God to auenge iniury: bicause he is gods vicar in earth: and god himselfe, although often times he take vengeaunce of synnes by himselfe, and as it is sayde withoute meanes, yet for the most part he punisheth by Magistrates. Wherfore those wordes: To me belongeth vengeaunce, and I wyl render, doo not let the seueritye of Magistrates, wherby they punish the guilty. For they are the Ministers of God: and that which they do, God himselfe doth by them.
By the same maner of speeche it is sayd vnder the person of God: God communicateth many of hys properties vnto men. Equity is mine, iudgement is mine, and power is mine: all which thinges yet he communicateth wyth men, vpon whom hee bestoweth them. Wherefore God commaunded Samson to reuenge the iniuries of eyther, namely of the name of God and his owne: for as muche as the Philistines had put out hys eyes. But for what cause? What, bicause he had committed whooredome? No vndoubtedlye: For what cause the Philistines afflicted Samson. but bicause he was an Israelite, a deliuerer and reuenger of the people of God. Wherefore Samson auengeth either iniurye, both that whiche the Philistines had done vnto hym selfe, and that which they had done vnto God. When he calleth vpon God, he prayeth hym to prosper hys vocation. And suche prayers are woont to be of most efficaye. For what other thyng dyd the Apostles and other brethren pray for (as it is wrytten in the Actes of the Apostles the fourth chapter) then that God would prosper their vocation and office? Geue vnto thy seruauntes (sayde they) not to regarde their threatninges, graunt them boldlye to speake thy woorde. Streche foorth thine hande, that they maye woorke sygnes. If a man will say, the sygnes of the Apostles were profitable and healthful, bycause they delyuered and healed the afflicted. But contrarilye the signe of Samson tended to the slaughter of his enemies. Wherfore there is not in them both one consideration: I answer, that often times it happeneth so, The sygnes of the Apostles did not alwaies heale. Similitudes. but yet the signes of the Ayostles also were sometimes hurtful. For Paul made Elimas the Cuniurer blynde, and sayd: Thou Sonne of the Deuyl, why peruertest thou the right wayes of the Lord? Beholde the hand of the Lord is ouer thee, and thou shalt be blynde, and shalt not see. Peter also wyth hys woorde slewe Ananias and Saphira. Yea and Paule delyuered manye vnto Sathan. Wherfore Samson prayeth vnto God to make fortunate, and to helpe his ministery.
Neyther can it be properlye sayde that Samson kylled himselfe. Samson killed not hymselfe. He dyed in deede, but he prescribed not vnto hymself this ende, namely to dye. But sought vengeaunce of hys enemies, whych he vnderstoode woulde by this meanes ensue. The Apostles also dyd thus make reckonyng wyth themselues: Similitudes. If as wee haue begonne we teache vnto the people the kingdome of Christ, vndoubtedly we shall bee kylled: and in that they went on wyth their purpose to teache the Gospell, it cannot be iustly sayd, that they kylled them selues. Paule also, when hee shoulde go vnto Ierusalem, and Agabus the Prophet tolde hym, that the Iewes woulde bynde hym at Ierusalem, what dyd hee when hee hearde these thinges? Dyd he forsake hys vocation? No verely. But rather affirmed that hee was ready both to be bounde, and to dye for Christ. So sayth Samson: Let my soule dye wyth the Philistians. He dyd not rashely incurre death, but followeth hys vocation. Souldiours when they go on warrefare, if a man peraduenture say vnto them: ye shall be slayne wyth gunnes, or wyth the swoorde, or wyth arrowes. They wyll aunswere, if they be men of valiaunt courage: we seeke not death but victorye, or we followe the defence of our owne thynges, whereunto we are called.
But as touching Samson, God gouerned him by his spirite. Wherefore when he dyed, he slewe more of the Philistines then he did before while he liued. What fruite therefore had the Philistines by their deceite and treason? They bought to them selues death, and present destruction. And euen as to them that loue god al thinges woorke to good, so to the aduersaries and enemies of God, al things are turned to their destruction.
The difference betwene the death of y e Philistines and of Samson. A moste profytable admonicion of Salomon Samson dyeth together with the Philistines, but the ende and maner is far diuers. For they dye in their wanton behauiour, cruelty, and idolatrye, but thys Samson in fayth, and calling vpon the true God. But as touching the matter it selfe, the residewe were to eyther of them alyke. Wherefore Salomon admonisheth vs most wisely, that wee muste not measure the godlynes of men by outward thinges, bicause they happen alyke, both to the godlye, and to the vngodly. That Samson dyed in the fayth, hereby it appeareth, bicause euen in the very destruction he called vpon God, and was heard, and bycause God restored vnto him hys old strength. But they which are in the fleshe, can not please God: neyther can God be rightly called vpon, vnlesse fayth shyne before. Howe shall they cal vpon hym sayth the Apostle, in whom they haue not beleued? And bycause he was heard, he prayed by the inspiracion of the spirite. For wee knowe not what we shoulde praye. Therefore the spirite doth with vnspeakeable sighinges pray for vs.
Samson had before fallen, he turneth vnto god, & he heareth hym. So let vs also, when we haue somtimes sinned, returne vnto God, & faithfully cal vpō him, & we shal be heard. For he is the same god that he was then, riche vnto al those that cal vpon him: Ambrose. that which he did vnto him, he wil do also vnto vs. Ambrose vpon this place writeth, that Samson was so heard of god, that hee lost his lyfe triumphantly, Samson is a figure of Christ. and he did not onely ouercome the Philistines, but also hymself: for he represented the image of Christ, who although while he lyued, exceedingly hurted the diuel, yet when he dyed, he vtterly triumphed ouer hym. The Philistines when they ouercame Samson, got vnto them selues moste certayne destruction: So the Iewes, when they crucified Christ, threwe them selues into euerlasting condemnaciō. And, which is to be marueiled at, the Philistines with this so great and so sodaine destruction, were so amased, that they suffered the kinsfolkes of Samson to come, and honorably to bury him. For when the Princes were perished, the courages of the people were daunted, neither durst they attempt any thing against the Hebrewes. This place seemeth here to requyre a disputacion, whither it be lawful for any man, for any cause, to kyll hymselfe. But bicause we shall haue a place more opportune for it, at this present I wyll omyt it, and wyl in an other place fully write thereof.
¶The .xvii. Chapter.
1 THere was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Michaiehu.
2 And he say d vnto hys mother: The eleuen hundreth peeces of syluer that were taken frō thee, for the which thou cursedst, and spakedst it euen in myne hearing, behold the syluer is wyth me, I tooke it. Then his mother sayde: blessed be thou my sonne of the Lorde.
3 And when hee had restored the eleuen hundreth peeces of syluer to hys mother, hys mother sayde: I had dedicated the syluer to the Lord, of myne owne hand for my sonne, to make a grauen and molten image. Now therefore I wyl geue it thee againe.
[Page 237]4 And when he had restored the mony vnto his mother, his mother toke two hundreth peeces of siluer, and gaue them to the goldsmith, whych made thereof a grauen and molten image, and it was in the house of Michaiehu.
5 And this man Micha had a house of God, & he made an Ephode, and Theraphim, & consecrated the hand of one of his sonnes, and he was his priest.
6 In those dayes there was no kinge in Israell, but euery man did that, which was good in his owne eies.
Fyrst I think good to enquire in this history cōcerning y e time wherin these thinges happened. For al men do not aunswere a like vnto this question. When thys history happened The elder Rabbines do thinke, that this was done, when Iosua was olde, and hee not able for age to execute hys offyce, neyther was there anye other Magistrate substituted in his place. But this is not verye likely, bicause wee reade that in all his time the Israelites worshipped God rightly and orderlye, It is not to be ascribed vnto y e time of Iosua. and that he in the latter time of his life, renued the couenant of god with the people. Other thinke that they were done after Iosuas death, when Othoniell gouerned. This sentence R. Selomoh defendeth. The sonne of Gerson thinketh that this happened vnder Eglon kinge of Moab, whome Ehud afterward slewe. R. Selomoh. Leui ben Gerson. But this also can not be proued, for in the x. chap. of this boke it is written, that the people cried vnto the Lord when they were oppressed of theyr enemies. And that Iiphtah was stirred vp by the sprite to bear rule. But before God aunsweareth the very sharpely. For he sayd: I will not helpe you, bycause you alwayes returne vnto your Idoles, and forsake me. But rather cal vpon your gods let them helpe you. Which words when the people heard, they repented, & put away frō them their idols which they had made. But this idole which is now spokē of, These thinges seme to haue happened after the deathe of Samson. indured to the time of Samuel: Wherfore it cānot seme probable that it was done at that time. The order of the holy scriptures is of most high authority w t me, and therfore I thinke y t these things happened after the death of Sāson. Forasmuch as frō that time euen to Heli there wer many yeares passed, wherin y e Philistians possessed y e land of the Iewes, neither suffred they any magistrate to be ouer thē. Iosephus. Iosephus agreeth with the Rabbines, but he is many times deceued. Wherfore it shalbe best to follow that opinion, which agreeth with the simple order of the holy history.
Howbeit ther is one thing which semeth to be a let, An obiection. namely if a man rekē the yeares frō Samsō vnto Saul, he shal find thē to be scarse .60. or at y e most .70. And whē as by reasō of filthy whoredom y e tribe of Beniamin was almost brought to nothing, and they which remained of it, had no wiues, but those which they got by violence: how could it be, that in so short a time it should so much encrease, y e Saule was out of that tribe chosen a king? This argumēt hath a certain shew, but it is not firme nor sound inough if a man more deligentlye examine it. For although there were but a fewe remayninge of that tribe, yet were they not so few, but they mought very much multiply. For there escaped sixe hundreth mē of warre, who had wiues geuen them partly of the men of Iabes Gilead, and partly by violence. And sixe hundreth men wer able in the space of .60. or .70. yeares to beget a great yssue, and to se theyr childrens children. They could not indede be so many as to be equall with the other tribes, but yet they might encrease to a sufficient numbre.
But that is farre more harde whyche is obiected concernynge Pinhas, An other obiection. namelye that hee remayned on lyue euen to the tyme of the warres of the [Page] Beniamites. Whiche if it be so, then muste he be at that time .300. yeares of age Therfore some thinke that it is more commodious to draw backe this historye vnto the beginninge of the Iudges. But I see not what should let, but that god might permit him to liue so longe. For when he had slaine a prince of Israell & a Madianitish woman, when they were committing whoredome, god graunted him not onely to succede his father in the priesthode, but also gaue him very long to liue. D. Kimhi. But vndoubtedly I chiefely allow the order and course of the historye, from which vnlesse great necessity vrge, I will not depart. And in this sentence I follow the iudgement of Dauid Kimhi, whose authority in expounding of the texte I thinke is not to bee contemned. Yea and all the Hebrewes in a manner agree in this, that Pinhas liued a very long time, and there are some whiche produce his age euen vnto the time of Elias the Prophete. Vnto whome I doo not agree, bicause no necessity compelleth me thervnto. Howbeit as cōcerning this thinge I will not much striue: But I leaue it free to euery willing mind to follow which opinion he will.
And in this history first I marke the institution of idolatry, then the consecration of a priest, which was twise doone. For firste Micha instituted his sonne a prieste: and then when by chaunce he met with a Leuite, he made him a priest. But wherefore was this ido le made? What a vowe is. For her vowes sake. For the promise of y e mother of Micha was not simple, but w t a vow. And a vow (as al deuines affirme) is a holy promise made to God of thinges which are ours. Wherefore it must nedes be that this woman was a widow, with whome paraduenture her sonne dwelled. For if she had beene a wife, or a maiden vnmaried, or a widowe in the house of her father, shee coulde not haue vowed a firme vowe, as it manifestly appeareth by the booke of Numb. Those persons might not vowe with out the consent of their father or husbād. For the law ordeined that if they wer against it, the vow should then be voide. Hanna did in dede vowe in the firste of Samuell, but we must beleue that Helkana her husbande confirmed her vowe. This woman sinned, not bicause shee vowed, but bicause shee vowed a thinge vngodlye, namely, an idole. For it was at that time lawefull for anye to vowe anye thinge of his owne thinges, for the adorninge of the temple of God, and to amplify his honor. But to institute a new and forbidden worshippinge, it was vtterly vngodly.
The sonne had stolen from his mother that money: neyther is it any maruall if he would steale, whych was so redy to idolatry. He which sinneth against the first table, doth easely sinne against the second.
The mother curseth the theefe, whosoeuer he were: neyther doth she so greuously take the matter for the money taken away, as for that she could not performe her detestable vow. And she curseth, as men in a manner vse to do, in aduersities. Yea and God himself also vsed curses in the old testament, in the assembly to the mount Hebal & Garizim. The priest also cursedly prayed for barēnes, diseases, losse of children, and other thinges of like sorte. And in our time, the Pope, Women do easely fall to cursinges. by what wicked zeale I know not, in the day of the supper of the Lord sē deth forth curses vpon all those whiche haue alienated themselues from his institution and sect. This woman cursed the theef: and no maruaile. Bycause women when they fail in strength, do easely fall to cursinges.
The sonne as soone as he heard the curse of his mother, was a feard. For so hath nature ordeined, that children do wonderfully feare the curses of their parents. But this man feared not to violate the lawe of God: which thing happeneth not seldome vnto men, to haue horror of small sinnes, and to neglect them that ar more grieuous. Ther is some fruit somtimes of curses, euen as of excō municatiō. [Page 258] Ther ar some somtimes so hard & obdurated y t they can be bowed by no other meanes then by curses, although they be corrected by publike and apert reprehēsion. But whither this sonne knew that his mother had by a vow dedicated that mony vnto the Lord, before he tooke it away, it appeareth not by the wordes of the history.
Neither is this to be passed ouer, in that the mother sayth y t she had consecrated it vnto the lord, and he vseth the name of .4. letters. The maner of idolatries. [...]. Wherfore we must consider that there are two kinds of Idolatry. The one is, wherby a straūge God is called vpō, the other is, wherby the true God indede is worshipped, but not with that worshipping which he himself hath commaunded, but by images or idoles, or by some other meanes inuented of our selues. To the seconde kinde of idolatry perteineth the sinne of this woman. As often as we heare an image that is made, and a straunge God not added, we muste vnderstand that that image was made vnder the shew of the worshipping of the true god: but that religion is far contrary to the institution of sound religiō. Wherfore when the people (as it is written in Exodus) made themselues a golden calfe, Aaron proclaimed a holye day vnto the Lord, that is to the true god, and not to an idole. For they counted it absurd, to worshippe, either the true god himself without an image, or els an image without the title of the true God. And so muste we thinke that Ieroboam did when he consecrated the golden calfes in Dan and Bethel. For I doo not beleue that in images he instituted the worshipping of Baal, or Astharoth, or Chamos, but he would vnder them worship the Lorde. Into the selfe same error fell the Samaritanes also, Iosephus. who (as Iosephus writeth) woulde haue a temple amonge them like that which was at Ierusalem. And the selfe same thing went the Iewes about at Helio polis, when they were in exile in Egipt. And it was detestable to worship god with oblations and sacrifices in any other place, then in that which he himselfe had chosen to be worshipped in. Wherefore the woman vowed that she would make an idole, which shee deliuered vnto her sonne, that he should institute a newe religion in her house. I wyll (sayth she) that thou haue the syluer, but thou shalt make an idole thereof.
Why these two wordes grauen and molten are so ioined to gether, Grauen and molten. the interpretors do doubt. Some of the Hebrewes and some of our writers doo thinke y t there were two images, of the which the one was grauen, and the other molten. But this semeth not to be so, bicause these woordes are oftentimes ioyned together in the holy scripture: neyther is it necessary, as often as we finde them, so to vnderstande many images. Other thinke that that image was first molten and then grauen, or wroughte. The opinion of other is, that wee shoulde reade grauen and molten disiunctiuely, that is, an image which was either grauen or molten. But I very wel allow the opiniō of Dauid Kimhi, D. Kimhi. who writeth that it was the maner to graue images firste out of marble stone, or some other matter, and afterward to couer them with siluer or copper plates or peces. And so in one and the selfe same image was either: For it was both grauen, & the plates also were moltē & extenuated to lay ouer it. For this hebrew word Nasach signifieth to couer. We must vnderstand by this word house of god, a priuate tēple, wherin she would worship the idole. How much the peeces of siluer were, or of what kinde, valew and waight it is not expressed. The Rabbines do thinke that they were siluer syckles. And a syckle (as Iosephus sayth) conteined .4. drammes of Athenes. And a dramme of Athenes (as Budeus gathereth in his booke de Asse) conteyned thre shillings of Towres. A shilling of Towres is the half part of halfe a batse. A sickle Iosephus. Budeus wherfore a dramme was as muche in valew as a shilling of Argentine, that is, three halfe batses. By which meanes a Sickle conteined sixe baises. That is .4. [Page] shillinges. Two sortes of Sickles. Obuli. But there was two manner of sickles, one was vsual and prophane, & the other was of the sāctuary. The holy sickle was double so much as the prophane. Wherefore Ezechiel in his 45. chapter sayth, that a prophane sickle conteined .20. halfe pence, but the sickle of the sanctuary .40.
There is a fable among the Hebrewes, that this woman was Dalila whiche deceaued Samson, as though she had receaued this mony for the rewarde of her prodicion. These thinges are sayde by the Rabbines, but without reason. But I with reason thinke contrarily. For Dalila receaued of euery one of the Lordes of the Philistians .xi. C. peeces of siluer. Wherfore seing there wer fiue of the lords, then must she nedes haue receaued 5500. sickles. But these whereof we nowe entreate were but .1100. Seing therefore the number agreeth not, the fained tale of the Hebrewes is easely confuted.
The sonne bringeth againe vnto his mother the money which he had taken a way. She straightway saith: Blessed art thou in the Lord my sonne. As though she should haue said: Now I reuoke my curses, and turne thē to good and lucky prayers. How supersticious y e woman was, appeareth by these words. She commē deth her sonne, bycause he had brought the money againe: but she reproueth him not, bicause he had before stollen it. Straightway she entreateth with him about idolatrye. This mony sayth she, thou shalt not lose, thou shalte haue it indede, but yet in an idole. Neyther made they onely a molten and grauē image, but also an Ephod: The papistes tunicle. by which woorde wee muste by the figure Sinechdoche vnderstande all ornamentes longing vnto a priest. For an Ephod if we speake properly, signifieth a priests garment that commeth ouer his shoulders.
Theraphim They made also Theraphim. Touching the signification of this word, there is greate ambiguitye amonge the expositors. But I vnderstande it to be that idole whyche they had grauen and molten, when all the other thinges were redye which serued for idolatry, they at the lēgth brought that image vnto the temple. And of these Theraphim or images they were wont in the olde time to aske oracles. In Genesis we reade that Rachel the wife of Iacob stale awaye the Theraphim of her father. And in the first of Samuel the .19. chapter whē Dauid escaped, Michel put in his bed Theraphim. In Amos also the third chapter, it is written: There shalbe neither Ephod nor Theraphim, that is, yee shalbe so vexed and led into exile, that ye shal neyther be able to worship god nor idoles. In Ezechiell also it is written: They shall enquire of Theraphim. An in Zachary the .x. chapter: The Theraphim spake lies. Other thinke that Theraphim were certaine instrumentes of Astronomy, whereby houres, degrees, eleuations, declinacions, both of the sunne and of other starres are taken. Which opinion Abin Ezra reciteth in the history of Rachell. But I thinke not this sentēce true. For here is entreated of an Idole, in worshipping whereof there neded no astronomicall instruments.
It is saide that Micha filled the hand of his sonne. By which Hebrew phrase is signified that he consecrated him a priest. This forme of speaking seemeth to arise hereof, bycause Moses when hee consecrated Aaron and his sonnes, did put in their handes sweete cakes, the shoulder, breste, and other thynges, whyche by them should be offred vnto god.
Now is the idolatry instituted. But how could that be doone in Israell? Bycause saith the history ther was no king in Israel: but euery man did that which semed right in his owne eies. By these words is declared that it was a wicked and detestable acte, that the mother and the sonne committed. If ther had bene a law full magistrate, who oughte chieflye to haue a regarde to the worshippinge of God, and obseruation of the firste table, this hadde not beene permitted nor suffred vnpunished. Wherefore let it not seeme meruailous if the lawe slepte: For there was no Magistrate whyche shoulde haue beene the keeper thereof. [Page 239] And if at any tyme there be Magistrates whiche haue no care of these things, bycause they execute not their office, it is all one as if there were none. Publique wealthes do oftētymes degenerate a kingdome into Tyranny, Aristocratia into Oligarchia, & a publique wealth into Anarchia, & an vnrulines of y e people, Anarchia whiche is w [...] of a ruler, is a destructiō o publique wealths y t euery man doth what himselfe listeth. And there is nothing in the society of mē more pernicious, then that euery man should follow his owne will. For our nature is corrupt & vitiated, therfore whosoeuer followeth it onely as a leader, must nedes exceedingly erre. But a law is a true minde, and a firme and sure rule of men in doyng of thinges. Plato in Cratilo elegantly sayth: As we call the mynde [...], Plato. What [...] so call we the lawe [...], as it were [...], that is an abydyng & stable minde, otherwise the minde of men is wandring. For y e whiche seemeth good vnto one, the same seemeth not so vnto an other. Neither doth one and the selfe same mā abide alwayes in one and the selfe same opinion. Wherfore for as much as all thinges are vncertayne, as often as any man doth that whiche seemeth good in his owne eyes, for the most part he strayeth from the true end.
7 There was also a yong man out of Bethelehem Iudah, of the familie of Iudah: who was a Leuite, and soiourned there.
8 And the man departed out of the Citie, euē out of Bethlehē Iudah, to dwell where he coulde finde a place: and as he iourneied, he came to mount Ephraim to the house of Micha.
9 And Micha sayd vnto hym, whence cōmest thou? And the Leuite answered him I come from Bethlehē Iudah, & go to dwell where I may finde a place.
10 Then Micha sayd vnto hym: Dwell with me, and be vnto me a father & a Priest, & I will geue thee ten peeces of Siluer by yeare, & a sute of apparell, & thy meat and drinke. So the Leuite went in.
11 And the Leuite was content to dwell with the man, & the yong man was vnto hym as one of his owne sonnes.
12 And Micha consecrated the hand of the Leuite, and the younge man was his Priest, and dwelled in the house of Micha.
13 Then sayd Micha: Now I knowe that the Lorde will be good vnto me, seyng I haue a Leuite to my Priest.
Here is set forth the consecration of an other Priest. For by chaūse there cō meth a younge man of the tribe of Leui, whom Micha hyreth to minister in hys holy seruices, and remoueth his sonne from the priesthood. And the Leuite soiorned to find out a place where he might get his liuing, for he desired a state of life. Micha receaueth him to be his priest. By this Hystory is gathered, Idolatrous worshippyngs do imitate the true worshypping of God. y e idolatrous worshippings, although they be cōtrary to the institution of god, yet they enterprise as much as may be, y t they may be like vnto it. For euen as Apes wil seeme to be men, although they be not men in deede, so idolatrers, although they worshippe not the true God, yet they will seeme to worship hym. For they labor to retayne some shewe of his worshipping as much as may be. So Micha, that he might seeme to worship the true God rightly, instituted an Ephod, a temple, and a Priesthode. Lastly, bycause he would not much straye from the institution of God, he ordreth a Leuite ouer his holy seruices and ceremonyes.
The Leuites wandred hether & thether. The tribe of Leui was dispersed amonge other tribes. For that tribe was disparsed among the other tribes. In whiche thing we must remember the maner of the publique wealth of Israel. The other tribes had landes and possessions, and conteyned thē selues in some certayne regions. But the Leuites dwelled dispersedly among them, that they might the easelyer minister vnto them. The Leuites in deede had [Page] their Cities also: but many of them wandred abrode through other tribes. This younge man was of Bethlehem which perteyned vnto the tribe of Iudah.
But it may be demaunded, if he were a Leuite, howe he belonged vnto y e tribe of Iudah? There are some whiche thinke that he had a Leuite vnto his father, but his mother was of y e tribe of Iudah. For tribes were oftentymes mingled as concernyng matrimonyes. D. Kimhi. But Dauid Kimhi somewhat doubteth concernyng that thing. For he sayth it is not the maner of the holy Scriptures, for the sonnes to deriue his tribe or famely of his mother. Other aunswere, that whiche Kimhi sayth, is for the most part true, but not alwayes. For if y e mother wer an inheritor, the sonne had his surname of her, and to proue this true, they alledge a place of the .2. booke of Paralp. where Ezron of the tribe of Iudah toke to wife y e daughter of Machor of the tribe of Manasseh, & the children which he had by her, were named by the name of their grandfather on the mothers side, & were called the children of Machor. And that was done, bycause the mother was an heire of 30 Cities. So it may be, that this young mans mother was an inheritor of Bethlelem, of the tribe of Iudah. But me thinketh these thinges are spoken superfluously, The Cityes called Bethlehem. & peraduēture not very truly. For it is sayd a young man of the tribe of Leui, of Bethlehem Iuda. And in that it is agayne added of Iuda, y e ought to be referred vnto Bethlehem, that it might be separated from the other Bethlehem y t lay in the tribe of Zabulon. If we fellowe this interpretation, then is there no ambiguity. But how dwelled the Leuite in Bethlehem? Not vndoubtedly as a Citezine, but as a straunger, and he wandred abrode to seke his lyuing. Wherfore it is not very likely that his mother was an inheritor, when as he was compelled to seeke his lyuing beggingly.
Why the tenthes were not at this tyme geuen vnto the Leuites.And that the Leuite so wandred abrode being compelled by hūger, was not for lacke of order by the law. For by it y e tenthes were geuē vnto the Leuites to lyue by. But as the tymes were then, they were not geuen vnto thē, partly bycause y e Philistines oppressed the Iewes, in polling thē of their riches, & partly bycause there was no Magistrate, to loke that the people shuld pay their tenthes. And mē are of themselues willingly in a manner so couetous, that vnles they be cōpelled they will not pay thē. Lastly, bycause the Israelites were at y e tyme very prone vnto idolatry, neither did they much regarde y e worshipping or Ministers of the true God: therfore they suffred the Leuites to starue. Wherfore it is no meruaile if this young mā were compelled to wander abrode, & to begge his lyuing. Nehemias in his .3. chap. sayth, that when Leuites had not so much geuen them as was sufficient for their liuing, they fled away, neither would they minister in y e tēple.
The Leuite came and turned into Micha, not minding to tary there, but to go on in his iorney, but Micha, when he vnderstood that he was a Leuite, hired him to be his Priest. The name of the Leuite is not in this place spoken of, howbeit by the latter end of the .18. chap. of this booke we learne that he was called Ionathan the sonne of Gerson, the sonne of Menasse.
How much the stipende of the Leuite was.He promised him ten silueringes a yeare: which sūme is (as they say) in a maner as much as fiue crownes of Kyne, & an ordre or sute of apparel, y t is, garmentes for winter, & garments for summer. Hereby we gather, y t althoughe Micha wer an idolatrer, The law of nature iudgeth that y e holy ministery is to be had in honour. yet had he y e ministery in estimation. For he noorisheth his Priest, he geueth him apparel, wages, and other thinges necessary. So did also the Gentiles which knew not god. It semeth to be the law of nature, that they which labor in the holy seruices, should haue both liuing, & honour. He doth not in deede geue him any great stipend, but yet so much as was sufficiēt. Paul sayd: Hauing meate and drinke & clothing, The Synode of Antioche. with these things let vs be content. Also in the Sinode of Antioche (as it is had in the .12. questiō the .3. chap. Episcopus) the stipend for a minister, is appoynted to be so much as is sufficient for the necessity of lyfe. And afterward in the .20. The seuenth Synode. question the .1. chap. Clericus, and it is the seuenth Sinode, is decreed the same thyng, where the glose demaundeth: What Church is [Page 240] to be counted riche, and what Church poore: and it answereth, What Church is riche. that that Church is sufficiently riche, whiche can noorishe his ministers with their famely, so that they may be able also to keepe hospitality. But in our time nothing is sufficiēt. They heape benefice vpon benefice, neither make they any end of sekyng for riches. What then at the length shalbe sufficient? The glose aunswereth, that y e can not be prescribed, for we must haue a respect vnto the place, person, & tyme, & sundry and diuers thinges agree to sundry persons, tymes, and regions. The Synode of Chalcedonia The Synode of Chalcedonia decreed that one man should not haue a title in sundry Churches. But they haue now long since abolished these thyngs.
And that the lawe of nature (as I sayd) willeth that Ministers should be noorished, appeareth also by that whiche Paul writeth to the Conrinth. in his .1. Epistle, when he teacheth that same, he bringeth argumentes euen from nature. No man sayth he, goeth on warfare at his owne charges. Thou shalt not mosel the mouth of the oxe whiche treadeth out the corne. Who fedeth a flocke, and eateth not of the milke? Wherfore y e yong man sinneth not in that he taketh a stipend. For that was lawfull both by Gods law and by the lawe of nature. Wherein this Leuite sinned. But in that he letteth his ministery to hyre vnto an Idole, hee very haynously sinned. For nowe he worshipped not God, but his belly. Suche also were they whiche Paul sayeth, serued not the Lorde Iesus, but their belly. This man nothing cared in what Religion he ministred, so that he myght get a liuyng. For this thing do very many euen now a dayes labour for, yea all the Massemongers for the most part, who nothyng regard, howe vngodly it is to say Masses. Herein is all theyr care to keepe still their reueneues and benefices. This Leuite sayeth not, God is not so to be worshipped. Such a cup such a couer. An euill Micha, hath gotten an euill Leuite. In his thyng also y e Leuite sinned, bycause he was nothyng made afeard by the example of Core, who when he would haue vsurped the office of a Priest, was swallowed downe quicke into the earth. This younge man was not of the famely of Aaron, he was onely a Leuite of the famely of Gerson, as some say. Neither doth Micha enquire of hym from whēce he was, or of what famely, or howe well he was instructed in the lawe of GOD, but he straightwaye consecrateth hym a Priest. But he ought fyrste diligently to haue examined hym: for GOD would not haue vncleane Sacrifices offred hym, and shall we thinke that he abhorred not from corrupte Priestes? This younge Leuite thought it a goodly thyng to be exalted to the ministery of a Priest. Thou shalt bee to me a Father and a Priest. Ministers of God are to be [...] counted for fathers. He seemeth vndoubtedly with great reuerence to honour the Minister. And in deede the Ministers of GOD are to be counted for fathers. For the holy Ghost vseth their ministery for the regeneration of other. So Paul sayde, he had agayne begotten the Galathians, when as he had before begotten them vnto God. The same Paul writeth vnto the Corinthians: Althoughe ye haue many schoolemasters, yet haue ye not many fathers.
Nowe the Lorde will doo good vnto me. Nowe GOD (sayeth he) wyll increase my thynges: for there were many whiche would come vnto those holy serseruices, and he should be partaker of all the oblations and Sacrifices, and so the miserable man thinketh that gayne is godlynes. And in deede Paul sayeth to Timothe, that piety is a great gayne with sufficiency, but he addeth: That they whiche will be riche, doo fall into temptacions and snares of the deuill, and many whiche desire to be riche, haue fallen into shipwracke from the fayth, and haue wrapped themselues into great sorowes. All these thinges happened vnto Micha: for he both strayed from the fayth, and was most greuously afflicted with vnlooked for calamityes. For the Danites, as we shall heare, inuaded hys house, and ouerthrewe it with all his felicity. They led awaye the Leuite with the idole. And yet he in the meane tyme flattereth hymselfe and sayth: The Lord will blesse me.
¶The .xviii. Chapter.
1 IN those dayes there was no kyng in Israell. And at the same tyme y e tribe of Dan sought thē an inheritaūce to dwell in: for vnto that tyme their inheritaūce had not fallen vnto them among the tribes of Israel.
2 Therfore the childrē of Dan sent of their famely fyue men out of their coastes, valiaunt men, out of Zora and Eshtaol to vew the land and diligently to searche it out, & they sayd vnto them: Go searche out the land. Then they came to mount Ephraim to the house of Micha and lodged there.
3 And when they were nyghe the house of Micha, they knewe the voyce of the younge man the Leuite, and they turned in there, and sayd vnto hym: who brought thee hyther? What makest thou here? and what hast thou to doo here?
4 And he aunswered them. Thus and thus doth Micha vnto me, and hath hyred me to be his Priest,
5 And they sayd vnto him: Aske counsell I praye thee of God, that we may know, whither he will prosper the way wherby we walke.
6 And the Priest sayd vnto them: Go in peace. Your waye whereby ye walke, is before the Lord.
In that it is sayd there was no kyng in Israell, is signified that it is not to bee meruayled, The Danites were left destitute of their brethren. that Religion, and the Publique wealth was then troubled. There was no Magistrate, which shuld iustly haue punished these sinnes. By this place is vnderstand y t the Danites wer left destitute of their brethrē, when they should get their possession, whiche thinge vndoubtedly should not haue bene done: for they ought euery tribe, one to haue helped an other, in getting their inheritaūce. For so had Moses & Iosuah prescribed them before, but the Israelites forgettyng theyr brethren, studyed euery man by himselfe for his owne commodity and profite. The vtility of a Magistrate. Hereof sprang Idolatry, and the takyng away of other mens goods, bycause there was neither kynge nor Magistrate, to restrayne these euilles. Hereby we maye knowe howe muche a Magistrate is to be made of: Who if he bee good, then keepeth in he good order both the publique wealth & the worshyppyng of god. For he is the keeper as wel of the first table, as also the latter. Neither hath he a care onely for the bodyes of his Citezins, but also for their soules. And howe ill soeuer the Magistrate be, yet to defende the common society of men, he many wayes profiteth y e publique wealth. But now al things were decayed, bycause y e publique wealth was destitute both of a king, & also of a Magistrate. They were not depriued of this good thyng by the institution of God, but by theyr owne sinne, whereby they were deliuered into the power of the Philistines.
An obiectiō touching the primitiue Churche.But thou wilt say: did not Christian men so in the primitiue Churche? For they had not their Magistrates, but were most cruelly vexed of tyrannes. That is true in deede, but in the meane tyme they had very excellent Ministers of the Churche, and therewith all most aboundaunt and greate benefites of the holy ghost. And when the Apostles wrought wonderfull miracles, there seemed to be the les want of a Christian Magistrate. Paul by a great power of the holy Ghost made blind Elimas the sorcerer. Heresies increase vnles y e Magistrate represse them. Peter slewe Ananias and Saphira. They deliuered vnto Sathā such as were past correction. Howbeit in the meane tyme increased many heresies, bycause there was no Magistrate to keepe them downe, euen as now in Israel, when they wanted their princes, Idolatry crept in. Afterward wer [Page 241] geuen vnto the Church both Christian princes & Magistrates, and therewithall there ceased such giftes of the holy Ghost, bycause they seemed not so necessary, when Christian Schooles, Christian Phisitions, and Christian Iudges happened vnto the Churche.
¶Of the head of the Churche.
THis place y e Papistes obiect vnto vs, An obiection of the Papistes. & thinke y t it maketh very much to establish their tyrāny. Se (say they) hereof sprōg so many sectes & heresies amōg you, bycause ye haue not an Ecclesiastical Magistrate, & for y t ye haue fallen frō the onely head of y e Church. Wherfore that the state of y e Churche may be the quieter, there must be one head therof in earth. But we neither wil, nor may suffer this: bycause it is manifestly repugnant vnto the word of God. We acknowledge one head of the Church that is Christ, from whom we fele that both lyfe & spirite floweth and spreddeth abrode into all the rest of the body.
But they say there must also be an other head of the Church. For Christ (say they) is the head as touching the soule and iustification. But there must be an other head also, concernyng the retayning of outward rites and ceremonies, for y e wedyng out of heresies, & to vnite Churches together. To this we say, y t it is sufficient y t euery Church haue his minister or Byshop, who may dispense the word of God and the Sacramentes, & retayne discipline as much as may be. But that there should be some one man to gouerne all the rest, neither is it necessary, neither ought it to be suffred: bycause (as I haue sayd) the head is from whence lyfe and spirite is deriued into all the body. And such a head is Christ onely. God woulde haue in the Churche not one Minister onely, but many. And we must marke the institution of GOD, who would haue many Ministers in the Churche. For so is it written vnto the Ephesians, Christ hath ascended into heauen, and hath led captiuity captiue, and geuen gyftes vnto men. And that we should vnderstande howe he hath geuen them, it is added: Some he hath g [...]uen Apostles, some he hath geuen Prophetes, some Euangelistes, some Pastors and teachers, for the renewyng of the saintes into the worke of administration, for y e edification of the body of Christ, wherfore to builde the body of Christ, God wil haue many and sundry gyftes of the spirite and Ministeryes retayned in the Churche. Let these men euery one execute his office, let them conferre together, if there happen any controuersy, and if neede be, let them assemble together to Synodes. But that euery controuersy should be referred vnto the Byshoppe of Rome, and that all men shoulde obey the Pope onely, it is intollerable, and vtterly Tyrannicall.
Neither doo the Popes contayn themselues, Popes do also chaūge the institutions of God. to excercise power onely in outwarde thinges, but also they chaunge the institutions of God, and rules of religion: Which thyng we haue now had experiēce of to y e great hurt of the Church. It is a very good saying whiche y e Apostle hath vnto the Romanes in the .12. chap. Euen as in one body we haue many mēbers, but all mēbers haue not one & the selfe same office: so we being many are one body in Christ, & euery one the members of others, hauing sundry giftes according vnto the grace geuē vnto vs. And the same things in a maner are written in the .1. to y e Cor. the .13. chap. Wherfore we must not thinke that if we acknowledge not the Pope for head, that for that cause the Churche is troubled: yea rather hereof springeth the contention and confusion in the Churche, bycause many, for that they will haue the Pope to be head, do most manifestly stand agaynst the truth.
Neither is it true that they say, how that the Church can not consiste, The Churche was long tyme and that happy without a earthly head. except all men obey the Pope onely. For the Church was long tyme and that in much better state, before the Pope obteyned his tyrannycall power. Then (say they) ye will haue no Magistrate in the Churche. We will haue gouerners in it, but not one onely: we wil haue Aristocratia kept in it, as Christ hath instituted. They on [Page] the cōtrary syde obiect that there ought to be but one onely, bycause in this place it is written that all thynges were troubled in Israel, bycause they had not a kyng. But we must consider, that the Scripture nowe speaketh so by anticipation: for as much as yet there was no kyngdome instituted in Israel. Wherfore a kyng is in this place to be vnderstand for a lawfull Magistrate.
An obiection of the Papistes: Thou art Peter, &c.But leauyng this place, they say that Christ sayde vnto Peter: Thou art Peter, and vpō this rocke will I builde my Church. I will geue vnto thee the kayes of the kyngdome of heauen, &c. These thinges (as they will haue them) haue a respect vnto one onely, and ought to be vnderstand of one whiche should be the head. But was not this selfe same thyng sayd vnto others also? Vndoubtedly in Iohn Christ sayd vnto them all: Receaue the holy Ghost, whose sinnes ye forgeue, shalbe forgeuen. Wherfore Peter dyd not alone receaue the kayes of the kyngdome of heauen. But they say that it was sayd vnto Peter onely: Fede my Lambes. Yea but this he spake vnto them all, when he sayd: Go into the whole worlde, Christe is the foundation of the Churche. and preache the Gospell to all creatures. But where as they boast that this saying belōgeth vnto Peter alone: Vpon this rocke I will build my Church, it shall not be so sone graūted them. For Christ is the foundation of the Church, as the Apostle hath taught. And there are some of the fathers, whiche do interprete that Christ referred these wordes, not to Peter hymselfe, but to the confession whiche he had made of Christ. But graunt that Peter was in some sorte after Christ the foundation of the Churche: the same thyng also may we say of the other Apostles, forasmuch as in the Apocalipse are rede .12. foūdations of the celestial Ierusalem. How there are 12. foundations of the Church. But of this matter we haue spoken more aboundantly before, and shall haue better occasion hereafter to speake therof: onely these thynges I thought good to bryng, that it should not be thought, that the Papistes had gotten the victory when they obtrude this place to the vnlearned.
They sent spyes. The cause was, bycause they had not landes ynough to dwell in, and to tyll. But howe could this be, when as all the land of Chanaan was destributed by Iosua? I aunswere, that it was in deede geuen vnto euery tribe accordyng to sundry porcions, but yet were not the Danites come to theyr full and whole possession. Yea, we gather by the History of Samson, that the Danites dwelled yet in tentes, where the spirite of the Lord began to come vpon Samson. Farther we must remember, that they at the begynnyng were content with tributes, which they exacted of those, whose landes they should haue possessed. But they were made vnto them as thornes and briers. For when as they had not driuen them out, but dwelled together with them, they quickely learned Idolatry of them. Wherfore we rede in this boke that the Danites were compelpelled to dwell in the hilly places, when they could not discend and possesse the playne. But now those hilly places seemed very narrowe, for they increased in number, and therfore they neded more roome to dwell in.
The promise of GOD was not weaker thē the enemyes of the Hebrues.If thou shalt say: was the power of the enemyes of greater force then the promise of God? No vndoubtedly. For it was not the enemyes that excluded them out, but they hyndred themselues, for that they followed Idolatry. Wherfore GOD punished them, and longe tyme draue them backe from the possession of their portion. That thyng therfore whiche happened, is to be ascribed vnto their impiety, and not to the strengthes of their enemyes. And to the promise of God was ioyned a condition, namely if they should abyde in the lawe of God. Their wickednes was the cause, that God did not straightway performe his promises.
They sende spyes to spye out for them some commodious place in the playne. They send out fyue spyes. Mikstsothim: which is frō theyr coastes, & they ar signified to be in extremies: which may taken two wayes, namely y t these spyes were either of y e basest sort, or of y e highest. For either of these in their order ar extreme. They wer in deede valiant and warlike men, but peraduēture obscure, wherby [Page 242] they might be the more vnknowē of their enemyes. For they y e ar noble ar more easely knowen. Cōtraryly other thinke y t it is declared, that they were most honest & most noble: bycause spyes ought to be wise men, & such as haue good skil in warlike affaires. Homere writeth that Vlisses was commaūded to be a spye, Homer [...]. and that he in the apparel of a beggar went thorough Troy. Moses also sent Iosua & Chaleb which were very excellēt men, to searche out the land of Chanaan. But whether they were of y e basest sorte or of the hyghest, it helpeth not much vnto y e matter. And paraduenture this opinion is more simple, namely that they were sent from the vtter partes of the places wherin the Danites dwelled.
They came to the house of Micha. By a by way as it is thought, & not y e right way as their iorney lay. For it is very likely, that there was in y e place an Inne, wherunto men out of euery quarter resorted vnto the idole. So we see it happeneth in the Papacy, for in places where superstitious Pilgrimages are had, there are many Innes builded, as at Humbert, and at Maria Lauretana.
The spyes laboured with y e yong mā the Leuite after they knew his ministery, to aske an oracle for thē. And he answereth thē in the name of Iehouah, whē they asked him by this word Elohim. Those men were wise & witty. Howe they knew the Leuite by hys speeche. For when they heard the yong mā speake, they perceaued he was a Leuite. And althoughe all the Israelites spake Hebrew, yet were there sundry formes of speech amōg those tribes. Wherfore we haue before heard, y t the Ephraites wer knowen by the pronū ciatiō of this word Siboleth. They might therfore peraduenture note y t the yong man spake in y e speech of the tribe of Iuda, for asmuch as he was of Bethlehem, & peraduenture they heard him intreatyng of things deuine: wherfore when they perceaued y t he was a Leuite, whiche executed holy seruices there, straightwaye they enquired of him an answer of y e successe of their iorney. They nothing regarded how rightly he did it, but strayghtway sayd: Aske of god. So at this day souldiers whē they go on warfare, they come to their Masse Priests, & desire them to say a Masse for thē either of George, or of Sebastiā, neither haue they any regarde whether y e Masse be good or euill. This is to deale w t god after our blind reason, At y e first burnt it may seeme y t the spyes did not euil. For it is a point of piety to aske coūsel of god, whē we shal do any thing. But we ought to take hede, y t what soeuer is taken in hande, y e same be ioyned w t right reasō & sound iudgement of y e minde. For our actiōs must flow frō the heart, which as it is affected, Good looketh also vpon the heart, and not vpon the actions onely. so are they to be iudged either good or euil. Wherfore although god require of vs actiōs, yet he much more requireth the hart. We must not separate y e action & hart or purpose a sunder: let them abyde ioyned together as the Lord requireth them.
If thou demaūde of a Philosopher how the action is good, & whether it alone maketh the mā good, he will deny it, & wil say that the action must be directed be a ryght reason, whiche if it be awaye, then is the action corrupt. Wherefore the goodnes of euery action dependeth of reason of the minde, and of iudgemētes. The goodnes of an action dependeth of the minde or iudgement of y e doer. If these be euill, thē must y e action also nedes be corrupt. Looke what y e roote is in a tree: y e same is reason in a moral actiō, & in religious workes & such workes as ar truly Christiā fayth: it is as it were the soule of good workes, as without which nothing cā be acceptable vnto god. But faith leaneth to no other thyng thē to y e word of God. Fayth is the soule of good workes. Wherfore for asmuch as these mē cōmaund to aske counsel of God contrary to the word of God, they do exceadingly displease God: they were more led by their own commodity, then by true piety. So many at this day say: What euil is it to come to Masse? and there, with a godly mynd to pray vnto god? The Masse hath a great shew of piety: but we must remember that it cā not be good, for as muche as it is appertly repugnant to fayth, and to the worde of God. Let euery manne take heede he bee not deceaued with the outwarde shewe of piety: and let hym diligently consider, that outwarde woorkes make not a man good, but rather contraryly good workes must procede out of a good man.
But now come I to examine, & consider y e which is here intreated as touching [Page] the asking counsell of God, The commaundement for asking counsel of God is moral. & I finde that it is cōmaunded, y t in things of great difficulty y e mynde of the Lord is to be enquired of. This cōmaundemēt thoughe it were geuen vnto the Iewes, yet it pertayneth to the moral kinde of preceptes. Wherfore it byndeth vs also. But vnto the Iewes were adioyned certayne outward ceremonyes, from which we are by Christ deliuered. They were bound to come to the Priest, to the Ephod, and to the place of the arke of the couenant, or to the Prophet: those things are now taken away. And yet ought we also, when we take in hand to do any thyng, to aske counsell of the Lord, but remouyng away these addicions, which were necessary in y e publique wealth of y e Israelites. But where shall we in this tyme aske coūsel of the Lord? We ought to aske counsell of the holy scriptures when we appoint to doo any thyng. In the holy scriptures, as we haue before taught. Wherfore euery Christian ought to haue them ready at hand, & to do all things by their guiding. Whatsoeuer we shall do, let vs first looke in them, whether it be iust or vniust. This is to aske counsell of the Lord, which thing if we do not, we shalbe alway in doubt cōcerning our thīgs. Wherfore Paul hath rightly admonished: Euery thing that is not of faith is sinne. Neither are we ignorant but y e fayth cōmeth of hearing, & hearing by y e word of god. Wherfore whether we take in hand a iourney, or do or go about any thyng els, we must not wauer or doubt in mynde, but must be assured that our worke pleaseth God. Whiche thing when we knowe, we must referre the euent therof vnto God. Horace. Let it suffice vs to haue knowen that. Remember this saying of the Poete: If the world should breake and fall, let the ruine thereof pearse the fearefull.
The estate of the Hebrues & ours is diuerseBut why the Hebrues were so careful for y e successe of their matters, we haue in an other place declared. Their state was not all one w t ours. They wer much careful for their publique wealth, bicause God had promised them y t it should endure euē vnto Christs tyme. Neither was true religiō in any other place publikly receaued. Wherefore they were very carefull for the successe of their expeditions, namely that y e publique wealth wherin onely was appointed sound religiō, should not take hurt. Wherfore god also very oftentimes gaue them oracles for their euentes. But our state is farre otherwise. Sound religion is not at this day boūd to one publique wealth onely. For y e inheritance of Christ is dispersed thoroughe out y e world, neither shall it endure so lōg, as one onely publique wealth stādeth. But rather if one publique wealth fal by reason of sinnes, an other shall rise. If there arise persecutions for the Gospell sake (which oftētymes happeneth) it is lawfull to departe to an other place, whiche thyng was not so free for the Iewes, for they had not a tēple of god, & his outward worshipping in any other, then at Ierusalē. Superstition & idolatry possessed all other natiōs. Farther, this was an other cause, for y t the Iewes for their religions sake wer hated of all natiōs: wherfore they had the more neede to be by oracles admonished of y e euēt of their things. Wherfore for asmuch as such difficultyes are farre frō vs, it is sufficiēt to seke out by y e holy scriptures, whether those things, which we do & medle with, do please god. And to y e study ioyned with faith, let prayers be added, y t that which we our selues ar not able to do, god himself may bring to passe. And thē at y e lēgth let vs diligētly & valiātly attēpte the thing which we haue taken in hād. So far (as I think) the precept for asking counsell of y e Lord pertayneth vnto vs.
Why the Leuite aunswered in the name of Iehouah.And in this Hystorye let vs consider (as I haue before sayde) that the Leuite aunswereth in the name of Iehouah, that is, of the Lord, bycause he would signifie, that he knewe well ynough, that the Idole was nothyng. I (sayeth he) aunswere in the name of the Lorde. This sentence, which R. Selemoh followeth, seemeth plausible. But to me it seemeth not so. For I thinke that the younge man dyd it to get authoritye to his Religion. For whiche cause he is the more grieuously to be accused, for that he contaminated the name of GOD, in applyeng it vnto an Idole. He aunswereth: your waye is in the sight of the Lorde, that is, God himselfe will go out before you, and direct your iorney, all thinges shall go well and prosperous with you, when as God is with you, and directeth [Page 231] you. And so did it succede in very deede. For they luckely spyed out all thynges, the euent came to pas as they desired. Wherfore it may well here be demaunded why God so prospered these euill workes.
Before I aunswere to thys question, Our workes do not therfore please God bycause they haue good successe. this I thinke good to put in by the waye, that we ought not to take it for a sure token that our doynges do please GOD, bycause sometymes they haue a prosperous successe: otherwyse if we should measure thynges by the euent and successe, we should allowe the wicked and most euil doers, for as much as fortunate and prosperous thinges doo happen vnto them. We should also prayse deuiners, sorcerers southsayers and coniurers, bicause they haue sometimes foretolde thinges that are true. It is sometymes permitted vnto the deuill to deuine by them.
Let suche foretellynges be referred vnto the .13. chapter of Deuteronomye, where it is thus written: If a Prophet ryse vp among you, or a dreamer of dreames, and shall geue thee a signe or wonder, and that whiche he hath foretolde thee come to passe: Thou shalt not harkē vnto his voyce. If he entise thee to Idolatry, let hym be killed (sayth he) neither let hym be spared. The Lord proueth his by the miracles of the vngodly. Afterward is added a reason, why God dealeth after this maner, which thyng was at the begynnyng demaunded: bycause (sayth he) the Lord proueth you, whether ye loue him or not. And therwith agreeth Paul in his .2. Epistle to the Thes. the .2. chap. wher he entreateth of Antechrist: His comming (saith he) shalbe by the working of Sathan, with power, signes, & liyeng wonders, & withall deceatefulnes in those whiche perish, bycause they receaued not the loue of the truth, to that end they might be saued. And therfore God shall send thē the efficacy of illusion, y t they should beleue lyes, y t all they should be iudged whiche haue not beleued the truth. Wherfore althoughe we do see signes, yet must we not straightwaye geue fayth vnto those by whom they are wrought, but must diligently examine, whether they attempt to teache any thyng contrary to the worde of God.
In the Papistical Masses & marchādise of reliques, were oftentymes wrought great miracles, & yet ought we not to beleue such superstitiōs, & to fall frō Christ & the true worshipping of god. How miracles profite for saluation. God suffreth this kind of miracles to be wrought that ingrate men, & those which haue forgotten their God, should be deceaued, & be taken as it were by these nettes, & that the godly should become the more vigilāt & better. Neither ar these things spokē to despise al miracles. For they which are done in a true cause & for sound doctrine, are certaine praises of god, & trumpets of y e truth. But cōtrarily, they which vnder the pretēce of miracles do with drawe men from the worshipping of GOD, we ought to counte them cursed, thoughe they worke neuer so great miracles.
7 Then the fyue men went and came to Lais, and sawe the people whiche were in it, dwelling carelesly, after the manner of the Sydonians, quiet and sure. And for that there was no mā in the land whiche made them ashamed in any thyng, nor whiche by the inheritance receaued the kingdome, and for that they were farre from the Sidonians, neither had they any busines with other men.
8 So they came agayne vnto theyr brethren in Zora and Esthoall, and their brethren sayd: What haue ye done?
9 And they sayd: Arise, that we may go vp vnto them. For we haue sene the lande, and beholde it is very good: and do ye sit stil? Be not slouthfull to go to enter and possesse the land.
10 When ye shall enter, ye shal enter into a careles people, farther, the coūtrey is large in roome: for god hath geuen it into your hāds, a place whiche wanteth nothing that groweth in the earth.
[Page]11 Thē there departed thēce of the family of y e Danites, frō Zorah & frō Eshtaol, sixe hundreth mē appoynted w t instrumētes of warre.
12 And they went vp, & pitched in Kiriah iearim in Iudah: Wherfore they called that place. Mahaneh dan vnto this day: and it is behind Kiriah-iearim.
13 And they went thence vnto mount Ephraim, and came to the house of Michah.
14 Then answered the fiue men, that went to spye out the countrey of Laish, and sayd vnto their brethren: Knowe ye not, that there are in these houses an Ephod, and Theraphim, and a grauen and molten Image. Now therfore consider what ye haue to do.
15 And they turned thetherward and came to the house of the yong man the Leuite, whiche was in the house of Michah, and saluted hym peaceably.
16 And the sixe hundreth men appoynted with their weapons of warre, whiche were of the children of Dan, stoode by the enteryng of the gate.
17 Then the fiue men that went to spye out the lande, went in thether and tooke the grauen Image and the Ephod, and the Theraphim, and the molten Image: and the Priest stoode in the entrynge of the gate with the sixe hundreth men, that were appoynted with weapons of warre.
18 And the other went into Michahs house and fet the grauen Image the Ephod, and the Theraphim, & the molten Image. Then sayd the Priest vnto them: What do ye?
19 And they aunswered him, holde thy peace: laye thyne hande vpon thy mouth, and come with vs to be our father and Priest. Whether is it better thou shouldest be a Priest vnto the house of one mā, or y t thou shouldest be a Priest vnto a tribe & to a familye in Israel?
20 And the Priestes hearte was glad, and he tooke the Ephod and the Theraphim, and the grauen Image, and went in the middest of the people.
21 And they turned and departed, and put the children and the cattell, and the substaunce before them.
The City of Lais is in the booke of Iosuah called Lesem. And they saw the people dwelling in security. This worde people is in this place ioyned with an adiectiue of the feminine gender. It is therfore the figure Enallage, bycause one gender is put for an other. They dwelled careles after the manner of the Zidonians. The Zidonians feared not the Hebrues, The Zidoniās wer most strōg men. bycause they were none of those seuen nations, whiche were deliuered to be possessed of them. Farther the Zidonians were men most mighty and of them came many Colonii, which were people dispersed, to seeke new seates and specially at Carthage. Wherefore Virgil calleth Dido a Sidonian, Virgil. bycause she came frō thence. But why this City of Lais was in such security, Why the City of Lais was secure. there may be other causes geuen. First it had no molestious neyghbours, wherby there should haue ben any daūger at hand towardes thē: farther there no was tyran, which vsuped vnto himselfe the dominion of y e City. Wherfore for asmuch as they wer not vexed, neither by any Tyranne, nor of enemies, they liued securely. These causes are gathered out of the texte, & also mencioned of y e Hebrues. But I thinke moreouer, that y e City had not seuere Magistrates, [Page 244] which should haue kept the people in doing their duties, Securiti of the fleshe is a thing pernicious. which thing ingēdreth most great daunger vnto Cities. Neither is ther any vice in a maner more hurtfull, then the security of the flesh Wherefore God wyll haue his to be vigilant and attentiue: bicause when all thinges seme to vs to bee safe and quiet, then is daunger most of al at hand. Whilest the Sodomites liued most pleasantlye and most securely, they were or they were ware burnt with fire from heauen: and in the time of Noe, when men made banquets daily, maried, and tooke wiues, they wer a w t sodain flood oppressed. Wherfore it is rightly sayd: when they shal say, peace, peace, and althinges are safe, sodaine destruction shall come. It is added, that they were farre from the Sidonians, A league ma [...]e with a people far distant, is litle profitable. for bicause by that meanes they mought the easelier be conquered. Peraduenture they had made some league wyth the Sidonians: but confederates which dwel farre a sunder, cannot but with difficulty geue succor and be at hand, when nede requireth: which thing histories euery where doo teache vs. It is also added, that they had no busynes or trafficke wyth other men: which is therefore spoken, bicause cities are somtimes holpen, not by reason of a league, but bicause of communicating of busynes, namelye, bicause they cannot be destroyed, without the misery of manye men. These thinges the Spies diligently marked: wherfore it appeareth that they wer wise & subtil mē.
Come, arise, the land is large and wyde, neither is there any thing wanting in it. What are the chiefe poyntes of this exhortacion. They doo in few woordes finish their exhortacion appointed. Then are we stirred vp to take in hand any thing, when it is easy & profitable. These two things are the principall pointes of thys exhortacion. They declare vnto their people, that that land is good and fertile, as wherein wanteth nothing that serueth for plentifulnes and aboundance. In placing our selues these things onely ar wont to be considered. And the reasons thereof they conclude by security. Then they adde spurres to pricke them, when they say: God hath geuen it into your hands, which thing peraduenture they adde, bicause of the Leuite, which answered thē, that their iourny was in the sight of the Lord: or bicause that porcion of the land when it was deuided, fel to the tribe of Dan.
There went out syxe hundreth men. It is not described after what maner, or with what furniture they went foorth, onely it is said that they were armed. But by those thinges which follow, we vnderstande that they had their cattell, children and wiues in their companye. And they pitched in Kiriath iearim. It seemeth that it was a iourney of three dayes: for they pitched twise before they came thither: vnles peraduenture they went a by way, and not y e right way. Kiriath-iearim is a Citye of woods or forestes. Whereby is geuen a reason why that place was called the tentes of Dan. And it lay on the backside of the citye of Kiriath-iearim. They came to the house of Micha, and ther they pitched againe.
The fyue men answered. With the Hebrues to āswer is to beginne to speake. The verbe of answering in the Hebrue phrase signifieth as much as to begyn to talke, or to begyn to speake. They made mencion of the Ephod and grauen image, whilest that they perswaded the fellow to theft or rather sacriledge. Their counsell was that it was expedient, to haue wyth them those holy thinges.
They came to the house of the young man. It is an exposicion of that which was before sayde, how that they came vnto the house of Micha, namelye where the young man the Leuite ministred. They saluted him peaceably, and peraduē ture they began to aske counsel of him, of the successe and euent of their expedicion. The sixe hundreth men stoode before the doore, and helde the Leuite aboute the gate, whilest the fiue men spoiled the temple. For entring into it, they tooke away al with them. Afterwarde they intreate the yong man to go wyth them. And he, for that he had no other guide but his belly, easely assented vnto them. An obiection of the Papistes. With this argument of the Danites the Papists oftentimes assayle vs: Ye teach by corners in one or two cities or prouinces. Why do ye not rather come to the catholike churche with vs are riches, honors, and benefices. Ye are fooles: ye neither [Page] prouide wel for your selues, nor yet for others.
By this kinde of perswasion the hart of this Sacrificer was won, who was not ready to cry out. And being perswaded, to the ende he might be the more in safety, he went in the myddest of the armed men, least peraduenture Micha, requiring his thinges againe, shoulde haue pulled him backe againe to his house: or rather he went so with his Idole, that he might somwhat resemble the Arke of couenaunt. For we reade in the booke of Numb. that as often as they went foorth, and remoued their host, the Arke of the couenant was caried about by the Leuites, in the middest of the host, so that the one part of the host shoulde go before, and the other part should follow behinde. After this maner the Leuite wold set foorth his Idole vnto the Soldiours.
But this is to be maruailed at, that men were so blynde and mad, to make them their Gods, How great the blindnes of idolatrers is. Augustine. which wer subiect to theft and to sacriledge. Augustine in his .x Tome, and .xix. Treatise elegantly derideth such defēders of cities and houses. Which haue eyes and see not, feete and handes and can not moue themselues. Such saith he, were the gouernours and keepers of the Capitolium: who seyng they could not defend themselues, how much lesse were they able to defend a cyty? Neither let any say: They were not Gods that were taken awaye out of the temple of Micha, but onely two images of Gods. But Augustine sayth: If they can not defende their owne images, what hope is there that they can defende Cities or houses? Virgil. But this thing is so much ridiculous, that euen the Ethnicke Poetes deride it. For Virgil hath soong of his Eneas: He caried Troy with hym into Italy, & their Gods being ouercome. Vndoubtedly miserable Gods, which could be ouercome of men, and be caryed into an other place. Some wyll obiect: That the Arke of the Lord was also taken once, and led away after a sorte captiue of the Philistians. I graūt that: But how was it caried away? To be kept as a prisoner? No vndoubtedly. For when it was put in the temple of the Philistians, it threw Dagon their god to the ground. Farther, it strake the Philistians with so grieuous plagues and woundes, that at the last they were compelled to send it home againe with honour. And it was taken, not bicause God can either be ouercome, or taken, but that the Hebrewes shoulde bee admonished of their synnes, who wythout repentaunce or fayth, dyd put al their confidence in an outwarde thyng.
They placed their children, cattel, and substance before. Bicause they suspected that Micha would with armed soldiours pursue them, to see if he could recouer the thinges which they had taken away. Wherefore they woulde chieflye prouide for their children, cattel, and substance. This woord Supplex which we turne substance, is called in Hebrue Kechodah, either bicause it signifieth a burthen or a packe, or els a thing whereof men make their boast.
22 When they wer farre of from the house of Micha, the men that were in the houses neare to Michahs house, gathered together, and pursued after the children of Dan.
23 And cryed vnto the chyldren of Dan: who turned theyr faces, & sayd vnto Michah, what ayleth thee, that thou makest an outcry?
24 And he sayde: ye haue taken away my Gods, whyche I made, and the Priest, and go your wayes: and what haue I more? Howe then say ye vnto me, what ayleth thee?
25 And the children of Dan sayd vnto hym: Let not thy voyce bee heard among vs, least peraduenture men of a bytter mynde runne vpon thee, and thou loose thy lyfe, wyth the liues of thine houshold.
26 So the chyldren of Dan went their wayes, and when Michah saw that they were to strong for hym, hee turned and went backe [Page 245] vnto hys house.
27 And they tooke the thynges whyche Micha had made, and the Priest which he had, and came vnto Laish, vnto a quiet people, and wythout mystrust, and smote them wyth the edge of the sword, and burnt the City wyth fyre.
28 And there was none to helpe, bycause Laish was farre from Zidon, and they had no busynes wyth other men: also it was in the valley that lyeth by Beth-rehob. After, they buylte the Citye, and dwelt therein.
29 And called the name of the City, Dan, after the name of Dan their Father, whych was borne vnto Israel: how be it the name of the City was Laish at the beginning.
30 Then the chyldren of Dan set them vp the grauen image: and Ionathan the sonne of Gershom, the sonne of Manasseth and hys sonnes were the Priestes in the Tribe of the Danites, vntyll the day of the captiuitye of the land.
31 So they set vp the grauen image, whych Micha had made, all the whyle the house of God was in Shiloh.
In that it is said that they which dwelled nigh the house of Micha were gathered together, is declared that the number of the houses had increased, & that by reason of peregrinacions, ther was in that place a village builded.
VVere gathered together. In Hebrue it is Noecu, by which verbe is signified, that they were raysed vp by an outcrye. For so are men gathered together when they heare an outcry on euery syde.
The Danites made him afearde, and threatned that men of a bytter mynde would inuade him, whom they so cal, either bicause they were angry (for choler is of his nature bitter) or els bicause they were desperate, as they in a maner are which seeke new dwelling places, and depart from home, bicause they can not there abide commodiously. It is agayne repeated that they of Lais wer far from Zidon: which declareth that they were in league with them.
But in that it is written that Ionathan and his sonnes were Priestes there, euen to the day of the captiuity of the lande, wee must not (as farre as I iudge) vnderstand it of the captiuity which the Hebrues suffred, either by the Assirians or by the Chaldeians: but of that whiche happened, when they were plagued by the Philistians: when also the Arke of the Testament was taken away. I know also that there are some of the Hebrues which fable that this Ionathan was the ne [...]ew of Moses by his sonne Gerson, and that his Graundfather is here called Menasseh, putting betwene this letter Nun, for to honour Moses with all. As though the holy scriptures doo not oftentimes make mencion of moste wycked children borne of excellent Parentes. But this is to be marked, that that is not very firme, neither can it be certaine, in that it was before said, that this Leuite was a Gersonite, bycause Gerson was the Sonne of Leui, and not of Menasseh. Wherefore it must nedes be vncertayne of what famely of the Leuites this man was. But now let vs diligently weigh such things as are in this chapter, worthy of peculiar noting.
Let vs chiefly consider how hurtful it is to want a Magistrate. An euil Magistrate also wanteth not some vtilitye. For althoughe sometimes there happen an euyl or to fauourable a Magistrate, yet if the thing be wel weighed, there commeth from him more good vnto the publike wealth, then there would come euyl, if there were in it no Magistrate at al. The Sunne and Moone, although they haue sometimes aspectes not very fauorable, whereby now and then ensue pestilences, dearth of corne, ouerflowing of waters, or [...] [Page] aultar, to the ende that holy seruices shoulde bee done thereon, but onelye they would haue it to be for a monument, that they shoulde not bee counted straungers from their brethren, but be thought to pertaine to the same people, and the same God. Wherfore if at that time the Israelites so hated Idolatry, that they would for that cause haue made warre agaynst the Rubenites and Gadites, it is not credible y t they would haue suffered the impiety of Micha. How this history is touched in the booke of Iosua. How then could this history be mencioned of in that booke? One of these twoo thinges we must answer, either that there were two cities both of one name pertaining vnto the Danites, which they by force conquered, so that of the one is mencion made in the booke of Iosua, and of the other in this historye. But this seemeth to be but a fayned tale. For those thinges which are written in the booke of Iosua, do seme altogether to pertaine to this place. Farther, al the Hebrue Interpreters doo agree that it was the same city. Let vs therefore rather say, that when, as in the booke of Iosua there is described the distribution of the land, and that it cōmeth vnto this city, that which was done long time after, is there added by an interpretacion, to expound after what sort the Danites shoulde in successe of tyme obtaine that city. And that particle was added, not of any meane man, but either of Samuel or els of Ezra, or of some other Prophet. And this is not to corrupt, or to confound the scriptures, but to put in something that is not from the purpose, whereby the whole matter may be the better vnderstand, so that it be done by the holy ghost. And I could bring foorth a great many examples, whyche are found to be spoken in the scriptures, by the figure [...], or anticipacion. But those thinges ought to be sufficient, which are red in y e beginning of this booke.
¶Of Security.
BVt bicause there is mencion made of security, I wyl speake somwhat largely of it in this place, how it is to be praysed or dispraysed. Security semeth to be a contempt of Gods iustice, whereby synnes are punished. If we speake of that, that can neuer be but vicious. But there is founde an other also, which vndoubtedly is to be allowed, and is laudable,
Hope is a mean betwene security & desperaciōBut to make the thing more plaine, let vs consider three thinges, Security, Hope, and Desperacion. Hope is euer the meane, whiche ought alwaies to bee commended. Security is excesse: but Desperacion is want. For as in puttyng away the mercy of God, we are made desperate, so in contemning his iustice we become secure. Wherfore we maye conclude that Security is a certaine immoderate hope.
Wherof security springeth.And it springeth hereof, either bicause we attribute to muche to our owne strength and wisdome, as though by our selues we thinke that wee are able to obtaine any thing: or els though we thinke that it lieth in the mercy of God, yet we suppose that he for our worthynes ought to accomplish it. So do they which promise themselues remission of synnes, or eternal felicity, although they do no repentaunce, but lyue vnpurely and wickedlye. Or els it springeth hereof, for that we doo not beleue that there is in God any execution of iustice. And thys Security wherof we entreate, The feare of God is contrarye to desperacion. Bernhardus. is not onely contrary vnto Desperacion, but also vnto the feare of God. For Desperacion springeth of to much feare of the iustice of God against synnes: but Securitye thinketh of nothing at all of that iustice. Wherfore Bernardus hath rightly sayd: Euen as the feare of God is the begynning of wysdome, so is security the ground of al impietye, and the begynning of foolishnes. For the feare of the Lord (as the scriptures testifye of it) pertayneth chefely vnto piety and religion. Wherefore in the Actes the .x. chap. Cornelius is called a man religious, and fearing God. Wherfore iustly hath security impiety ioyned w t it: & as it springeth of an euil beginning, so also bringeth it forth euil & noughty fruites, as sluggishnes, luskishnes, & slothfulnes. Therfore they which trust vnto thēselues, neither seke for helpe at gods hand, nor yet for ayd of men.
These people of Lais lyued securelye, What Negligence is. althoughe they were ioyned in no league or fellowshyp with their next neighbours. They were also infected wyth Negligence, which is nothing els, then a priuacion of that endeuour whych we ought to apply for the gouerning of thinges. By it the wyll is weakened, and the chearefulnes of the body is diminished. This kinde of security hath alwaies a daunger ioyned wyth it. For those thinges are not driuen away whych maye be hurtfull. For how can that be done, when as they are secure or careles, thinking rightly neyther of theyr owne strengthes, nor yet of the mercy of God, yea they are vtterly vnknowen vnto them selues? For if they knewe them selues, they woulde not lyue so securely. Augustine. Augustine vpon the foure score and nynetene Psalme wryteth: Where as is most security, there is most daunger. And he addeth, that a Shyppe when it is brought into the Hauen, thou thynckest it is in safety. But by the same waye that the Shyppe entreth in, the wynde also entreth in, and oftentymes tosseth it, and breaketh it vpon a rocke. Where then can there be securitye? Adam fell in Paradise, Iudas in the fellowshyp of Christ, Cain in the household of Noe, manye in the Lawe, and manye also in the Gospell. Where then shall wee lyue securely? Vndoubtedly no where. Therefore Ecclesiasticus doth right wel admonish vs: Sonne stand in the feare of the Lord, and prepare thy soule to temptacion. The Israelites sawe the Egiptians drowned in the red sea. Was it then meete for them to lyue in security? No surelye. Yea within a whyle after they were tempted in the wyldernes. Christ was baptised of Iohn: was he therefore made secure? No. For he was strayghtway tempted of the Deuyll. Wherefore we ought then to be most of all carefull, when we are receaued into the fauour of God, for then the Dyuel doth most of all watche for our destruction, and seeketh to make vs to fall. And therefore there is no place for securitye.
But are we so made of God, that we can in no place be secure? What Securitye is good and laudable. Not so vndoubtedly. For there is an other good and laudable Securitye, whyche (as Augustine sayth) consisteth in the promises of God, and is taken holde of by fayth. Thys engendreth not luskishnes or sluggishnes, but chearefulnes and diligēce. Of it Dauid hath very well soong in hys foure score and eleuen Psalme: Hee which dwelleth in the helpe of the most highest, shall abide in the protection of the God of heauen. Where as it is wrytten in the lattine Adiutorio, that is, in the helpe, the Hebrue woord signifieth a couer or secrete place, whiche no man taketh hold of, but he which hath faith in the promises of God. By that buckler we are defended, with that shadowe we are couered agaynst all hurt: this is the Security of faith, and of the spirite, which cleaueth vnto the woord of God. Securitye of the fleshe. And therefore it cannot be but commended. But the other Securitye is of the fleshe, and therefore it is execrable and detestable. Against it are set foorth most manyfest commaundementes of Christ, namely that we should alwayes pray, knock, seeke, and watch: for the daye of the Lorde wyl come lyke a theefe. If the good man of the house knewe what tyme the theefe woulde come, he would vndoubtedlye watche, neither would he suffer hys house to be inuaded. We oughte alwayes to praye and watche, bycause although the spirite be ready, yet the fleshe is weake. Paul admonisheth vs to put on the armour of God, that wee maye resyst in the euyll day. Stande (sayth hee) wyth your loynes gyrded wyth the gyrdle of truth, putting on thee the brest plate of ryghteousnes, and hauing shooes on your feete, to be readye to the Gospell of peace, aboue all thinges taking vnto you the shielde of fayth, whereby ye may quenche all fyry dartes of that euyll one, and take vnto you the salet of health, and the swoorde of the spirite, whych is the woorde of God. So doth Peter also arme vs against security, in hys fyrste Epistle, the fyft chapter: The Deuil (sayth he) your enemye goeth aboute lyke a roaryng Lyon, seeking whom he may deuour: resist him being perfect in fayth.
There is a certain fear which is euyl.But bycause I haue sayd that Security is contrarye vnto feare, I wyll not that any man should thinke that all maner of feare is to be praysed. Bycause there is also an euyll feare. And that spryngeth of an euyll iudgement of good and euyll thynges. As if a man shoulde thyncke that the aduersities of thys worlde, and the crosses whych the elect suffer, are both altogether euyll, and vtterlye to be feared. Agaynst these thynges we must syng together wyth Dauid: I wyll not feare what man doth vnto me. There is also an other feare of the vngodly to be reproued, which feare an euyll conscience engendreth. For they whych lyue fylthely and wyckedly, are alwayes afrayd, that the heauenly vengeaunce hangeth ouer them. Plutarch. Sores of the mynde. Suche feares Plutarche in his booke of Felicitye calleth sores of the mynde. There are (sayth hee) sores as well in the mynde, as in the body. And he addeth a trymme similitude. As they whych in a feuer either colde or whot, bycause inwardlye they are colde or whot, are more grieuouslye sycke, then if there were heate or colde applyed outwardly to theyr bodyes: So they which are vexed in the mynde, are much more tormented, then they which are afflicted in the bodye. After the same maner we may saye, that they alwayes tremble and are afrayde, whose consciences are troubled. Wherfore Dauid said: They haue trembled for feare, where as no feare was. So Cain, and so Iudas also were wonderfully afrayde. Seneca. Seneca vnto Lucillus, in hys hundreth and syxe Epistle sayth, that no place shall make a wycked man quiet. For thus he alwayes thinketh: Though I be not yet taken now, yet I maye at the length bee taken. And that I haue not hitherto bene taken, it came rather of fortune, then of confidence. They also doo exceedingly feare, whych are them selues horrible and fearefull vnto other. For he must needes feare many, whom manye feare.
Agaynst suche feares Seneca hath inuented remedies, namely that we should lyue iustly, Remedyes against euil feare and commit nothing that is wycked. But by thys meanes, who can at any tyme be secure? For who is he which synneth not? But we muche better rest our selues in the fayth of Christ, and put all our confidence and securitye in his mercy onely. After thys maner Paul teacheth vs: Being iustified (sayth hee) by faith, Carefulnes is not alwaies laudable. we haue peace with God. This medicine is of force against al diseases. Also Carefulnes, which seemeth to be contrary vnto Security, is not alwayes to be praysed: bycause in it are twoo vices to be taken heede of. The first is, that being moued with it, we seeke not by iniust meanes to remedye an euyll that commeth vnlooked for, as the Iewes dyd when they sayde: If wee suffer thys man to lyue, the Romanes wyll come, and ouerthrowe our place and Nacion. Wherefore they decreed to destroy hym.
Farthermore we must beware, that we be not so moued for temporall thinges, to cast awaye our hope and confidence of the goodnes and prouidence of God. What is the true and laudable Security. Wherefore the true Security is that whych is receaued by fayth, and consisteth of the promises of God. Paule dyd put vs in mynde of thys, when hee wrote vnto the Romanes: If God haue geuen hys Sonne for vs, how shall not he geue vs all thynges wyth hym? Who shall lay any faultes agaynst the electe of God? It is God whyche iustifieth, who then shall condemne? It is Christe whych dyed, yea and whych rose agayne, who sytteth also at the right hande of God, and maketh intercession for vs. Who shall seperate vs from the loue of God? Shall affliction? Shall trouble? Shall persecution? Shall hunger? Shall nakednes? Shall daunger? Shall the swoorde? I am perswaded, that neyther death, nor lyfe, nor Aungels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor thynges present, nor thynges to come, nor heygth, nor depth, nor anye other creature, can seperate vs from the loue of God, whych is in Christ Iesus our Lorde. Nowe it sufficiently appeareth (as I thynke) what maner of Security is allowed, and what maner is condemned.
¶ The .xix. Chapter.
1 ALso in those dayes, when there was no king in Israel, a certayne Leuite dwelt as a straunger on the syde of mount Ephraim, and tooke a wyfe a Concubine, out of Bethlehem Iuda.
2 And hys Concubine playde the whoore there, & went away from him vnto her fathers house to Bethelehem Iuda, & ther continued a few dayes, namely foure monethes.
3 And her husband arose & went after her, to speake vnto her hart, and to bring her againe: he had also his seruant with him, & a couple of Asses, and she brought him in into her fathers house, & when the yong womans father saw him, he reioyced of his comming.
4 And hys father in law, the yong womans father retayned hym: and he abode wyth hym three dayes. So they dyd eate and drynke, and lodged there.
5 And when the fourth daye came, they arose earelye in the morning, and he prepared to depart: then the yong womans father said vnto hys sonne in law: comfort thyne hart wyth a morsel of bread, and then go your way.
6 So they sat downe, and dyd eate and drinke both of them together. And the yong womans father sayd vnto the man: be content, I pray thee, and tary al night, and let thyne hart be mery.
7 And when the man rose vp to departe, hys father in lawe was earnest, therefore he returned and lodged there.
8 And he arose vp early the fyft day to depart, and the young womans father sayd: Comfort thine hart, I pray thee: and they taried vntil after mydday, and they both dyd eate.
9 Afterward when the man arose to depart wyth hys Concubine and hys seruaunt, hys father in law, the yong womans father sayde vnto hym: Behold now, the day draweth toward euen. I pray you tary al nyght: Behold the sūne goeth to rest: Lodge here that thine hart may be mery, and to morrow get you earlye vpon your waye, and go to thy tent.
10 But the man woulde not tarye, but arose and departed, and came ouer agaynst Iebus, (whyche is Ierusalem) and hys twoo Asses laden, and hys Concubine, were with hym.
By reason of sundry calamities and plagues wherewith the Philistians afflicted the people of their greuous synnes, the Israelites had nowe no lawfull Magistrates: wherby came to passe that many wycked actes were cōmitted, the woorshipping of God violated, and ciuill warres arose, which must nedes happen, where synnes remayne vnpunished. And that whych mought haue bene restrayned by the punishment of one or twoo, brought the destruction of manye thousandes, both of the Israelites, and also of the Beniamites. We shal see in this hystory (whych the holye ghost referreth to the ende of thys booke) fyrste a moste haynous wycked acte of the Beniamites. Secondlye vengeaunce taken of that Tribe by the other Tribes, wherby the Beniamites were in a maner cleane destroyed. And lastly we shal heare the wonderful instauracion of that Tribe.
The occasion of this warre was thus. A certaine man being a Leuite, had a wyfe, who committed adultery, and fearing the sharpenes of her housband, fled to her Parentes. Not long tyme after, her husbande went to seeke her, fyndeth her, and is reconciled vnto her. The woman as shee returned home together wyth her husband, was with most fylthy whoredome defiled of the Gabaonites, whereby she miserably perished, & so suffred punishment for her fyrst aduoutry. For God punisheth synnes by synnes. Neither suffered he adultry being not punished by the Magistrates, to go vnpunished.
As touching the historye, it is no marueilous or straunge thing, that the Leuite dwelt as a straunger. For althoughe that Tribe had certaine Cities and suburbes appointed it, yet very many of the Leuites went to the townes and villages of the other Tribes, to serue them as touching doctrine & counsels: wherof I haue a litle before somwhat spoken.
This man dwelt as a straunger on the syde of mount Ephraim. The Hebrewe woord signifieth a side, a hyp or thigh. And by translacion it signifieth a region or coast. And this is a very elegant Metaphore, when there is mencion made of a mountaine. He dwelled therfore on the side of mount Ephraim.
He tooke a wyfe a Concubine. By this place is manifestlye gathered, that the Concubines of the Fathers were wiues. For the Iewes were not bound to the lawes of the Romanes, when as both at this tyme they were not made, and also they pertayned not to that nacion. Whych I therefore speake bycause the Romanes had Concubines, which were not wiues. But the Hebrewes sometimes called their wyues Concubines, bycause they were not of the same honour and dignity that their wyues were, which had authority in the house. Yea the Maister sometimes maryed his handmayden, as Abraham maryed Agar, Iacob Bilham and Zilpa. Peraduenture in contracting of those matrimonies there wanted tables, or some outward ceremonies, wherwith they vsed to adorne the principal matrimonies. Neither yet was that a let, but that these were matrimonies. Of this thing I haue spoken largely before. Wherefore I will at thys tyme cease to go any farther therein.
But in that the Leuite had a wyfe, whiche was of the tribe of Iuda, it is not to be marueiled at: bicause vnles maydens were inheritours, they mought mary in other tribes, which thing was not permitted to those that had inheritāce, to the ende that possessions should not be confounded. Farther, forasmuche as the tribes of Iuda and Leui excelled the other in dignitye, they were the easelyer coopled together in matrimony. For the principality seemed wel to agree wyth the Priesthood. It is called Bethlehem of Iuda, to put a difference from the other Bethlehem, as we haue before declared.
She committed aduoutry by hym. We might also say against him. For ther is great iniury done vnto the man, when the wife playeth the whoore. And this preposicion All signifeth either. But the plainer sense is by him. As thoughe it should haue bene said that she committed aduoutry, when she was yet together with her husband, and had not departed from him.
She fled to her father. Being so afearde of her husbande that shee durst not come in his sight, she got her to her fathers house. Adultery is committed, which is a grieuous crime, and yet is not punished by the punishment of the lawe, for that there was no Magistrate to execute iudgementes. And thoughe in all persons aduoutry is a grieuous wicked act, The wyfe of a Minister if she be an adultres, synneth more grieuously then other. yet in the wyfe of a Leuite or Priest it is farre more grieuous, for as muche as the holye ministerye ought to bee well spoken of. Wherefore if the daughter of a Priest had played the harlot in her Fathers house, she was not stoned as other were, but burnt with fyre, as it is expressedly wrytten in Deuteromy. But why this adultresse was not slaine, the cause (as it is before sayde) was, for that there was no Magistrate in Israel. [Page 249] And this adulteresse might think to herself y t she had escaped punishmēt, This adulterous woman escaped not the punishmente of God. as touchinge men, but she could not escape the hand of God. For god shall iudge adulterers and whoremōgers, as the Epistle to the Hebrewes teacheth, which thing he doth sometimes by magistrates: and sometimes when they cease, by himself. The woman was with her parents .4. monthes, in which space of time, her husband being either moued with mercy, or wearied with solitarines, went to seke hys wyfe, and to speake to her harte. Two manner of wayes of punishinge the guilty. By this Hebrewe phrase is signified that he would comfort her being in misery and afflicted, or geue her some profitable counsell, peraduenture that she should repent her of the sinne which she had cō mitted, promising her that if she would do so, he woulde receaue her into fauor agayne.
He ioined a coople of Asses. That he might haue one to cary his wife, and the other to lade with thinges necessary for his iorney. The wife as sone as she saw him, brought him into her fathers house. By whiche acte shee declareth that shee was not vtterlye alienated from her husbande. The father of the maiden, that is his father in lawe, mette him and ioyfully embrased him. Whereby we gather, that the old man also wished a reconcilement betwene them.
He abode there three dayes. He abode there in verye dede fiue dayes: but thre dayes willingly, the other two dayes he was in a manner compelled by his father in law. And they did eate and drinke. These thinges declare that they were reconciled, and that the matrimony was renewed betwene them. But when he would haue departed, the father in law sayd:
Thou shalt strengthen thy hart with a morsell of breade. And by this woorde breade he vnderstode all kinde of meate. The old man would not so sone let thē go, bicause he desired to haue fauor and loue confirmed betwene them, to thend they should not afterward be easly seperated, the one from the other: This was his purpose. Behold the day is weakened. He vseth a Metaphore, and signifieth y e passage of the Sunne to the west, & that there was a little of the day remaining. So also men when they come to age, ar weakned in the body. The Leuit would tary no longer: which turned to his greate hurt.
Let vs by the way note in this place, that for him which shal make a iorney it is vnprofitable to tary long at banquetings. For commonly they ar oppressed with night, before they can come to theyr lodginges.
Now it semeth that I should entreate of adulteries, wherby I might declare the nature and greiuousnes of that sinne, and setforth the punishmentes of that crime, which ar appointed both by the ciuil laws & by the ecclesiastical, but these shalbe spoken of when wee are come vnto the history of Dauid, who committed most filthy adultery with Bethsaba. Now I haue determined to entreate onelye of the reconsiliation of the husband and the wife, after the committing of adultery, and I will touch the whole matter briefly.
¶Of the reconciliation of the husband & the wife after that adultery hath ben committed.
THe ciuil lawes are vtterly against the reconciliation of the husband and the wife, after the one hath committed adultery. The ciuill lawes abhorre from reconciliation after adultery. For in the Code ad. l. Iuliam de adulteriis in the law Castitati nostrorum temporum it is ordeined, that if a man maried againe a wife condemned of adultery, he incurreth the crime of being a bawd. And in the same title in the law Crimē, it is had, that he which retaineth still in matrimonye a wife that hath played the adulteresse, can not accuse her of adultry. Although afterward by a new law it was otherwise prouided for. Neither was it a light thinge to be condemned is a bawde: but it was euen as greiuous [Page] as if a man had ben condēned of adultry. Yea and if a man retayn her that is condēned of adultry, he may him self without an accuser be condēned of adultry. And if a man marie agayn her whom y t he hath once repudiated, he cannot accuse her of the adultry before committed. But if she again commit adultry, he may. Bycause in marieng her againe he seemeth to haue allowed her acte. And if any woman be condemned of adultry, no man can take her to wife. Wherefore y e ciuil lawes do abhor from reconciliacion after adultry, so that it be conuict and condemned. For if it be onely his suspicion, it is lawful for the husband to retayne and accuse her whome hee suspecteth: Who if hee afterwarde see that he was ledde by a vayne supicion to accuse her, hee maye cease from that which he hath begonne, so that he first obteine a release of the Iudge.
Ierome vpon the .19. chapter of Mathew may appeare to agree with the ciuil lawes. For he writeth: she which hath deuided one flesh into one or two, ought not to be retained, least her husbande be made subiect vnto the curse. For as it is written in the .18. chapter of the Prouerbes: He which retaineth an adultresse, is vngodly and a foole. In dede so haue the .70. interpreters turned it, but the verity of the Hebrewe hath it not. The same Ierome saith: If there happpen any sin, it breaketh not matrimony. But if ther happen adoultery, then the wife is not lawfull. And in the .32. question the first, ar rehearsed the words of Chrisostome. If a manne haue to doe with an adulterous wife, let him do penaunce. And the same Chrisostome vpon the .26. chap. of Mathew: Euen as he is vniuste whiche accuseth an innocent, so is he a foole which retayneth an adulteresse. The same thing is had in the decretals de Adult. in the chap. Si vir sciens: And it was decreed at the counsell of Orleaunce. The husband which retaineth an adulteresse is partaker of the crime. And if a woman repudiated, marye an other, her laste husband being dead, she can not return vnto the first. For now she is vncleane vnto him, as it is written in the .24. of Deut.
But now omitting these thinges, let vs see the reasons which serue for reconciliation. God himselfe which is onely good, would be the husbande of the church, and that not onely in our time, but also in the times of the fathers. But the church, especially the old church, oftentimes turned aside to idolatry, and cō mitted whoredome with the Gods of the Gentiles, as euerye where appeareth in this booke, and also in the history of the kinges, and in the prophetes: Neuertheles yet Ieremy called it back againe in the name of God to return to her husband. Which selfe thinge Hoseah the prophet also did, & that with many words. And if god be redy to receaue his wife beynge an adulteresse, man ought also to returne into fauor agayne with his wife, especially if she repent, and beginne a new life. For as many as are christian men, professe the imitation of God. Ther is also an example of Dauid, who toke agayne his wife Michol, although her father had placed her to an other man. Iustinian Iustinian also in his Authentikes, when he commaundeth that an adulteresse should be beaten & be shut vp in a monastery, yet hee geueth libertye to the husbande to take her againe, if he will, within the space of two yeares, & so he most manifestly alloweth reconciliation.
Augustine Augustine in his. 2 boke to Pollencius is very much in this, y t they should be reconciled. For many in his time would not receaue their wiues which had cō mitted adultery, as such, as which were now polluted & contaminated. Where fore he wrote: doest thou thinke her polluted, whom baptisme and repentaunce hath purged? Whom God hath clensed? She ought not to seme to thee polluted. And if she be now recōciled vnto the kayes of the church, & admitted into y e kingdome of heauen, by what right canst thou put her from thee? These thinges are had also in 32. question .1. If she haue fallen, thou must know it came of humayne nature, & mercy muste be shewed her, if she arise. For we woulde the same to be done vnto vs. And extreme right, is extreme wronge. In the decretals de adulteriis & stupris, in the chap. Si vir sciens, it is had out of the counsel of Orleaunce. [Page 250] An adultresse if she repent, ought to be receaued. The glose in that place demaū deth, by what right or dewty she ought to be receiued. It answereth: Not by the lawe of necessitye, for if y e man wil not, he cannot be compelled to receaue her, wherfore he ought by the law of honesty to take her agayne. But I woulde demaund whither it ought not also to be done by y e dewty of piety & by the strēgth of the commaundement of God, forasmuch as Paule to the Philip. saith, do these things, whatsoeuer ar honest and iust? Therfore it is also don by necessity of the commaundement. But the gloser in that place intreated of the outward iudgemente, wherein no man can be compelled to receaue an adulteresse. But in the Cannon now cited it is added: Not very often. For if she fal often into adultry, she ought not to be receaued. The Glose in the same place obiecteth vnto it self christ, who whē he was demaūded, how oftē we shuld forgeue our brother whē he offendeth against vs, answered not onely seuē times, but seuenty seuē times. To this he sayth, that the words of the Cannō are to be vnderstād, that when y e adulteresse so oftentimes falleth, the church shall not entreate for her reconciliacion, partelye bycause there shoulde be opened a wyndowe to wyckednes, When the churche ought to entreate for those that fall. and partly bycause she might thinke that penaunce is but fayned and dessembled. There is also added an other aunswere, that that is spoken for a terrour, least men should more freely and carelesly commit sinne. Hereby is gathered that the church oughte to entreate for the reconciliation of the repentant, that they may be reconciled. Wherfore an adultresse, either sheweth signes of repentaunce, or els sheweth not. If she shew signes, the church oughte to entreate for her, that there may be a reconciliation made. But if she shewe none, the churche shall not entreate for her: otherwise it should seme to maintain sinnes.
Now must we aunswere vnto the arguments which semed to be agaynst reconciliation. Aunsweres vnto the reasons on the contrary part. The counsell of Orleance. The cause why the law of Moses prohibited the returne of a wyfe repudiated vnto her first husbande. As touching the ciuill lawes they are to be corrected by the word of God. Ierome and Chrisostome do speake of such an adultresse whiche repenteth not, which selfe same thing is manifestly vnderstand by the counsel of Orleance. For that it is there had: He whiche retaineth an adultresse, is partaker of the crime: but if she repent, let her be receaued. But why the lawe of Moses suffred not, that a wife repudiated should not after the death of her latter husbande returne vnto her first, the cause may easely be assigned. For if he had permitted y t, then diuorsements would easely haue bene had, in hope somtimes to recouer agayne theyr wife. God would that she that was repudiated, shoulde returne no more, to the ende that shee shoulde not easelye bee repudiated. There mighte also bee conspiracies made agaynste the latter husbande, whereby the wyfe myghte, when hee were dyspatched awaye, returne agayne vnto her firste husbande. Wherefore the lawe of God was moste iuste, whiche pertayned not vnto adultrous women, which by the commaūdement of God ought to be stoned. By these thinges now it is manifest that it is lawfull for the husband to return into fauor with his wife being an adulteresse, so that she repent: who yet ought to accuse his wife of adultry, if it be a publike crime, or if she perseuer in her wickednes, or els if she bring forth any children by adultry, least the lawful heires should be defrauded: for vnlesse she be accused, the husbande cannot depriue the son borne in adultry, but that he shall inherite. Farther, let the church entreate and work with him, that he would receaue againe the woman being repentāt. Wherfore our Leuite ought not to be reproued, bicause he receaued again into fauor his wife being an adultresse, so that she repented her of her adultery. But now will I return to the interpretation.
11 When they were nere to Iebus, the day was sore, spent and the seruant said vnto his master: come, I pray thee, and let vs turn into this city of the Iebusites, and lodge al night there.
12 And his maister aunswered him: we wil not turne into the city of straungers that are not of the children of Israel, but we will go [Page] forth to Gibaah.
13 And he said vnto his seruant: Come, and let vs draw nere to one of these places, that we may lodge in Gibaah or in Ramah.
14 So they wente forwarde vpon their waye, and the sunne wente downe vpon them nere to Gibaah, which is in Beniamin.
15 Then they turned thither to goe in and lodge in Gibaah: and when he came, he sate him down in a strete of the city: for there was no man that tooke them into his house to lodging.
16 And behold, there came an old man from his worke out of the field at euen, and the man was of mounte Ephraim: but dwelte in Gibbaah, and the men of the place wer the children of Iemini.
17 And when he had lift vp his eyes, he saw a wayfaringe man in the streetes of the city: then this old man sayd, whether goest thou, and whence camest thou?
18 And he aunswered him, we came from Beth-lehem Iudah, vnto the side of mounte Ephraim: from thence am I: and I wente to Beth-lehem Iudah, and go now to the house of the Lorde: and no man receaueth me into his house.
19 Although we haue straw and prouender for our Asses, and also breade and wyne for me and thine handmayd, and for the boy that is wyth thy seruant: we lacke nothing.
20 And the old man said: peace be with thee: al thy penury be vpon me: onely abide not in the strete al night.
Ierusalem was therfore called Iebus, bicause the Iebusites in the old time inhabited it. The seruant counselled his master to take iodgynge before the Sunne should set. But he would not. VVe will not turne in (sayth he) neither to this city nor to that, neither to any other city of straungers which ar Gentiles. But it may seme merueilous how Ierusalem is called straunge from the Israelites, when as in the beginning of this booke there is mencion made y t the Hebrewes toke it & named it Ierusalem. How it is sayd that Ierusalē was at this time a city of straungers. They which sayd that this history is to be referred vnto the fyrst times of the Iudges, namely that it was done before Othoniell beganne to iudge, from the death I say of Iosua, to the gouernment of Othoniell, seeme to be ledde by this argument. In that space of time they say these thinges happened. These mens coniecture hath in dede som shew of truth. But it is not very firm. For wee muste knowe that the Iewes often times behaued themselues ill in fallinge from the worshippinge of the true God. Wherefore he left them destitute of his ayde, wherof they being beriued, they were again ouercome of those, whome before they had ouercome, whereby it came to passe that the Iebusites recouered agayne theyr city and dwelled in it. Wherfore those thinges which are written in the beginninge of this booke, are not agaynst those which are nowe declared. For the Iebusites hauing recouered theyr city, inhabited it as they did before, and it was called after the old name.
The wise counsell of the seruaunt.The seruant did geue his maister wise counsell, if a man should loke vpon y t the euent. For it is daungerous to trauayle by night especially for a man that is a straunger and vnarmed, as this Leuite was, which had with him onely his wife and his seruant. Neyther is this any new or vnaccustomed thinge that seruantes ar somtimes wiser thē their masters, although it oftētimes happeneth, that counsel hath authority of the geuer: as we vnderstand happened here, wher counsel although it were profitable, Aristotle. is despised, peraduēture bycause it came frō a seruāt. Aristotle in his Politikes saith, they which excel in mind & coūsel ought [Page 251] to beare rule and they which are strong of body must obey. But that cōmeth not alwayes to passe: yea rather it oftentymes happeneth that masters which are not of the wisest, but yet strong in body, haue seruaunts far wiser then themselues, although they be not very strong in body. Farther we must not deny, The giftes of God are not bound vnto the estates or cōditions of men. but y e prudence and counsels whiche are the giftes of God are not bounde vnto the conditions or estates of Lordshyp and seruitude, nor also to the temperatures of bodyes. God geueth them, to them whom he thinketh good, & that most freely, somtymes to seruauntes, and sometymes to Lordes, sometymes to poore men, and sometymes to riche men. GOD ministred vnto a man beyng a seruaunt good counsell: whiche yet the Leuite would not fellowe to his great hurt. For if he had turned into the City of the Iebusites, peraduenture he had not fallen into that calamity whiche followed.
These thinges are spoken concernyng the counsell of the seruaunt if we consider y e vtility therof: but yet a thing is not to be iudged by y e euent. The Leuite is excused. Neither is the Leuite in this place rashely to be accused: bycause it seemeth that he had a shewe of honesty & piety. For he thought, that if it were possible, he should not go vnto the vngodly & Idolatrers, such as wer the Iebusites, and he had a great deale better opinion of the Hebrues, then of straungers. Yea and the seruaunt, for y t he so earnestly desired to turne into y e Iebusites, may be accused either of sluggishnes, for that he being weary of the waye, would take no paynes to go any further: or els he may be accused of vnaduisednes, bycause he considered not with himselfe y t the Iebusites wer enemyes vnto y e Hebrues: or els of an vngodly mind, for that he litle passed to turne vnto Idolatrers. Wherfore it seemeth that the Leuite did rightly and wisely, if we looke vpon the ordinary way and law of piety, and not vpon the end. But all thynges happened contraryly. For in Gibaa (as we shall heare,) his wife was by violence oppressed, and so died: and ciuile warre stirred vp, wherin many thousandes of men died. What we ought in counsell to counte doubtful, and what certayn. Wherfore we ought alwayes to suspect our counsels as touching the ende, but yet not as touchyng iustice, not that we should feare, least god shuld cast vs away, but least for our sinnes there might happē some miserable end. Wherfore whē we haue determined to do any thing, we must with most feruent prayers pray vnto God to turne to good the counsell whiche we haue taken, and to direct our purpose. For vnles he build the house, What is to be doone after we haue taken coū sell. they labour in vayne whiche build it. And except he prosper our enterprises, all thynges are in vayne taken in hand. And yet in the meane tyme we must vse a very great diligence. But now we rede not y t the Leuite called vpon God, when as yet he was in some daunger. Iacob when he should iorney into Mesopotamia called vpon God with a great fayth.
The counsell or purpose of the Leuite was to turne into Cities which the Hebrues inhabited, especially either vnto Gibaa or vnto Rama. These Cityes were not farre from Ierusalem. He entred into Gibaa, where no man bad hym to hys house. That City longed to the tribe of Beniamin. It may seeme that he would rather haue gone to Rama, but (as it is written) the sunne went downe vpon him nyghe vnto Gibaa, wherfore he entred into a City of men vncurteous. For whē the man being a straunger stoode in the streetes in the night tyme, no man receaued him into his house. But where as barbarous inhospitality reigneth, there also are more grieuous wicked vices wont not to be wantyng. Why no man bad the Leuite to his house. But why no mā receaued him into his house, the cause was, for that in a great number of euil Citezins, there were very few good men, & if there were any, the same wer afrayed to receaue him into their house, least for his sake some euill should happen vnto them. For they knewe the wantōnes and the filthy lustes of those men. And so whilest the straunger was despised, the law of God was in that City had in contempt. For it commaunded, that gentlenes should be shewed vnto straungers, yea and God called himselfe the tutor and reuenger of straungers, neither could [Page] those Citezins seeme any longer to be the people of God, seyng they had cast awaye hys lawe.
A praise of hospitality.And euen as to contemne straungers is a most grieuous vice: so is Hospitality a vertue most excellent. Wherfore in the Epistle to the Hebrues it is writtē: Forget not liberality and Hospitality. Although (not to dissemble) in Greeke it be somewhat otherwise written [...]. What is the general worde of hospitality. But [...] is the general word of Hospitality. Then it followeth: For with such sacrifices God is wel pleased. Out of which place the Papistes go about to defende merites, as though he whiche sheweth himselfe liberall towardes the poore, shall deserue something at Gods hand. But in the Greke is rede [...], whiche signifieth not, shalbe wonne by deserte, but receaueth with a glad and chearefull minde: which is to be referred vnto God, and not to those whiche shew liberality vnto the poore. The sense therfore is this, that god doth reioyse in such sacrifices, & doth accept them with a glad mynde, yea and Christ himselfe also shall say in the last iudgement: I was a straunger and ye lodged me, for he that receaueth a straunger, receaueth Christ in him. So Abraham & Lot when they thought that they had had straungers in their house, receaued the sonne of God & aungels. The Gabaonites being voyde of this vertue, contemned the Leuite beyng a straunger walkyng in the streete. But there was in that City a certayne other straūger, whiche was borne in mount Ephraim, who being moued with mercy, receaued the Leuite into hys house. And so in Gabaa a straunger was better then the Citezins. This man peraduenture was a husband man, and in the euenyng returned out of the field frō his rusticall worke. The Leuite telleth him that he hath prouendre for his Asses, and also that he wanted not bread and wine, that he might the easelier and willinglier be receaued. As thoughe he should haue sayd, we shall not be burdenous vnto any man, for we haue all things that are necessary for our liuyng.
Peace be with thee: Thy pouerty be vpon me. Care not (sayth he) I wil furnishe that whiche wanteth. I nothing passe what thou hast with thee, or what thou hast not. The humanity of this man was great, whiche appeareth so muche the more excellent, bycause he dwelled among the inhumane and cruel Gabaonites. He was borne & brought vp in an other place, where the feare of God was more regarded, then among the Gabaonites. Yet he seemeth not herein to be praysed, for that he dwelt so longe among vngodly and wicked men. We must flye the fellowshyp of wicked men. For we ought not to esteme any thyng so much, that for the cause therof we should haue a will to dwell among idolatrous & wicked men. Wherfore if any greuous chaunce happen in that society vnto men which are otherwise good, they can not complayne that the same happeneth vnto them vndeserued. Lot sped yll bycause he dwelt among the Sodomites. He saw the coūtrey fertyll and plentifull, & hauing great plēty of heardes and flockes, he would abide there. But with that he escaped not vnpunished. For once he was led away prisoner, and except Abraham had delyuered him with an army which he had assembled, he should al his lyfe tyme haue serued in most hard bondage. Afterward when these Cityes were burnt, he scarsely escaped frō burning. Whiche benefite he may ascribe rather vnto Abraham, then vnto himself: How vnprofitable euill fellowship is. for if he had perished together with them, he should haue had no cause to haue cōplained of God. Euill fellowship alwayes for the most part, either hurteth or eis engendreth daunger.
The Gabaonites beyng of the tribe of Beniamin, are called also the children of Iemini, bycause that famely was noble in the tribe. Wherfore this famely possessed y e City, D. Kimhi. although Dauid Kimhi expoundeth the sonnes of Iemini, for strōge and migthy men, for Iemini in Hebrew signifieth the right hand. Wherfore the children of Iemini (as he thinketh) are they, whiche haue lawe and ryght in the right hand, and therfore do not what is lawful, but what they can. I do not deny but that the Gabaonites were such, but I rather allowe the first exposition as the truer and more simple. For it is manifest that it was a famely in Beniamin, [Page 252] of whiche came Saul also.
Mesapua signifieth in Hebrew whatsoeuer meate is geuē vnto cattell, besides straw and chaffe, that is Tares, Otes, and Barley. The old man had compassiō of the straunger, either peraduenture bycause he was his contreyman, or els at the least for that he himselfe also dwelt there as a straunger. For common miseryes do oftentymes ioyne men together. Wherfore in Virgil Dido sayth: Virgil. I not beyng ignoraunt of euil, do learne to succor the miserable. After the same maner the Lord sayth in y e law: afflict not straūgers, bycause ye were sometymes straū gers your selues in Egypt. But the Gabaonites had vtterly forgotten their olde estate. But y e old mā, bicause in time past he had ben a straūger, or rather bicause he was euen then also a straūger, was moued with mercy. Yea & God doth somtymes somewhat afflict those that are his, that they should learne to haue cōpassion ouer other. For they whiche alwayes florishe in wealth and riches, are not greatly moued with the miseryes of other men. And Paul to the Hebrues sayth, that Christ was made lyke vnto his brethren in all thynges, that he myght haue compassion of other.
The Leuite maketh mention that he would go vnto the house of God, that is in Siloh where the arke of the Lord was. And Siloh was in mount Ephraim. He would therfore go thether, peraduenture to geue thākes vnto god, bicause bringing home his wife agayn he had luckly finished his busines. Other thinke that the yong man added these things of the arke and house of God, to the end the old mā should be the more gentle vnto him, when he should vnderstand that he was no common man, but a Leuite, which would go vnto the holy tabernacle of God.
21 So he brought hym into his house, & gaue foddre vnto y e Asses: Afterward they washed their feete, and did eate and drinke.
22 And as they were making their hartes merye: Behold, the men of the City, wicked men, be set the house round about, and smote at the doore, and spake to this old man the master of the house, saying: Brynge foorth the manne that came into thyne house, that we maye knowe hym.
23 And this man the master of the house went out, and sayde vnto them: Nay my brethren do not so wickedly, I praye you: seyng that this man is come into mine house, do not this vilannie.
24 Beholde, here is my daughter, a virgine, and his concubine: thē will I bryng out nowe, and humble them, and do with them what seemeth you good: but to this man do not this detestable acte.
25 But the men would not harken to hym: therfore the man tooke hys concubine and brought her out vnto them: and they knew her, and abused her all the night vntyl the mornyng: and when the day began to spryng, they let her go.
26 So the woman came in the dawning of the day, and fell downe at the dore of the mās house, where her Lord was, till the light day.
27 And her Lorde arose in the mornyng, and opened the doores of the house, and went out to go his waye, and behold, the woman his concubine was dead at the doore of the house, and her handes laye vpon the threshold.
28 And he sayde vnto her, vp and let vs go: but she aunswered not. Then he tooke her vp vpon the Asse, and the man rose vp, and went vnto his place.
29 And when he was come to his house, he tooke a knife, and layde [Page] hand on his concubine, and deuided her in peces with her bones into twelue partes, and sent her throughout al the quarters of Israel.
30 And all that sawe it (sayd:) There was no suche thyng doone or sene since the tyme that the children of Israell came vp from the lande of Egypte vnto this daye: consider the matter, consulte, and geue sentence.
Where as it is sayde, And he gaue his Asses foder. In Hebrew it is written Vaiabol whiche signifieth, he mingled, for this verbe Balal signifieth to myngle. For in those regions they vse to mingle chopped straw with barley, & so to geue them vnto their cattell. The maner of washing of fete very muche vsed in Syria. And washed their fete. In those places y t are extreme hot, when men haue done their iorney, they vse to washe their feete, & to wipe away the dust, which office was sometymes shewed vnto Christ our sauiour, and he agayne executed the same vnto his Apostles. Paul also required this of good widowes, namely to washe the feete of the Saintes.
Bring out the man that we may know him. By these words is described a thing most filthy & an horrible act. There was neuer heard of the like boldnes & filthy lust as was this of the Gabaonites: therfore they are called the children of Belial, that is, without an yoke, bycause they had shaken of good manners, the lawe of God and of nature, neither would they abyde to beare any yoke. Hereby also appeareth theyr exceding cruelty, for they did not onely despise a straunger, but also would reprochefully haue doone him great iniury.
But y e good old man the host of y e Leuite, had not onely receaued him into hys house, but also afterward defended him with y e daunger & iniury of his house. He goeth forth vnto thē, exhorteth thē not to cōmit any such thing. First bicause the thing was filthy & horrible: farther, bicause y e mā had entred into his house, & he coūted it his part, by right of hospitality to defēd him frō al iniury. Lastli, whē he perceaued y t their lust was importunate & vnbrideled, he offred vnto thē his own daughter & the wife of y e Leuite, rather thē they should do him so great a reproche. Howbeit they as contēners both of god & mē nothing care for these things. Of the fayth of Hospitality. The right of hospitality was of no force with thē, which the old mā obiected vnto thē. Vndoubtedly faith is to be kept with an enemy, and much more with a guest or strāger. Wherfore in the digestes de nautis & cauponis in y e law .1. there is a double actiō allowed against the host, if any thing be takē away out of y e lodging frō the guest, how much more if there be violence done against his body? Among the elders y e religiō of straūgers was great, bycause it semed a thing acceptable vnto god to defēd & saue harmeles y e straūger. Iupiter Hospitalis. Wherfore Iupiter, as he was called Stator & Pheretrius, so also was he named Hospitalis, as it were a keper and defēder of straungers. Busyris a cruell host. But Busiris like a cruell & bloudy Tyrant slewe his guestes. But his cruelty escaped not vnpunished, for Hercules slew him with his club.
Euery manne ought to bee sale in his own house.The Gabaonites w tout al yoke rāged abrode in the night tyme, beset the house, threaten to breake it opē, & to stay them y t are in it, when as otherwise euery mā ought to be safe in his owne house. Which thing was also decreed afterward by the Romane lawes, as it is had in the title de in ius vocando, in the digestes in the lawe plerique: No man ought to haue hys house inuaded. For the priuate house of euery man seemeth to be a certayne holy sanctuary to his possessor. But with the Gabaonites there was nothyng safe or holy: so much had lacke of a gouernor brought to passe.
The vngodly are sometymes called brethrē.The olde man when he dissuaded them from their wicked crime, called them brethren, to see if by pleasant and gentle speech he could haue asswaged thē. For if he should haue dealt more sharpely, he should more vehemently haue kyndled them. And yet in callyng them brethren he lyed not, for as they came of the tribe of Beniamin, and he discended of Ephraim, they were begotten all of one father, [Page 253] namely of Iacob. Lot also in the like cause called the Sodomites brethren. It was vndoubtedly wysedome in moste daungerous corrections, to vse moste gentle wordes. Yea and Augustine when he wrote to the Madaurenses, Augustine. whiche otherwise were Idolatrers, called them brethren. Wherfore it is to be lamented and meruayled at, that the Ministers of the Churches of the Lutherians doo so abhorre from our men, that they will not in any case call them brethren, as though they denyed the sonne of GOD, and preached not his Gospell. But our Churches nothing regarde their importunity, but of Christian charity counte them for brethren, whether they will or no: and althoughe they differ from them in the matter of the Sacrament, yet haue they not broken the bande of brotherly charity towardes them. But whether of vs doo behaue our selues more sincerely and faythfully in the fielde of the Lord: Christ in the last day, & also in tyme hereafter shall declare.
But here commeth a question whether this olde man did well, in offryng his daughter and the wife of the Leuite vnto the Gabaonites, to the ende they should not violate his guest. To this all men aunswere not after one manner. Some say that he considered the greatenes and horriblenes of the wicked crime, and preferred the lesser euill before the greater, and would not breake his fayth geuē vnto his guest. And by these reasons they thinke to excuse hym. And after the same manner they iudge of Lot. Chrisostome. And amonge other Chrisostome excedyngly prayseth Lot in that thyng: Ambrose. whiche selfe thyng doth Ambrose also in hys booke of Abraham the Patriarche, bycause he lesse estemed the contumely of hys house, then so great a wicked acte. But Augustine in his questions vpon Genesis, Augustine. considereth these things, both more diligently & also more depely, and denyeth that to recompēse one faulte by an other, is not in any case to be suffred. Compensation of sinnes is not to be admitted. By his sentēce it was not lawfull for hym to permitte hys daughter to the lust of the Sodomites, to the ende they should not sinne more grieuously. Neither is it lawfull for vs to committe the lyghter crime, to auoyde a more grieuous. For the Apostle hath apertly taught: That euyll thynges are not to be doone, that good should ensue. Wherfore when the matter commeth to sinne, althoughe it seeme light, yet we must vtterly abstayne from it. And if it should seeme that some greuouser sinne would followe, if we should refuse to sinne, that care is to be committed vnto GOD, but we vnder that pretence ought not to committe any sinne. This was Augustines opinion, whiche I excedingly well allowe. And not to goo from our Hystory whiche we haue in hande, althoughe this olde man ought fayth vnto hys guest, yet ought he fayth and defence also vnto his daughter, and vnto the wife of the Leuite. Neither was it lawfull for him to performe more fayth vnto hys guest, then the woorde of GOD would suffer. Wherfore he could not iustly humble vnto them his daughter, or the wife of his guest. For the father hath not the daughter so in hys power, that he maye put her foorth to other men to be abused. Neither ought the daughter to obey in any thyng that is sinne, thoughe the father wil and commaunde her.
But they say: The lesser euill is to be preferred before the greater. How the lesser euill is to bee preferred before the greater. I knowe that men are wont so to say. But it must ryghtly be vnderstand, namely that it taketh place in outwarde afflictions and griefes of the body, and of the lyfe. Bycause in such discommodityes, as often as we must take deliberation what we ought to preferre, the lesser hurt is to be preferred before the greater: bycause it hath the nature and reason of goodnes. But in sinne there is no consideration of goodnes. And vndoubtedly what soeuer is synne, the same muste strayghtwaye be reiected, let followe what will. But Augustine, excuseth after a sorte Lot and thys olde manne, bycause they fell with a heauy and troubled mynde. It oftentymes happeneth vnto wyse men, with a troubled mynde to doo those thynges, whiche afterwarde when they come to themselues, they allowe not. [Page] But this excuse doth not vtterly absolue these menne from sinne, althoughe it somewhat release them. But if a manne will say, Paul preferred the lesser sinne before the greater, when he sayde, he woulde be accursed of Christ for hys brethrē, rather then they should persiste in that blyndnes and stubbernnes, wherein they were holden. He whiche obiecteth this vnto vs, must knowe that he doth not rightly vnderstand that place of Paul. For the Apostle desired to redeme the saluation of the Iewes with his daunger, not vndoubtedly with sinne, but with hys losse or hurte, namely to be accursed of Christe, not certaynely to be made an Apostata, or to cease to beleue in Christ, but onely not to haue the fruition of the eternall and blessed lyfe. Augustine. Augustine also hath many thynges agaynst thys compensation of sinnes. And amonge other thinges: What (sayeth he) if a man require, either of a mayden fornication, or of a maryed woman adultery, and threateneth to kill hymselfe, vnles he obteyne hys request, ought the pure and chaste women to fulfill his desire? No vndoubtedly. Neither thoughe he afterwarde slay hymselfe, shall the chast women be counted guilty of his death. They ought in deede to be sory for hym, to deplore his acte, but not to thinke they haue done euill, bycause they graunted hym not vnlawfull thynges. The same Augustine vpon the .146. Augustine. Psalme writeth: If a man deny dewe beneuolence vnto his wife bycause he would lyue chastly, and the wyfe in the meane tyme fall into adultery, he sinneth, neither can his entent be allowed. For sinne is not to be admitted in the wyfe, for the exercising of continency. God (sayeth he) doth not recompense suche a hurte with suche a gayne. Wherfore the sentence of Leo the first, Leo in the dist .46. chapter. Non suo) is to be allowed, wherein he sayth, that it is vncomely that any should bestow theyr faultes vpon other mens commodities. Augustine in hys booke De mendacio to Consentius sayeth: For the health of our neyghbours, Augustine. we must doo whatsoeuer may be doone. And if it come to that point, that we can not helpe them without sinne, there remayneth nothyng els for vs to doo. And he addeth that no manne must be brought into heauen by a lye. The same Augustine in an other place sayeth: If poore menne see a cruell and bitter riche manne, and woulde steale any thynge from hym, eyther to helpe themselues, or other poore menne, they doo not diminishe sinne, but encrease it. Gregory And Gregory Byshoppe of Rome in hys Epistle to Siagrius: To committe the lesse sinne, to the end to auoyde the greater, is to offer Sacrifices vnto GOD of a wicked acte, To Chrisostome and Ambrose. as it is written in the .21. of the Prouerbes. But in that Chrisostome and Ambrose doo for thys cause prayse Lot, they are thus to bee vnderstande, namely that they allowed hys charity and fayth towardes straungers, and had a respecte vnto the horriblenes of the sinne whiche the Citezins were ready to committe, not that they allowed their abandonyng of theyr women. And thus muche as touchyng thys matter.
How much the horrible synne of the Sodomites is to be detested. Augustine.But in that the olde manne calleth it a villany and a detestable thyng, whiche they went about to committe, he sayeth most truely. For seede was geuen vnto manne for procreations sake. But these pestiferous menne abuse the gifte geuen them of GOD, they resiste hys law, and agaynste nature chaunge menne, in that after a sorte they turne the male into the female. Augustine to Pollentius: Adultery (sayeth he) is more grieuous then whooredome, and incest more heynous then adultery, but that whiche is done agaynste nature, is of all most wicked and detestable. And he addeth: In thynges whiche GOD hath graunted, it is more tollerable immoderatly to transgresse, then lyghtly to sinne in those thynges whiche by no meanes are graunted. And in hys .3. booke of Confessions he sayeth, that the fellowship of humane kynde is violated with GOD, bycause nature whiche we haue of GOD, is polluted. This was the crye of the Sodomites and the Gomorhites which ascended into heauē, and the grieuousnes [Page 254] of their wickednes is moste manifest by their distruction. For they were distroyed with fire and brimestone from heauen, punishementes vndoubtedly agreable vnto so greate a heynous crime: by the fire was noted their burnyng filthy luste, and by brymestone theyr stynkyng and vnpure wicked crime. Chrisostome. Chrisostome writeth: Bycause they followed not fertility, but barennes, therfore God made that so ill, baren, and infertyle whiche before was most fertile. But he demaundeth: Why god doth in the [...]e da [...]es deferre the punishement of Sodomites. Why are not they whiche are in the same faulte in these dayes punished also after the same manner? He aunswereth, whome that punishement moueth not, for them abydeth the vnquencheable fyre. And they are not so punished in this lyfe, bycause suche menne for the moste parte are conuersaunt amonge good menne: and GOD promised Abraham, that he was ready to forgeue Sodome, if there mought haue bene founde there but onely tenne good menne. Wherefore for as muche as Cityes at this daye are not altogether so corrupte, as Sodome was then, therefore GOD dealeth more remissedly with them. It also oftentymes happeneth, that althoughe these men are moste wicked, yet they had good predecessors. And GOD (as he hath testified) tarieth, and differreth the punishement vnto the thyrde and fourth generation. Farther, we muste marke that thys vice wheresoeuer it rangeth, it is not alone. With it are ioyned cruelty, inhumanity, pryde, robbery, and oppressing of the poore. And when it shall come to this point, that menne cruelly withdrawe their dewtyes from their neyghbours, GOD doth then on the other side withdrawe hys helpe and grace. Wherefore they beyng left vnto themselues, that is, vnto their owne corrupte and viciate strengthes, doo degenerate into beastes. The Sodomitical sinne is to bee punished with death. The lawe of GOD in Exodus and Deuteronomy made thys sinne death. And Paul to the Romanes sheweth that thys is the punishement of Idolatrers. And in an other place he numbreth abusers of nature with them, whom he excludeth from the kyngdome of GOD. Amonge the olde Grecians thys wicked crime was punished with death, and that by the lawe of Laius, Bessarion. Tertulian. whereof Bessarion maketh mention agaynste Trapezuntius. Tertullian de Monogamia writeth that among the Romanes there was a lawe called Lex Scantinia, Lex Scātinia. whiche was of the same shapenes. For he would signify that the Byshoppe of Vthinensis was contaminated with thys kynde of wickednes: He feared not (sayeth he) the lawe called Lex Scantinia. In the Code ad l. Iuliam de Adulteriis & stupris in the lawe Cum vir nubit. Constantius Augustus, cōmaundeth the lawes to arise, and the lawes to be armed with the auengyng sworde, that such as are infamed by this crime, should be subiect to most cruell punishementes. Iustinian also in his Authentikes in the title vt no Luxurientur contra naturam, maketh thys crime death, and addeth that for such a detestable crime, Cityes are ouerthrowen, and plagued with pestilēces, hunger, and earthquakes. He mought also haue added ciuile warres, whiche (as this Hystory testifyeth) doo fellowe, and those moste cruell. Extra de excessibus prelatorum in the chapter Clerici, it is ordeyned, that they whiche are taken in thys crime, shoulde be put out of theyr place and dignity. And the lay men also should be excommunicated.
But it is to be knowen that euen GOD bendeth hymselfe to vengeaunce, ☜ and sendeth fury and madnes vpon suche persons, where the Magistrate neglecteth his dewty, and suffreth wicked menne to go vnpunished. Therefore in Genesis it is written that the aungelles smote the Sodomites with blyndnes, so that they could not finde the house.
We muste also note that the Gabaonites came in a manner all of them vpon a heape vnto the doore, that it myght appeare that they all conspired into thys so detestable a crime.
But there ariseth a doubt, whether sinne may by any meanes be excused for [Page] this cause, Sinne is not excused therefore bycause it is publique. bycause it was common, and almost all men were infected with it? No vndoubtedly, yea rather it was so muche the more wicked and heynous, as it was committed of many, and that without punishement. For they dyd not onely conceaue and committe wickednes, but also publishe and set it forth openly, and without shame ranne together to accomplishe it. Wherefore it is rightly written, that the sinnes of the Sodomites cried and ascēded vp into heauen. Esay also writeth: They haue published abrode their sinne like Sodoma. And where we see that done, we must thinke that it is a certayne token, that that publique wealth shall in shorte tyme perishe. For menne when they are touched with some shamefastnes, althoughe they sinne, yet remayneth there some hope of amendement and repentaunce. But when in a manner they openly professe wicked actes, and write bokes of them, and wil haue theyr wicked crimes to be publique, there is nothyng elles to be looked for, but the vengeaunce of God. With thys wicked vyce the Prelates and Papisticall Sacrificers in these dayes are chiefely infected, and also the Antechristes of Rome, vnto whom matrimony is very odious.
Let vs also consider the goodnes of God, whiche stirreth vp this olde man, to admonishe, and reproue them, and to bryng them agayne into the ryght waye. They were menne polluted and contaminated and vtterly vnwoorthy of so great a benefite. But there are neuer men so euill, but that GOD doth by some meanes admonishe them of their synnes. The olde man dyd his dewty: but they contemne and deride him.
He brought foorth hys concubine. Who? Not the olde manne, but the Leuite, who deliuered his wife, for feare least he should hymselfe haue fallen into their power. But why did not the olde manne delyuer his daughter also? Paraduenture, bycause those Citezins cared not for her beawty, who yet counted the wife of the Leuite to be very fayre and beautifull. They so afflicted her all the nyght, that in the mornyng she dyed. Theyr wicked crime turned at the length into murther. In this place the hande and vengeaunce of GOD sheweth forth it selfe. This woman hauyng before committed adultery, and not for it iustly punished, The adulteresse as she sinned so is she punished. at the length dyeth euen in adultery, and suffreth the lawe of the lyke. But whether she repented at last or no, there is nothyng written of that matter. We onely see the outwarde thynges, it is GOD whiche searcheth the heartes. But if she dyd repent, and that with fayth, then escaped she eternall punishementes. Yet GOD will haue discipline established in publique wealthes, and the malefactors punished, who if they repent, then are they fatherly chastisynges, and not punishementes. Neither is it lawfull for the Magistrate to neglecte his office, althoughe they repent: for if they doo cease to punishe, God (as it is before sayd) will by hymselfe reuenge. Wherfore that whiche is written to the Hebrues: Whoremongers and adulterers GOD will iudge, may be vnderstand two manner of wayes, bycause God sometymes punisheth by himselfe, and sometymes by the Magistrate.
The Leuite layd his concubine beyng dead vpon the Asse, went home and deuided her body into twelue partes, whereof he sent into euery tribe a parte. But it may be demaūded, Howe the Leuite distributed the pieces. how he sent twelue parts into euery tribe, when as they wer 13. number. Some thinke it was, bycause he sent nothing vnto the tribe of Leui, for that y e Leuites dwelled dispersedly among y e other tribes. Other suppose that he would send nothing vnto the tribe of Beniamin, bycause he thought that they would be no equall reuengers, for as muche as the Gabaonites pertayned vnto them. But this sentence seemeth not probable, bycause it was the sinne onely of one City, & therefore it pertayned not vnto the whole tribe: vnles peraduenture we will say, that he supposed that the Beniamites were of such mindes, that they [Page 255] woulde not know and take vengeance of the offences of theyr owne bretherne. Neither was he deceaued in his opiniō. For so happened it in very dede. Other say that he sent two partes to the tribe of Manasses, bycause the Manassites dwelled part beyond Iordane, and part on this side: therfore they say that in this hys distribution were omitted two tribes, Beniamin and Leui, for the causes before alledged. The entent of the Leuite was, What was the entent of the Leuite. that no tribe should excuse themselues by ignorance.
He was compelled so to do, bicause ther was then no Magistrate in Israel, neyther any certayn place of iudgement where he might plead his cause. Wherfore he stirreth vp al y e people to take away euil amōg thē. And it semeth that he more profited by this meanes, then he shoulde haue done if he had vsed letters or spech. For those things do very much moue, which are set forth before y e eies. And yet in so doing he sought not reuengemēt, either by a wicked or by an vnlawful meanes, forasmuch as he did not tumultuously call souldiers together, neyther raised vp sedicions, or inuaded the city, which did him the iniurye. He broughte the cause before them, to whom it pertained to knowe it: He complained not to Ammorhites or Iebusites, but to his owne people. Wherfore he ordreth his accusation well and lawfully: neyther by accusing doth he violate the law, By accusinge the law is not violated, but holpen. yea rather he is an help vnto it, as on the cōtrary side, they which hold their peace and vtter not wicked acts, ar against the lawes. For euē as of our selues we ought not to wish any mans death, so must we not suffer the lawes to be openly and vilanously violated with out punishmēt. This ciuil war is not to be imputed vnto the Leuite. Wherefore let the bishops in the old time looke howe godly they did, when they made intercession vnto magistrates for wicked men, and for such as wer appointed to dy. If thou wilt say ther straight way followed most ciuil warre, whiche thing seemeth may be imputed vnto the Leuite. But it is not so, it ought rather to be ascribed vnto the Beniamits, which would not punyshe so greate a wicked cryme.
In this history Iosephus somewhat varieth from the holy scriptures. Iosephus. Firste he denieth that this woman was an adultresse, and that she therefore departed from her husband. She was (sayth he) very beawtifull, and when her husbande loued her excedingly, and complained that she loued not him agayn, she as one not able to abide his brawlinges, fled vnto her parents. But the holy scriptures do manifestly teache, y t she had played the harlot. In which sentence al the interpreters agree together. Farther he denieth that the Gabaonites thoughte this, namely to abuse the Leuit, he sayth that they being allured by the beawty of the wife, desired onely to haue to do with her. But y t also is plainly against the holy scriptures, wherin it is by expresse words written: Bring forth the man, that we may know him. Farther he denieth that the Leuit deliuered his wife vnto them, but the Gabaonites (saith he) toke her by violence. At the last also he addeth this (which I thinke also is very likely) that the Leuite when he sent the peces of the body, did sende messengers also to declare what was done: otherwise he shoulde not much haue profited, if he had sent but the peeces onely.
These euils did therefore happen, bicause there was no magistrate or prince to iudge the Israelites. In the papistical church ther is no magistrat The same thinge also happeneth when there is a magistrat or prince, which doth not his office. And bicause the ecclesiastical men haue at this day shaken of the yoke of the politicall Magistrate, there is therefore no magistrate amonge them. Whereby the Christian publike welth suffreth great discommodities.
¶Of a Magistrate.
THis place admonisheth me to entreat of a magistrate, whome I iudge may thus be described, namely to be a person elected by the institution of God, to kepe the lawes as touching outward discipline, in punishing trāsgressors with punishment of the body, and to noorish and defend the good. There are vndoubtedly [Page] many persons elected by the institution of God which are not Magistrates as the ministers of churches, whiche yet are keepers of the worde of God, & of his law, but not as touching outwarde discipline onely. Bycause it is the office of ministers, by the word of God to pearce euē to the inward mociōs of minds: for the holyghost adioyneth his power both to the right preachinges of his word & also to the sacraments which are distributed in the church. But the magistrat onely exerciseth outward discipline & punishment vpon transgressors. The minister bindeth the guilty & vnpenitent in the name of god, and in his name excludeth them from the kingdome of heauen, as long as they so remain. The magistrate punisheth withoutward punishmentes, & when nede requireth vseth the sword. Ether of them nourisheth the godly, but after a diuerse manner: the magistrate encreaseth them with riches, honors and dignities: the minister comforteth them with the promises of god, and with the Sacramentes. Wherefore the magistrate is instituted, The end of a magistrate. to the end that the lawes should be most diligētly kept, the guilty punished & the good holpen & noorished. And vndoubtedly the law is a dumme magistrate, & againe the magistrate is a liuing and speaking law, and so also is the minister of god (as Paule sayth) to theyr prayse which do well: and contrarily he beareth the sword against the wicked, as gods reuenger & iudge, neyther tende these thinges to any other end, then to the health of men.
But the forme of magistrates is not one onely but manye, as Monarchia, Aristocratia, Many formes of magistrates. & Policia: or Tirannis, Oligarchia, & Democratia. The discriptiōs and natures of which forms Plato, Aristotle, and other Philosophers haue elegantly taught. Of all those formes the best is to be desired, and all men to whome it pertayneth ought to prouide, that a good or tollerable estate degenerate not into an euill one. But if it happen that Tirans or wicked princes obteine the gouernment of thinges, An example of the Iewes. that is to be suffred asmuch as is by the word of god lawfull. The Iewes were by violence oppressed of the Babilonians, whome yet god admonished that they should obey, & to pray for the king, although he were a tiran, & possessed the kingdome of the Hebrewes most wrongfully. Cesar also held Iewry by tiranny, and yet Christ sayd: Geue that whiche is Cesars vnto Cesars, & the thinges y t are of god vnto god. The Apostles also haue taught that we must obey princes & pray for thē. Nero was a most vnpure beast, whō yet the Apostle in his Epistle to y e Romains declared y t he ought to be obeyed, not onely for fear, but also for cōscience sake. Phocas possessed y e empire of Rome by euil arts, most cruelly slew Mauricius his prince, & also his children, whom yet y e Romaines acknowledged as theyr Emperor, & Gregory the .i. red vnto y e people his cōmaundements & writings. If y u wilt demaūd, what form of a publike wealth y t Iewes had, it may easly be known by those things which we haue in an other place spokē. They had at y e beginning this forme Aristocratia: for god allowed y e counsell of Iethro, which was y t ther should be chosē out wise mē & strong & such as fered god, which should gouerne the publike welth, as it is writtē in Exodus & Deut. Yea & god himself did so w t his sprite inspire these .70. men, whō he had cōmaunded to be chosē as helpers of Moses, y t they also prophesied. So were the Israelite gouerned, although afterward they were gouerned by y e power of a king.
Princes ar called Pasto [...].But this is not to be omitted, y e princes in y e holy scriptures ar not only called Deacōs or ministers of god, but also pastors, of whō Ezechiel cōplaineth for many causes for y t they cruellye & peruerslye fed the people of God. Homere also calleth Agamemnon the feder of y e people. For they ought not to beare rule as thieues or hired mē, to flese & to oppresse, but to kepe, norishe & fede like pastors. They are also called fathers, Magistrates are called fathers. wherfore the Senators among y e Romaines were called Patres conscripti, y t is appointed fathers, nether was ther a greter or more aunciēt honor in y e publike welth thē to be called pater patrie, y t is the father of y e country. Yea also a magistrate is contayned in y e law of God vnder this cōmaū dement: Honor thy father & thy mother. Wherfore princes owe vnto their subiectes a fatherly loue. And they ought alwaies to remēber, that they are not rulers [Page 256] ouer beastes but ouer men, & that thēselues also are men, who yet ought to be far better & more excellēt thē those whom they gouern, otherwise they ar not apt to gouern thē. For we make not a shepe a head ouer shepe, but the chief wether & then the shepeheard, And euē as a shepeheard excelleth y e sheepe, so ought they to whome the office of a magistrate is committed, to excell the people. But now must we consider by whome Magistrates are ordeined. That sometimes is done by the cōsent of y e Senate, somtimes by y e voices of y e people, By whome magistrates are ordeined. God is first ordeiner of magistrates. or by y e will of the souldiers, or els by successiō of inheritāce. But these ar but instrumēts. But y e proper cause of Magistrates is god him self: which may be by many reasōs proued. First there is by god a certain light kindled in y e harts of mē, whereby they vnderstand y t they can not liue together without a guide, & there hēce spronge y e office of a magistrate. The law of god also commaundeth to obey Magistrates. And before the law geuen by Moses (as it is written in Gen.) god ordeined y t he which shedeth mans blood his blood, also should be shed, not vndoubtedly rashly & by euery mā (for that were very absurd) wherefore we may gather by those wordes, that a magistrate was not obscurely instituted by god, whiche shoulde punish manquellers. Paule also writeth, that all powers whatsoeuer they be ar ordeined of god. And Christ aunswered vnto Pilate: Thou shouldest haue no power against me, except it had beene geuen thee frō aboue. By these testimonies and reasons it followeth that god is the true & proper cause of Magistrates.
But here some cauell, & saye that if all magistrates are of God, then must all things be rightly gouerned: but in gouerning publike welthes many things as we se, are done viciously & peruersly. Vndoubtedly vnder Nero, Domician, Commodus, Caracalla, & Heliogabalus good lawes were contēned, good men killed, & discipline of y e city was vtterly corrupted. But if Magistrates were of god, such thinges coulde neuer haue happened. This reason neither can nor oughte any thing to moue vs: bicause the office is to be seperated from the person: The office is to be seperated from the persō. & vndoubtedly it is possible, that he which hath the office may be a wicked & noghty mā, when as yet neuerthelesse the power is good & very profitable. For there is nothing so good, but that men by theyr malice may vse it ill. Therfore it is no meruaile if there haue bene kings & Emperors, which sometimes haue abused y t power geuen thē, which yet they were not so able to corrupt, but that mē receiued by it many good things & cōodities, as I haue before shewed. By the testimony of Daniell it is most manifest that Magistrates ar of God. For he (saith he) geueth & transferreth kingdōs as it pleaseth him. Farther we se that y e Monarche hath somtimes bene in y e East, somtimes in y e South, afterwarde in the Weast, & somtimes in y e North: & also that there hath sometimes bene good princes, and somtimes euill: sometimes haue reigned noble men, & sometimes obscure men. And we vnderstād that it oftentimes happeneth that riches or power profite not to get or kepe a kingdome: and to thinke that these things are done by chaunce without the prouidence of God, it is most absurd.
Some Astronomer will peraduenture say that these chaunges or mutaciōs are imported by y e starres: but Daniell the minister of y e truth, saith that it is God which chaūgeth times. For euē as he hath in y e year appointed courses of times, The chaunges of the wicked ar not to be ascribed vnto the starres. so hath he as it pleaseth him somtimes ordeined & somtimes takē away princes. He did cast down Saul, & he also promoted Dauid. And he foretold that he woulde so do: least it should seme to haue happened rashely or by chaunse. Yea and kingdomes & publike wealthes may be called certayne worke houses or shops of the wil of god. For that is done in them, which god himself hath decreed to be done, although princes oftētimes vnderstād it not. God called y e Medes and y e Assiriās to afflict y e Israelits, & them (when it semed good vnto him) he repulsed & toke a waye. He raysed vp the Persians agaynste the Chaldeans, and the Grecians agaynste the Persians, and lastlye the Romaines againste all other nations. Who deuided the kingdome of the Hebrewes into Iuda and Israell? Vndoubtedly God. Ahias the Silonite did foretell that it shoulde so come to passe, and sayde [Page] that the word was come forth from the Lorde, that it shoulde so be. Who ouerthrew Achab? Who caused Iehu to be annointed, but onely God? But there ar certayne Tirannes which destroy publike welthes. What draweth Tirannes to Pub. welthes. I graunt that. But our wicked actes deserue it. For there are oftentimes so greiuous wicked actes and so many, that they cannot be corrected by the ordinary magistrate, and by a gentle and quiet gouernance of thinges, and therfore god doth then prouide tirannes to afflict the people, and yet for the most part he tempreth and lenyfieth his punishment in raysinge vp good and godly princes. God sendeth good Princes after tirannes. After the fall of Nero he set vp Vespacian: after Domician, he sent Neruan and Troian: after Commodus, Pertinax and Seuerus: after Heliogabalus, Alexander. But they which say: The wicked actes of Tirannes are not of God, yet do they range and spreade abroade in kingdomes and Empires, therfore Empires and kingdomes ar not of god: they (I saye) make a false Silogismus a secundum quid ad simpliciter that is, from that which appeareth to that which is indede, neither doth this rightly follow: Certayne thinges in a magistrate are not of God: therfore the magistrate is not of God. Or tather they reason [...] from accidences for vices and wicked acts chance to publike powers, but are not knit vnto them (per se) that is of thēselues, or by theyr nature.
The godly may vse Ethnike magistrates.But some man will doubt: If the Magistrate be an Ethnike & also a tiran, whither it be lawfull for a godly man to vse his helpe and ayde? What els? Paul appealeth vnto Cesar a most wicked tiran. But it may seme that he did against his own preceptes. For in his firste Epistle to the Corrin. he reprehended those Christians whiche pleaded causes at the iudgemente places of the Ethnikes. He iustlye reproued the Corinthians, bycause there were Christians amonge them, which might in the church haue decided theyr causes. Neyther was it conueniēt that Christians should contend with christians at the iudgemente places of the vngodly. But Paul whē he appealed vnto Cesar, had not to do w t christians, but with y e Iewes, & president of Rome. Wherfore forasmuch as he had not a faithfull magistrate, neither could it otherwise be done, & his life also was soughte, he did not il in imploringe the fayth and ayd of the cōmon magistrate, although he were an Ethnike. For euē as we vse the Sun & Mone, so also is it lawfull to vse the publike and ordinary magistrate, what manner of man so euer he be.
The church vsed an Ethnike Magistrate.The Christian church did the same thing, whē there were yet no Christiā Emperors. For Paulus Samosatenus was condēned as an heretike, & being a bishop he was displaced. But bicause he would not render vp the house which longed to y e bishop, there was request made vnto Aurelianus y e Emperor, & ayd obteined at his hands to cōpel him to deliuer his house vnto y e new bishop. Who can say y t the church herein sinned, bicause it vsed y e publike magistrate, though he were an infidel? But let vs returne thither frō whence we digressed, and constantly beleue that the magistrate is of god, althoughe oftentimes (our sins deseruing the same) many things vnder him ar done wickedly & vniustly. Howbeit Hoseah the Prophet semeth yet to be against vs whē he saith: they haue raigned, but not by me. How it is sayd that tirannes raign not by god. But we must know that Hoseah entreated of tirans, which nether regarded laws, neither norished y e good, nor toke away y e euil frō among y e people, & therfore they raigned not by god, but by theyr own lust: they regarded theyr own affections & not the law of god. Farther they inuaded kingdomes, being stirred vp by theyr own wicked desires, & moued by their own ambiciō, not as they which felt y e calling of god vnto the kingdome, neither toke they vpon them the power w t a wil to obey god, but to satisfy theyr own ambiciō. This was not to reign by god. But y t they were not exalted to the kingdom by y e wil of god, it is contrary in a manner to y e whole scripture. For god calleth Nebucad-Nezar his seruāt, bycause he would vse his ministery to afflict y e Israelites, whē as yet it might haue bene said y t he reigned not by god, forasmuch as he foght against y e Iewes by his own lust & couetous desire of his mind, & not of a zeale to fulfil the will of god. [Page 257] Wherfore the sentence of Hosea the prophet is nothing against vs, but that we may beleue that the Magistrate is of God, and that we ought to obey him. Paule saith: Let euerye soule be subiect vnto the higher powers. The same thing is written to Titus. And in the first Epistle of Peter, the second chap. And Paule to Timothe addeth, that we should pray for them.
But the Papistes, and they which wil be called Ecclesiastical men, Ministers of the churche are not exemted frō the ordinarye power. Chrisostome. wyll not heare these thinges. For they cry that they are exempted from publike and ordinary powers, when as yet the Apostle vsed no exception when hee sayde: Let euerye soule be subiect vnto the higher powers. And: He whiche resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. Yea and Chrisostome also vpon that place saith, that the Apostles, Prophetes, Euangelistes, and Moonkes, are comprehē ded vnder that lawe. And Chrisostome wrote these thinges of Ecclesiastical persons, when as yet he was Bishop of Constantinople, and there were then also Christian Emperours.
But it is a sporte to beare the argumentes, What the false ecclesiastical mē trifle of twoo swoordes. whiche these false Ecclesiasticall men vse. In Etrauag. de Maioritate et Obedientia, chap. Vnam sanctam, Bonifacius the .viii. (whom they say entred in as a Foxe, raigned like a Lion, and dyed like a Dog) saith that there are two swordes in the Church. And least he should seeme to speake it rashly, he citeth these woordes out of the .xxii. chap. of Luke: whē I sent you without bag or scrip, did ye at any time want any thing? They said vnto him: No. Christ added: But now I saye vnto you, let euerye man take his scrippe and wallet, and he which hath none, let him sell his coate and bye a swoord. They said vnto him: Behold here are two swoordes. Christ answered, it is sufficient. Bonifacius saith: Two swoordes are sufficient for the Churche, namely the spiritual sword and the temporal. Wherefore they whiche say that Peter had not an outward swoord, do seeme not to vnderstand the woordes of Christ, wherein he sayd: Put vp thy swoord into the sheath. Thy swoorde (sayth he) and not an other mans. For he had a swoord of his owne, although he were bidden to put it vp.
But there must needes be some order kept and obserued in these swoordes. For what powers soeuer there be, they are ordained of God. For there shoulde be a great confusion, if for that being two swordes in the Church, the one should not be gouerned by the other. Wherfore the temporal sword ought to be gouerned by the spiritual. And to make this argument more plaine: The church (saith he) hath two swoordes, but it vseth them not after one and the selfe same manner. For it exerciseth the spiritual swoord, but the temporal sword ought to be drawen, onely at the becke and suffrance of the Church. This is so obscure, that it may in a maner seme to be a riddle. Howe be it this is his meaning, The Pope maketh subiect vnto him selfe the swoorde of the Emperour. that the sworde of the Emperour ought to be drawen onely at the wyll and pleasure of the Pope, that when he commaundeth, he must strike, and by sufferance, that is he must go forward in striking, so long as he listeth and wil suffer it. Wherfore these thinges must be in order: and the order is that the temporal swoord be reduced vnto God by the spiritual. For (as that Dionisius saith, Dionysius. who is thought to be an Areopagite, although he be farre an other) all inferiour thinges are referred vnto the chiefest thing, but yet by a meane. Wherfore, saith he, the temporal sworde must be drawen at the becke of the Pope, that by that meanes it may be referred vnto God. So we see is now brought to passe. For so often onelye as the most holy willeth that warre be made against the Lutherians, he wil that the Emperour straightway should obey. And if any Prince wil not with much submission obey him, straightway are sent Legates hither and thether, that al other kinges and princes should apply them selues vnto his becke, and make war and vexe him, which wil not obey him. The Pope preferreth himselfe before al kings and princes.
Bonifacius addeth moreouer that he himselfe is aboue al kinges and princes. For principallity is to be esteemed according to the dignity of the things which [Page] by it are exercised. We (saith he) exercise spiritual thinges, and they temporall, wherfore their swoorde is inferiour to ours, and they themselues also vnto vs. He addeth also an other reason, they pay vnto vs tenthes, but tenthes ar paid by the inferior vnto the superior. Wherfore seing kings & princes pai tenthes, they do testify y t their lands & reuenues pertaine vnto the church, & that they ar subiect vnto it. Moreouer, he which blesseth, is greater then he which is blessed. But Bishops consecrate and anoynt kinges. The Glose addeth: That of kinges onely the right shoulder is anointed, but the heades of Bishops are anointed. And vpon Kinges is poured oyle, but vpon Bishops Chrisma. Wherefore wee must needes confesse that Kinges are inferiour to Bishops. Farther, kinges receaue the crowne and scepter of Bishops. For who saith hee, anoynted Saul, and who anointed. Dauid, but onely Samuel? who anoynted Iehu, but a Prophet sent by Helizeus? The matter also which is intreated of by bishops, is greater thē that, about which kinges are occupied. For Christ said vnto Peter: whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth, shalbe bound in heauen. This power is greater then al humane power. And God saith vnto Ieremy: I wil set thee ouer nacions and kingdomes, to roote out and destroy, to scatter and to plant. Therefore we are greater then al the power of kinges, and are exempted from their right. Wherefore prophane and lay powers of Emperours and Kinges must be iudged by the Ecclesiastical men, The Pope wil not bee iudged or gouerned of any. & ought by vs to be appointed, and may by vs be ouerthrowen. For to whom it pertaineth to builde, to the same it belongeth to destroy. Therfore the spiritual Magistrate ought to iudge of the ciuill Magistrate. But if the spiritual offende in any thing, of whom ought he to be iudged? The inferiour, saith he, ought to be iudged of the superiour. But the Pope, which is the highest of al, of whom shal he be iudged? Of no man saith he, but onely of God, bycause the spiritual is iudged of no man, but he iudgeth al thinges.
Oh how finely and trymly ordaineth he his tirannye? He calleth hym selfe onely spiritual. The Gloser, although he were otherwise grose inough, yet hee could not be so much a blocke, but that he sawe that these thinges were spoken very absurdly. How, saith he, is the Pope spiritual, if he be vnpure and wycked? He expoundeth himselfe by this distinction: Two maner of spiritualties of the Canonists. There is one maner of spiritualtye saith he, of the person, and an other of the state. Wherfore if there be anye spiritual person, he may reproue al men by a brotherly admonicion: but he ought to be reprehended of no man. Bicause for that he is spirituall, hee committeth nothing filthely. But sometimes some person which is not spiritual in life and maners, ought yet to be called spiritual, bicause of his degree. As are many bishops and Popes: wherfore we must cal the bishop of Rome whatsoeuer he be, spiritual and most holy. But what thing els is this, then to teache vs to lye, if they wil haue a filthy varlet called most holye? Bonifacius at the last concludeth, that all Emperours and Kinges must be subiect vnto his power onely. And he addeth a reason: Vnles we wil together with the Maniches appoint twoo begynninges: which thing we ought not to do, for Moses sayd not, in the beginninges, but in the beginning God created heauen & earth. The Pope pronoūseth that he of necessitye of saluacion ought to be obeyed. Of the two maner of powers, the ciuil and ecclesiastical. Wherfore, saith he, we define, determine, and pronounce, that all men oughte of necessitye of saluacion, to obey the Pope, as the chiefest power. And so he excellētly I promise you concludeth that al Ecclesiastical men are exempt from the ciuil Magistrate.
Before I come to confute this their most shameles boasting, I thinke it expedient briefly to speake of the two maner of powers: of the Ecclesiasticall power I say, and ciuill. In that it is sayd that the Ecclesiastical power is preferred before al ciuil functions, it is somwhat that they say, if it be rightlye and aptlye vnderstand. All ecclesiasticall power cleaueth vnto the woorde of God, so that without it is none: but the woord of the Lorde is a rule common, whereby all thinges ought both to be directed and be tempered. Ambrose instructed Theodosius. For it teacheth in what maner the outward sword and publike wealth ought to be gouerned. And generally also it sheweth how althinges ought to be done of al men. So Ambrose (whō [Page 258] Theodosius the Emperor raged to cruelly, and without al consideracion against the Thessalonians) perswaded him, that in al punishmentes of death, ther should be .xxx. daies space after the sentence geuen, least the Magistrate should do those things in a rage and fury, wherof although he afterward repented him, yet they could not be amended. So many Bishops, oftentimes in things most waighty, shewed foorth their authority, and many times either put away cruell warres, or els pacified them, & out of the word of God preached among them. Wherfore the Ecclesiastical power after this maner comprehendeth althinges, bicause out of the woord of God it findeth how to geue counsell in all thinges. For there is nothing in the whole world, wherunto the woord of God extendeth not it selfe. Wherfore they are farre deceaued, which vse to cry: The preaching of the woord of God hath al mē & al states subiect vnto it. what hath a Preacher to do with the publike wealth, what hath he to doo with warres? what with Poticaries? what with Cookes? But let them tel me, when the Minister of the woorde perceiueth the law of God to be violated in these thinges, why should he not reprehende them by the woord of God? Why should he not admonish them? Why should he not exhort them to cease from synne? The Minister of the Churche worketh by the woord, and not by the swoord. How far cyuill power extēdeth Nndoubtedlye it is his dutye to correct synners, not in dede with the swoord, or punishing by the pursse, not by emprisonment, not by banishment, but after his owne manner, that is by the might and power of the woord of God.
Againe, the political power is extended to al those thinges which pertayne to political power. But after what maner? Shal ciuil power require good mociōs of the minde, and inward repentance? It cannot cause these thinges: yet it must wish these thinges, and vse those meanes wherby they may be had. For he ought to haue a care, that Bishops, Pastors and Teachers in the Churche doo teache purely, reprehende fatherly, and by the woord of God administer the sacramēts. This thing in dede the Magistrate doth not by himselfe, but hee ought to haue a regarde, that they may be in a redynes, which should do them wel. Wherefore either power extendeth most amply, and comprehendeth al thinges, but not after one and the selfe same maner. And the rule of either of them is to bee taken out of the woord of God, which is plaine to be in the Church.
Againe, there are two subiections: One is political and ciuil, Two kinds of subiection. whereunto all men are subiect, who if they offend in any thing against the lawes, let them at the iust Magistrates hand looke for imprysonment, punishment by the pursse, banishment, death, and outward paines. But if they doo wel, let them looke for honours, rewardes, dignities, and prayse. And after this maner the ciuil power is not subiect vnto the ministery of the woorde, bicause by it it can not by these kindes of punishmentes be afflicted and constrained. The other subiection is spiritual, that is of faith, and of obedience. For strayghtway, as sone as men heare of their duty out of the woord of God, and that either this thing or that is to bee done, or this or that thing to be auoyded, they geue place, beleue, and obey. Bycause they perceaue, that that which is spoken, is the woorde of God. And these are the endes of eyther power. A sentence of Valentiniā the Emperour. And so is to be vnderstand that saying of Valentinian the Emperour, out of the booke called Historia Tripartita, which thing is had also in the distinction .63. chap. Valentinianus: Chuse (saith he) suche a bishop, vnto whom we which gouerne the Empire, may sincerely submyt our heades, and vse his admonicions as medicines. &c. By which wordes is vnderstand that it longeth vnto the Ecclesiastical power, An error of the same Valentinian. to admonish out of the woorde of God for saluacion. Although the same Emperour afterward erred. For when he had appointed Ambrose Pretor of the City of Millane, the people did chuse him byshop. Which thing when the Emperor knew, A bishop ought not to haue a care onely ouer soules, or onely ouer bodyes. he gaue thankes vnto God therfore after this maner: I had made hym ruler ouer the bodyes of men, but thou wouldest haue him ruler ouer the soules. &c. Valentinian did not rightlye put a distinction betwene offices. For why? Ought bishops to haue a care onely ouer soules, and not also ouer bodies? What if they geue them selues to glotonye or [Page] dronkennes, or liue licenciouslye touching outwarde thinges, shall they not reproue these thinges? Vndoubtedly they must reproue them. Neither must princes haue a care onely ouer the bodies of men, and neglect their soules. For wee do not imagine that a prince is a neateherd or a swineherd, to whom is committed onely the care of the belly, flesh and skinne of his subiectes: yea he must prouide that they may liue vertuously and godlily. But what if Christian Princes when they are by the woorde of God admonished of publike and most grieuous synnes, wil not heare, neither amende that which they haue noughtely committed. What I say shal the bishop do herein? Ambrose excommunicated Theodosius the Emperor, when he exercised so grieuous tiranny against the Thessalonians. Innocentius also excommunicated Arcadius, when he had exiled Iohn Chrisostome, who admonished him freely and trulye, as it is had in the dist. 96. chap. Duo sunt, & in the dist. 18. in the chap. Quoniam quidam. And they are the wordes of the syxt Synode, where it is decreed that ther should euery yeare be had two Sinodes. And if princes would hinder them, let them be excommunicated.
Eusebius.But what do I make mencion of these latter thinges? Let vs reade Eusebius in his .vi. booke, and .xxxiiii. chap. where he saith that Philip the Emperor, who liued in the tyme of Origene, was the first Christian prince, and when he would haue bene present together with the faithful on Easter euen, and haue communicated with them in prayers, the bishop, bicause he was a wicked and noughty liuer, reiected him among them that wer put to penance, that he should make open confession before the Churche, and acknowledge his synne, otherwyse hee could by no meanes be admitted vnto the Communion. This did the byshop at that tyme against the Emperour & chiefe Monarche of the whole world. Wherfore the ciuil power ought to be subiect vnto the woorde of God which is preached by the Ministers. But againe the Ecclesiasticall power is subiect vnto the ciuil, when the Ministers behaue themselues yll, either in thinges humane or Ecclesiastical. For these powers are after a sorte conuertible and sundry wayes are occupied about the selfe same thinges, and mutually helpe one an other, euē as Aristotle Theodectes calleth Rhethorike and Logike interchangeable artes, Aristotle. bicause either of them are occupied in the selfe same thinges after a sundry maner. The Ecclesiastical power is subiect vnto the Magistrate: not by a spiritual subiection, but by a politike. For as touching the Sacramentes and sermons, it is not subiect vnto it, bicause the Magistrate cannot bende the woord of God or the Sacramentes, which the ministery vseth, neither can he compel the pastors and Teachers of the Church to teach otherwise, or in any other sorte to administer the Sacramentes, then is prescribed by the woorde of God. Howbeit ministers in that they are men and Citizens, are without all doubte subiect vnto the Magistrate, and also their lands, riches, and possessions. So Christ payd tribute, so also did the Apostles, and the whole primatiue Churche, when there were yet most holye men. Their manners also are subiect vnto the censures and iudgementes of the Magistrates.
Farthermore, we must adde that Ministers are subiect vnto the Magistrate, not onely as touching those thinges which I haue rehearsed, but also (as I before signified) cōcerning their function. Bicause if they teache not right, neither administer the Sacramentes orderly, it is the office of the Magistrate to compel them to an order, and to see that they teache not vnpurelye, and that they myngle not fables, Princes may put Ministers oute of their place, if their be haue thē selues yll. or that they abuse not the Sacramentes, or delyuer them otherwise then the Lorde hath commaunded. Also if they liue noughtelye and wickedly, let them put them out of the holy ministerye. This did Salomon, who deiected Abiathar, and substituted Sadok in his roume, as it is written in the fyrst boke of Kinges, the second chap. And in the new Testament, Iustinian displaced Siluerius & Vigilius, which thing I doubt not but other princes did sometimes. But how iustly, I wil not presently declare: this one thing I wil say, that that [Page 259] thing was lawful for them in the causes now alledged. But some man wil say, that I speake now of the fact, and not of the right. Yea but I speake also of the right. For the king ought to haue with him the law of God written, bicause he is ordained a keeper, not onely of the first table, but also of the latter. It longeth not to the Minister of the Churche to put downe Princes. Wherfore he which offendeth in any of them both, falleth into his power. But althoughe a king may remoue an vnprofitable and hurtful bishop, yet can not a bishop on the other syde put downe a king, if he offend. Iohn in dede reproued Herode, but he displaced him not of his kingdome. Ambrose and Innocent excommunicated Emperours: but they went no farther. Yea and Christ called Herode a woolfe, but he tooke not away from hym his kingdom, and he payed tribute vnto Tiberius, a most wicked Tiranne, neither was he at any time author to any man to shake of his yoke. Wherefore let Popes take heede by what right as they lust them selues, they put Kinges and Emperors out of their place. This thing did neither anye of the Prophetes, nor the Apostles, nor Christ.
The Popes boast that they haue great power: but if it be any that they haue, it consisteth wholy in the woord of God. Let them teache, preach, and admonish, if they wil exercise their power: otherwise the ciuil and temporal power, whom they so much crake of, is farre from the ecclesiastical Ministers. In summe, euen as there is found no king nor Emperour so great, which is not subiect vnto the power of the woord of God, which is preached by the Ministers: so on the other syde is there no bishop, which when he hath offended, ought not to be reproued by the ciuil Magistrate. What difference so euer there bee, the same (as I haue sayde) is wholye as touching the manner of reprouing. The Ministers of the Churche doo that by the woorde, and Princes by outward punishmentes. But our false ecclesiastical men wilbe princes and raigne. But Christ woulde be no king. And when he was sought for, to that ende to be made a king, he vtterly refused it: yea he openlye professed that his kingdome was not of this worlde. He said also vnto the Apostles: Princes of the nacions do beare rule ouer them, but ye shal not do so. Peter also (whose successors they affirme them selues to be) admonisheth Ministers, not to exercise dominion ouer the Clergy. But these men wyll haue prysons, soldiours and swoordes, and styrre vp warres, as they lust them selues.
Perduenture they wil obiect vnto vs the Assamonites, Of the Assamonites or Machabites. out of the olde Testament, whom it is certayne that they were both Kynges and Priestes, and confounded both the powers. That historye in deede is wrytten in the bookes of the Machabites, but we must see whyther they dyd it rightly, or wyckedly and ambiciously. Vndoubtedly I thinke they did it not orderly: for God by his word had many tymes adiudged the kyngdome vnto the Tribe of Iudah, euen to the tyme of Messias. And contrarily he commaunded the Leuites, that they shoulde possesse no landes, and muche lesse to occupye a kyngdome among theyr brethren. But if a man had rather saye, that they did thys thyng by a certayne secrete reuelacion and hydden iudgement of GOD, hee shall not amende theyr cause. For that whithe is so done, ought not to bee drawen into an example. But I thynke rather that they offended in so doyng. They dyd well vndoubtedlye, when they delyuered theyr Countrey from tyrranny: but that thing being finished, they ought not to haue taken vpon them the kyngdome. Neyther dyd GOD obscurely declare that that theyr act displeased hym. For (as wee gather out of Iosephus) that house afterward neuer wanted Tragedies. How the Apostles somtimes vsed outwarde punishmentes. They farther obiecte vnto vs, that Peter slewe Ananias and Saphira, and that Paule strake Elimas the Sorcerer wyth blindnes. That is true in deede: but they dyd these thinges by the woorde of God, not by violence, not by the swoord, neither by the labour of a hangman. Let these men doo the same thynges by the woord, and wee wyll regarde them. Why doo they not harken vnto Paule to Timothe: [Page] Let no man going on warfare for God, wrap hymselfe in cares of this lyfe. If they wil go on warfare for God, why doo they in such sorte hynder themselues with worldly busines? Haue they so much leasure from their own affaires, that they can haue a care ouer other mens thinges? Let them answer plainly: would they at this day abide, that any king should attempt to teache the Gospel, or administer the Sacramentes? They would not suffer it. Neyther did God hymselfe also suffer it: The offices of both the powers must not be confounded. but he strake Ozeas with Leprosy, when he would haue burnt insence vnto God. Why therfore doo they inuade other mens borders? These functions ought to be seperated, bicause either of them requireth a whole man a part by hym selfe: yea rather scarce hath beene founde anye one man at anye tyme, which coulde ryghtlye execute eyther of them, so hard a thyng is the execution of them both. Howbeit, both of them doo helpe one an other: for the politike Prince geueth iudgement, and the Ecclesiasticall doth not in deede geue iudgement, but he teacheth how iudgement ought to bee geuen. Haue no respect (sayth he) of persons in iudgement: afflict not the poore and straunger: receaue no bribes. &c. So on the other syde the political Magistrate preacheth not, neither administreth the Sacramentes. But vnlesse these thinges bee ryghtlye ordered, he ought to punish the Ministers.
Wherin either power differeth and agreeth.And to be briefe, there are two thinges to be considered of vs in thys collacion. In the Ciuyll Magistrate is to be considered both the power, and also the man which beareth and exerciseth the power. He in respect that he is a Christian man, is vndoubtedly subiect vnto the woorde of God, and in respect that hee beareth power, and gouerneth, he ought also to be subiect vnto the same woord of God. For out of it ought he to seeke rules to gouerne and to administer. In the Minister of the Churche also is to be considered both the ministerye it selfe, and also the person which executeth it. As touching the person, the minister is subiect vnto the Ciuill power: for he is both a Citizen, and payeth tribute as other men doo, and is vnder the correction of manners. But as concernyng the ministerye, he is also somewaye subiect vnto the Magistrate: For if he eyther teache or administer the Sacramentes agaynst the woorde of God, he must bee reprehended by the Ciuil Magistrate. And yet must hee not seeke for rules and reasons of hys function at the same Magistrates hand, but out of the woorde of God. By thys distinction we may easelye vnderstande the differences and agrement of eyther power.
To the argumentes of Boniface.Now resteth to come to that Thraso Bonifacius to confute hys argumentes. Fyrst, he gathered out of that whych the Apostles answered: Beholde here are two swoordes, and Christ added: It is sufficient, that the Churche hath twoo powers, How the churche maye haue twssiwoordes. and both of them committed vnto hym. To that I aunswer, that it is possible, that sometymes there may be two swoordes in the Churche: but there were not so alwayes in it, neyther peraduenture shall bee alwayes so. What outward swoord had the Church in the tyme of Christ, and of the Apostles and Martyrs? The Churche hath nowe almost al artes. But yet now (they wyll say) it hath. I graunt that, bycause kynges and Emperours are Christians, whych in the olde tyme were Ethnikes. The Churche hath also husbandrye, trade of marchaundise, the arte of Carpenters, and other suche lyke. For they whyche exercise these thynges, are members of the Church. But that cōmeth to passe (as the Schoolemen speake) per accidens, that is by chaunce. For there might be a Churche, thoughe those thynges were not. So nowe, bycause there are Princes in the Churche, it is sayde to haue an outward swoorde. But bycause Princes are in our tyme a part of the Churche, it doth not therfore follow that the sword of Princes is the sword of ministers: euen as although there be in the Church husbandry and trade of merchaundise, and also the arte of Carpenters, it cānot therby be gathered that ministers are husband men, merchauntes, and Carpenters.
Now I come to the place of the Euangelist. The Apostles sayde, they wanted nothing, when they were sent without wallet and scryp, vnto whom Christ sayd: Let euery one take vnto him his scrip and wallet, and he which hath none, let him sell his coate, and bye a swoord. What woulde Christe signifye by these woordes? Nothing els vndoubtedly, but to shewe that the state and condicion of tymes hereafter should be far otherwise then they wer before. Hitherto (sayth he) whylest I was wyth you, ye felt no griefe, neyther wanted you any thyng. But now harder tymes are at hand: now shall ye haue neede of coates, scryps, and swoordes. By these woordes hee declareth that hee shoulde depart from them, and that hee woulde sende them into the whole worlde to preache and teache the Gospell, in which ministery they should meete with so manye aduersities, that they should thinke themselues to haue neede of swoordes. It is a figuratiue kinde of speeche, whereby is vnderstande one thing by an other, as is that in Genesis, when the Lorde sayde, that hee repented that he had made man. For God is not in very deede touched with repentance, but he doth that, which men repenting vse to doo, that is, he chaungeth that which hee hath done. And vndoubtedly then he by the flood destroyed humane kinde which hee had created. So now he hath not instructed his Disciples, to fight with yron, but onelye by a certaine paraphrasis describeth the condicion of the tyme to come. And euen as a gowne oftentimes signifieth tranquility and peace: so in this place a sword sheweth troublesome and vnquiet times.
After this maner Chrisostome interpreteth these woordes, Chrisostome. expounding this place of Paule: Salute Prisca and Aquila. The Lorde (sayth he) hath not broken the lawe, which before he had made, saying: And hee which striketh thee on the one cheeke, turne vnto him the other. Blesse those that curse you, pray for them that persecute you. How then doth he commaunde his Disciples to bye themselues swoordes? He ment no such thing, saith Chrisostome: For it is a figuratiue kinde of speeche, whereby he signified that he should be taken away from them, and that they should be afflicted with many calamities. These woordes are not so to be taken as they appeare at the first syght. In an other place Christe sayth also: That which ye haue heard in the eare, preache on the house toppes. And yet wee neuer reade, that the Apostles stoode on the house toppes, when they preached vnto the people. Neither assuredly was it decent to haue left the strete and temple, and to haue spokē from the house top. The sense was, that those thinges which they had hearde priuatelye, they shoulde speake openlye and manifestlye. The Lord also sayd: Destroye this temple, and in three dayes I wyll restore it: which is also spoken figuratiuely. For he commaunded not to ouerthrowe the temple of Salomon (as the Euangelist himselfe interpreteth) but vnderstoode that which he spake, of the temple of hys owne body: wherein (as Paule sayth) corporally dwelled all diuinity.
But to returne to the matter, that Luke so ment Chrisostome proueth by these thinges which follow: That in the sonne of man shoulde be fulfylled that which was spoken of him: And he was counted with the vngodly. But the Apostles vnderstoode not Christ: for they thought that hee had spoken simplye, and (as the woordes sounded) spoken of an outward sword. And so did Boniface vtterly interpreate it. And in that Christ addeth: It is inough, he vnderstoode that two swordes are sufficient in the Church, so that ther ought to be nowe neyther more nor fewer. But Chrisostome vnderstandeth it farre otherwise. For when Christ perceiued y t the Apostles vnderstode him not, by that answer he declared that he would omit the thing. And in dede so is a scholemaster wont to say vnto a child which yet vnderstandeth not that which is taught him: It is inough. Otherwise vndoubtedly two swords wer not sufficient against al the aduersaries of Christe. There shoulde moreouer haue needed coates of male and shieldes. Wherfore Chrisostome concludeth that y e speche was figuratiue & parabolical. [Page] Farthermore, In the times of the Apostles y e church had not two swoordes. if Bonifacius exposition bee receaued, wee muste thincke that the Church in the time of the Apostles ought to haue had two swords, which is most farre from the truth.
But let vs come to that which Christ said vnto Peter: Put vp thy swoord into thy sheath. Thy sword (saith Boniface) not an other mans sword. But what gathereth he by those wordes? Although Peter haue his sword, yet if he be cōmaunded to put it vp, how can he haue it drawen? or to what end hath he a swoord, if he maye not vse it? But Boniface wil peraduenture aunswer: I haue in deede a sword, but I vse it not, but by an other mans hande. Or I vse not myne owne swoord, but the sword of the Emperor, & other princes. For they ought to draw the sword at the becke and sufferance of the Church. I would gladly demaund, whither Christ, whē he bad Peter to put vp his sword, ment this, that he should in dede vse it as he listed and would himselfe, Euery man is sayd to doo that himselfe whych he doth by an other man. but yet by the labour of an other man? Assuredly that which a man doth by an other, he seemeth to do it himselfe. If a man by mony or giftes get one to kil his enemy, although he do it not with his own hand, yet neuertheles he should be an homicide: otherwise euen Princes doth not with their own hand kil the guilty, but commaunde the hangmen to punish them. Ther is in this answer of Bonifacius a deceite of equiuocation. For we demaund whither an ecclesiastical Minister may beare the office of a ciuil Magistrate, and vse a ciuil sword: and they remit vs vnto the sword of Peter, a man otherwise priuate.
Bernardus.Howbeit Bernardus in his .4. booke de Consider. ad Eugenium, semeth to interprete the two swordes. I graunt that Bernard hath certaine thinges lyke vnto this, but yet not vtterly the same. But we must remember, in what tyme Bernardus lyued. He liued at that time, wherein all thinges were corrupted in the Church, and if a man reade those his bokes de Consideratione, he shal se that he grieuously complaineth of the corruption of his time. Eugenius was by the Romanes excluded the City, and peraduenture he meditated by violence to restore himselfe. Wherefore Bernard exhorted them to preache the Gospell, to deale aganst the Romanes with the woorde and with Sermons, rather then wyth the sword. Eugenius said: what wilt thou haue? That I should feede Serpentes and Dragons and Beastes? Yea rather assayle them saith Bernard with the woord, & not with iron. And in an other place he saith: If thou wilt haue both swordes, thou shalt leese both. Neither is it to be thought that Eugenius would by himself haue fought, but peraduenture he assayed to moue warre by other, from whiche purpose Bernard disswaded him. And thus much of him.
But in that Bonifacius addeth, that those swords of the church ought to be in order (namely that the one should be subiect vnto y e other, & that he proueth by thys saying of Paule: Those powers that are, are ordeined of God) is manifestly declared how this man wresteth the scriptures. For this word ordinatae, that is ordered, is in Greeke written [...]: which is nothing els, then instituted or appointed. But be it so, as Bonifacius hath expounded it, what manner of order shal this be at the length? Vndoubtedly, it shoulde be that the Minister shoulde teache, and the ciuil power shoulde heare and beleue. But this is nothing vnto the Pope which teacheth nothing.
The lowest thinges saith Dionisius are by meanes reduced vnto the hyghest. Wherfore Bonifacius concludeth that the outward sword ought to be referred vnto God by the spiritual. Vndoubtedly I wil easely graunt that the swoord of the spirit, that is the word of God, is the meane wherby the other sword, namely the outwarde, ought to be tempered and directed vnto God. But why doth not the Pope retaine this meane? The Pope vseth not the swoorde of the woord. Why vseth he not the word? Why teacheth he not? why preacheth he not? Nndoubtedly princes that stray, are not by him reuoked into the right way, yea rather contrarywise the Pope and bishops of the Church are somtimes rebuked and iustly reproued of princes.
Aaron assuredly, being high priest, It longeth to princes sometimes to admonish and correct Ecclesiastycall men. fel greuously in making the golden calfe and obeing the foolishnes of the people. Moses accused him greiuously, whome it is certayne that he was a ciuil magistrate. For toward the end of Deut. he is called a king. And when the priestes abused the mony which was offred for the mending of the couerings of the temple, who remedied that, but onely Ioas the king? I will not speake of Dauid and Salomon, and others which deuided the lottes of the priest, & orders of the Leuites. And I will not at this time proue these things by any more examples. For they are manifest inough of them selues. Wherefore I graunte that the ciuill power maye be corrected of the ministers by preaching of the word. But the Pope vseth not this kind of gouernment, but rather an incredible tirrannye.
They boaste moreouer that they themselues are greater in dignitye, for that they excercise spirituall & heauenly thinges, where as princes are occupied onely about earthly and ciuill thinges. Be it so: for we deny not but that ministers are occupied about thinges greater and more deuine then magistrates are. But doth the Pope alone minister them? Yea rather he neuer doth it at al. Wherfore if the dignity of the ministery depend of those things, then will it follow that many bishops and priestes do in dignity far excell the Pope, which neuer preacheth, & most rarely, and to very few, administreth the Sacraments.
Let vs come to tenthes, Of tenthes. by y e paiment wherof Bonifacius laboreth to proue y t al princes ar subiect vnto him. This argumēt semeth to haue some shew, bicause at the first sight it agreeth with the .7. chap. of the Epistle to the Hebrewes, wher Paul proueth the dignitie of christ to be greater thē y e dignity of the priesthode of the Leuits. For thus he gathereth: Abraham payd tenthes vnto Melchisedech, at which time Leui was not yet, but was at y e time in the loins of Abrahā, & so paid tēthes in him. And he which payeth tenths to an other, by the self same thing professeth himself to be inferior vnto him. Christ was priest accordinge to y e order of Melchisedech. Wherfore the Apostle concludeth y t the priesthode of y e Leuits was much inferior vnto the priesthode of Christ. I haue opened the spring frō whence Bonifacius deriued his argumēt. The place is very dark, and nedeth explicatiō, and moreouer Bonifacius doth not aptly apply it to his purpose. First we ought to vnderstand that tenthes in the old time pertayned vnto ceremonies, & that aswel in Melchisedech as in the Leuites. Both the priesthode of Leui & also of Melchisedech signified Christ. For in either priesthode they were referred vnto Christ. And either priesthode was in very dede a figure of Christ: for euen as the Leuiticall prieste entred once euery yeare into the Sancta Sanctorum, and that neuer without blood: So Christ by his blood entred once into the tabernacle, that is into heauen, and agayne Melchisedeche for that he had neyther father nor mother, resembled Christ, which in respect that he was God, had no mother, and in respect that he was a man, wanted a father.
But what signified the tenthes in either priesthode? Christe was more playnelye signified by the priesthode of Melchisedech, then by the Leuiticall priesthode. Vndoubtedly they signified nothing els, then that the elders ought to referre al theyr things vnto christ. By that ceremony the people worshipped euen Christ. And if a man wil conferre Melchisedech and the priesthode of Leui together, although both of them seme to shadow Christ, yet shall he se that he is more expressedly & manyfestly signified by Melchisedech, as the Epistle to the Hebrewes testifieth. Bonifacius sayth: we receiue tenthes of all the lay men. Ye do take them indede, but now that Christ is come, the paying of tenthes is no more a ceremony, as it was before the comming of Christ, when by tēthes men worshipped Christ, which was to come in the flesh, and confessed that they ought vnto him both thēselues, and al that they had. After which self same manner they payd the first fruites of al their thinges. Tēthes at this day ar no more ceremonies but rather rewards and stipendes. But our men do in these dayes receiue tenthes. But by what law? Not vndoubtedly by the ceremoniall law, but by the morall lawe. Forasmuche as it is mete that the Mynister shoulde bee nooryshed of the people. For the laborer is woorthye of hys rewarde: and hee whyche serueth the Gospel, it is meete [Page] that he liue of it. Wherfore whither stipéds be payd vnto ministers out of lands or out of houses, either in ready mony or in tenths, it skilleth not, so that they be not maintained filthily, but honestly. Indede these rewardes in some places doo retayn the olde name of tenthes. But in many places they ar not called tenthes, but stipendes or wages. And assuredly they are in very deede rather rewards, whiche are dew vnto the labours of the ministers, then tenthes.
Stipendes are paid both to superiors and also to inferiors.And as touching this foresayd argument, we must vnderstand that such rewardes and stipendes, are thinges indifferent: bicause they are sometimes payd vnto inferiors, and sometimes to superiors. For tributes which are geuen vnto kinges and princes, are theyr stipendes which we geue vnto them, partly to norish and susteine them, and partly to confesse that we are subiecte vnto them, and lastly y e they may haue wherwithal to defēd the publike welth and vs. And somtimes inferiors also do receaue stipendes. For princes pay them vnto souldiers, and yet cannot we therefore saye that the souldiours are greater then Kynges and Prynces. And notwythstandynge I woulde not haue anye thynke, that I speake these thinges, to dimynyshe the dygnitye of the Ecclesiasticall ministerye, but that men myghte vnderstande that theyr argumentes are very trifling. The church which payeth the stipēd vnto the minister is greater then he Why in the church kinges are consecrated Power is geuē vnto princes of god, and not of bishops. Neither doubt I to affirme, that the church it self whiche payeth the stipend vnto the minister, is greater then the minister. Wherfore if we speake of tenthes, as they are at this day geuen vnto ministers, they are no cause that they should be greater then those that pay them. But in that kinges and Emperors are consecrated and annointed of byshops, and in that they receiue the crowne and sword of them, it nothinge helpeth their cause. For if we speake of the ciuill power, that is not geuen of the bishop, but of God. But this thing is ther done, that after the king or Emperor is chosen of god, in such manner as is agreable, prayers should be made for him in the assembly of the church, that god may confirm and strengthen his hart, that he may encrease piety in him, and instil in him a feare of his name, prosper his counsels, and so make fortunate his actions, that they may proue profitable vnto the church, and vnto the publike welth. And the bishop whilest these thinges are in doing, is the mouth of the church, & goeth before it, in expressing the prayer. And this function was deriued of an olde ceremony and custome of the Iewes. And y e the king receaueth not his power of the bishop, but of God, euen their owne decrees also do testifye. In the dist. 96. chap. Si Imperatur, Gelasius saith, that the Emperor hath the priueleges of his power at gods hand. Why then doth Bonifacius arrogātly claim it vnto himself? namely that which longeth to God onely. For as Paule sayth: All power is of god. In the Code de Iure veteri enucleando in the lawe firste, Iustiniane. Iustinian declareth that his power was geuen him of the deuine maiesty. And the Glose ( in Extrauag. de maioritate & obediencia in the chapter vnam sanctam toward the end, saith, that power is geuen vnto kings of God onely, and that therfore they do indede receiue the crowne of the byshop, and the sword from the aulter.
But let vs more narowly examine Bonifacius argumēt: I (sayth he) do geue power vnto Emperors. Therfore I am greater then Emperors. Let this most blessed Thraso aunswere me, who consecrated him when hee was chosen Pope? Vndoubtedly the bishop Hostiensis. Let vs conclude therfore that the bishop Hostiensis is greater then the Pope. And if that follow not, thē is the argument also of Bonifacius of no force, bicause (as I haue now shewed) it cleaueth vnto a broken foundation. For they are not bishops which geue power vnto kinges. Farther, All emperors were not consecrated of the Pope. wer there not many Emperors whiche were neuer consecrated of bishops, and yet were neuertheles for al that Emperors? Neither were the old Grecian Emperors so annointed. Wherfore that is a new inuētiō. But what if I proue that the head bishop was somtimes consecrated of the ciuill magistrat? Vndoubtedly Moses cōsecrated Aaron, whē as yet (as it is sayd) Moses was a ciuil prince. Wherfore Bonifacius laboreth in vayne about his consecration, bicause he canne [Page 262] gather nothing thereby.
He boasted moreouer of the kayes. Wherin the kayes of the church consyst. We (sayth he) haue the power of binding and losing. But the power of the kayes consisteth herein, that ye should preach the word of god truly. For he which beleueth the gospel, is losed: & he which beleueth not, is bound. But when ye neither preach, nor teach, neither can ye binde, nor lose. And farther this subiection which we haue graunted is spiritual, namely of fayth and of obedience: and not ciuill, and with dominion.
Afterward was Ieremy obiected, vnto whom the Lord sayde: I haue appointed thee ouer nacions and kingdoms, &c. First here I demaund what kings Ieremy deiected, or whom he abrogated of theyr Empire, and what new kinges he instituted? They can shew of none. What therefore signify these woordes: I set thee ouer nacions and kingedomes? Vndoubtedly nothing els, then that by the sprite of prophecy & word of god he should foretell what kingdomes god would ouerthrow for sinnes, and what new ones he would institute. Why doe not the Popes so excercise theyr power? Let them sette before kinges and princes of the earth the threatninges of god, Prophetes are not the efficiēt causes of the ouerthrow of kingdomes. Ministers and prophetes are an occasion, but not a iust cause of ruines. and let them be in this manner ouer nacions and kingdomes. Could Ieremy be called the cause of the ouerthrowe of kingdomes? He was not properly the efficient cause, but onely a certayn occasion. For when he had admonished the king of Iudah, and he beleued him not, the prophet by his preachinge was some occasion that he shoulde be condemned and ouerthrowne. So Paule sayth: To some we are the sauor of life to life, and to other the sauor of death to death: When as yet the Apostle properlye killed no man, but his preaching after a sorte broughte death vnto those whiche would not beleue. It is god therefore that seperateth, ouerthroweth, scattereth & planteth. Neither disdaineth he sometimes to call vs hys fellowe workers.
Bonifacius goeth on, the lay power ought to be iudged of the Ecclesiasticall, but by what kind of iudgement? Vndoubtedly by this, that in the churche he set forth the anger of God against sinners, & that they be admonished and corrected by the holy scriptures. But y e bishops may expel kings and put them out of their kingdome, wher is y e permitted? Frō whence haue they that? what writings wil they bring for it? The Pope ought to be iudged of the church. But that is most intollerable y t the Pope sayth that he can be iudged of no man. And yet Iohn .23. was in the counsel of Constance put downe, and not onely by god, but also by men. So these men plant and replant Canons, and the same they allow and disalow, as often as they think good. Yea and Emperors haue sometimes thrust out and put down Popes, as it is before said. Paul to the Gal. sayth: If an Aungell from heauen preach any other gospel, let him be accursed. If the Pope (which may come to passe, and hath alredy long since come to passe) obtrude wicked opinions, who shall pronounce him accursed? It is the dewty of the magistrate to execut the sentence of the church agaynst the pope Shall he be vtterly iudged of no man? The church vndoubtedly shal geue sentence vpon him: and the magistrate (for that he is the chiefest part of the church) shal not onely iudge together with it, but also shall execute the sentence. Farther it longeth vnto the magistrate to prouide that the riches of the churche be not geuen vnto y e enemies of godlines. Wherefore if bishoppes become enemies of the churche, a faythfull magistrate ought not to suffer the goods of the church to be consumed by them. The Canonists haue this oftentimes in theyr mouth: That for the office sake is geuen the benefice. When therfore they do not their office, ought the magistrate to suffer them to enioy their benefices?
But let vs heare howe Bonifacius proueth that he can be iudged of no man. Bycause he that is spiritual (sayth he) iudgeth all thinges, but he himselfe is iudged of no man. A godly and wel applied argument I promise you. But let vs se what kind of iudgement Paul writeth of in that place. He speaketh not vndoubtedly of the common kind of iudgement, whereby men are either put to death or put oute of theyr roome. He entreateth there onelye of the vnderstandinge of thinges deuine, and which auaile vnto saluation. These thinges I say properlye [Page] belong vnto the iudgement of the spiritual man: but concerning common iudgementes, and knowledge of ciuill causes, Paule neuer thoughte of them in that place. Which is easely perceaued by his wordes, we haue not receiued (saith he) the sprite of this world: but a sprite, which is of God. If thou wilt demaund for what vse y e sprite is geuen vs: He answereth, that we should know those things y t are geuen vs of God. And bycause y e sprite of this worlde cannot geue iudgemente of thinges deuine, it is added: The carnall man vnderstandeth not those things which ar of y e sprite of god. The spiritual man iudgeth al things. What? Doth he iudge also ciuill and common causes? No vndoubtedlye: but he iudgeth those thinges whiche pertayne vnto the saluation of men: he himselfe is iudged of no man. Without doubt both Peter and Paul were iudged by the ciuil power, wherunto Paul appealed to be iudged there, and yet were they both spirituall.
Peter & Paule were iudged by the ciuil power.But that place is thus to be vnderstanded. He y t is spirituall, in that he is such a one, cannot in thinges deuine and such as pertaine vnto saluation, bee rightely iudged of any mā, which is not endewed w t the same sprite that he is. The wicked and worldly ones count him oftentimes for a sedicious, vnpure, & infamous fellow: but only God and his sprite looketh vpon the hartes.
Note.Lastly Bonifacius concludeth, that there is one onely chiefe power which longeth vnto the pope, least we should seme with the Maniches to make many beginninges. We put this one onely beginninge, and not many. And he addeth: That god in the beginning, and not in the beginnings, created the world. We also abhorre from the Maniches, and do put one onely beginning, and pronounce one onely fountayne and ofspring of all powers, namely, god and his word, without which can be no power, either ciuil or Ecclesiasticall. For the foundation of either of them dependeth of the word of god, & so we make but one beginning & not two. Farther, if Bonifacius wil vrge these words of Genesis: In the beginning god created. &c. there oughte to be in the world but one onely king. For when Paul sayde: One Lord, one faith, one baptisme, he added not one Pope.
A Schisme of thre Popes.At the length our Thraso commeth so farre, that hee excludeth them from the hope of saluation, which acknowledge not the Pope for the chief prince & head of the church. But when ther were two or three Popes al at one time (which thing both happened, and also endured the space of .60. yeares full) it muste needes be that those were at that time Maniches, and did put two beginnings, which were of Bonifacius opinion. Moreouer, what thinke they of the Gretians, of the Persiās, and Christians which dwell in the East part, for as much as they acknowledge not the Pope, who yet neuerthelesse reade the scriptures, beleue in our Lord Iesus Christ, and both are, & also ar called christians? Al them Bonifacius excludeth from the hope of saluation. This is the ambicion and vnspeakeable tirannye of the Popes.
When we obiecte vnto the papistes these wordes of Paule: let euery soule be subiect vnto the superior powers, they aunswere: that euery soul ought to be subiect vnto the superior power, but yet to theyrs, not to other mens power, otherwise the frenchmen ought to be subiect vnto the Spaniardes, the Spaniardes to the Germaines, which thing, for that it is absurd, it is concluded, that euery man ought to obey his own Magistrat. But now the clergy acknowledge the bishops for theyr power, and ought to be subiect vnto thē: and the bishops acknowledge the Archbishoppes and Primates, and they lastly acknowledge the Pope. After this manner say they, we obey the power, and satisfye Paule. What haue we to do with kings or ciuil magistrats? But this is nothing els, then most filthily to abuse the wordes of Paule. The Papistes do rēt into two partes both the kingdomes and the people. Doo they not see that they deuide the publike wealth into two bodies, which oughte to be one body onely? For when they deuide the kyngdome of the Clergye, from the kingedome of the laitye, they make in one kyngedome twoo peoples, and doo sette ouer eyther people a Magystrate. [Page 259] And thereby commeth to passe, that the Clergy whiche are Frenchemen, seeme not to be Frenchemen: and the Germanes seeme not to be Germanes. And this maketh not coniunction, but diuision.
Farther, of what power I praye you speaketh Paul? Not vndoubtedly of Byshops or Archebishops, but of that power whiche beareth the swoorde. He doth not without a cause (sayth he) beare the swoorde. He speaketh of that power to whom tribute is payd. For for this cause (sayth he) ye pay tribute. But Bishops neither beare swoorde, nor exacte tributes of the people. Wherfore Paul speaketh not of them. And thoughe Germany Byshops beare the swoorde, and do gather tributes and customes, they doo not that in respect that they are Byshops, but in respect that by accidens they haue the ciuile power adioyned vnto thē: how rightly, let them see to it. But it is manifest that Paul spake of the Ciuile power, vnto whiche he commaunded that euery soule should obey. Neither is the interpretation of Origene probable, wherin he affirmeth, that Paul sayd: Euery soule, Origene. and not euery spirite. Bycause (sayth he) the spirituall man is moued with no affections, neither possesseth he any thyng in the world. Wherfore he is not subiect at all vnto the outward power. Wherfore Paul commaundeth euery soule, that is, euery carnall man to obey the ciuile power. But what? Was not Christ spirituall? who was more spirituall? And yet he acknowledged the superior power, and payd tribute. What say you to the Apostles, were not they spirituall? And yet they neuer exempted thēselues from the ciuile power: yea rather they obeyed and taught others to obey them.
But let vs heare what our Bonifacianes aunswere farther. They say that they haue not this power ordinarily, and by the right of their fruition, but graunted them by priuiledges and giftes of princes. And why say they is it not lawful for vs to enioye the priuiledges and liberality of princes? But we ought here to haue a regard, not what princes haue doone, but what they ought to haue done. God without all doubt hath made subiect euery soule vnto the hygher power. It was neuer lawfull for any prince to breake that law. Whether it wer lawful for princes to exempt Ecclesiastical men from their subiectiō. Nor humane reason seeth not better then the prouidence of God, what should become of the affaires of humane kynd. And the euent it selfe also sufficiently hath declared how much that remission of princes hath profited. For after that Bishops and false Ecclesiastical men got themselues once frō the subiection of the ciuile power, they straight way became farre worse then they were before, and made the people which were committed to theyr charge, nothyng the better. Wherfore let them cease to say that Emperours and kynges haue geuen them these thynges, let them rather heare y e word of god, wherin they are cōmaūded to obey princes. But they haue not onely withdrawen thēselues from obedience towarde princes, but also haue claymed vnto thēselues an immunite or fraunches. What immunity is. What tribute is. What custome is. Vlpiane. And an immunity is a liberty from doyng of homages, & bearyng of ciuile burthens. And among burthens are numbred tributes, & customes. Tributes are those which are payd of landes and possessions. Customes are those whiche are payd of marchandises, & of those thinges whiche are either caried out or brought in. These thynges Vlpiane calleth y e sinewes of the publique wealth, as without which it cā not either consist, or be gouerned. By what ryght therfore and reason haue these men withdrawē themselues from the publique commodity? With what face do they boast of such liberality of princes, whiche neither Christ, neither the Apostles, nor the Prophetes vsed? And althoughe they haue this thing as they say, Ministers of the Church ar exempted from personall burthēs and from such as are filthy. Vlpianus. by the gift of kings and Emperors, yet must they take heede, that it be not hurtfull vnto the Citezins, and least whilest they are lifted vp, other be aboue measure burdened. And yet ar they not by priuiledges and lawes of princes exempted from all burthēs. In deede they are franchised from personall burthens: & that not without great reason, whiche euen the Ethnike princes sawe also. In the digestes de Vacatione & excusatione munerum, in the law Praetor: Vlpianus saith: If a man haue [Page] gotten a benefice, neither can hurt of conscience be absent from it, he is acquited. And Constantine the Emperor, in the Code de Episcopis & Clericis in the law .1. and .2. What personal burthens are. Filthy burthens. exempteth them from personall and filthy burthens. Personall burthens are those whiche are accomplished by the industry of the mynde and labour of the body. Filthy burthens are those, as to burne lyme, to digge sand, to kepe the cundite, to heate the bath, and such other of like sorte. From these burthens they are woorthily exempted, bycause the ministery by such filthy excercises should come in contempt. And they are made free from personal burthens, bycause whē they should geue theyr mindes to holy thyngs, they ought not to be withdrawē to other thynges. Wherfore princes haue ryghtly graunted these thynges vnto Ecclesiasticall men, that they should not be absent from the study of religion, and that they should not be contemned of the common people.
But what if a man clayme hymselfe to be a Minister onely by hys apparell or garmentes, and doth nothyng in the Churche, is this freedome also graunted vnto hym? Iustiniane. No vndoubtedly. Yea Iustiniane in the Code de Episcopis & Clericis in the lawe generaliter sancimus, sayth that he meaneth onely of those, whiche diligently geue themselues to holy thynges, and not of vagaboundes and idle persons, which bragge onely in the name of the Ministery. Moreouer Ministers are not loosed from ordinary charges, althoughe they are exempted from extraordinary charges. Ordinary charges. Extraordinary charges. Ordinary charges are those, whiche are imposed alwayes by the commaundement of the lawes. Extraordinary charges, whiche are exacted onely for some present necessity, and afterward doo cease. Wherfore if Ecclesiastical men haue manors & landes, as other Citezins haue, for them they ought to pay. Why they are acquited from extraordinary charges. For the Church when it taketh landes, taketh them w t their burthens. But they are free from extraordinary tributes, bycause in the olde tyme Ecclesiastical men were poore, & besides necessary foode and apparell had nothyng remanyng, or if peraduenture there remayned any thyng, all the same, whatsoeuer it were, was bestowed vpon the poore. But nowe it is cleane contrary: for both they abounde in riches, and they bestow very litle vpon the poore. And yet if any great necessity happened, They are not exempted from all extraordinary charges. they were compelled to pay also extraordinary charges. As if there were any highe wayes to bee mended, and any bridges to be made, any shippes to be edified, for to transporte an hoste, as it appeareth in the Code, by the lawes of the Emperour. Neyther vndoubtedly doth brotherly charity suffer, that when other are burdened, they shoulde lye styll aboundyng in wealth and riches. Neyther is it to bee suffred, that they shoulde lyue at ease, and other in payne.
Yet the Pope in his Decretalles ( de Immunitate Ecclesiae in the chapter. Non minus, where the woordes of the Counsell holden at Lateranum are cited. And in the chapter aduersus Consules) will haue the Ecclesiasticall men vtterly exempted. And Bonifacius the .8. in hys .6. de Immunitate Ecclesiarum, in the chapter Clericis laicos, permitteth them not to pay any thyng. Yea and he excommucateth the prince, which taketh tribute of a Minister of the Churche, and also the Minister hymself which payeth it. This law as to cruel, Benedictus the .11. after a sort mitigateth, in Extrauag. de Immunitate Eccles. in the chap. Quod olim, yet he permitteth not y e prince to do any thyng without askyng counsel of y e Byshop of Rome. For he in deede doth not excōmunicate those princes which do receaue tribute of Ecclesiasticall men, but onely those that exacte it of them. For he permitteth not, that princes should exacte any thyng by their owne right, whiche thing yet sometymes he permitteth, namely in an extreme necessity, as in daunger of religion and lyfe, so that firste there be had the consent of the Byshop and clergy, and afterwarde also the agreement of the Pope. So longe therefore hath he decreed that they must tary. So these men do exempt themselues frō the obedience and tributes of princes and kyngs, which (as I haue before sayd out of Vlpiane) [Page 264] are the establishementes and sinewes of the publique wealth. A sayinge of Diocletian. When I thinke vpon these thinges, I call to remembraunce a profitable saying of Diocletian: of whō when a Philosopher desired an immunite: This request (sayd he) disagreeth with thy profession. Thou professest (sayd he) that thou wilt ouercome thy affections, but thou shewest that thou art ouercome of auarice. So these men professe themselues to be spirituall. But in a spirituall mā is nothing more required thē charity, whiche counselleth vs not to lyue franchised and securely, when other are oppressed with cares and burthēs. Thomas Aquinas bringeth a place of Genesis to shewe that Priestes are exempted from tributes, Thomas Aquinas. not in deede by the law of GOD, but by a lawe made by princes, and yet neuertheles agreing with the law of nature. For Pharao kyng of Egypt prouided, that the Priests should not paye the fift parte of their fruites for tribute, when as yet so muche was exacted of all the other Egyptians. Wherfore he concludeth that Priestes are exempted. This place is diligently to be considred. First let vs note, that the Priests of the Egyptians had theyr dayly lyuing out of the threasory of the kyng. They had meate and drinke and money geuen them to lyue by. Afterward it came to passe, that when the hunger waxed great, all the Egyptians solde their landes vnto the kyng, therwith to buy corne to driue away the hunger. But whē that famine was past, the kyng rendred the landes vnto the olde possessors, but yet vpon this condition, that euery yeare they should paye him the fift parte, but of the landes of the Priestes there was no fift part payd. And no meruayle: bycause they sold not their landes vnto the king when they were kept of the common cost. Yet it is to bee thought that they payd so muche tribute of their landes as they were wont to pay before the famine. Neither vndoubtedly can any other thyng be gathered out of that place, but that Priestes ought to be noorished of the common cost: but in that they payed not the fift part, that happened for an other cause, as we haue nowe declared.
They bring forth also the .8. chapter of Esdras, where Artaxerxes prouided that when he had layd a tribute vpon the Iewes, there should be nothing leuied of the Leuites in the name of a tribute. But this is not to be meruayled at, seyng y e Leuites had no landes to pay tribute of. For vnto them pertayned onely oblations, first fruites, and tenthes. For whiche cause they were released of tributes. Also Iulius Cesar de bello Gallico sayth, The Druites payd no tributes. Plini. that the Druites whiche were Priestes in Gallia payd no tributes. But Plini in his .16. booke and .44. chapter, writeth that the Druites had no landes. And yet are not these thinges spoken to this end, that I should thinke that it is not lawfull for the Magistrate to deale somewhat more gently with them, and somewhat to beare with thē: It is honest that the [...]agistrate deale somwhat more gently with Ministers. Bycause they must alwayes apply themselues to holy thinges, and study for nothyng els. Wherby it cōmeth to passe, that they can not increase their substaunce, yea rather very oftentymes they suffer great losse, neither haue they their stipendes, but duryng theyr lyfe. This thyng onely I dissalowe, that they clayme vnto thēselues immunity, both real and personall, they vtterly refuse both ordinary and extraordinary charges, and that by tyranny or against the worde of God, and for that the Pope will not suffer princes to exacte tributes of Byshops and Ecclesiasticall men, when they will themselues: and bycause they will not geue them, if they be required. The word of God hath otherwise commaunded, when it sayth, let euery soule be subiect vnto the higher power. And therfore (sayeth he) ye pay tributes. None is excepted: neither would Christ himselfe be exempted. Chrisostome. Chrisostome vpon that place of Paul: It may (sayth he) seeme greuous vnto Christians, for that they beyng the children of God and appoynted for the kyngdome of heauen, are subiect vnto princes of this world. But he aunswereth: Whilest we are in this lyfe, our dignity is hidden. For it appeareth not what we shalbe. Wherfore whilest we lyue here, let it not be grieuous vnto vs to rise vp to the Magistrate, to geue them the way, and to honour them. These thynges are full of comelynes and are decently [Page] done of the saintes. Nowe that we are regenerate by the worde and the spirite, it might seeme that we neede no Magistrate. Wherefore the Iewes, bycause they were the people of God, tooke it very grieuously that sometyme the Babilonians raigned ouer them, sometymes the Persians, sometymes the Grecians, sometymes the Romanes, Anabaptistes & Libertines. and other nations whiche knewe not God. The Anabaptistes also and Libertines cry that it is a thyng vnworthy for a Christian to suffer a Magistrate ouer hym. The Clergy of the Pope also haue shaked of this yoke from themselues. But the Apostles which foresawe that this thing would come to passe, did very often inculcate, that the Ciuile power should be obeyed, whiche precept is two wayes transgressed: one way is, when men say they will not obey the Magistrate, Sinne committed two maner of wayes agaynst the Magistrate. and sediciously make warre agaynst hym. The other way is, whē they circumuent hym by subtility and guile, that he can not execute his office. For there are in courtes, whiche flatter in the eares of princes, disprayse & prayse whom they lust, complayne of the good, as euill, and commend the euil, as good. So according as they wil, some ar preferred to prouinces, and other some ar displaced. A sentence of Diocletian. Wherfore Diocletian sayde: A good, wise, & wary Emperor is oftētymes solde of his subiectes. The prince is at home in his palace, they that are familiar with him accuse & defende before him whom they will. Yea and among the Romanes y e fathers which were called Conscripti, y t is appoynted, were sometymes called Circumscripti, that is deceaued or abused. The course of Iustice is by many deceates hindred. Neither skilleth it much whether it be done by violēce or by guile, bycause both wayes the publique wealth is hurte, and the institution of God contemned.
Neither is this to be passed ouer in this place (whiche hath also ben often spoken of) that the Magistrate is not to be obeyed, if he commaūd any thing against the worde of God. For when he so doth, he is no Magistrate. Bycause (as Paul sayth) he is the Minister of God to good. Wherfore if he commaund thinges contrary vnto the worde of God, he is not in that parte his Minister. But thou wilt say: Sometymes greuous, molestous, and harde thinges are cōmaunded: whiche yet are not agaynst the worde of God. What is to be done in those cases? We must obey: for we are commaunded to obeye our Lordes, thoughe they be hard, so that they commaunde nothyng agaynst the worde of GOD: whiche thing if they do, we must aunswere them with this sentence of Peter, whiche sayth: we must rather obey God then men. Nabucad-Nezar would haue had his Image worshipped, the faythfull Hebrues aunswered: Thy image O kyng we will not worship. Antiochus cōmaunded the Hebrew woman to eate swines fleshe: but she chused to dye with together her seuē childrē, rather then to cōmit any thing agaynst the lawe of God. Also the Martin, as well in the old tyme as also in our tyme, suffred most extreme punishmentes, and most cruell deathes, for that they would not sinne agaynst the law of God.
Eusebius. An example of Constātius an Emperor. Eusebius Casariensis writeth that Constantius the father of Constantine fayned vpon a tyme, that he would put out all the Christians whiche would abyde in theyr religion, from their honours and offices. But they whiche were in very dede godly, of theyr own free will gaue ouer their dignity, and chused rather to geue place vnto dignityes, then to depart frō Christ. But this turned to good vnto thē, for the Emperour embraced thē: and those which had denyed Christ for to keepe their dignityes, he vtterly remoued from hymself, saying: that they also would not be faythful vnto him, whiche had broken thier fayth vnto God. Constantius afterwarde the sonne of Constantine, Constantius the second an Arrian. beyng an Arrian, went aboute to drawe the faithfull Byshops into hys heresy: but they chused rather to be banished, Iulianus Apostata. then to follow that wicked purpose of the Emperour. Afterward Iulianus Apostata opened the temples of Idoles, and labored to dryue the Christians to the Ethnike religion & worshipping, but such as wer in deede godly had greater [Page 265] loue and regarde to Religion of Christ then to their lyfe. Achilles. Yea and Achilles in Homere sayth: I will obey the princes, but yet when they commaund things honest and iust.
And these thynges pertayne not onely to subiectes, but also to inferior Magistrates. For what, Of inferior powers. if the superior prince commaunde the inferior Magistrates, to receaue the Masse in their Cityes? Vndoubtedly they ought not obey. If a manne will saye: It is the superior power, therefore it muste bee obeyed: I will aunswere: In thynges ciuile and humane let them obeye as muche as they ought, but nothyng agaynste GOD. We muste alwayes runne vnto that principle: Euery thyng is suche a thyng by reason of an other, wherefore that other shall more bee suche. Therefore if we obeye the Magistrate for goddes sake, muche more is GOD hymselfe to be obeyed. Wherefore the inferior Magistrates ought not in suche thynges to haue a regarde what the superior power commaundeth, but what God hymselfe hath commaunded.
But there are some whiche saye: Whether the consent of the Churche is to be taryed for in reformyng of religion. A Similitude. that before we departe from the obedience of the Magistrates as touchyng Religion, we must tary for the consent of the Churche. They whiche say these thynges, must marke that Christ neuer so commaunded: Euery manne for hymselfe is wholy bounde vnto the lawe of GOD, whether other consent or dissent. If the good man of a house haue many seruauntes, whome he commaundeth to doo hys woorke in the countrey, but some of them, when their master is absent wil be idle, Paul taryed not for consent. ought the rest therfore to be idle, bycause some consent not to theyr common busines? Did Paul when he was called to preache Christ, tary for the consent of his other brethren. No vndoubtedly: but as he writteth vnto the Galathians, when it pleased GOD to reuele vnto me hys sonne, that I should preache hym amonge the Gentiles, I dyd not strayghtwaye aske counsell of fleshe and bloude, neyther went I vnto the Apostles whiche were before me, but I went into Arabia. Wherefore he taried not for the consent of other, but straightwaye obeyed his vocation. So also ought we to doo: after that GOD hath opened vnto vs his truth, Whē we must tary for consēt. we muste not tary. We muste in deede tary for the consent if the thynge bee doubtfull and darke. But our cause is manifest and without all obscurenes, whiche if we will omitte tyll consent be had, the thyng it selfe is lost, An acte of Tiberius. and good occasions taken awaye. Tiberius woulde haue brought Christe into the number of the goddes, but he thought to haue the consent of the Senate: but the Senate woulde not: and by that meanes it came to passe, that whylest the consent was taryed for, Christ coulde not bee numbred amonge the goddes, wher as Tiberius was able to haue brought it to passe by himself. But I pray you let them tel vs: For whose cōsent they will tary? For the Byshops cōsent? But they (no doubt) wil neuer consent: for they are sworne enemyes vnto the truth.
But let vs returne vnto the inferior Magistrate, of whom we spake before. We must remember what God hath commaunded chyldren concernyng theyr parentes: Honour thy father and thy mother. By whiche woordes vndoubtedlye is also commaunded honour and obeysaunce towarde superior powers. For they haue the place of parentes towarde the inferior Magistrates. But let vs see what Christe hath pronounced as touchyng thys matter. He whiche loueth father (sayeth he) or mother more then me, is not woorthy of me. The same thyng without doubte muste we thynke of the Magistrate whiche is the father of the countrey. We muste obeye hym, but yet not aboue the Lord. Yea if he commaunde any thyng agaynst hym, he is both to be hated, and also to be denyed. Neither is it lawfull for any manne to professe hymselfe to be a Christian, whiche will not departe from the superior Magistrate in these thynges, whiche are agaynste the woorde of GOD. Thys were to haue a wyll to serue two Lordes, and to halte in two partes. If GOD be God, let vs follow hym: and that not by halues, but wholy.
But it is to be feared (saye they) least whylest we are agaynste the superior power, we engender daunger to the publique wealth. To this will I answere contraryly to that which Demades in the old tyme answered vnto the Athenienses. An answere of Demades. Cassander the Macedonian, whiche succeded Alexander the greate, entreated with the Athenienses, to woorshippe Alexander for a GOD. They stayed at it, but Cassander, vnles they woulde consent, seemed that he would inuade them with battaile. Wherefore Demades spake thus vnto the people: That it was to be feared, least whilest they retayned heauen, they lost not earth. So doo I aunswere these menne, but chaungyng the woordes: That it is to be feared, least whilest they to muche regarde and defende an earthely publique wealth, they lose heauen. For althoughe the superior power doo fume and threaten, we must stande valiantly to a good cause. For we muste woorshippe GOD holyly and godly, thoughe all Magistrates and the whole worlde were agaynste vs. And therefore if that superior power commaunde any thyng agaynst the lawe of God, it is not to be obeyed.
An example of Naboth.So dyd Naboth behaue hymself, he would not graunt vnto Achab hys vyneyarde whiche was his inheritaunce. Neither had he in that thing a respect vnto any thing elles, then that the lawe of GOD should remayne vnbroken, wherin it was commaunded that y e tribes and famelyes of the Israelites as touchyng possessions should remayne distincte and separated. Wherefore by it, it was not lawfull for Naboth to alienate hys inheritaunce for euer. Yet a manne beyng farre endetted mought haue solde his inheritaunce, till the yeare of Iubily. But after that yeare it returned vnto the olde possessor agayne. GOD woulde by thys meanes, that the inheritaunces of the Israelites shoulde not be confounded. Wherefore Naboth woulde not sell hys auncient inheritaunce, that the lawe of GOD shoulde not be broken, whome Magistrates also ought to follow, and not to geue place in theyr Cityes and dominions vnto moste vnpure Masses and Papisticall Idolatrye. The Iewes, when they were oppressed vnder the Mocedonians, The constancy of the Iewes agaynste the Macedonians & Romanes. chused to suffer any thynge, rather then that the Image of Iupiter Olimpicus shoulde abyde in the Temple of GOD. And when the Romanes bare rule ouer them, howe greate sedition and tumult stirred they vp, rather then they would suffer the Siluer Eagle, or the Image of Caligula to be set vp in the holy place. Yea & Valentinian y e Emperor beyng an Arrian (as both Eusebius writeth and also Ambrose in hys Epistles) would haue had the Church of Millan delyuered vnto him, there with hys heretikes to haue celebrated prayers and holy seruices. Ambrose. But Ambrose woulde not geue place, but rather abode daye and nyght in the Temple together with the people, that the Emperour should not fynd it empty and so possesse it. If the Hebrues would not haue the Temple of GOD polluted with Idoles, and Ambrose suffred not the Churche to be contaminated by heretikes, why doo faythfull Magistrates permitte theyr Temples to Idolatrers, and vnpure worshippynges of Papistes?
They saye that these thynges pertayne not vnto them, and that these Temples are not in theyr power. What then? If murther shoulde be committed in those Temples, or any shoulde there conspire agaynste the publique wealth, woulde they leaue murtherers and conspirators vnpunished there? And would they say y t these wycked crimes pertayne nothyng vnto them? Would they willingly & wittingly suffer these thyngs? I thinke not, if they were wise, & if they would keepe and defend the publique wealth. If a man should obiect vnto them, this Temple is not yours, neither maketh it any matter vnto you what is here done: yea but they would then aunswere, for as muche as it is in our City, in that it sufficiently pertayneth vnto vs. But wicked actes, farre more grieuous then murthers and conspiracyes, are there committed, Idolatry I say, sacrilege, [Page 266] and blasphemye. And shall a Magistrate whiche will be called a Christian, thynke that these thynges pertayne nothyng vnto hym? But, say they, the superior power hath commaunded these thynges to be done. To this I haue already largely aunswered. Nowe thys thynge wyll I adde, if the same power shoulde go aboute to destroye the Citye, or to take awaye or diminishe the priuiledges, they woulde neuer suffer that, they woulde rather runne to weapons: but these thynges whiche are farre more grieuous and cruell, are openly and manifestly done and suffred. And whiche is muche moste grieuous of all, those thynges are there suffred, where many yeares the Gospell of Christe hath bene receaued.
Nowe resteth (bycause oftentymes the Magistrate excuseth hymselfe, saying y e Ecclesiastical causes pertayne not vnto him) to declare y t to be vntrue. Although it be sufficiently declared by those things which I haue already spoken, yet for y e more easie vnderstandyng I thinke it good to adde those thynges. First I say y t y e Magistrate is the keper of the law of God, which conteyneth not onely the latter table, but also the first. Wherfore y e Magistrate is a keper as well of the one, as of the other. I adde that also whiche Augustine sayth, Augustine. that not onely priuate men, but also kynges ought to serue the Lorde. For in the Psalme it is written: In gatheryng together peoples into one, and kynges to serue the Lorde. And in an other place. And nowe O kynges vnderstand, be wise ye that iudge the earth. Serue the Lord in feare, &c. A priuate man (sayth Augustine) serueth the Lorde if he confesse hys name, and lyue vprightly. Howe kynges ought peculiarly to serue the Lorde. But this is not sufficient for a kyng and Magistrate. For he by his authority and power ought so to serue the Lorde, that he must punishe those that are agaynst hym: whiche thyng vnles he doo, he seemeth to assent vnto blasphemers and heretikes. For the king, when he seeth these menne, and suffreth them, is as much in faulte, as if he shoulde ioyne hymselfe with them, and mainteyne theyr wicked actes. Nebuchad-Nezar as soone as euer he knewe GOD, made a decree that whosoeuer spake blasphemy agaynst the GOD of Daniel, shoulde dye. The lyke decree made Darius afterwarde. Wherfore our Magistrates also ought vtterly to take awaye all Idolatryes, blasphemyes, and superstitions, assone as euer they find them out.
The Ethnike princes neuer thought that the care ouer Religion pertayned not vnto their power. Why was Socrates condemned at Athens? The Ethnike princes had a regard vnto religion. I do not now demaunde how holyly or iustly: (for as all men in a manner beleue, Anitus and Melitus lyed agaynst hym) this I speake, for that he was for no other cause condemned, but onely for religion, as thoughe he taught newe gods, and led away the youth from the olde, and receaued worshyppyng of the gods: and he was by a prophane Magistrate condēned. Socrates was for religiō sake condemned of a prophane Magistrate. Wherfore the Athenienses thought that the obseruance and care of religion pertayned vnto their Magistrate. The law of God commaunded that the blasphemer should be put to death, not I thinke by euery priuate mā, or by the Priestes, but by the Magistrates. The Ethnike Emperors also in those first tymes did for no other cause rage agaynst the Christians, but bycause they thought that matters of religion pertayned vnto their iudgement seat. And assuredly as touching this opinion, they wer not deceaued: for none (as Chrisostome sayth) either Apostle or Prophet reproued the people, Chrisostome. either Iewes or Ethnikes, bycause they had a care ouer Religion, but they were deceaued in the knowledge of Religion: bycause they defended theyr owne religion as true, and condemned the Christian religion, as vngodly and blasphemous.
Constantine and Theodosius are praysed, and very many other holy princes, bycause they tooke awaye Idoles, and either closed vp, or elles ouerthrew theyr Temples. But they dyd not these thynges, but for that they thought that the charge of Religion pertayned vnto them: otherwise they should haue bene busy fellowes, and should haue put theyr sicle into an other mannes haruest. The Donatistes tooke thys in very ill parte, and grieuously complayned [Page] thereof in Augustines tyme, bycause the Catholique Byshoppes required ayde of the Ciuile Magistrate agaynst them. Augustine. But Augustine confuteth them with the selfe same argumentes, whiche I haue a litle before rehearsed, and addeth this moreouer: Why did ye accuse Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage before Constā tine, if it be wicked for the Emperor to determine concerning Religion.
Farther, there is gathered by those thynges whiche the same father wrote agaynst Petilianus, and agaynst Parmenianus, and also in many other his Epistles, howe that the Donatistes accused Cecilianus (as it is sayde) before Constantine the Emperour, who first sent the cause to Melchiades Bishop of Rome. And when by hym they were ouercome, they appealed agayne vnto the Emperor, neyther reiected he their appealation from him, but committed the matter vnto the Bishop of Orleance: by whom they were agayne condemned. Neither rested they so, Constātine decideth a matter of religion. but again appealed vnto y e Emperor, who heard thē, decided their cause, condemned them, and by hys sentence absolued Cecilianus. Where are they now which so often and so impudētly cry, that there is no appealyng from the Pope, and that the causes of Religion pertayne not vnto the ciuile Magistrate?
To whom in the olde tyme pertayned the ryght of callyng generall counsels? Pertayned it not vnto the Emperors? Counsels were called by Emperors. As for the counsell of Nice, the counsell of Constātinople, of Ephesus, and of Chalcedonia, Emperors called them. Leo. 1. of y t name, prayed the Emperor to cal a counsell in Italy, bycause he suspected the Gretians of the error of Eutiches: & yet could he not obteyne it, and the Byshops were called together to Chalcedonia, where at the Emperor also was present, as was Constantine at the counsell of Nice. Neither doo I thinke y t they were there present, to sitte idle and to do nothing, but rather to put forth vnto the Bishops what they should doo, and to vrge them to define rightly. Theodoretus telleth, that Constantine admonished the fathers to determine all thinges by the scriptures of the Euangelistes, Apostles, Prophetes, and Canonicall scriptures. Iustinian also in the Code, Iustinian. Augustine. wrote many Ecclesiasticall lawes of Byshoppes and Priestes, and other such lyke. Yea and Augustine hath taught, that the Magistrate ought after the same manner to punish Idolatrers & heretikes, as he punisheth adulterers, for as much as they cōmitte whoredome against God in mynd: which is much more heynous then to committe whoredome in body. And looke by what lawe murtherers are put to death, by the same also Idolatrers and heretikes ought to be punished, for that by them are killed not the bodies, but the soules: although the common people be stirred vp onely agaynst homicides, bycause they see the bloud of the bodyes killed, but see not the death of the soules. Vndoubtedly it is profitable for the Magistrate to take vpon hym this care, and by his authority to compell menne to come to holy sermons, and to heare the worde of God: for by that meanes it commeth to passe, that by often hearyng those thyngs, begyn to please, whiche before displeased. As Hystoryes teach, that God hath oftentymes with most noble victoryes illustrate godly prynces, God hath prospered princes whiche had a care vnto Religion. which haue had a care vnto these thinges.
Farther, it can not be denied, but that it is the dewty of the Magistrates to defend those Cities and publique wealthes ouer whiche they are gouerners, and to prouide that no hurt happen vnto them: wherfore for asmuch as Idolatry is y e cause of captiuity, pestilence, famine, & ouerthrowing of publique wealthes, shal it not pertaine vnto the Magistrate to represse it, and to kepe the true sound religion? Lastly Paul teacheth fathers to instruct their children in discipline, & in the feare of God: but a good Magistrate is a father of the countrey, wherfore by the rule of the Apostle he ought to prouide that subiectes be instructed as common children. But kynges and princes, whiche say that these thynges pertayne not vnto thē, do in the meane tyme let, geue, and sell Bishoprikes, Abbacies and benefices, to whō they thinke good, neither thinke they that to be none of their office: [Page 267] onely religion they thinke they haue nothyng to doo with, and they neglect to prouide that they, whom they exalte to most ample dignityes, should execute theyr office rightly. Wherfore this thyng onely remayneth for them, euen that GOD hymselfe at the length will looke vpon these thynges, and with most grieuous punishement take vengeaunce of their negligence. These thynges haue I spokē the more at large by occasion of our Hystory, which maketh mention twise or thrise that euilles happened in Israel, bycause they had not a kyng or lawfull Magistrate.
¶The .xx. Chapter.
1 THen all the children of Israell went out, and the congregation was gathered together as one man, from Dan euen to Beerseba, and from the lande of Gilead, vnto the Lord in Mizpa.
2 And the corners of all the people, and all the tribes of Israell, assembled in the Churche of the people of God, foure hundreth thousand footemen that drew sword.
3 And the children of Beniamin heard y t the childrē of Israell wer gone vp vnto Mizpa. Then the children of Israell sayde: Howe is this wickednes committed?
4 And the man the Leuite, the womans husband that was slayne, aunswered and sayde: I came vnto Gibea whiche is in Beniamin, with my concubine to lodge.
5 And the men of Gibea arose agaynst me, and beset the house roūd aboute vpon me by nyght, thynking to haue slayne mee. And haue forced my concubine that she is dead.
6 Then I tooke my concubine, and cut her in pieces, and sent her thorough out all the countrey of the inheritance of Israel. For they haue committed abhomination and vilany in Israel.
7 Beholde all ye children of Israell, geue your aduise and Counsell herein.
The congregation of the Israelites was assembled together to iudge of the crime. This Hebrew word Edah signifieth a Church or an assembly, The end of assemblyes or meatynges together. beyng deriued of this verbe Adah, whiche is to testify: bycause that it is the vse and ende of such assemblyes, that the godly should faythfully testify before God of those thynges whiche are put forth to be consulted of.
From Dan euen vnto Beerseba. Dan & Beerseba. In this kinde of Paraphrasis is comprehended the whole people of Israel. For these ar the endes of that kyngdome: & Dan is the ende towarde the North, wherby y e Iewes are neyghbours vnto the Zidonians, and Beerseba toward the South.
Euen vnto Gilead. That land is beyond Iordane, The borders of the region of the Hebrues. where the two tribes Ruben and Gad together, with halfe the tribe of Manasses dwelled. Thys was the third end toward the East. And ouer agaynst that toward the West lay the sea called mare Mediterraneum. Within these termes and lymites was conteyned the region of the Hebrues, whiche they possessed in the land of Chanaan.
They came into Mizpa vnto the LORDE. Where Mizpa was. Mizpa was a place moste apte to haue assemblyes in, it was not farre frome Ierusalem in the Tribe of Iudah. In the fyrste booke of the Machabites the thyrde Chapiter, [Page] it is thus written: When the people by reason of y e tyranny of the Macedonians fled out of Ierusalem, they assembled together in Mizpa vnto Iudas Machabeus. And it is added that y t place was a house of prayer of aūcient tyme, & laye situate ouer agaynst the City of Ierusalem. And in this booke we haue before heard, how that when Iiphtah should be ordeyned Iudge ouer the people, the people assembled together in Mizpa. In Samuels tyme also y e people assembled together twise vnto that place: once when they should leade an army agaynst the Philistines, & an other tyme when Saul should be created kyng. Farther, when all the Citye was ouerthrowen by Nebuchad-Nezar, all the people fled to Godolia in Mizpa. Moreouer besides the oportunity of the place, was added a notable benefite of God: bycause, as we rede in the .10. chapter of Iosuah, there assembled thether agaynst the people of Israel a very great nūber of kynges, for there were not fiue or sixe, but very many kinges which were neyghbours, entending vtterly to destroye the name of the Iewes. Yet God commaunded them to be of a good & valiaunt courage, bycause he would geue vnto his people the victory ouer them all. And when that thyng happened, contrary to all mans hope, the Hebrues for a monument of so great a benefite, built in that place an alter vnto God. Wherfore it is probable (as the Rabbines affirme) that in Mizpa began to bee a house of prayer. For the people went not to the tabernacle or to Ierusalem, so often as they had occasion to pray, Euery Citye had Synagoges. but had in Cityes and Villages certayne Synagoges, wherein they prayed together vnto GOD. But to doo Sacrifices it was not after that manner lawfull but onely at the tabernacle of Moses, or at Ierusalem, after Salomon had builte the Temple: althoughe hyghe places were sometymes vsed. Wherfore the people assembled thether as well for the opportunity of the place, as also by reason of the auncient Religion: neither thought they it lawefull to begyn any thyng without prayers. Whiche institution, for that the Papistes woulde somewhat resemble, they firste prouide to haue a Masse of the holy Ghost, songe before they make any leagues, or rather conspiracyes agaynste Christe.
It is sayde that they assembled together vnto the Lorde, to praye together vnto the Lorde. D. Kimhi. Although Dauid Kimhi thinketh that this was added: bycause wheresoeuer is a multitude of the godly, there is GOD also present. And to confirme that sentence, he bringeth a place put of the Psalme: GOD stoode in the Synagoge of Goddes. For Iudges whiche in thys place are called Goddes, when they geue iudgement, ought not to thinke that they haue theyr owne cause in hande, but Goddes cause, as Iosaphat the godly kynge shewed them. I doo not dissallowe this sentence: for it is both godly, and also it maketh menne to vnderstande, that when assemblyes are godly had, then doo menne assemble vnto GOD: whiche thyng if menne in these dayes woulde consider, greate menne woulde handle publique causes with more feare of GOD. Howbeit thys is for certayne that the Israelites assembled not in Silo, as some thinke.
And the corners of all the people assembled. The Hebrewe woorde is Penoth, whiche properly signifyeth corners: but in this place it is taken for Capitaines, heades ouer ten, Cēturious, Tribunes, and gouernors of warlike affayres. For they after a sort are corners, strengthes and stayes of an army. Wherfore the villages of the Holuetians in the Italian toungue are called Cantones. Wherfore the Hebrues come and assemble in Mizpa, not rashly, but in their orders. They had not in deede a kyng, or myghty Magistrates, or Senadrim, as it is thought, for they wer sore decayed and weakened by the Philistines. Yet they retayned among themselues some order and discipline.
Fower hundreth thousande footemen. When they went out of Epypte, they were 666000. The nomber of the Israelites diminishe. men. It seemeth that the number was nowe diminished. And no meruayle, bycause they had ben afflicted with many & greuous calamities. Also [Page 268] the tribe of Beniamin was away, which peraduenture had thirty thousande soldiours. For that tribe was both ample and also mighty.
And the chyldren of Beniamin heard. The Beniamites would not be present, they onely heard what should be done. Dauid Kimhi Kimhi admonisheth that these woordes are put in by a parenthesis: for there is no cause shewed why they woulde not be among them.
And the children of Israel sayd: Tel how this wycked act was committed. Kimhi thinketh that these things are to be red in y e vocatiue case, as though it should haue bene sayd: O ye children of Israel, declare the whole matter in order as it was done: in the meane time it seemeth that the Beniamites are noted, bycause they would not come vnto the assembly, neyther take awaye euill from among them. The people assembled together to vnderstand the cause, that for as much as ther was no Magistrate, the people might publikely geue iudgement of so haynous a wycked crime.
The Leuite answered. This is in deede a short accusacion, It is prooued that Concubines wer wiues but yet it comprehendeth al. In the meane time, this is to be noted, that this Leuite is called the husband of the womā that was slaine, which yet is called his Concubine. Wher by is proued the sentence which we haue before affirmed, namelye that lawfull wyues also are called Concubines.
They entended to kyl me. He speaketh modestly and shamefastly, and declareth the wycked act of the Gabaonites. Leui ben Gerson saith, that he so spake, bicause he was ready to dye, rather then then he would suffer so great a villany.
Behold al ye chyldren of Israel. When hee had finished his tale, he byddeth them to take counsell, what was to be done in this matter. Then followeth the deliberation.
8 Then al the people arose as one man, saying: There shall not a man of vs go to his tent, neyther shal any turne into hys house.
9 But now thys is the thyng whych we wil doo to Gibea, against it by lot.
10 And we wyl take ten men of the hundreth throughe out all the tribes of Israel, and an hundreth of the thousand, and a thousande of ten thousand, to bryng vittayle vnto the people, that they maye doo (when they come to Gibea of Beniamin) according vnto all the villany, that it hath done in Israel.
11 So all the men of Israel were gathered agaynst the City, knit together as one man.
12 And the tribes of Israel sent men throughe all the Tribe of the chyldren of Beniamin, saying: What wyckednesse is thys that is committed among you?
13 Now therefore delyuer vs those wycked men which are in Gibea, that we may slay them, and take away euyll from Israel. But the chyldren of Beniamin woulde not obey the voyce of theyr brethren the chyldren of Israel.
They al euen to one determined, that so great a villany should be auenged, if the Beniamites would not punish the guilty, as it was meete they should. The summe is: They wil not suffer the wicked act to escape vnpunished. But howe these thinges mought be rightly and orderly done and ordered, was first to bee considered. For there was a great number of men, namelye .4. hundreth thousand. Wherfore out of that number they chused some to bring vittayles: & other some to assayle the enemies. But before all thinges, they sent a message vnto the Beniamites, that if they woulde deliuer the wicked men, they woulde cease [Page] from warre. But some man wil say, was it sufficient to deliberate to fight, and onely to heare the accusacion of the Leuite? Vndoubtedlye it seemeth that hee ought to haue proued that fact, What wytnesses the Leuite mought haue. both by reasons, and also by witnesses. But it is probable, y t he had his seruant to witnes, which was present when those things were done, and peraduenture that old man, to whom he had turned in. For it is to be thought that he was departed from the Gabaonites, for as much as he could not abide their wickednes. But howsoeuer the matter was, the people before they go to hand strokes, decreed to send messengers vnto the Beniamites, that by them they might excuse their fact, and defende them selues. And by that meanes the other part, namely the guilty, was heard.
In the meane time they chuse those by lots which shoulde be appointed to certayne offices. This was the peoples doing: and therfore it was done by choyse, that they might know, who should cary vitailes vnto the campe, & who shoulde fight. To cast lots ar most apt for the popular state. And to cast lot seemeth to be the most meetest way for the state of the people: for the people loueth equality of lawes, and equability, which seemeth then to be chiefest, when choise is permitted vnto lots. Wherfore wher as the people gouern, Magistrates are oftentimes chosen by lots. So is it also in hostes, y t whē soldiours wil, they doo many thinges betwene themselues by lots. This therefore was the maner therof, that the tenth man of the whole people shoulde bee had, so that one of ten should by lot be taken, ten of a hundreth, one hundreth of a thousand, and a thousand also of ten thousand. This seemeth to be a very profitable and commodious way. For now oftentimes in hostes a man shal se more rascals and vitlers, then soldiours. But by this meanes or decree, one tended vp on nine soldiours, and ten vpon ninetye. And their charge was to prouide vyttailes, bicause they knew not how long that expedicion shoulde endure. So in Titus Liuius Quintius Cincinnatus, Titus Liuius. being created Dictator in a perilous time of the publik wealth, and hauing a iorney to make by night, straightway cōmaū ded, that the youth should gather together stakes and make readye weapons: but the old men and such as were not apt for warre, shoulde dresse vittailes for the rest, as much as should serue them for fyue daies. Here we see that the Dictator had his choise of them al. But among the Israelits ther was no Dictator: wherfore the matter was put to lots. In the booke of Iosua also in the first chapter, it is written that Iosua commaunded the tribunes to gather an armye, and that al of them should haue meate ready drest to their handes, when they should passe ouer Iordane. For they wer ignorant what should happen vnto them.
As it were one man. They were agreed together, and also of one mynde: and nothing is more profitable prosperously to make warre, then the concorde of soldiours.
Warre whē it is not proclaymed, seemeth theft. The tribes of Israel sent messengers. The Israelites do appoint nothing rashly or headlong. This reason was most iust, that before they made any inuasion by warre, they should proclaime warre. For where that is not done, it may seme to bee rather theft, then warre. Farther, they woulde that if anye had beene innocent amonge them, they shoulde not haue wrapped them selues together with those wicked men. Delyuer vnto vs (say they) those which haue committed so great wickednes. That al the people may punish them, if ye will not. And they bring foorth the law of God: That euil may be taken away from among the people. By euil is vnderstand sinne and wickednes: that semeth to be taken away, when it is punished. How euyl is taken away. But if it remayne vnpunished, then remaineth that God wil take vengeaunce therof. Other do thus expound it: That we maye take away euil, that is, that we may turne away from Israel the calamities, whyche for that sinne seemed to hang ouer it. So Iesus in the Gospel healed al diseases and griefes in the people: when as yet he came not for diseases sake, but for sins. But diseases are inflicted bicause of synnes. Therfore seing he tooke awaye the cause, namely synne, he tooke away also the effectes of synne. They sent messengers, [Page 269] not onely to one famely of the tribe of Beniamin, but to all. Schebat in Hebrue is a tribe, but here it is taken for a famely. And in very dede tribes wer nothing els then famelies, comming of the Patriarches, namely the children of Iacob. But the tribe of Beniamin had ten famelies, Beniamin had ten fa [...]elies. R. Selomoh. who toke their names of their first Parentes. And those ten famelies were so notable and aboundant, that R. Selomoh saith, that Rachel after a sort brought forth twelue tribes, that is, ther came out of Beniamin ten famelies, which myght bee likened vnto ten tribes: Farther, of Ioseph were borne Ephraim and Manasses. Wherfore the Tribe of Beniamin was very populous and mighty. Whereby also it came to passe that they trusted to much in their own strength, and thought that they were able to resist al Israell. Wherfore they would neither deliuer the guiltye, nor yet punish them. For they thought it ignominious vnto them, if they should haue don either of them. They would not geue place to sound counsels, wherefore they could not deny, but that warre was iustlye made against them, which by honest meanes they might haue auoided. But the rest of the people are to bee praysed, bicause they with so great moderacion tooke in hande so great a matter. Fyrst, A comparyson betwene y e people and the Bē iamites. they would know the cause, then sende messengers, to require that the guiltye might be put to death: lastly they would assay althinges, rather then they would make war against their brethren. On the contrarye syde, the Beniamites doo al thinges peruerslye, they take no counsel, they neither deny nor excuse their act, they wyll not deliuer the guilty, but prepare them selues to defende. And so for the wickednes of a fewe, they contaminate them selues all. And as Paul sayth to the Romanes, they do not onelye euyll them selues, but also consent to them that doo euyl. Neither could they excuse themselues by ignoraunce of the law, which they had so often heard. They acknowledge that the wycked act was most grieuous, which yet they allow in defending the guilty.
14 But the children of Beniamin gathered them selues together out of the Cities into Gibea, to go out and fyght agaynst the chyldren of Israel.
15 And the children of Beniamin were numbred at that tyme .26. thousand men that drew swoorde, besides the inhabiters of Gibea, whych were numbred .vi. hundreth chosen men.
16 Of al this people there were .7. hundreth chosen men, that were shut in their ryght hande: all these coulde slyng stones at an heare breadth, and not fayle.
17 Also the men of Israel beside Beniamin, were numbred .400. thousand men that drew sword. Al these wer men of warre.
18 And they arose vp, and went vp to Bethel, and asked of God, & the children of Israel sayd: which of vs shal go vp firste to fyght agaynst the chyldren of Beniamin? And the Lord sayde: Iuda shall be fyrst.
19 Then the chyldren of Israell rose vp earelye, and camped agaynst Gibea.
20 The men of Israel I say went out to battaile agaynst Beniamin, and the men of Israel put them selues in aray, to fight against them besyde Gibea.
21 And the chyldren of Beniamin came oute of Gibea, and slewe downe to the ground of the Israelites that day .xxii. thousand mē.
22 And the people the men of Israel plucked vp their hartes, and set their battayle agayne in aray, in the place where they put them in a ray the fyrst day.
[Page]23 And the children of Israel went vp, and asked the Lord saying: Shal I go agayne to battayle agaynste the chyldren of Beniamin my brethren? And the Lord sayd: Go vp against them.
24 Then the chyldren of Israel came neare the chyldren of Beniamin the second day.
25 And the second day Beniamin came forth to meete them out of Gibea, and slew downe to the grounde of the chyldren of Israel agayne .xviii. thousand men. Al they could handle the swoord.
The Beniamites assembled together to Gibea, bicause they saw al the brunt of the battail bent thitherwarde. They tooke out the choyce of their soldiours, wherein were not comprehended the inhabiters of Gibea, which were in number sixe hundreth men of warre, and men picked out. And it is added for a thyng wonderful, that there were of the Beniamites seuen hundreth, which had an impediment in their right handes, but vsed slynges, & leuened so nye, y t they missed not euen an heare bredth. What hande is said to be closed It is saide that they had their handes closed, bycause the sinews wer bound, neither could the spirites haue their mouings frely. For which cause they were vnapt to draw swordes. The latin translacion hath ambi dexteros, bicause they could vse both handes, as though either hand were the right hand. Leafthanded. And they which excuse this translacion, do say that they so vsed the leaft hand, as if they had had no right hand. I thinke rather that they were leaft handed. But in that it is added that they leueled so rightly, that they missed not a heare bredth, Hyperbole. I thinke it be spoken by this figure Hiperbole, wherby their cunning and industry might the more be commended.
In the Hebrue it is read that the Beniamites had .xxvi. thousande soldiours. But in the latin interpretaciō are put onely .xxv. thousād, for this cause as I suppose, bicause in that last conflict wherein the Beniamites were ouerthrowen, we reade onely of .xxv. thousand that were slaine. Wherfore if a man compare the first number with the latter, there are a thousand ouer, whom other thinke that when their host was discomfited, and thinges past all hope, they turned backe & fled into Europe. D. Kimhi. But Kimhi thinketh more rightlye, that they were myssing, when the Beniamites got the vpper hand in those twoo first conflictes. For it is not credible that they so ouercame, that they lost none of their soldiours. Wherfore if thou adde them vnto the .xxv. thousand, which fel in the third battail, then is the whole number of .xxvi. thousande explete. These thinges I knowe are of smal waight: which yet I thought good to note, bicause the Rabbines haue written many thinges of them, and the translacions do differ.
When the soldiours were chosen out, and al thinges set in an order, the Israelites send to Bethel, and aske counsel of God. The Arke of the Lorde was at that time in Siloh, Bethel is not alwaies the proper name of a place. and from thence wer geuen answers. And Bethel in this place is not the name of a City, but is takē for the house of God, and signifieth a place where the Arke of the couenant remained. Farther, Siloh was not farre from Gibea, wherfore it was no hard matter for the Israelites to send thether to aske counsel of God. They asked the Lord, which tribe should haue the fyrst place in the battayle, for some one tribe must nedes be the first. Answer was made, that this should be geuen vnto the tribe of Iuda. That was of al the tribes most populous and noble, vnto which afterward came the kingdome. They enquired not who should be the captaine of the warre, but which tribe shoulde begyn the battaile first against the enemies.
Why thei doubted not of the victory. Wherin the Israelits synned.They nothing doubt of the victory: neither demaund they any thing concerning it. They saw that their quarrell was iust. They sawe also that they were more in number and multitude, and that it would be easy to ouercome so fewe: wherefore they pray not vnto God to geue them the victory, which was a grieuous [Page 270] synne, as R. Leui ben Gerson affirmeth. Wherefore God being offended, suffred them twise to fal before their enemies, and that wonderfullye. For God hateth nothing more then pride, and to much trust in our owne strengthes. He wil also haue men knowe, that victory is both to be required, D. Kimhi. and also to be hoped for at his handes onelye. But Kimhi sayth, that other thinke that this so great misfortune of warre happened, bicause of the idolatry of Micha the Israelite. As though God should in this maner haue delt with them: Ye will auenge the iniury done vnto a man, being a Leuite, but ye neglect and wyncke at the contumely which I suffer at the Danites handes, who publikely worship Idoles. Either of these sentences is very likelye, althoughe neither of them is gathered out of the text. Howbeit this we may affirme, that there were some certain causes, wherby God was excedinglye prouoked of the Israelites. But what those causes were, though we know not, it is no meruayle. For the counsels of God are hidden and obscure. Order at the length required this, that the Israelites should first auenge the contumely of God himself, and afterward of the Leuite. But this is sufficiently declared in the text, What thynges the Israelites had omitted, that they at those twoo first tymes came not vnto God earnestly inough. They came in deede: but they neither fasted, nor killed sacrifices, nor made any praiers, as far as the holy history declareth. But at the last, hauing already two ouerthrowes, all of them with a lowly and humble minde come vnto God, al pray together and fast. These thinges seme sufficiently to declare, that they were not before in the house of the Lord in suche maner as they ought to haue beene. For if they had had true fayth, they would haue before also proclaimed both cōmon prayers, and also fasting. Mourning, fasting, and praiers are the effectes of faith and true repentaunce. These thinges for that they had not, it is probable that therfore they receaued so great losse at the first and second conflict. This thing also might bee a cause, for that they made warre to much securely and contemptuously, as they which dyd put their confidence in the number and strength of their own men. Wherefore they contemned the enemy, The contempt of enemies hurteth very much then the which nothing is more vnprofitable to those y t shal fight. For contempt of the enemies engendreth negligence in the hostes.
26 Then al the children of Israel ascended, and all the people, and they came into the house of God, and wept, and abode there before the Lorde. They fasted also that day vnto the euening, and offered burnt offringes, and peace offeringes before the Lord.
27 And the chyldren of Israel asked the Lorde (for there was the Arke of the Lord in those dayes.
28 And Pinhas the sonne of Eleazar, the sonne of Aaron stoode before it in those dayes) saying: Shal I yet go any more to battayle against the children of Beniamin my brethren, or shal I cease? The Lord answered: Go vp, for to morow I wil deliuer them into your hand.
29 And Israel set men to lye in wayte round about Gibea.
30 And the children of Israel went vp against the children of Beniamin the thyrd day, and put them selues in aray against Gibea, as at other tymes.
31 Then the children of Beniamin comming out to meete the people, were drawen from their City, and they beganne to smite and to kyl of the people as at other times, euen by the wayes (whereof one goeth vp to the house of God, and the other to Gibea) in the fielde, vpon a thirty men of Israel.
32 And the chyldren of Beniamin sayd: They are fallen before vs [Page] as at the first. But the children of Israel said: Let vs flie, and pluck them away from the city, euen to the high wayes.
33 And when al the men of Israel rose vp oute of their place, and put them selues in aray in Baal-Thamar: in the meane while, the men of Israel that lay in wayte, came forth of their place, euen out of the medowes of Gibea.
34 And they came ouer agaynst Gibea, ten thousande chosen men of all Israel, and the battayle was sore: for they knewe not that the euyll was neare them.
35 And the Lord smote Beniamin before Israel, and the chyldren of Israel destroyed of the Beniamites the same day .xxv. thousand and one hundreth men. All they coulde handle the swoord.
36 So the children of Beniamin saw that they wer smitten down, for the children of Israel gaue place vnto the Beniamites, bycause they trusted to the men that lay in wayte, whych they had layde besydes Gibea.
37 And they that lay in wayte hasted, and brake forth toward Gibea, and the embushment drew themselues along, and smote al the City wyth the edge of the swoord.
38 Also the men of Israel had appointed a certayne tyme with the embushmentes, that with great speede they shoulde make a great flame and smoke ryse out of the City.
39 And the men of Israel retired in the battayle, and Beniamin began to smyte and kyll the men of Israell, about .xxx. persons, for they sayd: Surely they are striken downe before vs, as in the fyrste battayle.
40 But when the flame began to aryse out of the City, as a pyller of smoke, the Beniamites looked backe, and beholde, the flame of the City began to ascend vp to heauen.
41 Then the men of Israel turned againe, and the children of Beniamin were astoyned, for they saw their destruction at hand.
42 Therefore they fled before the men of Israel vnto the waye of the wyldernes, but the battayle ouertooke them, also they whyche came out of the Cities, slewe them among them.
43 Thus they compassed the Beniamites about, and chased them at ease, and ouerran them, euē ouer against Gibea on the East side.
44 And there fel of Beniamin .xviii. thousand men, which were all men of warre.
45 And they turned and fled vnto the wyldernes, vnto the rocke Rimmon, and the Israelites glayned of them by the way .v. thousand men, and pursued after them vnto Gidehon, & slew two thousand men of them.
46 So that al that were slayne that day of the Beniamites were 25 thousand men that drew sword, which were all men of warre.
47 But .vi. hundreth men turned and fled to the wyldernes, vnto the rocke of Rimmon, and abode in the rocke Rimmō .4. monethes.
48 Then the men of Israel returned vnto the chyldren of Beniamin, and smote them with the edge of the swoord, from the men of [Page 271] the City vnto the beastes, and al that came to hand, also they set on fyre all the Cities that they could come by.
After that the children of Israel had had the ouerthrowe, they went vp vnto the house of God, and wept there. And assuredly somewhat they dyd that belonged vnto piety, but yet not so muche as they ought: for they fasted not, neyther offered they Sacrifices, whiche are tokens of a full fayth and conuersion. Why God had thē ascend whē they shoulde be ouerthrowen. How beit the Lorde byddeth them to ascende, bycause he woulde not feare them away from the battaile, which they had in a iust cause taken in hande. He dyd not strayghtway geue the victory, but styll permitted them to be afflicted of their enemyes, whereby they might vnderstande their faultes, and more earnestly desyre pardon. There perished againe .xviii. thousand of them, after which slaughter it is sayde that they came all of them humbly vnto God. There they wept, not counterfetlye or lightlye, but bytterly and earnestlye, and that all the whole daye. They fasted, they offered burnt offerynges and peace offeringes. Burnt offeringes were they which were all whole burnt, but of peace offeringes a certaine part was offered, an other part was geuen vnto the Priest, and an other part returned vnto him whych offered it, to eate it with his frendes in the sight of the Lorde. The Hebrues being now oppressed with troubles, doo not onelye pray vnto God, and bewayle their synnes, but also fast, and after fastyng institute a cōmunion among themselues. In that it is said that the Arke of the Lord was there, we must vnderstande that of Siloh: for there it continually abode. It is said that the priest stoode before the Lorde: and that is nothing els, then that he exercised the holy ministery.
They asked: Shal we ascende, or shal we cease? This is a more ful interrogacion then the first were. This is a more ful interrogaciō then the first wer: for at the first time they onely demaunded, which tribe should first assaile the enemies. At the second time, whither God wold that they should ascend against their enemies. But now they demaund whither they shal go vp, or whither they shal cease? As though they vtterly referred the matter vnto the wil of God. God answereth them more gently & faith: Go vp, to morow I wil deliuer them into thine hand. The thinges that are now done and set foorth, serue to our cōmodity. We ought to attempt nothing, whereof we are not before certain, whither it be iust or vniust. For the true knowledge wherof, we must seke for the answer of God out of the holy scriptures. The Israelites wold not wrap the innocents with the gilty, & therfore they sent messengers at the beginning, which thing at this day is not obserued in making of wars. Our Capitains and Emperors do althinges without respect, & do no les rage against children, olde men, maydens, and widowes, then against those which haue chieflye offended. The Beniamites are worthely to be condemned, bicause they defended an vniust cause, & thought that it would be ignominious vnto thē, if they should deliuer any of theirs to be punished, which thing we see happeneth very often tymes in these dayes. For maisters defend their seruantes, they care not by what right or wrong. For if their seruant, although he be gilty, be cast into prison, they think that therby cōmeth a great ignominy vnto thēselues, their famely, and to their court. But they ought to haue iustice before their eyes, & not to haue a regard to any thing els, then that the lawes should be kept. The Beniamites did put their confidence in their own strength, & the Israelites in their great number, and also in the iustnes of their cause. But both of them sinned, for confidence is not to be put either in the strength of soldiours, or in the number, or in the iustnesse of the cause, but onely in the mercy of God.
Although the cause be good, yet doth not the thing alwaies succeede prosperously. The Beniamites in a most wicked cause got the victory the fyrst time, the second tyme, yea and the thirde tyme, yet at the last they suffered punishment, and were ouerthrowen and slayne. For God, howsoeuer he do for a time winke [Page] at the wicked actes of men, yet he suffereth them not alwayes to escape vnpunished. For the vngodly, as the holy prophetes admonishe vs, floorishe for a short time: but if thou a litle while passe by and returne, he shall be no where. That the Israelites wer so often ouercome, Why god wold haue the Israelites ouercome. it was the worke & counsel of God, not bicause he would help the wicked men, but to allure his to true & iust repentace.
We may also hereby learne, that in all matters that wee take in hande, three thinges are chiefly to be required: first that the cause be iust which we will defend. Three thinges required in euerye thing that we take in hād. Farther, that we put not the abilitye of performing the same in our owne strength, but in God: lastly, that we put to our endeuor & diligence. Otherwyse to despise the meanes, wherby we may attain to our purpose, is nothing els thē to tēpt God. It is not inough to say: I haue a good cause, I will cōmit y e residue vnto god. We must also stretch out our strengthes, & ad to our diligence: Wherfore we may not put our affiance in any cause, although it be neuer so iust.
Some man wil say: what difference then is there betwene a iust cause, and an vniust? There is great difference betwene, to haue a good cause, & to haue an euil. Much vndoubtedly. For in an vniust cause thou canst not cal vpon God, or trust that he wil be an helper vnto thee. For an vniust cause is vnder y e curse of God, and to cal vpon God to helpe, it is euen like as if I should desire help of a man, to fight against my selfe. But if the cause be good, euery man maye put his confidence in God, & cal vpon him, but yet not in such maner to put hope in the equity of the cause, but that thou mayest hope, that God for his mercies sake wyll bee an ayde vnto thee. The successe maketh not the cause eyther good or euyll. If the successe bee euill, the cause is not therefore straightwaye good. Nebuchad-Nezar destroyed Iewrye, and ledde awaye the nacions that were adioyning captiues into Babilon, and yet was not his cause therefore good. Gods cause in deede was iuste: for hee woulde by that meanes take vengeaunce of a rebellious people. But Nebuchad-Nezar thought nothing els but to exercise his tyrāny. Ioseph, bicause he would auoide adoultery, was cast into prison, and yet was not his cause therefore euer a whyt the woorse. Dauid was eiected of Absolon, and yet was not Absolons cause therefore anye whyt the better. In our time Princes that are Protestantes haue had yl succes in war, and yet is therfore not the cause of the Gospel to be thought the worse. The Beniamites now got the victorye more then once or twise, in a cause moste wicked. The holy Martirs in our times are most miserably slayne of Tyrannes, and that with most cruel kinde of torments, and yet we nothing doubt but that their cause is most excellent. England had of late, as touching the word of God and truth, a Church most rightly instituted, which was afterwarde miserablye disiected and seperated: neither followed it therby that the cause of religion was euil. But now thankes be geuen vnto God which hath restored it.
From the cause to the effects is a firme argument, wher the effect followeth of necessitye the cause.There may in deede be drawen an argument of the euentes, but not of necessity, yea scarse probable. For the passage from the effectes to the cause, is not firme, vnlesse the effectes and causes be necessary. Wherefore this argument is of no force: The Israelites haue a good cause, therfore they shall not fall in battayle: for it may be, that God wil illustrate hys glory, yea euen with the slaughter of them. And this argument also is no stronger then that: The Beniamites ouercame, wherefore they had the better cause. These things I haue spoken the more at large, to the end we should not wauer in mynde, or doubt of the goodnes of our cause, if peraduenture the thinges go not prosperously wyth vs.
The godli whē they haue receaued the ouerthrow, flee vnto God. The vngodlye gaue not thāks vnto God for the victory.Farther, in this place is to bee noted the nature of godlye men: when they haue receaued the ouerthrow, they flee vnto God. But the vngodly, euen when they get the victorye, doo not geue thankes vnto God, as now we rede not that the Beniamites gaue thankes vnto God for their good successes, we haue heard of none of their prayers, nor of any confidence they put in God: yea rather there arose so great security and insolencye of some of their successes, that they brake out of the Citye, and pursued the enemies, farther then was meete or conuenient. [Page 272] But at the last they receaued the iust fruite of their pride. Contrarilye the Israelites being afflicted with miseries, got themselues vnto God. Vnto whō god answered, y t he would the next day deliuer the Beniamites into their hands.
In the two first interrogacions, the Israelites seemed to doubt nothing of the victory: bicause they had yet a confidence in their own strengthes and number, but after the second ouerthrowe, they shewed in verye deede a lowlye and humble mynde. Shal we go vp (say they) or shal we cease? As though they shoulde haue said: O Lord Iehouah, al the victory lieth in thine hand, therfore we wholy cōmit our selues to thy mercy: shew thou vnto vs, what we ought to do. If thou commaunde vs, we are ready to leaue of from our enterprise. Leui ben Gerson. Dauid Kimhi This is a perfect interrogacion, after the opinion of Leui ben Gerson. Kimhi hath noted manye thinges in this place, not a litle profitable for the vnderstanding of other scriptures, concerning interrogacions and oracles. This saith he, was the maner of asking of God. He which would enquire concerning anye publike affaire, The maner of asking of God. or otherwise of anye waighty matter, came vnto the priest, and he putting on an Ephod, stoode before the Arke of the Lord. In the Ephod, or in the brest plate wer twelue precious stones, wherin were written the names of the twelue tribes, and ther were also set the names of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, & in those stones were al the letters of the Alphabete. The asker ought to turne his face vnto the priest, and to aske, not in deede so apertely that his voice should be hearde, neyther yet so softly, that he should onely thinke in minde the thinges whych he desired, but in such sorte, as we reade that Hanna prayed in the firste booke of Samuel, wher it is sayd that she moued her lips onely, neither spake she any thing that could be heard. Then was the oracle in this maner geuen vnto the Priest. By the power of the holy ghost certaine letters appeared aboue the other in the brest plate, and that either in place or in brightnes, wherin the Priest red the oracle and wil of God. And these thinges are those Vrim and Thūmim, which the Priest bare in his brest plate. This is Kimhies opinion. Vnto whom, what faith is to be geuen, I cānot tel. For it might be, that the spirit of god did w tout letters geue oracles by the voice of the high Priest, whose hart he inspired w t prophecy.
This Pinhas which is written to haue stand now before the Lord, Pinhas. is not called by his proper name onely, but also by the names of his father and grandfather, are added with al, that is, the names of Eleazar and Aaron: which is don so much the more diligently, bicause no man otherwise would beleue that he could haue lyued so long. Therfore the Readers woulde haue thought that thys had bene some other, rather then the sonne of Eleazar. For if thou wilt count the yeares, Pinhas lyued long. thou shalt finde that ther wer no les then .300. yeres passed, from the time of that noble act of Pinhas, vnto this age wherof we now speake. Wherfore it mought seme incredible that it should be the same man. Howbeit for as much as the holy scriptures do testify this thing, we ought so to beleue. Neither vndoubtedlye is it any maruaile, though God prolonged his life so long. For when he had slaine the harlot of Midian, and the Prince of the Tribe of Simeon, euen in that their wicked act, God iudged that he had employed his labour excellently well, & that he had done a most notable act. Therfore my couenant (said he) shalbe with h [...] life and peace. By which wordes was promised vnto him long life & honorable, which he should execute in his priesthood. Of what tribe Elias was. Ther are some which produce his life farther, and say that he was Elias. But that hath no grounde of the holye scriptures. Yea rather some thinke that Elias came of the tribe of Beniamin, and not of the tribe of Leui, wherof Pinhas came.
¶Of Merites.
VVHere as it is said that the Israelites went vp, wept, fasted, & did sacrifice, Against merits we must not think that by those actions they satisfied the anger of god: for we haue no merites, for as muche as we cannot perfectly obey the law of God. [Page] Farther, if there were any merites of ours, they should consist of such woorkes which we ar not of duty bound to do vnto God: otherwise if we owe vnto God whatsoeuer we do, what thing can our merite then be? But both we our selues and al ours, doinges I say, sayinges, thoughtes, and counsels are due vnto god. Wherfore our merites do vtterly perish. Moreouer those workes whereby wee should merite, ought to be of our selues: which cannot be affirmed, for as muche as it is god which worketh in vs both to wil & to perform, & that not as we wil, but according to his good wil. Augustine. Wherfore Augustine was accustomed very wel to say, y t God which crowneth his giftes in vs. And in his .100. Epistle ad Sixtū Presbiterum, Paul (saith he) when he had sayd: The rewarde of synne is death, dyd not straightway adde contrarily: The rewarde of righteousnes is euerlasting lyfe. But Grace sayth he, is eternal life, for that is not rendred to our merites, but is geuen freely. He might in deede haue wrytten after the same manner if he woulde. For the holye Scripture sometimes so speaketh. But for that he was a defender of grace, hee woulde not geue occasion vnto his enemyes to impugne it. Farther, our woorkes, how holye so euer they appeare, are neuerthelesse vnpure and imperfect. Wherefore they are woorthye rather of punishment, then that they should deserue any good. And wythout doubt they should be punished, were not the redempcion and iustification whyche wee haue by Christ our Lorde.
There ought also to be some anallogy or proporcion betwene merites and rewardes, whereof there is none betwene our workes and eternall lyfe. For as Paul saith: The sufferinges of this time, are not woorthy of the glory to come, which shalbe reuealed in vs. This is to be added, that in the holye scriptures is no where found the name of merite. Some in deede are wont to bring the .xvi. chap. of Ecclesiasticus, and there they say it is written: All mercy shal make place vnto euery one, according to the merites of his workes. But they which obiect this thing, let him looke vpon the Greeke text, wherin it is thus written: [...], which is in latine: Deus omni misericordiae faciet locum, & quis (que) iuxta opera sua inueniet. Which in englyshe signifieth: God wil make place vnto al mercy, and euery man shall finde according vnto hys woorkes. But in these woordes there is no mencion made of merite, onely this is wrytten, that whose woorkes are good, they shall be in good case, but yet their woorkes are not sayde to bee merites or causes of rewarde. I wyll not speake howe that booke is not in the Canon: bycause Paule and the Gospels vse the same forme of speaking. But of that whyche is wrytten vnto the Hebrewes, by suche Sacrifices God is well pleased, I haue before spoken: nowe wyth one woorde onely will I briefly touche the thing. This woorde of deseruing is not founde in the Greeke. In Greeke is read [...], by whyche woorde is onely signified, that the good woorkes of the faythfull are gratefull and acceptable vnto God.
Of the woorde reward.But as touching this woorde rewarde, which some, bicause they do not well vnderstand it, do take for merite, we must deuide it two maner of wayes. For that is sometymes called a rewarde, whiche is geuen freelye, but yet is promysed, by adding of some worke, wherby men should be styrred vp to doo well. So eternal life may be called a reward, not y t we deserue the same by our woorkes, but bicause by a certain order appointed of God, it followeth our good workes. But somtimes a reward is that which is due vnto good dedes, Whither eternal lyfe may be called a reward & is rendred vnto them of duty. After this maner eternal life cannot be called the reward of our workes. Wherfore Paul to the Romanes saith: Abraham beleued God, & it was imputed vnto him for righteousnes. But vnto him which woorketh reward, is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. Wherefore eternal lyfe, for as muche as it is not of ryght dewe, cannot be a reward, if the woorde be taken in that signification. But when they thus reason: there is a reward geuen, [Page 273] ergo there is a merite. The argument is not firme, A genere ad species. bicause in affirming we may not discend from the general woorde to the species. Neyther doth he rightly conclude whych sayth: It is a liuing creature, ergo it is a man. This generall word reward hath two species: therfore this argument is not firme, if we saye: It is a reward, Ergo it is plaine that it must be geuen of dewty.
This saying also of Ieremy is to be added: Cursed be euery one that putteth his hope in man, and calleth flesh his strength. But all our thinges, whatsoeuer they be, are not without flesh. Wherfore it is not lawful for vs to put confidence in them. Ierome. And Ierome writing vpon that place hath very well brought in manye thinges, whereby may be vnderstanded that in our workes there is no regard of merite. Yea and the Papists also themselues, which ar the patrones of merites, are sometimes compelled to confesse that our merites are nothing at all. For on the 2. Sonday in the Aduēt, thus they pray: Be pacefied O god with the prayers of our humility, and wher helpe of merites do want, succor vs with the aydes of of thy mercy. The fathers, whē in theyr writings they oftentimes inculcate this word of meriting, do by it signify nothinge els, then to get, to obteine, and to atteine to. And as manye of them as haue written purelye, the same haue detested the consideration of merites, whereof the papistes so much bost. Wherfore the Israelites were not heard thoroughe the merite of their teares or prayers, but bycause by fayth in Christ to come they obteyned forgeuenes of sins, and so by his merite onely they returned into fauor againe with god.
They offred sacrifice. What profite the sacrifices of the law had. Although I haue before largely spoken of the sacrifices in the olde time, yet I thinke it good here also briefly to touch what profite was of them in the old law. When men are vexed with calamityes, they beginne to think vpon theyr sin, they loke vpon the law: wher whē they behold the wrath of god kindled for sinne, they are in hart deiected: in which perturbatiō there remaineth no remedy, but to get them vnto Christ, which is the summe and end of all sacrifices. Him did the fathers, which wer godly, embrase by faith: but in the sacrifices, as often as the sacrifice was slaine, so often the death of Christe was after a sorte set before the eyes of those that stoode by, by whose death the synnes of the world should be taken away. The sacramēts of the olders & ours at al one, but differ in outward Simboles & signes. Wherfore they had after this manner a communion amonge themselues in Christ, which by sundry notes and signes dayly signified to the people in the old time, wherhēce they by fayth receaued vnto their saluacion both his death and the fruite therof as we do. Wherfore Paule sayth trulye vnto the Corrinthians: All did eate of one, and the self same spirituall meate, and all dronke of one, and the selfe same spirituall drinke. And they dronke of the spirituall rocke following them. And that rocke was Christ. Wherefore the elders had theyr misteries and sacraments, whereby they also embrased Christ. And vndoubtedly as touching the thing, they had the same that we haue, the difference was onely in the Simboles.
But Augustine noteth in thē certaine other differences, Augustine. Differences betwene the Sacramentes of the elders and ours. which here to rehearse shal not be vnprofitable. Firste they hadde manye sacramentes, and wee but few: the Simboles of our sacraments are water, bread, and wine: they had oxen calues, shepe, gotes, doues, turtle doues, bread, wine, oyle & such other like. Farther, the condicion of our sacramentes is diuerse from the equality of theirs: for theyrs were more greuous, but oures are by Christe made both easier and also lighter. Moreouer those simboles that were geuen vnto them, were conteined in one country onely, but ours ar common to the whole world. Farther in them Christ was setforth, as he which should come: but to vs, as he which is now alredye come. But as touchinge saluation there is no difference. For the same saluation and the same Christ was offred vnto them, which is settefoorth vnto vs. [Page] This is also to be added, that our Sacraments are more manifest and excellent, for asmuch as they haue more manyfest woordes of Christ and his redemption, which make fayth more ful. And therfore the sprite is now had more aboundātly, then it was in that time, if we speake of the cōmon state of men. For I speake not of persons singularely, neither do I thinke that Abraham had lesse faith and sprite then christian men now haue. But now let vs returne vnto the history.
The hebrewes when they were afflicted, fled vnto God by Christ, who was set before them in their sacrifices, and was there apprehended by fayth. Therehence was all the vtility of their sacrifices, to the offring or receiuinge wherof it was not lawfull to come rashly, otherwise they should haue beene to their hurt, and should haue kindled the wrath of God against them, which thinge Paul hath very well admonished vs of saying: He whiche eateth or drinketh vnworthely, eateth and drinketh vnto himself damnation. What the purifications of the Elders signified. Wherefore in the law there were many purifications, sprinkelings, and washinges, before they came vnto the holy seruices. And these men now repent, and throwe themselues downe vnto the ground wepinge before the Lorde: for they were touched with the bitternes and greuousnes of their sinnes.
When god had heard the prayers of the Israelites, and had promised to deliuer the Beniamites into theyr handes, he ministred also vnto them secrete and sound counsels, namely that they shoulde in a conuenient place lay an embushmēt, and making as though they would flee, draw away their enemies from the cities, that afterwarde they mighte oppresse them, both before and behinde. They had among them contrary counsels. The counsels of the B [...]niamits and of the Israelites are diuerse. The like poletike deuise in the boke of Iosuah. The Beniamites sayd: They flee, let vs follow them and oppresse them as they are fleing. The Israelites contrarily said: Let vs geue place vnto the Beniamites, hat they may follow vs more insolently and securely. For we will stoppe them of their returne into the city. We reade of the like pollicy of warre in the booke of Iosua, when the city of Hais was assalted. It is now writtē that god himself smote them. For it is said, And god made Beniamin to fall before the Israelits, least the victory should seme to be attributed, either vnto the strengthes of the Israelites, or to theyr pollitique deuyse. The whole sūme of those which were slayn, were .25. thousand. The order of this history might seme somewhat trobulesome, which yet if it be apart cōsidered perticulerly, shalbe the better vnderstanded. For at the first conf ict were slaine of the Beniamites 18000. then when they fled into the desert .5000. lastly when they fled to Gibea .2000. all whyche summes added together, doo make the full nomber of .25000.
The city ascended vp to heauen. Here is the figure Hiperbole, whereby is signified either that the smoke of the citye ascended vp into heauen, or that els all the riches thereof which were now on fire and turned into smoke, ascended vp into heauen. The Beniamites being in extreme daunger, loke backe vnto the city, as though there they should haue found succor and ayde. They recule, but they fall into the handes of the Embushments, and are slaine. From thence they get themselues and flee vnto the woods, but in the flight they are miserably killed. A few whych escaped in those ouerthrowes, got them to the rock Rimmon, as in to a high castel and wel fensed, both by nature and situation. And ther a few wer saued, as is afterwarde declared. Whereby we gather that no mighte or power can help vs, when god wil strike. Whatsoeuer can be deuised or inuented of vs, it nothing profiteth agaynst the Lord. In the hebrew tongue a place of fence is called a rocke.
So great and so populous a tribe, as soone as euer god would, perished in a manner wholy. Ther remained only .600. men, whiche got themselues into the castle of Rimmō. It is called a rock, bycause in the holy scritures places of fence are so called, for that they are in a manner situate vpon stony rockes and high [Page 274] places. But why the .600. men were left on lyue, there is shewed a cause, Why the .600. men wer saued namely least any one whole tribe should want in Israell. God would not for theyr deserts, but for his names sake haue a certayn few remaining, that the pub. wealth of the Israelites should be preserued. And those same he left not whole, but in a manner mained: for they had no wiues, neyther were there anye wemen lefte of that whole tribe, for them to marry: therfore they wer compelled to desire wiues of y e other tribes. Wherfore the tribe of Beniamin, The tribe of Beniamin that remained, consisted also of other tribes. Whither it was lawful for the Israelites to kill the children. although otherwise it remained but smal, yet howsoeuer it was, halfe the part therof cōsisted of other tribes. For the Israelites had slayne al their wyues and children and cattayle. This seuerity of the Israelites was great, or rather it may seme to be cruelty, and also against the law of God, wherin it was forbidden, that the childrē should be slaine for the sinnes of the parents. But it is very likely (which thing the Hebrewe interpreters also affirme) that the Israelites when they fasted and prayed before the lord, vowed Cherim, that is the vow of a curse, wherby it was not lawefull to reserue any thing, which thing they vsed to do in battaile of peril, and in great daunger. Yea and in Deut. the .13. chapter: God commaunded, that if any citye of the Israelites fell vnto idolatry, all the tribes shoulde go vp and ioyne theyr powers together and conquer it, so that they shoulde with sword and fire destroye all thinges that they found in it. But the Beniamites defended a manifest wicked act, which differred not much from idolatry, and it is possible that the city of Gibeah was idolatrous. Wherfore nothing ought to be reserued in it. In the boke of Iosuah it is written, that when Acham had hidden for himself a certayn small thing of the curse of Iericho, the whole host was afflicted for that cause, which deceate being afterward found out, not onely he himselfe was killed, but also hys sonnes and daughters, with his oxen, his asses, his shepe, and his tente also and all his stuffe. Which thing yet we must not thinke that it was done by the prescript of the law, but by a certaine singulare counsell of God. Ciuill warres more cruel thē outward wars But whither Israell exceded measure in this auengement or no, wee shal afterward see. We may learne also by this history, what sharpenesse there is in ciulll wars: for they haue farre more cruell endes, then outwarde warres.
¶Of fasting.
NOw that we are come to the end of the chapter: For asmuche as it is sayde that the Israelites fasted and afflicted themselues before the Lord, I haue occasion geuen me, somewhat to speake of fasting. And to beginne from the Etimoligy of the word, this Hebrew woorde Tsum signifieth to afflict. Aben Ezra Wherefore Aben Ezra sayth, that whersoeuer in the holy scripture is founde affliction of the soule, there is vnderstand fasting. There is a nother word namely Tsama verye ny vnto this word, and it signifieth to thirst: for they which fast much, ar wont to thyrst, bicause the humors of the body ar with hunger and fasting dried vp. The Grecians cal it [...], of this particle primatiue [...], & [...], which is to be strong and firme, bicause by fasting the strength of the body is diminished. But bicause this particle [...] is rather extensiue, it semeth to signify very firm and very strong, bycause a man that is fasting, is verye firme and constante, so that he had rather suffer grief, then to go from his purpose. Also the Grecians cal fasting by an other word [...], bicause they which faste, doo beriue themselues of foode. For [...] signifieth both corne and meate.
But before I define what fasting is, I think it good first to vse a distinction. A distinction of fastes. Natural fast For forasmuche as there are sundry kindes of fastings, they serue not all to our purpose. For there is a certaine fast that is naturall, whyche pertayneth eyther to the recouering or to the defending of the health of the body. Wherfore Hipocrates [Page] sayth, that they which are of a full and perfect age, or also are old, can verye well abide to fast: in which place old men are to be vnderstande as touching the first part and beginning of age. For they which are very old can no better abide fasting, Ciuill fast. then young men or childrē. There is an other fast which is ciuil, & is thē taken in hand, whē men are so bent to their things, that by no meanes they will intermitte the affaires which they haue begonne. So Saule when he pursued the Philistians, and had the victorye nowe in his handes, commaunded that no man should taste of any meat before euening. So also certain Hebrewes vowed that they would neither eate any thinge or drinke, A fast familiar vnto christiās. before they had killed Saul, as it is written in the actes of the Apostles. This manner also of fasting pertaineth not to this present matter. There is an other kinde of fasting, which ought to be familiar vnto all Christans, namely to take meate soberly and temperatly: which thing they shal do, if they neither eate to often in one day, nor whē they do eate, doo gorge themselues with to muche meate, or seeke for delicates and fine banquetes.
The commodities of christiā sobriety.This manner of liuing is very muche profitable to diminishe lustes, neyther suffreth it the minde to bee troubled with affections. It maketh the minde more chearfull and redy both to prayers, and also to the actions of the life. Wherfore Christ sayd: let not your hartes be oppressed with surfeting or dronkēnes. Peter also hath writtē: Be ye sober, for your enemy y e deuil goeth about like a roaring lion, seking whom he may deuour. Paul also wrote of himselfe: I chasten my body, and bring it into bondage, least I preaching to other, should be made a reprobate. Farther there is an other commodity of this fast, that thereby expenses are spared, not to lay them vp couetously, but that that which is ouerplus vnto vs, we may geue vnto the poore.
There is an other fast which is aboue mans strength, and is sometimes geuē of god meruelously vnto some of the saints, Miraculous faste. to commend theyr doctrin. Moses in the mountayn fasted .40. dayes, for God would by a notable example shew, that that law which he setforth, came from himself, and was not inuented of men. Nether went Moses therfore vnto the mountayne to fast, but to receiue the lawe of GOD, and to talk with him. Elias also receued bread and water of the Aungel, and in the strength of that meate walked .40. daies, euen vnto the mount of god Horeb, that hee by this miracle shoulde bee declared to bee the true reuenger of the lawe. By this kynde of fastynge our Sauioure commended the preachynge of the Gospell, that it should not seeme to bee a thynge vulgare, but shoulde be proued a thyng begonne by God. But these wer miracles, neyther pertayne they anye thinge vnto vs, but onelye that wee shoulde haue them in admiracion, and by suche examples bee stirred vppe with reuerence to receaue the word of God.
A fast cōpelled.There is also an other fast, which lieth not in our power. As when we beinge destitute of meate, haue not wherof to eat. Here is nede of pacience, and we must pray vnto god, that he would strengthen and encourage vs. So the saints when they wandred about, and preached the Gospel, wer compelled somtimes to hunger. And the disciples when they followed the Lorde, were driuen by hunger to plucke the eares of corne, and to rubbe oute the corne. Elias also desired meate of the widow, and wayted at the brooke for such meate as the Rauen should bringe him. This kind of fasting men do not take vpon them of their own free wil, but it is layd vpon them by God.
Religious fast.But omitting all those, as which nothing pertayne vnto our disputation, let [Page 275] vs come to our fast which we may cal religious. And this fast is an abstinēce, Definition. not onely from meate and drinke, but also from all other thynges whiche may delite and noorishe the body, contrary to the accustomed manner, as much as strength will suffer, and it is done of a repentant mynd and of a true fayth, by prayers to desire the clemency of God, for miseryes, eyther already oppressing vs, or very nighe at hand. The forme of this definition is abstinence, An expositiō of the causes of true fasting. and that aboue the accustomed manner, whiche yet excedeth not strengthes of the body. The matter is not onely meate and drinke, but also all thynges whiche may reioyse the body. The efficient cause is fayth and repentance for sinnes committed agaynst God. The end is, by prayers to craue the mercy of God, and to turne away or to diminishe calamityes. Therfore they whiche fast, Exercises of those that faste truely. ought to geue themselues to prayers, almes, visitynges of the sicke, and to the holy supper.
When we feruently pray vnto the Lord, and do from the heart truly repent vs of the sinnes which we haue cōmitted, & for their causes are earnestly afflicted, we can not easely thinke vpon meate, drinke, & fine delicates. For whō such a griefe grieuously vrgeth, it is more pleasant to thē to absteyne, thē is any other delectation. So Dauid in his .35. Psalme sayth of his enemyes: When they were sicke, I laughed not, but put on sacke clothe, and afflicted my soule with fasting, and earnestly prayed for them. They whiche deiect and humble themselues (bycause they in a manner dispaire of their things) are wont to contemne and loth meate and drinke, and other delightes and pleasures. Hereby we may vnderstād, Why fastyngs please God. Ierome. how it commeth to passe, that our fastes doo please God, not assuredly that the emptines of the belly pleaseth God. So Ierome derideth certayne, which fasting to hardly, were made to all purposes all their lyfe long vnprofitable. This pleaseth God, that we deiect the mynde, that we returne vnto him with prayers, and casting away other pleasures, do put all our delectation in him onely.
But the fastes wherof we now intreate, Fastes publike and priuate. are sometymes publique and sometymes priuate. Priuate fastes we take in hand, when we are afflicted with proper and domesticall miseries: for there is none whiche is not vexed sometymes either in himselfe, or in his famely. Or if it happē that peraduenture he be not greued with any calamity of his owne or any of hys: We must faste sometymes for other mennes sakes. yet sometymes he must mourne for other. For if we be the members of one & the self same body, we must thinke y t the discōmodityes of our brethrē pertayn vnto vs our selues. So Dauid prayed for them which afterward became his enemies, & which reioysed in his euils. So Iobs frindes, whē they saw hym vexed w t most grieuous plagues, lay seuē dayes full, in dust and ashes, before they spake any thyng vnto him: so much wer those men moued with his misery. Wherfore before they commoned with hym, they would by fasting and prayers desire God to asswage his so great misery. So Dauid when Abner was slayne, did not onely mourne at his buriall, but also sware that he would y t day taste of no meate before the sunne were set. The same thing did he when he was reproued of Nathan the Prophete, and when he had receaued tydinges of the death of the childe. Vndoubtedlye all the whole tyme that he was sicke, he neuer toke meate. Nehemias in the .1. chap. whē he heard of the afflictions of the Hebrewes whiche remayned in Ierusalem, afflicted himselfe with fasting, and prayed vnto the Lord. Daniel also when he had red those things which Ieremy wrote of y e captiuity of .70. yeares, cōfessed both his owne sinnes, and the sinnes of the people, wept also and fasted. Wherfore priuate fasting ought to be taken in hand, not onely for our selues, but also for others.
But publique fasting is two maner of wayes commaunded: How publique fastes are denounced. Either of God himself by the law, or of y e Magistrate, or of the Bishop, or els of a Prophet. And this is to sanctify a fast, which sometymes is red in the holy scriptures. Of thys kind there are many examples, What it is to sanctify a fast. & especially that fast which the Israelites in this place imposed vpon themselues. In the .1. booke of Samuel, when the Philistines [Page] grieuously afflicted the Iewes, the whole people at the exhortation of Samuel assembled in Mizpa, wept, fasted, and threw away their Idoles. Dauid also with all his, fasted, when he heard of the ouerthrowe of the people and death of Saul. The men also of Iabes Gilead toke the carkayses of Saul and Ionathas, and wept, and also fasted. That also was a publique fast whiche Iosaphat commaunded in the .2. boke of Paralip. the .20. chap. Esther the queene beyng in extreme daunger, commaunded by Mardocheus a publique fast to be denounced. The Israelites in their captiuity (as it is written in the .7. chap. of Zachary) had a fast both in the .5 moneth, & the .7. moneth, bycause in the .5. moneth the spoyling of the City & desolation of the tēple happened, and in the .7. moneth Godolias was slayne: wherby so many miseryes afterward ensewed. That was also a publique fast whiche Iezabel proclaymed, a woman otherwise wicked and an Hipocrite. Her acte declareth that it was the manner, that when any great wicked crime was committed, the whole Churche should fast, as it were desiryng helpe agaynst the common punishement. This fast sometymes also the Prophetes required. As Iohel when he sayd: Sanctifie ye a fast. Esdras also in his, 8. chap. proclaimed a fast. Wherfore fastes were by certayne godly considerations publikely denounced.
Why an yearely fast was instituted among the Hebrues.God himself also commaunded a publique fast. For he commaunded that euery yeare the feast Chephurim, that is the feast of expiations, should be celebrated the .10. day of September with a publique fast. For the people committed many sinnes thorough out the whole yeare, neither did they diligently obserue the ceremonyes. Wherfore once in a yeare the tabernacle was purified, and a publique fast was obserued. These thinges in the old Testament, signified as it wer by a certaine shadow that the sinnes of mē should be by Christ abolished, of whō when we take hold by a true and lyuely faith, The day of fast was a festiuall day. we are losed from sinnes, and therof followeth the mortification of sinnes and carnall delightes & pleasures. Neither is this to be passed ouer, that that one daye of fast was a festiuall day. For it was not lawful in the publique fast, either to worke, or for a man to geue hym selfe to his own busines, not that on feastiual dayes we ought vtterly to be idle, but that in those dayes we should do good deedes, whereby we may rest in God, and we are commaunded onely to absteyne from our owne woorkes. But to beleue, to pray, to acknowledge sinnes, to bewaile them with an earnest repētāce, are the woorkes of God, and therfore are not forbidden on festiuall dayes, but rather commaunded.
The Ethnikes acknowledged a Religious fast.These thynges haue not onely the Hebrues learned out of the lawes of God, but also the Ethnikes by the instincte of nature. For when Ionas preached vnto the Niniuites that their City should within .40. dayes be ouerthrowen, they dispayred not of the mercy of God, but got themselues to repentaunce, and euery one of them, euen from the kyng vnto the lowest Citezin, with their beastes also and cattell, fasted. And when they vehemētly and with a feruent zeale cried vnto the Lorde, Augustine. Porphyrius. they were heard. Augustine de ciuitate dei, writeth that Porphyrius taught, that abstinence from flesh and grosse meates, doth purify the myndes of men, wherby they are made the more prompt to thinges deuine, and to familiarity with good spirites. Plutarche. Plutarche also in his litle booke de Iside & Osiride sayth, that the Priestes of Heliopolis vtterly absteyned from all meates, whiche might noorishe and augment the wantones of the fleshe, and that they neuer brought wyne into the temple of their God. For they counted it a vilany to drinke wyne in the day tyme in the sight of their God: other men sayd he, vsed wyne, but not much, and they had many purifications without wyne. The same Plutarche de cohibenda Iracundia sheweth, Holy [...] that among the Athenienses wer certayne holy sacrifices, which were done onely with water without wyne. And this is notable, which is written in the same booke, Empedocles. Titus Liuius. that Empedocles was wont to say, that a mā ought most of all to fast from malice. Titus Liuius maketh mention, that when at Rome there happened many portentuous thyngs, which seemed to foreshewe [Page 276] some great euill, the decemuiri were sent to looke into the bookes of the Sibilles, and that there was aunswere made, that they should institute a publique fast in the honor of Ceres, whiche fast should also be repeated agayne euery .5. yeare. And that by that meanes the anger of the gods should be pacified. Wherfore the Ethnikes beyng smiten with the feare of the euils, whiche hoonge ouer their heades, fled vnto the oracles, fasted, and prayed the gods to turne away their anger. But Christians, not onely seyng so many & so great euils, but also hearyng them told from all parts of the world: yet turne they not vnto GOD by prayer, neither are they any thyng moued in mynde.
But peraduenture some man will say, that Fastes, Fastes are commended in the new Testamēt bycause they are partly Iewishe, and partly Ethnike, seeme to be farre from our Religion. But that it is not so, may easely be proued by the new Testament. In the Actes of the Apostles the .13. chap. the Church, beyng admonished by an oracle that Paul and Barnabas should be chosen to visite the Cityes and Townes where the Gospell had ben preached, first decreed a fast: then they layd their handes vpon them. And in the .14. chap. when they after they had accomplished their matters thorough Iconium, Listria, and Antioche, returned home, they instituted a fast, and created ministers and Priestes in euery City. Augustine in his Epistle to Cassulanus sayth: Augustine. When Peter should at Rome haue talke with Simon the sorcerer vpon the Son day, the Churche of Rome vpon the Sabaoth day denounced a faste, whiche custome was alwayes afterward retayned. Ierome. Ierome in his prologue vpon Mathew sayth, that Iohn beyng desired of the Churches to write the Gospell agaynst Ebion and Cerinthus, who denyed the deuine nature of Christ, aunswered that he woulde so doo, if the whole Churche woulde before indicte a publique faste. Whiche thyng Eusebius also in his Ecclesiasticall Hystory testifieth. Eusebius. Paul also in the .1. to the Corinthians the .7. chapter, admonisheth those that are ioyned together in matrimony, not to separate themselues a sonder, but for a tyme, to geue themselues to fastyng and prayers. In whiche place I thynke he vnderstādeth publique prayers, and also a publique fast. For fellowshyp with the wife nothyng letteth, but that they may be vsed priuately, but whether he vnderstood publique fastes or priuate, it skilleth not much.
Farther, Christ being asked of his Apostles, why they could not heale y e dōme and cast out the deuil. He answered: Bycause of your incredulity. And he added: This kynd of deuils is cast out onely by fasting and prayer. That place is somewhat darke, and therfore it shall not be vnprofitable briefly to expounde it. Is it to be thought, that by the merite of fastyng and prayers (as they vse to speake) deuils are cast out by vertue of the worke wrought? Not so. What thē signified the woordes of Christ? First he said: Bycause of your incredulity: for if ye had fayth, euen so muche as a grayne of mustard, and should say vnto this mountayne: Take vp thy self, & cast thy self into the sea, it should obey you. And together with a fayth, is necessary a vehement and feruent prayer, and also fastyng, bycause a fixed and earnest prayer which draweth the mind, not onely frō meate and drinke, but also from all other humane cogitacions and pleasures. Wherefore Christ by the effectes describeth the cause, namely, fayth by prayers and fasting, and he speaketh of those deuils, to whom god gaue more liberty, as though he should haue sayd: ye must not lyue easely or idely, if ye will cast out this kynd of deuils. Ye must haue a sure and strong fayth whiche thyng he expressed by the effectes, by prayers I say and fastes.
By these reasons and testimonyes may fastes also be commended in the new Testament. But in them are faultes to be taken heede of, What vices in fasting ar to be taken heede of. whiche very often are many, and those greuous. First bycause in the Papacy are obserued fastes vpon certayne appoynted dayes, without consideration of persons or occasions, Faste brought in without measure. as an yearely ceremony, whiche at this day is vtterly of no strength, & is as if it were Iewishe. Moreouer euery man hath added & heaped vp of his owne, whatsoeuer [Page] pleased him, and not that, which calamity of tymes or feruent prayers required. For one man brought in Septuagesima, an other Sexagesima, an other Quinquagesima, another Quadragesima which is Lent, an other Rogatiō dayes, an other Imber dayes, an other y e euēs of y e Apostles, an other Friday, an other Saterday, & an other brought in fastyng on y e Wēsday. But of so many fastes, what vtility hath there at the length followed? Many contentions and questions concernyng fastyngs. A great many questions & contentions. For a man will scarse beleue, howe many questions the elders haue had concernyng fast. Augustine ad Cassulanum writeth that therfore we must fast on the Wensday, bycause Christ was sold that day: and on the Friday, bycause on that day he was crucified. But of the Sabaoth day he much doubted. For they of Millane & of the East parte, affirmed that on y e day we should not fast, bycause Christ that day was at reast in the sepulchre: contraryly the Romanes and Affricans, and certayne other, bycause Christ was deiected euen vnto y e ignominy of the sepulchre: therfore contended that the Sabaoth should be fasted.
Monica the mother of Augustine.The mother of Augustine, when she came out of Affrike to Millane, and sawe that the men there fasted not on the Sabaoth day, began to meruayle at the vnaccustomed manner. Wherfore Augustine which was not yet baptised, came to Ambrose, & asked in his mothers behalfe what was best to be done? Do sayth Ambrose that which I do. An aunswere of Ambrose. By which words Augustine thought y t he should not fast, bycause Ambrose fasted not. But what he ment, he himselfe more manifestly expressed. I (sayth he) when I come to Rome do fast, bycause the Sabaoth day is there fasted: but when I returne to Millane, bicause here it is not fasted, I fast not. De consecratione dist. 3. chap. De esu carnium, it is decreed that Friday and Wensday should be fasted, y e Sabaoth day is left free. And in the same distinct. y e chap. Sabbato vero, Innocentius. Innocētius hath added: That y e Sabaoth also must be fasted. But he bringeth a farre other cause, then that which before we spake of. For for bycause (saith he) the Apostles both vpon the Friday, and also vpon the Sabaoth day were in great mourning and sorow, therfore we must fast. In the same dist. chap. Ieiunium: Melchiades decreed, that we must not fast on the Sonday, nor on the Thursday: and he geueth a reason, bycause the fastes of Christians ought to be on contrary dayes, to the fastes both of heretikes and of Ethnikes.
Epiphanius. Epiphanius bringeth a reason why the Wensday is to be fasted, namely bycause Christ was that day taken vp to heauen: for it is written, that when the bridgrome is taken from thē, then they shall fast, and this he affirmeth to be the tradition of y e Apostles, when as yet at this day we beleue y t the Ascension happened on the Thursday: We must geue [...]le credite to traditions. wherfore let the Papistes take heede, howe muche credite they will haue to be geuen vnto their traditions. For there are many of them, whiche euen they themselues can not deny, but that they are ridiculous and vayne. I know in deede there are traditions founde whiche are necessaryly gathered out of the holy scriptures, and for that cause they ought not to be abrogated. But other traditions whiche are indifferent, are not to be augmented in number, least the Churche should be oppressed, neither to be thought so necessary, that they can not be abolished. And we must beware that in them be not put the worshipping of GOD. But as for those whiche are agaynst the woorde of god, are by no meanes to be admitted. In the dist. 76. chapter .1. are added Imber dayes, or the Fastes foure tymes in the yeare. Which why they are so diuided, scarsely can any man perceaue. They cite Ierome vpon Zachary, who maketh mention of the fourth moneth, fift, seuenth, and tenth. And they seeme to be moued with a wicked zeale to distribute these fastes into foure partes of the yeare. And those fastes whiche the Iewes receaued euery yeare for y e calamityes which they had suffred, Why y e fast of Imber dayes were inuented the same our men haue made yearely. But other haue inuented an other cause, namely bycause in those foure tymes of the yeare: Byshops are wont to promote clarkes vnto the ministery and orders. Wherfore they say that the people ought then most of all to faste and praye, that GOD would graunt [Page 277] them good Pastors.
Fasting and prayers should be had in the ordering of Ministers. But I would demaund of the Byshops why they institute Ministers onely at those .iiii. tymes of y e yere. Vndoubtedly, they cā render no certayn & iust reason therof. Augustine. Aerius an heretike. Augustine in his boke de Haeresibus, sayth y e Aerius contemned oblatiōs for the dead, & also such fast as were appointed, bycause Christiās were not vnder y e law but vnder grace: but he would y e euery mā should fast at his owne pleasure whē he himselfe would. In dede I allow not Aerius in y t he was an Arriā, but as touchīg sacrifices & oblations for y e dead, he iudged rightly & godly. And also concerning appointed fastes, I see no cause why he ought to be reproued, vnles peraduēture he thought this, y t fastes could not be denoūced of the Magistrate & of y e Church, as y e difficulty of times required. The reason also which he vseth, y e Christiās are not vnder y e law, but vnder grace, is weake: for we are not so deliuered frō the law, y t we are absolued frō all order. Iouinian an heretike. Augustine also writeth y t Iouiniā contemned abstinences & fastes as things vaine, & vnprofitable: where in if he spake of bare fastes onely, & such as wer appointed at certayne dayes & certayne tymes of y e yeare, he iudged not ill. For vnles they be adioyned with faith & repentāce, & also with vehement prayers, they nothing at all profite. In Esay y e .58. chap. y e people cōplayned: We haue fasted, & thou hast not looked vpon vs: which wordes shew, that fastes with out circumstances requisite, are not acceptable vnto God: but if they be ioyned with their additions, they are not vnprofitable.
By y e decrees of Liberius, who liued in y e tyme of Cōstātius, may be knowē, Liberius. how y t whē y e ayre was vntēperate, or y t there was any famine, or pestilēce, or warre, then they assēbled together to denoūce a fast, wherby to mitigate y e anger of god. Augustine. Augustine whē he saw his city besieged of y e Vandales, gaue himself vnto fastyng & prayers, & in that siege died, as Possidonius testifieth. And generally whē we attēpt any great waighty matter, as whē we denoūce war, or creat Magistrats, or ordeine Ministers of y e Church, we haue nede most of al of feruēt prayers, for the feruētnes wherof fasting very much auayleth. Christ when he should begyn his preaching, went into y e wildernes & fasted. A widow when her husband is dead, is left in a perillous state. Therfore prayers & fastes are very conuenient for her. Anna the daughter of Phanuel led her life in y e temple, where she gaue herself to prayer & fasting. Paul to Tim. sayth: A widowe which is truly a widowe, putteth her cōfidence in the Lord, & day & night applieth herselfe to prayers & fastes. Cornelius, when he was not yet sufficiently instructed of Christe, and was heauy and pensiue in mynde, in the ninth houre was fastyng, and in prayers, to whom the Aungell (as it is written in the Actes of the Apostles) appeared.
But it may be demāded, when fastes are denoūced of princes & of the Church, Whether fastes denounced ought to be obeyed. whether men are bound to obey them or no? Vndoubtedly they are bound by the law of fayth, & by obediēce. For when fastes are set forth y t are agreable vnto the word of God, how can he which beleueth in god detract thē? Assuredly he cā not. Howbeit this is to be vnderstād of those which are of y e state & conditiō y t they be able to fast. For if a mā be hindred either by age, or disease, or labours, in y e case this ought to be of force which y e scriptures say: I wil haue mercy & not sacrifice. But they which are not hindred, ought to obey. Consilium Gā grense. In y e counsell of Gāgrensis chap. 30. it is ordeyned, y t if a mā obey not y e fastes which ar cōmāded him of y e Church, howsoeuer he boast of perfectiō, without bodely necessity, & proudly contemneth the decrees of the Church, let him be accursed. The Canones of the Apostles In the Canones of y e Apostles (although they be Apocripha & conteyne certayne strāge things, neither is it sufficiently agreed vpō the nōber of them) in y e Canon I say .68. it is cōmanded, y t the Clergy, which fast not, hauing no bodely necessity, shuld be deposed. Let infātes in no case be cōpelled & driuē to fast: for y t should hurt their health. Yet Ioel sayth: Sanctify a fast, gather together old men & sucking children. And the Niniuites at the preaching of Ionas, cōpelled beasts & infātes to fast. These wer extraordinary [Page] thinges, neither are they for that end set forth, that we should imitate them.
Augustine.As for priuate fastes most men will haue them to be free. Wherfore Augustine ad Cassulanum: We know (sayth he) that we must fast when we are commaunded, but on what dayes we should fast, and what dayes we should not, we know not, bycause that is no where prescribed in the newe Testament, therfore fastes are to be left free: And in his 2. booke de Sermone domini in monte (expoundyng these woordes: Howe fastes maye be called free or not fre. Iudge not and ye shall not be iudged) he writeth, that men may two maner of wayes iudge rashly. Either if they drawe that into the euill parte whiche mought haue bene done ryghtly: or if when it is manifest that a facte is playnely euill, they thinke that he which hath done it, can not repent. And of the first kynd he bringeth an exāple, as if a mā, bycause he is sicke in the stomake, or is troubled with any other infirmity of y e body, would not fast. An other whiche knoweth not this, will suspect him to be a gloton, & to much delicate. For here that which is free, & which may well be done, is drawen into y e worse part. This in deede is Augustines opinion, which yet we ought prudently & soundly to vnderstand. For if a priuate man, when he is in misery or daunger, doth see that fasting & prayers may helpe him, he except he fast doth vndoubtedly sinne. But for as much as fasting after this sort & maner now declared may profit, we must vndoubtedly fast. It is free in deede, bycause by y e outward law he can not be condē ned which fasteth not. But when our fast may aduance the glory of god, it is no more fre, for asmuch as we ar cōmanded to loue God withall our hart, w t all our soule, & w tal our strength. For there are many things which of their own nature are free & indifferent. But when it commeth to choise, & we see they may eyther illustrate or obscure the glory of God, then are they not free nor indifferent, bycause all our strengthes and facultyes are to be applyed vnto the glory of God.
In true fastīg we must faste the whole day.Farther there is an abuse of fastes as touching the space of tyme: for as much as the Papistes, if they some litle while defer their dinner, and then whatsoeuer they eate, so that they eate no fleshe, they thinke it sufficient. But the elders remayned fasting al the whole day euen to euening, al which time they were occupied in the worde of God, in prayers, and holy occupations. In Leuit. the .23. God sayth, The Iewes fasted from euenyng to euenyng. when ye fast, rest from all worke, and afflicte your soules: for it is a Sabaoth. And no man doubteth but that the Sabaoth endureth from euening to euening. So Saul when he had put the Philistines to flight, proclaymed a fast vntill night. And Dauid in the death of Abner sware y t he would taste of no meate till night. Tertulian. Augustine. Tertullian cōtra Psychicos sayth, y t the Churche produced their fastes euen to euenyng. Augustine de moribus Ecclesiae contra Manicheos: Let accustoned fastes saith he, of the Church be continued euen vntil night: for al the whole day were celebrated holy assemblyes, were also had publique prayers, but at euenyng they were dismissed, In the Lent. & did eate meate. But it is a sporte, to see how y e Papistes illude this aūcient custome: they say their euen songes before noone, & then they go to dyner, at night they institute a drinking, & so boast y t they fast very wel.
Thomas Aquinas, Consilium Calcedonense. Whiche was the ix. houre. Thomas in secunda secundae sayth, that in his time fastes were produced euen vnto the ninth houre. And he bringeth the counsell of Chalcedonia, where it is decreed y t he which eateth before the ninth houre, should not be counted to haue fasted. Here by the way we must declare which was the ninth houre. The vi. houre was at none, in which tyme we rede y e Christ our sauiour was crucified. Wherfore the ninth houre must needes be the third houre from noone. The elders dyd so deuide the tyme, The distribution of the houres among the elders. that alwayes from the Sunne set to the Sunne rysing they counted 12. houres, and agayne as many from the rysing of the Sunne to the goynge downe thereof. Agayne they deuided eyther tyme into foure spaces, and those they called watches: And euery one of those spaces contayned three houres. Wherefore the thirde houre from the rysing of the Sunne is with vs eyther the eyght or nynth houre, as the tyme of the yeare requireth: For these houres are vnequall. The sixte houre is noone, and the nynth [Page 277] is the thirde at after noone, and the .xii. at the sunne set. But Thomas obiecteth vnto hymselfe, that whiche we say, namely, that the elders fasted the whole day. It is ridiculous to heare what he aunswereth. Bycause we (sayth he) are in the state of the day, and the elders were in the state of the nyght: therefore we must finishe our fastes in the day tyme, when as they ended them in the night tyme. And he bryngeth this saying of Paul: The nyght is past, & the day hath drawen nyghe. Whiche sentence how much it serueth to this present thyng, all menne see and vnderstande.
An other abuse is, the choyse of meates, Of the choyse of meates. wherein nowe in a manner consisteth the whole religion of fastes. The elders vsed it not: for when they had fasted vntill euen, at supper they dyd indifferently eate whatsoeuer was set before them. But now our mē do more seuerely absteyne from flesh, egges, and milke, then they in the olde tyme absteyned from vncleane beastes. Paul reproueth this superstition, and calleth it a doctrine of deuils. But they say, that Paul reproueth those onely, whiche auoyded some meates, as euill creatures, and beleued that those euill creatures came from an euill God: but we (say they) do teache no such thyng: we onely forbid mē some kind of meate for one day, or a few dayes, which afterward we set at liberty. Montanus an heretike. Tertulian. What choise of meate is to bee followed. As though Montanus could not after this manner haue excused himself, against whom these places are cited of the fathers. Tertullian accuseth Marcio as an heretike, bicause he did put some holines in fish. Wherfore there is no choise of meate to be suffred, but so much as shall seeme to serue to temperance, whiche thing if the Papistes would so diligently haue takē heede of, they should rather haue absteyned frō wine, then frō flesh. For Salomō saith, wine is a thing of excesse. And Paul: Absteyne (saith he) from wine, wherin is excesse. They should also haue absteyned from fishe, & especially the delicater kinde of fishes. For there are of them whiche do no lesse delight the taste, Fishes coūted amōg delicates and no lesse stirre vp to lustes, then doth fleshe. And vndoubtedly among the elders, as well the Grecians as the Romanes, fishes were counted among the chiefest delicates.
Moreouer Socrates in his Ecclesiastical History teacheth, Socrates the Hystoriagrapher. Sōdry kindes of fastes. that the elders fasted far otherwise: for in the Lent some fasted two dayes, some foure dayes, some .x. some xv. some xx. & other some the whole xl. dayes. And when they fasted, some absteyned frō all kynd of flesh & fishe, and did eate onely all maner of pulses. Other absteyned frō flesh of foure footed, & lyued onely on foules & fishes. For al thīgs were at that tyme left free in the Churche. For when they had fasted vntill euen, at supper they dyd eate moderately whatsoeuer came to hande: althoughe afterward the thing began by litle & litle to decline to superstitiō. Ierome. Ierome to Nepotianus sayth, that there were in his tyme whiche absteyned not onely from all kynd of meate, but also from bread. They vsed certayne thinne broths, made with spices, neither did they drinke them out of a cuppe, but supped them out of a shell. Augustine de moribus Ecclesiae & Manichaeorum, Augustine. A cōparisō betwene a Christian and a Manichite. bringeth in a Manichite an elect (for so theyr called they Ministers) who in dede did ease no flesh, but in the meantyme vsed most delicate & fine meates, and most sweate sawses: wyne also they might not touche, but drinkes which wer made of fruites, which much resēbled wine, & farre passed it in pleasātnes & tast, of these I say they dranke aboundantly. On the other part he setteth a true Christian man, who remayned fastyng vntill euenyng and then had to supper a messe of herbes potage sodde with a pece of larde, and a smal portion of salte flesh, and hardened in the smoke, and dranke thre or iiii. draughtes of wyne: Augustine demaūdeth, whether of these semeth to haue fasted best & more truly: and he gaue iudgement on the Catholikes syde.
The Mōtanistes so delighted in this choise of meates y e they inuēted for thēselues [...] which wer meates to dry vp nature, & such other like. [...] of the Montanistes. Tertullian. Ierome. For (as Tertulliā affirmeth) they did eate only bred, salt, & al maner of pulse, & their drīke was water. This kind of fast they vsed ii. wekes before Easter. Ierome also addeth y t they [Page] wer wont to fast three Lentes, & for that cause that they fasted so seuerely, they were called [...] that is Pure. Eusebius. Mōtanus the first that wrote lawes of fastīg Eusebius in his .5. booke and .18. chap. writeth that one Appollonius reproued Montanus, bycause he was the first that wrote lawes of fastyng, as though the Churche before hym was free. He by lawes and prescriptes prescribed what dayes men should fast, and what meates they should absteyne from. Suche an author haue the Papistes of their prescribed fastes and choyse of meates. Agaynste the choyse of meates. This superstition agreeth not with the woorde of God. Christ sayth: That whiche entreth into the mouth, defileth not the man. And whatsoeuer is set before you, that eate, demaūdyng nothyng. And to Titus: All things are cleane, vnto the cleane, but vnto the vncleane, nothyng is cleane. To the Colossians: Let no man iudge you in meate and drinke. To the Romanes: The kingdome of God is not meate and drinke. To the Corinthians also, are many thynges written to confirme this sentence, where he entreateth of meates dedicated vnto Idoles. So the Scriptures make mencion of no choyse of meates for Religiōs sake: yet I deny not but that meates are to be chosen, either for the auoyding of excesse or sicknes, or elles for the kepyng vnder of the wantones of the flesh. A certain choise of meates is to be admitted. Of the institution of Lent. But that Christians should absteyne from fleshe, from egges, and from milke for religions sake, is no where prescribed in the Scriptures.
There is an other abuse bycause they impose such fastes which the strengthes of men are not able and abyde. For they will haue the people fast .40. dayes. Which thyng, if it should be required accordyng to the prescript rule of GOD, and of the olde Churche, namely that the fast should be continued vntill euen, no man in a manner were able to performe that. And that institution some referre vnto Thelesphorus the Pope, other some to a tyme a litle before hym. And vndoubtedly therein is nothyng elles, then a certayne mere wicked zeale and noughty imitation of Christ. For he fasted .40. dayes: therfore superstitious then thought it good that Christians should fast so many dayes euery yeare, when as yet Christ fasted after this maner, Christe required not of hys Apostles the fast of Lent. but once in his lyfe tyme: neither required he at any time any such acte of his Apostles. But these men decree it to be sinne, and that a grieuous sinne, whē such a fast is violated. They ought to haue regarded that Christ all y e tyme did eate nothyng, & in that he could so long endure, y e same to haue pretayned to a miracle, and to the power of God: The holy scriptures no where commaunde, Chrisostome. that in that thyng we should imitate Christe. Chrisostome in hys .47. Homely vpon Mathewe: The Lorde (sayth he) hath not commaunded thee to faste fourty dayes, althoughe he mought haue commaunded it. What then commaunded he? Learne (sayth he) of me, for I am meeke and humble in heart. But the manner of these men is peruerse. For they will imitate Christe in that which they ar not commaunded: but that which they are cōmaunded, they will not followe. Our sauior when he sent foorth his disciples: Go (sayth he) to all nations, teachyng to obserue those thynges, not whatsoeuer thynges I haue done, but whatsoeuer thynges I haue commaunded you. And it is a wonder to see howe superstitiously and subtelly they haue decreed of these thynges in the Counsell of Martine de Consecratione, Confiliū Martini. in the dist. 3. Non licet, and in the Canones of the Counsell of Laodicenum in the chapter Non oportet, it is commaunded, that in the Lent fastyng on the Thursday should not be broken. And in the Counsell of Agathensis it is commaunded, Consiliū Agathense. that in the Lent fasting on the Saterday also should not be broken: bycause on the Thursday & Saterday many fasted not. Yea & on the Sondayes also in the Lent, wherin they fasted not, they would that there should be retayned a choise of meates. And de Consec. in the dist. 4. A reason out of Gregorye for the obseruynge of Lent. Gregoryes reason confuted. chap. Deni (que) sacerdotes it is ordeyned, that y e Priestes should begyn theyr fast from Quinquagesima. And in the same place .5. distinct: chap. Quadragesima. Gregorius hath inuented a reason wherby to proue that Lent is to be fasted. We must sayth he, geue y e tenth part of the whole yeare vnto God. And the .x. part of y e yeare cōsisteth of .40. dayes. Wherfore we must fast so many dayes. A goodly [Page 279] reason I promise you. Why doth thys Gregory forget that the Leuiticall priesthoode and ceremonies thereof haue now ceased? Wherfore it is not lawfull to bind christian men to tenthes and Iewishe ceremonies. And if for that cause the time of Lent be to be cōsecrated to a fast, bicause it is the tenth part of the whole yeare, why did not the Iewes in y e old time so fast? Why did not the Prophets reproue them, bicause they deceaued god of such a kind of tenth?
But why Lent was inuented, as much as I can gather I wil declare. Why the fathers instituted Lent. The fathers when they saw men liue very carelesly and negligently, thoughte it good y t they should be cōpelled after a sort to renew godlines in some part of the year, & somewhat to bridle the fearcenes of the flesh. And for this thing they thought that the .40. dayes before Easter were most mete, that men should so long haue theyr minds both occupied in repentance, & also in remembring the benefites of God. This inuention, although at the first sight it might seme trimme, The institutiō of Lent is against Christiā liberty. yet it agreeth not with Christian liberty. For we must think vpon the benefites of god and of our greate ingratitude, and other our moste grieuous sinnes, not onelye 40. daies, but also continually. Farther by this meanes they opened a most wide window to liue securely and reacheleslye. For if they once had performed fullye those .40. dayes, they thoughte that all the whole yeare after they mighte geue themselues wholy to al kind of pleasures and lustes. For they referred the time of repentance to these .40. dayes. And although the elders had a lent, Eusebius. Ireneus yet (as Eusebius sayth in his .5. booke and .24. chapter) it was left free vnto all men. For Ireneus after this manner entreated with Victor bishop of Rome, whē he would haue excommunicated the East church, because in the obseruinge of Easter it agreed not with the church of Rome. What (sayd he) can we not liue at concord, although they vse theyr owne rites as we vse ours? For some fast in the Lente two dayes, some .4. dayes, some ten dayes, some .15. some .20, and other some .40. dayes, and yet is concord neuertheles kept in the Church.
Ther is an other abuse, Fasting is an excercise & not a holines. namely bicause som put holines in fasting as though a worshipping of god consisted in it, where as in very dede fasting is onely an excercise, which of it selfe hath no holines. They are fooles, which in fasting thinke that for that cause they haue god bound vnto them: Ierome. wherfore we must not rashly geue credite vnto Ierome when he sayth, that fasting is not a vertue, but the foundation of al vertues. For onely Christ and faith in him is the foundation of all vertues. If he had sayd, that fasting is a helpe of certayn vertues, he mought haue bene borne with al.
And vndoubtedly herein the elders oftentymes erre, A fall of the riders. for that they prayse & extol fasting aboue measure. If so much should be attributed vnto fasting, we must of necessity confesse that Iohn Baptist liued more holily then Christ. For he fasted more then Christ did. For Christ did eate and drinke as temperate and modest men vse to do: But it is sayde that Iohn did neither eat nor drinke. Yea and Paule to Timothy writeth, that the exercise of the body hath small vtilitye, but piety is profitable to all thinges. If thou wilte demaunde what piety is: What piety is. I wyll aunsweare, that it is a true worshippinge of God, a soundnes of doctrine, and a pure life, which thinges follow hope and faith. In these thinges assuredly is very great profite, and the excercise of the body hath indede some profit, but not so great. But we must note that Paule speaketh not of fasting and excercise of the body, which is Hipocriticall and wanteth fayth, but of the true and christian fasting and excercise of the body. For those things which want fayth and procede of hipocrisy, are sinnes, neither do they any thing profite. Wherfore Esay sayth: Fasting is not a part of satisfaction. Is this the fast which I haue chosen? But these our men go farther, and besides that in fastynge they put holynes, they make it also a parte of satisfaction. [Page] Forasmuch as y e Scholemē in the .4. They extende fastes euen to purgatory. Gracian. boke of sētences do appoint satisfactiō to consiste of prayers, almes, & fasting. What abrogateth the death of Christ, if this do not? They say also that by fasts, soules are deliuered out of purgatory. And least any should think that I fayn these things, let him rede Gratian in the .13. quest .2. chapter anima, where he putteth the wordes of Gregory, who sayth: Soules are deliuered from purgatory, either by the prayers or fastinge of theyr kinsfolkes.
There is also an other more greuous abuse, for that some affirme that by fastes they can satisfye the churche, althoughe they ceasse not from sinne. Thys kynde of faste God himselfe reproueth by expresse woordes in Esaye: What care I (saith he) for your fastes? Ye fast contentions and strifes. Is thys the faste which my soul hath chosē? Liberius y e Pope decreed, y t al the lent we must abstein from pleadinges in the lawe. Liberius. This is not verye wiselye decreed, for the publike wealth cannot consiste if it be so longe or euer matters be heard, or iudgemente geuen. If fasting should for a weighty cause be denounced for a day or two, ther mought for that space of time be commaunded intermission of iudgement. But that lawes shoulde cease, so longe as Liberius will haue them, it is againste the Publike wealth. Farther the same Liberius saith, that the vse of matrimony polluteth the fast of Lent, wherefore they would haue men all that time to abstain from theyr wiues. But Paule exhorteth man and wife more soundly, namely to departe for a time, and that by theyr mutual consent, and to return to the same, least they should be tempted of Sathan.
An abuse of shrouetide.There is also an other abuse, in that euery where before Lent all that time, which they call Srouetide, men do most vntemperately geue themselues to glotonye, excesse, dronkennes, and filthye lustes, and that vnder this pretence, that they may the easelier fast, as though it were lawful to do euill, that good may ensew. Neither is this a new kind of vice. For Basill in his homely of fastyng, and Chrisostome vpon Gen. do in many places greuouslye complaine of that thing. Basile. Chrisostome. Some fast for delicatenes. For when they know that they shal not suppe, at dinner they lade theyr filthy sinke with many and heauy burdēs, so that they make themselues vtterly vnprofitable for the whole day. Other on the contrary part, do vtterly wast themselues with fasting, It is not lawefull for a man to consume him selfe with to much fastinge. yea and in a māner kil themselues, as Basilius and Nazianzenus did: who being men excellently wel learned, yet by abstinences and fastinges were made vtterly vnprofitable vnto the Church. They wer compelled to kepe theyr bed sometimes halfe a yeare, and somtimes a whole yeare. Lastly, there ar some, which for that they fast, haue a wōderful delight in themselues, & ar proud, & also dispise other mē, as that Pharesy which said: I am not as other men, I fast twise in the weeke &c. I could reckē a great many more of these abuses: but for this time me thinketh these ar sufficient. This one thing onely wil I adde, that in fasting we see two extremities. The Papists in a maner retaine theyr superstitious fastes, but we vtterly neglect those fastes that ar lawfull and good. Wherefore it seemeth that on eyther side the thing is to be amended. And thus farre concerning these thinges.
¶The .xxi. Chapter.
1 ANd the men of Israel sware in Mizpa saying: Ther shal not a man of vs geue his doughter to any of Beniamin to wyfe.
2 And y e people came into y e house of god, & abode there til euen before god, & lifted vp theyr voice & wept sore.
3 And they sayd: O Lorde God of Israel, why is this chaunced in Israel, that there should be this day one tribe lacking in Israell?
4 And on the morowe the people rose vp, and made there an altar, [Page 280] and offred burnt offringes and peace offringes.
5 And the children of Israell sayde: Who are they amonge all the tribes of Israel, that came not with the congregatiō vnto the lord? For they had made a great othe concerning them that came not vp to the lord in Mizpah, saying, that they should surely dye.
6 And the children of Israell had pity on theyr brother Beniamin, and sayd: There is one tribe cut of from Israell this day.
7 What shall wee doo vnto the remnant of them, for to get them wiues, for asmuch as we haue sworne by the Lord, that we will not geue them of our daughters to wiues?
8 They sayd, I say: What ar they of the tribes of Israel, that came not vp to Mizpah vnto the lord? And behold there came none of the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead vnto the congregation.
9 For the people was numbred, and beholde there was not one of the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead there.
10 And the congregation sent thither .12. thousande men of the strō gest of thē, & commaunded thē sayinge: Go and smite the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead with the edge of the sword both women & childrē.
11 And this is that ye shall do, vtterly destroy all the males and all the women that haue lien by men.
12 And they found among the inhabiters of Iabes-Gilead .400. mayden virgins, that had knowen no man be lying with any male. And they brought them to the host in Siloh, which was in the land of Chanaan.
13 And the whole congregatiō sent & spake vnto the childrē of Beniamin, that were in the rocke Rimmon, & called peaceably vnto thē.
The Israelites, as farre as may be gathered by this history, had bound themselues with a double othe. First, y t no man should geue his doughter to wyfe to the Beniamites: which was nothing els, but that they were minded vtterlye to destroy the tribe of Beniamin. Farther, they sware that if any of the Israelites had not put to his help agaynst the Beniamites, he should be slain. Here are very many things worthy to be noted. First, we must consider that the Isralites wer to seuere against the Beniamits. For they did not onely slay the men, but also the wiues and maydens: wherefore there were no women left on liue for those .600 menne whiche were remaininge, to engender yssue of. But afterwarde when the same Israelites more diligentlye considered their acte, they iudged it not wel done, that a whole tribe should be cleane destroyed. Of which they nothing thought when they were in their great iury and rage. Wherfore they now accuse theyr cruelty, and detest theyr rigorousnes which they had vsed.
But that they bound themselues with an othe, y t they woulde not geue their doughters in matrimony to the Beniamites, it is not in this history mencioned: but yet it is most likely y t it thē happened, whē they were in Mizpah, & the Beniamites would not deliuer the guilty. Wherfore the Beniamites wer oppressed w t great miseries. For ether they must take to wiues foren & straūge wemē, which thing was prohibited thē by the law, or els they must perpetually lead a sole life without wiues, and so that tribe should vtterly perish. The Israelites were to cruel agaynst the Bē iamites. The Israelites in y t they mourn, do suffer punishments for theyr cruelty. For it should haue ben inough for them to haue punished the men. What nede was there to slay women & maidens which had nothing offēded? Vnles peraduenture they had vowed the vow Cherem. But such a vow it was not lawfull for them to vow, but by the authority [Page] and commaundement of God, whych appeareth not to haue beene doone in this historye. In reuenginge we muste keepe a meane: for all are not to be slaine which come into the power of them that ouercome. It is sufficient to punish the guilty. God punisheth moderatly. God slew in Egipt Pharao, also the firste begotten, and many other, yet destroyed he not the whole nation. And when he destroyed Sodom, he saued both Lot and also his famelye, and deliuered from misery the citye Zoar, whither Lot went. And in the flood when he drowned the worlde with water, yet he woulde saue on lyue Noah with his famely. But it semeth that these men determined, vtterly to destroy al the Beniamites: whiche theyr counsel God allowed not, who when the Iewes were afflicted of the Chaldeians, and they raged more cruellye against them then was mete, both threatned to punish them, and also did indede punish them most grieuously.
The variety of mans nature.Now the Israelits repent them of their cruelty: but it is to late. They should haue thought of this thing before. But this is the nature of man, these that florish they are angry with, and enuy them, & when the same men are ouerthrown & deiected, Architas Tarentius. Athenodorus they pity thē. The sword is not rashly to be moued, neither should punishmentes be executed with an angry mind. Architas the Tarentine hath a very wise saying vnto his seruant: If I were not angry I would punish thee. Athenodorus a Philosopher very wel learned when he had gotten leaue of Augustus to depart home, & being desyred to leaue some notable precept with him, aūswered very wisely: Before thou geue place to anger & execute auengment, first say ouer with thy selfe in order all the letters of the Greke Alphabete, namely that in that space and detracting of time the violence of the mind may asswage. The othe of the Israelites being vniust, did not bind them to obserue it. It was not lawfull for daughters to marry without the consent of theyr parents.
Farther we must note that this othe of the Israelites of not geuinge wiues vnto the Beniamites, was neyther godly nor lawefull. Wherefore they were not bound to obserue it. Howbeit we vnderstand by this history, y t this was of force among the people of god, that the daughters should not mary without the consent of theyr parentes. For if it had bene lawfull for thē to haue maried against theyr parentes will, a man might haue saide: Althoughe ye will not geue your daughters vnto them, they of their owne accord may contract matrimony with them. This thing is so agreable vnto nature, that the Romaine lawes also forbid that matrimony should be firme, except it be contracted by the consent of the parents, as we haue before declared. But that thing which neither God, nor nature, nor good lawes can suffer, the same doth the Papisticall superstition easely admitte.
The Israelites come to Siloh for two causes, partly to aske counsell of God concerning the Beniamites, and partly to geue thanks vnto God for the victory. Therfore they burne sacrifices and burnt offringes. And they wept for the misery of the Beniamites, euen vntil euen. Wherfore it appeareth that they fasted the whole day, otherwise they could not haue wept before the lord vntill euen.
Why the Israelites erected an altare. Dauid Kimhi And they erected an alter. But to what ende? There was an altare there before. Some aunswere that there was an altare there indeede, but it was so old, that it was halfe decayed, and therfore it neded to be repayred. But Kimhi saith that it was a custome, that when all the people shoulde publikely aske counsell of God, there should of new an altare be erected. But this he affirmeth without the authority of the word of God. I rather thinke, when so great a multitude of people assembled together, ther was so great a number of sacrifices, that the old altare was not sufficient to do holy seruices vpon. Wherfore that the seruice of of god should be with more expedition finished, there was erected an other altar. Which thinge also we rede Salomon did, when he dedicated the temple whiche he had built.
When they had wept, bicause of the othe wherby they had bound themselues not to mary theyr daughters vnto the Beniamites, they thought vpon the other othe, whereby they had vowed themselues to slay all those whiche woulde not [Page 281] put to their helpe to the common warre. Neither is their any mencion made before of this latter othe. For many thinges are ouerpassed in the historye, which are afterwarde spoken of, althoughe not in their place. And whilest they are in hand with these thinges, with one and the selfe same labour they both prepare wiues for the Beniamites, and also saued their othe. For they which wer absent from the warre, were not bounde by the othe. Wherfore they might mary their daughters vnto the Beniamites.
But as touching the first othe for not geuing wiues to the tribe of Beniamin, it was not lawful. Wherfore it might haue bene broken without any violating of religion: for the cutting of of that tribe, was against the word of god. For his wil was that it should be preserued among the people of Israel. For God by Iacob the Patriarche gaue manye and excellent blessynges vnto the Beniamites, which blessinges also Moses in Deut. repeated. But although such an othe was not ratefied, yet the Israelites do wisely in that they labour, both to prouide for the Beniamites, and also not to be counted rashly to violate their othe. An example of Iosuah. So Iosua sware that he would saue the Gabaonites, when as yet god had cōmaunded that al the Chananites should be slayn. For he found a meanes that they should serue in the tabernacle, and so by that meanes bee after a sorte punished wyth cyuill death. Although he durst not do that, but by the commaundement of god. And he would that the people by his example, should learn not easely to violate an oth. For example sake euen vain othes ar not easely to be violated. What men the Iabenites wer As touching the Iabanites, in that they are called Galaadites, it manifestly appeareth that they pertained vnto the tribe of Manasses, and dwelled beyond Iordan. They bicause they were not present at this warre, are iudge of al the Israelites as enemies, who being destroyed, their maidens which remained on lyue, were brought to Siloh, into the land of Chanaan. And it is rightly added in the lande of Chanaan, bycause Iabes Gilead was not there, but in halfe the Tribe of Manasses, beyonde Iordane.
This warre against the Iabenites was iustly and worthely taken in hande, The Iabenits are worthely inuaded. bycause they obeyed not the publike cōmaundement. The Israelites had bound them selues by an othe, that whosoeuer withdrew himselfe from this war, the same should be put to death. Therfore they counted the Iabenites as enemyes, least other men by their example should contemne publike decrees. The Beniamites had committed a grieuous wicked crime: but these men in that they refused the common warre, and weakened the authority of the publike wealth, seme also to fauor their crime. The punishment of Metius Suffecius. It is not the parte of good Citizens in warre taken in hand by common counsel, to withdraw themselues by priuate counsell. Metius Suffecius captaine of Albany, when he forsoke Tullus Hostilius, fighting against the Fidenates, by the commaundement of Tullus was bound to two cartes, and so drawē in peces. Solon depriued him of al honour & dignity, Solon. A decre of Pō peius. which in the time of sedicion adioyned himselfe to neyther party. And Pompeius (as Plutarche affirmeth) when he fled from Cesar, proclaymed that he woulde count all them to be enemies which abode at Rome, and helped not the common cause. And after this maner are the Iabenites prescribed and counted for enemies. And no otherwise are they to be counted, which in this our tyme, when there is controuersye concerning religion, doo dissemble althinges, when as in the meane tyme they wyl neither stand on the Papistes syde, nor on ours. It is not lawful for vs in religion to be neuters. They (say they) wyll stand in the myddest betwene both, which is nothing els, then that they wyll be wyth the aduersaries or enemies. For they halte on either side, and therfore it may be said that after a sort they fauor them. Farther the cause of religion is farre greater and greuouser then the cause of the publike wealth. In the Churche no man can excuse himselfe that hee is a straunger: for no man which professeth himself to be a Christian, can be a straunger from religion: wherfore warre is iustly proclaymed against the Iabenites.
Althoughe I thinke that in this matter also the Isralites wer to cruel. For it [Page] semeth that it should haue bene sufficient to haue slaine the men that were apt vnto warre, To much crueltye against the Iabenites. which had committed the crime of rebellion. But to kil womē, old men, and children, it was to much cruelty. Neither could they say that they had vowed vnto the Lord the vow Cherem, forasmuch as they had saued the mayden virgins. And vndoubtedly so great cruelty turned them to euyl: for if they had delt more gently with the Iabenites, they had had more women for the Beniamites. Neither coulde they haue geuen counsell to haue vsed force to get them selues wiues. But it is good to vnderstand how the Israelites founde oute that the Iabenites were absent.
The battaile being finished, they al assembled to Siloh, and numbred the people, among whom when they founde none of the Iabenites, they easelye vnderstoode that they were absent from the warre. So great was their piety and religion at that time, that when they had obtained the victory, al of them assembled together to geue thankes vnto God. But that thing is contemned now a daies: for how many are there, which when they haue gotten the victory, wil acknowledge the benefite of God, and geue him thankes. Preachers do out of the Pulpit admonish the people to pray publikely for sicke folkes, of which we either se, or heare of none in a maner, which when they are restored to health, do publikelye geue thankes vnto God, for that they haue by the prayers of the Churche escaped free.
They proclaymed peace vnto them which were in Rimmon. That is, gaue them safeconduct to returne home againe in safety.
14 And Beniamin returned at that tyme, and they gaue them wiues, whom they had made on lyue of the women of Iabes Gilead, which yet were not sufficient for them.
15 And the people had compassion on Beniamin, bicause the Lord had made a gappe in the tribes of Israel.
16 And then the Elders of the congregacion sayd: what shall wee do for wiues for the rest? For the womē of Beniamin are destroied.
17 And they sayd: There must be an inheritance for them that bee escaped of Beniamin, that a tribe be not destroyed out of Israel.
18 For we cannot geue them of our daughters to wyues. For the chyldren of Israel had sworne saying: Cursed be he that geueth a wyfe to Beniamin.
19 Then they sayd: Behold, there is a feast of a Lorde yearelye in Siloh, in the place which is on the North syde of the house of God, and on the East syde of the way that goeth from the house of God, vnto Sechem, and is South from Libanon.
20 And they commaunded the chyldren of Beniamin, saying: Go and lye in wayte in the vyneyardes.
21 And take hede: For behold, if the doughters of Siloh come out to daunce in a row, then come ye out of the vyneyardes, and catche vnto you euery man hys wyfe, of the daughters of Siloh, and get you into the land of Beniamin.
22 And if their fathers or brethren come vnto vs to complayne, we wyll say vnto them: Haue pity on vs for them, bicause we reserued not to eche man hys wyfe in tyme of war. And bicause ye haue not geuen vnto them, so that ye haue at this tyme offended.
23 And the children of Beniamin did euen so, and tooke them wiues of the dauncers, according to their number, whom they cought, [Page 282] and went their wayes and returned euery man to hys inheritance. And repairyng their cities they dwelt in them.
24 And the children of Israel departed thence at that time, euerye man to hys trybe, and to his famelye. And went out from thence euerye man to hys inheritaunce.
25 In those dayes there was no kyng in Israel, but euery man did that which seemed ryght in hys owne eyes.
They are sayd to haue made on lyue those maydens, whom they had not slain: for forasmuch as they had thē in their power, it semed y t they might iustly haue slayne them. But they would preserue them on lyue: Whereby they vnderstode that God wold saue the tribe of Bē iamin. for that they sawe it was not the wyl of God, that al the Beniamites should vtterly be destroyed, and here by they vnderstoode the wil of God, bicause he had caused sixe hundreth of them to escape. Wherfore they gaue them safeconduct, and the maydens of the Iabenites to be their wiues.
God made a breache in Israel. That which they did themselues, they ascribe vnto God. A breache they cal the cutting of of one tribe. Here is expressedlye set foorth the inconstancy of mans minde. In that fury and hot anger they woulde haue destroyed al, and they desyred of God to graunt them a ful victory: & when they haue obtained it, and finished the matter, they mourne & afflict themselues. If they had moderatly vsed the victory, this thing had not happened vnto them. After the same maner they synned against the Iabenites: for if they had not slaine al the women ther, they had had wiues inough for the Beniamites. Now hauing slayne all, they found onely .400. mayden virgins: which not being sufficient, they are compelled to seeke other by rapte or stelth.
And the Elders sayd. So were the Senators or Senadrim called, or els the Tribunes and Centurions, which were rulers ouer the warlike affaires. Let their inheritance be safe. Iosua had appointed vnto euery tribe his inheritance. Wherfore the Israelites could not clayme vnto them selues the landes of the Beniamites.
Cursed be he which geueth his daughter. What mooued the Israelites to sweare. Hereby appeareth the forme of the othe: it was an othe of execration. This act of the Israelites had some shewe of equity. For godlye men ought not to contract matrimonies with the vngodlye. And it is most manifest that the Beniamites were vngodly, when as they would neither deliuer nor punish the guilty. Besides that, they considered that the Beniamites wer now not much vnlike vnto the Chananites, for as much as they had cōmitted wicked acts, like vnto their syns. But God had forbidden the Israelits to mary with the Chananites. Wherefore they coūted it a wycked thing to geue their daughters in matrimonye to them. Howbeit they oughte not so to haue done. For what if they had repented, The oth of the Israelits was not fyrme. might they not then haue contracted matrimonies with them? That othe was rashly and without iudgement made, neither ought it by any meanes to haue bene kept. Neither, as it is most lykelye, was it obserued of their posterity.
A solemnity in Siloh from yeare to yeare. It was a yearely solemnity, whervnto they vsed publikely to assemble: but for asmuche as the Iewes had manye suche feastes, it is vncertain, what maner of solemnity this was, Dauid Kimhi of which mencion is now made. Yet I maruaile that Kimhi sayth, that this feast seemeth to haue bene Kippurim, whē as it is written y t thei had a famous dauncing, which wer absurde to be added in a publike fast. The Chaldey paraphrast. The Chaldey Paraphrast seemeth to haue a respect vnto the feast of the Calēdes or new Moones, in which feast wer thankes geuen vnto God for the gouerning of the world, and course of thinges, as vpon the Sabaoth day for the creation of thinges. But I confesse that I am ignorant what maner of feast this was. How be it I am of that opinion, that I thinke it was the solemnity of the tabernacles.
There is a feast day of God in Siloh. This description sheweth not that it was the solemnity of the place, but rather of the people of Israel, which assembled vnto the feast: and forasmuch as one City coulde not hold al the Israelites, they assembled vnto al the partes adioyning vnto the City, & to those in especial which are here described. And the Elders do appoynt these places by name, y t they might there hide them commodiously, and leade away the maydens as they were dauncing. As though they should haue sayde: Vnto those places they wyll come, out of the hidden places you may breake foorth, and steale them away. Hereby wee maye perceaue, It was synne to daunce at the solemnity. It is synne to abuse the feast dayes. that the virgins in holye assemblies gaue themselues to playes and daunces, which was to abuse the feast day. It had bene better for them to haue occupied them selues about grauer matters. For the feast daies were to this end instituted, that the people shoulde assemble together to heare the woord of God, to be present at the sacrifices, where they shoulde both cal vpon God, and communicate together the Sacramentes instituted of God. Wherfore it is no maruail if these maidens were so stollen away.
Wher as it is written: And when their Abothem, that is their fathers, shall come, & againe Achihem, that is their brethren, this letter Men is put for Nun, that is M. for N. namely the masculine gender for the feminine. Which forme of speaking is often vsed in the holy scriptures.
Haue compassion on vs for them. The sense of this short and briefe prayer is this: We wil say that we wer sorowful and pensiue, and that we could no other way seeke and prouide wiues for the Beniamites. And whatsoeuer is done, we wil affirme to haue bene done by our counsel, and that we were the authors therof. And so we wil desire them, for our sakes to pardon you. Other do easelier expound it: Gratefy vs, and geue vs your maidens, if you thinke them vnworthy to haue them. We thought that there had bene maidens inough of the Iabenites: but that happened otherwise. Wherefore we were constrained to prouide for them by some other meanes. And if they wil say that they are bounde by an othe, and that they cannot geue them: vnto that we wil answer, that their othe is satisfied, bicause they themselues haue not geuē their daughters, but ye haue stollen them. Here we perceaue that a publike othe is lenefied and mitigated by the interpretacion of the Elders. And vndoubtedlye that is their office whyche gouerne a publike wealth. Ye (say they) haue not geuen them of your owne free wyl, wherfore ye are free from the othe. Therefore the Beniamites are prouided for by rapte or stelth. The rapt of the Sabines. In the Romane historye also it is saide that the virgines of Sabine were rapte or stollen, but yet somewhat after an other sorte. For ther the virgins whych were rapt, were straungers, neyther had Romulus any ryght ouer them: but these maidens were Israelites, and were subiect vnto the authority of the people.
In that these men interprete and lenefy the othe, it hath some shewe of equity. For it might seeme that the fathers violated not their othe, bicause they of their own accorde gaue not their daughters vnto the Beniamites, but they tooke them away by violence. But if a man more diligently examine the thing, he shal finde either of those excuses false, The oth is not wel interpreted bicause the Beniamites dyd not of their owne priuate counsel steale the maydens, but by the perswasion of the Elders. And on the other syde it seemeth that the Israelites gaue their daughters of their owne accord, & fraudulently brake their oth. For the fathers sware y t they woulde not geue their daughters to the Beniamites. Howe had they them then? Of the Elders. But they are the fathers of the countrey: wherefore this was no vpright and simple dealing: They eschewing one wicked example fall into an other. neyther dyd guile breake their oth, but rather bound it. The Israelites pretended the religion of an othe: which yet they craftelye violated, & cōsented to rapte or stealth, which wicked act is no more remisse then periurye. They wyll not geue an example of periury, and they graunt to rapte. Farther they violate an other principal pointe of the law of God. For in the last chap. of [Page 283] Numbers it is cōmaunded, that if a mayden be an inheritour, she should not mary into an other tribe, to the ende that inheritances should not be confounded. What therefore if some of these that were stollen, were inheritours? Vndoubtedlye they had against the law of God maryed out of their tribe.
If a man wyll say, they did thys wyth a good minde, and (as they vse to saye) for a godly intent, that the whole tribe of Beniamin should not vtterlye perishe: Answer may be made, it is not sufficient that a thing be done with a good minde: bicause also we must see that the thyng whych is done, be good, be iust, be right, and agreable vnto the woord of God. Farther, God forbyddeth that matrimonies shoulde be ratefied wythout the consent of the Parentes. But here the maydens are rapte, and maryed not onely wythout the knowledge of the Parentes, but also agaynste their wyls, agaynst good lawes, and authority of the woord of God. Farther, the Magistrate promiseth to pacefy the Parentes, and to reconcile them vnto them, if they chaunce to be angry: and so they fall from one wycked act into an other, neither asked they counsel of God in thys thyng. They take counsel of themselues, as though in a thyng of such perplexity and obicurenesse they coulde not erre. And that we shoulde not maruayle that these thyngs so happened, this verse is agayn repeated: There was no king in Israel.
Now resteth to speake apart of Rapte and of Daunces. But as touchyng an othe, I wyll touche onely so muche, as I thynke sufficient to this history.
¶Of Rapte.
THys woorde Rapte in Hebrue is called Cheteph, the Grecians saye [...], the Latines Rapere, whych is to take away by violence, not al maner of wayes, but as it were by a certayne fury and great violence. What differēce is betwen theft and rapte Wherefore Rapte differeth from theft: bycause theft may be commited secretely, & wythout violence. Wherfore in the digestes de Iureiurando, in the law duobus reis it is had: Though a man sweare that he hath not rapte any thing away, yet is he not straight way quit of theft. For although that which is done be not rapte, yet it may be theft. So the ciuil law seperateth theft from rapte. But to what thynges rapte pertayneth, Of what rapte is here intreated. it is had in the Digestes De condictione triticearia in the law .1. Thinges immouable as houses, landes and Farmes, are inuaded, but thynges moueable, as thynges not hauing lyfe, beastes and men are rapted. But we here entreate of the rapte of thyngs moueable, & yet not of althings, but of humane bodies, whych are by violence taken away for lustes sake.
There is an other kinde of rapte, but not proper: Augustine. which Augustine toucheth in his 19 sermon de verbis Apostoli, & it is had in the decrees. 14. quest .5. chap. Si quid inuenisti, wher he sayth that thynges which are found must be restored. Which thing if thou do not, thou hast rapte them, forasmuch as thou hast done what y u couldest, so that if thou haddest founde more, thou wouldest haue rapte more. &c. The Gloser. There the Gloser very well declareth, what is to be done wyth thinges that are found. Eyther (sayth he) the same thynges are counted for thynges cast awaye, as if anye owner hath cast awaye anye thyng, the same thyng if a man retayne when he hath founde it, he committeth not theft. But if that thyng whych is found be not wyllingly cast away, What is to bee done wyth thinges found. neyther thought to haue bene wyllingly lost by the owners (as when a ryng is found, or a pursse, or any suche thyng, whych is not wont to be cast asyde) the same thing if thou retaine, it is theft, vnles thou keepe it by thee with a wil and mynde to restore it again. Wherfore thou must publykelye testefye that thou hast founde those thynges, whereby the owner may come to hys owne agayne, as it is decreed in the Digestes de furtis, in the lawe Falsus, in the Paragraphe Qui alienum. But if thou keepe it by thee, wyth the mynde not to restore it, it is thefte. Whych thing Augustine in the place nowe alledged reproueth.
The same thyng is decreed in the Code de thesauro, in the law Nemo. And in the institucions de Rerum diuisione, where it is ordayned, that if a man fynde treasure in his house or grounde, it shall be hys that fyndeth it. But if he finde it in an other mans soyle, either he hath gotten it by chaunce, or els he sought for it, if he haue gottē it by chaunce, let it be deuided betwene the fynder and the owner: but if he sought for it, the whole muste redounde to the owner. If the place were holye, and the treasure be founde by chaunce, the fynder shall haue it.
It is added, that if a man sought treasure in his own ground, Against magi [...] and artes forbidden. & vsed therunto magike & artes forbiddē, the thing foūd ought to be forfaited to the cōmon treasury. For he which by euil meanes hath sought a thing, semeth vnworthy to be possessor therof. [Page] But to returne to Augustine, that which I before said, I affirm that it is not properly rapte, Origene. if a man hold backe a thing that he hath founde. Which thing Origene plainly declareth in his .4. Homely vpon Leuiticus: Some saith he, wyll not restore that which they haue found. For they say that God hath geuen it them. But whatsoeuer they say it is a crime like vnto rapte. He saith not that it is rapt, but a certain thing like vnto it. Although we haue out of the ciuil law made a difference betwene theft and rapte, yet may rapte be called theft, but yet so that there be added violence. In the digestes de furtis, in the law Si vendidero, it is thus writtē: A rapter euery way cōmitteth theft, and is an open theefe. But omitting these thinges let vs returne to that kinde of rapte wherof we now intreate.
Some said, that to rapte is nothing els then violentlye to leade awaye a mayden from the house of her father, to the ende after he hath defiled her, to marye her to hys wife. But this definicion is not ful nor absolute, although it be vsurped of the Canonistes, in the .36. question .1. chap. Lex illa, Paragraphe Cum ergo. For in this our history the maydens were rapted, and yet not led away from their fathers house, but out of the field or vineyardes. Neyther is that true which is added, namely to mary her, or to haue her to his wife, when he hath defiled her. For the rapter may either haue a wyl to haue her for his Concubine, or to abuse her for his pleasure, although he take her not to wyfe. Farther, this foresaid definicion mencioneth onely of maydens, whē as yet neuertheles both maried women and wydowes, also free mayd seruants, and bondmayd seruants, & also yong children may somtime bee rapted. Wherefore that crime extendeth farther then that definicion containeth. Onely harlots seeme to be exempted. For they are not said properly to be rapted, although they be led away by violence. And vndoutedly it is then no action of rapt, but onely of iniuries. But such persons are vnderstand to be rapted from the custody eyther of the parent, or of their Tutor, or Guarden, or Patrone, or Lord, to the ende to haue vnlawfull accompanieng together, whyther matrimony do follow or no.
Of the punishmentes of rapters.Now must we declare what punishments are ordeined for rapters. In the Code de raptu virginum et viduarum in the law Vinca, Iustinianus intreateth at large of that matter, & maketh the rapte of the persons, which I haue before rehersed, death, so that also the companions, and they which haue holpen the rapter, are comprehended in the same punishment. Neither was that thought to be sufficient, but ther were inuented other punishments more grieuous then death. For it is decreed that not onelye the Iudges & Magistrates shal put him to death, but also if the rapter be takē in the wicked act doing by the parents, brethren, kinsfolkes, tutor, gouerner, lord, patrone, or finally by him in whose power she is that is rapted, they may kyl him, & that without any punishment. It is also ordayned, that they which are present with the rapter, & defend him in his filthye act, maye also be slaine wythout any punishment to hym or them that killeth them.
Rapte is sometimes cōmitted against a mans own spouse.He addeth moreouer, that rapte is somtime cōmitted against a mans owne proper spouse, as if one by violence take away her, whō he hath not yet maryed. And if a man take away an other mans wife, he doth not onely cōmit adultery, but also rapt. If the rapter be not slaine in the very wicked act doing, he ought afterward to be put to death by the Iudges or Magistrates, & that in such sort, that though he appeale vnto a superior magistrate, he shal not be heard. And that thing saith Iustinian was ordained by the law called Lex Constantinia. Power to appeale is taken away frō rapters. Vndoubtedly it is grieuous not to be heard if thou appeale: which thing is here decreed. So great a matter dyd the ciuill lawes make of rapte
In freemaid seruants, & bondmaid seruants the punishment is ended with death: but if a frewoman be rapted, the goods of the rapter, & those which be present w t him, [...]o turne to her vse that is rapted. Neither is it any thing worth for the rapter to geue away his goods, or to bequeath them away by wil, but they fal into the hands of her that is rapted, & that not onely for a time, but also for euer, so that she may either sell them, or alienate them, or geue them for a dowry. One thing onely is excepted, vnles she that is rapted doo marye the rapter, the goods of the rapter are geuen her on that condicion that she should not mary hym. And the reason of the law is added, bycause in our publike wealth we suffer not, that a man shoulde marye a wyfe after the maner of an enemy. For Citizens are wont to mary their wyues, and not to rapt them. But what was done with them, which although they wer not present at the rapt, yet were a counsel therof, or being wytting thereof, vttered it not, or afterward receaued [Page 284] the rapter into their house? Iustinian decreed, that they in deede shoulde not loose their goods, but onelye be put to death. But if a bondman, or bondwoman were taken either in cōmitting or ayding this crime, they were commaunded to be burnt wyth fyre.
But what if a mayden wil by her own consent be rapte? None of the punishment for al that (saith Iustinian) ought to be diminished, it is vtterlye al one, whither the woman wil, or wil not. And the reason is added, bicause if the rapter woulde abstayne from the rapte, it is not very likely that any woman wil offer her selfe of her owne accorde to be rapted. Wherfore it semeth probable, that she was won by flattery & deceites. Yea, & the Parents of the maiden, if they consent to the rapte, are cōmaūded to be banished. These things Iustinian decreeth in the Code, who yet afterward in the Authentikes (where is entreated of womē rapted, which mary the rapters) was cōpelled to make y e law new, bicause ther wer which canelled, that if she that was rapted did consent vnto matrimony, she might posses the goods of the rapter. For so they interpreted the first law: y t the goods of the rapter ought to come vnto her that was rapted, if she maried him, or if he in his wil made her his heire: But we (saith Iustinian) ment no such thing: for our lawes do not appoint rewardes for a wicked crime. Farther, neither can he make any wil, for asmuch as he is now condemned to dye, neither do our lawes suffer any such matrimony to be of force. And if it be no matrimony, how thē cā she posses y e goods of the rapter in the name of a dowry? wherfore he decreed that such matrimonies should not be ratefied. What then shal become of the goods of the rapter? If the maiden (saith he) haue parentes, which haue not therunto consented, those goods shall come vnto them. But if they haue consented as it is alredy said, they were banished without anye propritye of goods or landes, which kinde of punishment was much more grieuous then playn exile. But if the mayden had no Parentes, or had those which consented, the goods of the rapter were confiscate to the cōmon treasory. By these thinges appeareth that in those tymes rapte was counted a detestable crime.
Wherunto this thing also I wil adde, if any daughter had maried against the wyll of her parents, or otherwise behaued her self wantonly & vnchastly, it was lawfull for the parents to disinherite her, as it is had in the Code, De Inofficioso Testamento, in the law si fileam. This one thing is excepted. If the father knew that the iust time of matrimony was past, & he would not place his daughter, then hath he nothing to saye against hys doughter, if she mary without his knowledge, or against his wil: yea rather he is compelled to geue her a dowry, as it is had in the Code in the same place, in the law Si post viginti quinque annos. Wherby it appeareth that .25. yeares was the time of farthest prolō gacion of matrimonye. The same thing is had in the Digestes, De ritu nuptiarum, What if a woman rapt a mā in the law qui liberos, Other lawyers determine the same thing, if a woman rapte a man: although they say that happeneth rarely.
Now is to be added the opinion of the Canonists, The opinion of the Canonists & what they bring out of the scriptures. In the .36. q. 1. Gracian bringeth that definicion of rapte, whiche we haue before confuted. But this thing he addeth: That in rapte is iniury done somtimes to the maiden, & not to the parants: & somtimes to the parents, & not to the mayden: & somtimes to both of them. For if the maiden wil be rapt of her own free will, there is no iniurye done vnto her, but vnto her parents. But if the parents geue the man power to rapte the daughter, bicause she wil not consent to mary him, then is no iniury done vnto thē, but vnto the daughter. But to both of them is iniury done, when the mayden is led away from her parents, against her wil, & aginst their wil, Consilium An reliauense. & in the same place he bryngeth the counsel of Orleance, in the chap. de raptoribus, where also he confesseth that rapte was wont to be punished with death. But it is added, that if the rapter come vnto the Church, the punishment of death is escaped. What shal there then be done? If the mayden (sayth he) consented vnto the rapter, first she shall be taken from him, & be restored to her parents, but yet being excused, that is, a caution receaued, that she be not slayne or disinherited. But if she consented not, she is by her selfe sufficientlye purged: but the rapter shal be compelled to publike penaunce, as it is had in the .36. q. 2. chap. Raptores. But what if he wil not do penance? He shalbe excōmunicated, Cōcilium Chal cedonense & Cabilonense. according to the counsel of Chalcedonia & Cabilonum. But if he do penance, he shall be punished by the pursse. And herein they say y t they follow the word of God, which is written in Deut. 22. chap. If a man defile a mayden, he shal geue vnto her parents .50. sycles, and shal take her to wife. And so he condemneth the rapter to pay a certain sum of mony vnto the parent of the mayden. The which sum if he wil not pay, or haue not wherwithal to pay, he is driuen to serue the father of the maiden for certaine yeres, which the Gloser contracteth to fyue, vpon this condicion, that in the meane time he may redeme himselfe if he wyll.
It is also added: If they consent together, the matrimony is firme, so that the father agree therunto. And that these matrimonies may be firm betwene the rapter & her that is rapted, it also appereth by the decretals de Raptoribus et incendiariis, Conciliū Mel dense. in the chap. cum causa, & in the chap. following. Which thing without dout is against the ciuill lawes, & the Canōs that are of the better sort. But the coūsel of Meldenū hath far otherwise decreed. [Page] For first it hath ordained, that the rapter, & she that is rapted should do publike penāce: afterward it permitteth matrimony, but yet not betwene themselues, but wyth other. And it is added, that if the husband or wife of either of them die, he which hath cōmitted the rapte, or consented vnto the Rapter, cannot contract new matrimony, except the bishop release him. Farther it is ordained, that by no meanes any such matrimony shuld be firme, no though the Parentes consent therunto. Yea, and the same Gracian confesseth, Consilium Aquisgrauense. that the same thing was decreed in the Counsel which was had at Aquisgranum. Yet afterward, both he himselfe otherwise defineth, & also the decretals of the Popes. What then make they of those Counsels? They answer, that those Counsels ment this, that it should not be lawful to contract matrimony in that case, vnles open penance be fyrste done, and the consent of the Parentes had.
Ierome.And to proue that sentence. Gracian (in the .36. q. 2. chap. Tria) citeth Ierome, who semeth to acknowledge three lawful kindes of matrimony. One, when a mayden is geuen in matrimony to a husband by her Parentes or Tutors. An other, if a mayden bee oppressed of a man, & her father afterward consent to geue her him in matrimony. The third is, if the father cōsent not to such mariages, but geue her vnto an other mā. These three matrimonies he saith are lawful in the holy scriptures. But in the .27. q. 2. chap. Additur, is by the testimonye of Ierome an other kynde of lawfull matrimonye added, namely when a widow, which is not vnder the power of the Parentes, marieth in the Lord. Hereby Gracian gathereth that Ierome acknowledgeth matrimonye betwene the Rapter & her that is rapted. But I perceaue that in the .22. chap. of Exodus, is nothing intreated of rapte, onelye mencion is made of fornication, and not of rapte. For it is said: If he shal by flatteries allure her to lye with him, then hath he libertye geuen him, that he may take her to his wife, hauing the consent of the Parentes. But if a man had rapted a mayden or man chylde, then he was iudged by the lawe called Lex Plagii, which is written in Deutronomy, & testifieth that he shoulde be punished with death, whosoeuer stealeth a womā or mā in Israel. Wherfore ther is nothing writtē in the holy scripture (as far as I se) as touching y e establishing & racefieng of such a matrimony
But here some man wil obiect, that Iacob & his sonnes consented, that Sechem one of the sonnes of Demor, Of the rapte of Dina. should haue in matrimony Dina Iacobs daughter, whō Sechem had rapted, so that his subiectes would suffer thēselues to be circumcised. I graūt this: but it was done before the law of Moses was geuen. Neither do we rede that the Patriarches had anye woorde of God concerning this thing. Neither can it be denyed that before the law was published, very many thinges wer cōmitted against it. Iacob, of whō we now intreate, had the same time .2. sisters in matrimony. Amrā had to wyse his Aunt, of whom he had Moses, Aaron, & Maria, which matrimonies, after the law was geuen, wer not lawful. Wherfore the example now brought, proueth nothing.
But if hope of matrimony should be geuen vnto Rapeters, there shoulde be opened a wide window for furious yong men to vse raptes. For they wyll make no doubt to rapte, if they may hope to mary her whom they haue rapted. But all occasions of euyll are to be taken out of the publike wealth and the Church. Farther, forasmuche as Parentes are highly to be honored, if matrimonies should against their wils he contracted betwene the Rapter and her that is rapted, they should suffer great cōtumely. This thing also semeth to be added, that Lucius the Pope writeth to the bishop of Burgenū (as it is had Extra de Raproribus et Incendiariis, in the chap. Cum causa) that he decreeth, that if a mayden saye, that before she was rapted, there were woordes passed betwene them of mariage, it cānot be called properly rapte. What shal then be done? May she agaynst her Parents wil mary the Rapter? Innocentius the .3. in the chap. following, decreeth: If a maiden be rapted against her wil, and afterward consent to mary the Rapter, that mariage is also firme, yea although it be agaynst the wil of her Parentes. And he addeth that this is done in the honor of matrimony, when as in deede it apertlye pertayneth to the reproche therof, if a man do more deepely weigh the whole matter. In the 27. q. 2. chap. Raptor, it is had: If a mayden that is rapted, bee betrothed vnto an other, by the woords of the future tence, she must be restored vnto him, so that he wil receaueher. But if he wil not, it is free for the maiden which was rapted to mary an other. But if she were betrothed by the woords of the present tence, and that she can proue that she was rapted against her wil, the spouse if he wil not receaue her, ought to be compelled.
The schoolemens opinion. Thomas Aquinas.The schole Deuines write not much disagreing vnto this. Thomas Aquinas in .2. 2. toucheth this question, whē he writeth that capte springeth of a vehement lust, wherby the Rapter is so troubled, that he neglecteth al daungers. And he wyll haue her that is rapted, to be rendred vnto her Spouse, if she haue any: and if she haue none, vnto her Parentes, or if she be wythout Parentes, to them in whose power shee was. And then if they wil agree, she may mary the Rapter: but so, that first be made restitucion, bicause in al theft and rapte restitucion is chiefly required: yet saith he, rapte before restitucion be made, letteth matrimonye to bee contracted, that is, that they synne, if they contract matrimony: but if it be cōtracted, it breaketh not the contract. But to the Canōs which [Page 285] determine against it, be answereth, y t they were made in detestacion of y e crime. But the Pope afterwarde considered the matter better. But this was not the parte of a holye man to woorship the Pope for God, and so to flatter him lyke a bondsclaue. And to the ende he might seeme to speake rightlye, he bryngeth the woordes of Ierome, which are in Gracian concerning the three kindes of matrimonye. But how that place serueth to this present matter, I haue before shewed. Lastlye, hee obiecteth vnto himselfe the Counsell of Meldenum. But that place he sayth, is to be vnderstand: If a man shall rapte her which was maryed vnto an other. As thoughe that were obscure or doubtfull. Wee neede no Canons to vnderstand this. A certaine Deuine not of the woorste sorte, stronglye setteth himselfe against Thomas concerning thys thing, and where Thomas saith, that rapte letteth not the matrimony already contracted, he aunswereth, that many decrees make against that sentence. Farther hee bringeth a reason, namely that he which is cōmunicate can not receiue the sacramentes. And then he addeth that the Rapter is excōmunicated: wherfore vnles he do open penāce and reconcile hymselfe vnto the Church, he cannot contract matrimony.
But Caietanus there laboureth vtterly to defende hys Thomas, Caitanus. and denyeth that he which is excommunicate, cannot receaue the Sacramentes. Howbeit this he confesseth, that he which is excommunicate, synneth if hee receaue the Sacramentes. And he addeth: If an excommunicate be admitted to confyrmacion or to holy orders, it cannot be denyed but that hee hath receaued the Sacramentes, neither is it lawful for him to repeate them againe, if he afterward doo penaunce. Farthermore, he sayth that the Mayster of the Sentenses in the .iiii. where he reckoneth the impedimentes, whych take awaye matrimonye contracted, numbreth not rapte at all. Farther, he teacheth that the Rapter, and shee that is rapted, are not by the act it self excōmunicated, but to be excōmunicated. But bicause he seeth it is in the Canons of the counsel of Chalcedon & Cabilon: Let the Rapter and her that is rapted be accursed, he answereth that the Glose enterpreteth that saying to be of the same force, as if it had bene sayd: Let them be accursed. Moreouer he answereth to the other twoo thynges concerning restitucion and penaunce, & he sayth, that she that is rapted, ought not to be restored, but it is sufficient, if he satisfy the father by some meanes, although she bee not rendred vnto him into his hand: euen as in theft it is not alwayes necessary that thinges taken away shoulde be restored, but sometymes it is sufficient, that the iniury be recompenced by a price or bonde. But concerning penaunce he sayth: The Rapter, if he contract without it, doth synne in dede, but yet after he hath contracted, the matrimonye is firme. Lastlye, he saith that the Canons, which decree to the contrary, are either abrogated, or els doo speake of spouses. After this maner Thomas, Caietanus, the Deuines, Ecclesiastical men, & Canonistes triflle among them selues, & play the Parasites with the Pope their God.
Now wil I declare, what the holy scriptures determine of rapte, The sentence of the holye scriptures. and what they iudge thereof. The first place is out of the booke of Genesis the .6. chapter, where it is wrytten: The sonnes of God seing the daughters of men that they were fayre, tooke them to wiues, such as they lusted them selues. I know there are brought sundry interpretacions of this place. Some expounde the sonnes of God to be angels, which being kindled by the beuty of faire women, had fellowship with them. This exposicion cannot agree: for forasmuch as angels haue no bodies, they cannot burne in such lustes. Others by the sonnes of God vnderstand those which came of Seth, and were brought vp in the true worshipping of God, who being ouercome with beuty & fayrnes, contracted matrimonies with the daughters of Cain, that is, with Idolatrers and Infidels. Whereby nothing nowe remayned sounde and perfecte, and therefore God sending a flood, The Chaldey interpreter. destroyed the whole worlde. The Chaldey Interpretour sayth, that the Sonnes of God were myghtye men, and Magistrates, who when they hadde taken to wyues the daughters of vyle men, all thynges were fylled wyth vyces.
Here I see was committed rapt, which thing the Chaldey Paraphrast hath signified, which paraphrast among the Hebrues is of an incredible authority. And assuredlye Moses saith not that they desired those wiues of their Parentes, but onely tooke them whom they lyked best. By that place may easely be noted the course, and as it were the degree of mans peruersnes. For first they sawe, and then they desiced, and at the last they rapted. Neither were they wonne by their vertues, but onely by the beauty of the body. Wherfore God punished that sinne by a flood. And although there were many other synnes in men, yet this one is expressed with a great emphasis.
Moreouer in the .34. chap. of the same booke, Sechem the sonne of Hemor dyd rapte Dina the daughter of Iacob. But what ende that rapte had, it is not nedeful now to declare. Curiosity was the cause that Dina was raptes. But the cause why Dina was rapted, was her curiositye: the mayden would go foorth, and vnderstand the maners of other women. Curiosity did then hurt her, & also wil alwayes hurt women. For if it were hurtful vnto the famely of Iacob, being so great a Patriarche, for a mayden to wander a broade, howe muche more daungerous is it for other famelies, which are not so holy nor acceptable vnto god? But the nature of women is much infected with this vyce. And therefore Paul to Titus, admonisheth women to loue their husbandes, to bring vp their children, and to be byders at home. And to Timothe, when he entreateth of wanton and yong widowes: they wander abroade (sayth be) and runne from house to house, and at the last go after Sathan. Yea, & these virgins, of whom we nowe entreate, when they wandred thorough the vyneyardes, and gaue themselues idely vnto dauncinges, were taken vp by the Beniamites. Some man wil say, that the brethren of Dina oppressed the Hemorhites by guile. It is true in deede, but when they were reproued of their Father, they sayde: Ought they to haue done Niblah, that is, a foolishe and wycked thing in Israel? And that Dina was rapte not wyllingly, but against her wyl, hereby appeareth, bycause it is written that Sichem, after he had oppressed her, spake vnto her hart, which signifieth nothing els, then that he woulde by flatterye haue comforted her.
The Beniamites did not properlye commyt rapte. Vniuckiendes of raptes.But it maye seeme marueilous, that these Beniamites were not punished for their rapte: but we must consider that they dyd not properlye commit rapte, bycause they led away the maydens, not onely by their owne counsell, but also by the wyl of the Elders. Otherwise true and proper rapte hath alwayes had an vnlucky ende. Io Argus was led awaye of the Phenicians, Europa of the men of Creta, Medea of Iason, Helena of Paris, all whych raptes styrred vp discordes and warres, and also the ouerthrowinges of publike wealthes and kingdomes.
Also the women of Saba, being of curiositye desirous to bee present at open spectacles, Titus Liuius. Augustine. were rapted by the Romanes. Whereof followed suche warres, that both nacions were almost destroyed, as Titus Liuius and Augustine De ciuitate dei wryte. Wherefore forasmuch as God wil not haue such wicked actes vnpunished, it is meete that from hence foorth we auoyde suche matrimonies. I am not of that sentence, to deny y t those matrimonies which hitherto haue ben contracted after that maner, are matrimonies. For it is not my mynde to bring in a confusion of thinges. But these two things I affirme, first that in contracting there is sinne, especially if it be done against the wil of the Parentes. Farther, that those lawes, wherby suche matrimonies are permitted, are to be corrected, that hereafter it be not lawful to doo the like. For we see that the order whyche God hath set, is peruerted, when Parentes are neglected, by whose counsels matrimonies should be contracted. And by this meanes yong mē at encouraged to raptes, whē as they hope y t they may mary the wiues whō they shal rapte. Farther, that which I speake, is agreable with y e lawes of God, with the law of nature, & with the ciuil lawes. Wherfore let the Canonistes & Schoolemen take hede how they iudge the contrary. Now resteth somwhat to speake of daunces.
¶Of Daunses.
CHorea that is a daunse, is formed (as Plato sayth) of this worde [...], whiche signifieth ioye, bycause it is a certayn testification of ioy. Seruius. And Seruius (when he interpreteth this verse of Vergil, Omnis quam chorus & socii comitantur ouantes, that is, whō all the daunse and fellowes followed with mirth) saith that chorus is the singyng and daunsing of such as be of like age.
But whēce daūces had their beginning, there at sōdry opiniōs. Of the offryng of Daunses. Some thinke that men when they beheld the sondry motiōs of the wādring and fixed starres, sound out daunsing, wherby y e variety of motions might be represented. Other thinke that daunses came rather of religion, bycause among the old Ethnikes, there were in a maner no holy seruices wherein was not leapyng or daunsing. For they led their daunses from the leaft part of the alter to the right, wherby to resemble the motion of the heauen from the East vnto the West, afterward they returned frō the right to the leaft, to expresse the course of the wādryng starres. Whiche thyng peraduenture Vergil signified when he sayd: Virgil. Instaurant (que) choros, mixti (que) altarla circum, that is, and they beyng mixed together renewed theyr daunses compassing about the alters.
Yea & the Priestes of Mars whiche were daunsers, Salii the priestes of Mars. were had in great honour among the Romanes. And there are some also which referre the beginning of daū sing to Hiero a tyran of Sicilia. For he (they say) to establish his tyranny, forbad the people to speake one to an other. The deuise of Hiero. Wherfore men in Sicilia began to expresse their meaninges and thoughtes by beckes and gestures of the body, and y e thing turned afterwarde into an vse and custome. But whatsoeuer this thyng was, daunsinges in the olde tyme were not agaynst Religion: althoughe afterwarde they were applied to publique mirth.
There was also an other kind of daunsing, wherby young mē wer exercised to warlike affaires. For they wer cōmaunded to make gestures & to leape, hauyng vpon thē their armor, y e afterward they might be the more prompt to fight, whē neede for the publique wealth should require. Saltatio Pyrrhica. This kind of daunsing was called saltacio Pyrrhica, & bycause it was exercised in armor, it was called [...]. Of this daūsing is mētion in y e ciuile lawes, namely in y e digestes de paenis, in y e law ad dānū. And sometymes yong men whē they had offēded, wer not straightway put to death, but were condēned either to hunte vpon a stage, or els to daunse in armor. And they wer called Pirrhicarii. Also there was an other kind of daūsing, Wanton daunsyng. which was instituted onely for pleasure & wantōnes sake, & that was called of y e Grecians [...] & [...]. But of those daūses which by gestures of y e body, expressed the senses of y e minde, writeth Lucianus in hys booke [...], Lucianus. Athenaeus. & so doth Atheneus. In which kynd at the length it came to y e point, y t when at Rome Demetrius Cynicus derided the daunse called Mimica saltacio, callyng it a thyng vaine & nothing worth, a noble daūcer, which thē was had in honor at Rome, desired him, y t he would once onely beholde hym daunsing, & afterward to iudge & speake his fansy whatsoeuer he would. He came vnto y e stage, the daunser called saltator Mimicus begā by gestures to resēble y e cōmon fable of Mars, takē in adultery with Venus. In which thing he so expressed the sunne whiche declared the fact, & Vulcanus knittyng his nets, & Venus ouercome with shame, & Mars humbly destring pardon, A saying of Demetrius Cynicus. y t Demetrius being astonished cried out: [...]. That is, I heare O mā the things y t thou doest, I do not onely see thē, for by these thy handes y u seemeth to me to speake. About y e same tyme by chaūce came to Rome y e king of Pontus, & whē he had sene this daūser played his gestures on y e stage, being afterward biddē of Nero, to aske what thīg he most desired to haue geuē him, he desired to haue y e Mimus. Nero meruailed, forasmuch as he mought haue asked other thinges of much greater price, & asked him the cause of y t his request. He answered, bycause [Page] I haue sōdry nacions subiect vnto me, which without an interpreter, I cannot vnderstand, and oftentimes it happeneth that the interpreters do not faithfully inough tell vnto them what I say, nor againe what they say vnto me. But this fellow with his gestures will expresse al thinges most faythfully.
Plato. Plato in his .3. de legibus maketh two kinds of daunsings, one [...], which before we haue called Pirrhicum. The other [...], which he calleth [...], I omitte to speake of the filthy kynde of daunsinge, bycause it is apertly condemned by the lawes. The Pirrhicall daunsing, and that whiche is done by gestures maye haue place to some vses of the publike wealth, but they pertayne not to our purpose. Wherfore in this place we must speake of [...], how fat it is lawful, Daunsing by it selfe and of his owne nature is not vicious. forasmuch as it is excercised for mirth sake. Assuredly I thinke that this kinde of daunsing is not of his owne nature vicious or prohibited, bicause nimblenes and agility of the body is the gift of God, and if there be added any arte, namely that the body be moued in order, aptly in nomber, and with comelines, I do not se why it ought to be reproued, so that it be doone in time, moderately and without offence. For euen as it is lawfull to sing, and we may vse singing to geue thankes vnto god, and to celebrate his prayses, so also by a moderate daunsing we may testify the ioy and mitth of the minde. For Dauid publikely daunsed before the arke of the Lord, & the maidens with daunses & songes celebrated his victory against Goliah. Maria also the sister of Moses, whē Pharao was ouerthrowen & slayne, led daunses with other women, and soong a song of victory. Wherfore seing holy men and chast women haue vsed daunses, we can not say y t of theyr own nature they are vicious. Daunsinges vsed at thys day ar vicious. But as it is vsed in these dayes that men should daunse mingled together with womē, ought not to be suffred, bycause these thinges are norishmentes and prouokers of wantonnes and lusts. Maria the sister of Moses daunsed not with younge men, but apart by her self among women. Neither daunsed Dauid with women, and maidens which celebrated his victory daunsed among themselues, and not with men.
Moreouer they which loue God withall their heart, & withall their stengthes, ought not onely to obserue his commaundementes, but also to cut of all occasions whereby the obseruing of them might be letted.
Reasōs against daunses of our tymes.But our daunces are most euident occassions of trāsgressions of the lawes of god. They are snares & offences, not onely vnto the daūsers, but also to y e beholders: for they stirre vp & inflame the hartes of men, whiche are otherwise euill ynough euen from their beginning: & that thing which is to be repressed & kepte vnder with great study & industry, the same is stirred vp by the wanton entisementes of daūses. Vndoubtedly, if a mā wil consider himself, either by experiēce or by reason, he shal finde that in such spectacles y e lustes of y e mynd are not a litle kyndled & inflamed, & he shall perceaue y e men returne home from those daunses les good then they were, & women also les chast then they were. Farther, perils are rather to be auoyded, then to be noorished. For (as Salomon sayth) he which loueth daunger, shall fall therin.
But some wil obiect, that whereas daunses be so against maners, & do kindle lust, the same commeth rashly & by chaunce: but euery thing is to be iudged not of these thinges, whiche happen by chaunce, but of these thinges which are in it of it selfe & by nature. There are some so chast & vncorrupt, that they can behold these spectacles with a perfect & chast mind. Difference of accidences. I graunt, y t that may sometimes happen, but I adde that all accidences are not of one & selfe same kynde. For there ar some which happen very rarely, other some are called [...], y t is which by their nature may as well be present vnto any thing, as absent. And there are some which are called [...] that is, such as are wont to happen oftentymes & for the most part. These last accidēces ought in euery thing to be considered and most diligently weighed: neither must we take heede, what may be done, but what is wont to be done. Aristippus. Aristippus daūsed in purple, & beyng reproued, he made [Page 287] an excuse, that he was made neuer a whit the worse by that daūsing, but might in y e softenes kepe stil his Philosophical minde. But such voyces are not to be heard: bicause as Demosthenes saith, & it is cited of y e lawyers, Demosthenes. we must not cōsider what some certayne man doth at a tyme, but what is wont to be done for the most part. Graūt that there be some one mā so chast y t he is nothing moued with such entisementes, how in the meane tyme is the people & multitude prouided for? Shall we for the perfectnes and integrity of one or two, suffer all the rest to be in daunger?
But so (a mā will say) take away sermons also & sacramentes, for many heare the word of God, sometymes to their condēnation, & many eate & drincke the holy misteryes vnto their own iudgemēt. A certayne profitable distinction of thinges Here we must know that certayn things are profitable to the saluation of mē, & are cōmaūded by y e word of god, which things ought by no meanes to be taken away. And certayn things are indifferent, which if we se they tend to destructiō, they are not to be suffred. We haue the law of god for hearyng of Sermons, and receauing the Sacramentes: but for daunsyng there is no cōmaūdement geuen. Wherfore these things ar not to be cōpared together. But by daūses & leapinges some say y t very many honest matrimonyes ar brought to pas. It may be so sometymes, but I was neuer of y e opiniō y t I would haue matrimonyes contracted by these artes, wherin a regard is had onely to the agility & beauty of y e body. There are other meanes much more honest: let vs vse them and leaue these as litle chast & shamefast. Let vs remēber, y t although honest matrimonyes ar sometymes brought to pas by daūsings, yet much more oftē ar adulteries & fornications wont to follow of those spectacles. What daūses are honest. We ought to follow the exāples of godly fathers, who now & then vsed daunses, but yet such as were moderate & chast, so that the men daūsed by thēselues, & the womē a part by thēselues: by such kynde of daunses, they shewed forth the gladnes of their myndes, they sang prayses vnto God, and gaue hym thankes for some notable benefyte whiche they had receaued. But we rede not in the holy Scriptures of mingled daunses of men and women together. But our men say: Who can daunse after that sorte? In saying so, they vtter themselues, what they seeke for in daunsing.
Moreouer let vs marke y e effects of daūsing. It is writtē in Mathew, The effectes of wicked daū ses. y t the daughter of Herodias daunsed at a banquet which the king made: & the kyng tooke pleasure in her, whom he could not openly without shame behold. For she was a manifest testimony of his vnlawfull matrimony & of hys adultery. For Herode had maried the mother of that mayden being his brothers wife. Of that daunsing it came to passe, y t Iohns head was cut of. Many are angry with vs, bycause we crye agaynst daūsings, as agaynst things which are of their own nature euill & prohibited: we on the other side say, that things are not alwayes to be weighed by theyr owne nature, but by the disposition & abuse of our fleshe: we can not deny but that wyne of his owne nature is good, whiche yet is not geuen vnto one that is in an agew, not that the wine is euill, but bycause it agreeth not with a body that is in that maner affected. In Exodus, when the people had made themselues a calfe to worship, they sat down, did eate, dranke, and rose vp to play. In which place it seemeth that to playe was nothing els then to daunse.
But least I should seme this to speake and to iudge alone, I wil adde certayne testimonies of the fathers. Augustine against Petilianus the 6. chap. The byshops (saith he) were alwaies wont to restrain idle & wantō daūsings: but now a dayes there are some bishops which are presēt at daunses, & do daunse together with women, so farre are they of to restraine this vice. The same Augustine vpon the .32. Augustine Psalme (when he expoundeth these wordes, on the Psalter of ten stringes, I will sing vnto thee) maketh those ten stringes the ten commaundementes, & when he had spoken somwhat of one of them, at the last he cōmeth to the Sabaoth, where of it is writeten: Remember that thou sanctify the Sabaoth daye. I say not (sayth he) to liue delicately, as the Iewes were wont. For it is better to digge all the whole day, them to daunse on the Sabaoth day.
Chrisostome in his .56. Homely vpon Genesis, Chrisostome. when he entreateth of the mariages of Iacob: Ye haue heard sayth he, of mariages, but not of daunses, whiche he [Page] there calleth deuelish: and he hath many things in the same place on our side. And among other he writeth: The bridedome & the bride are corrupted by daunsing, & the whole famely is defiled. Agayne in the .48. Homely: Thou seest (sayth he) mariages, but y u seest not daūses. For at y e tyme they wer not so lasciuious as they be now a dayes. And he hath many mo thinges on the .14. chap. of Mathew, where he spake vnto the people of the daūsing of the daughter of Herodias, & amōgest other thinges he saith: At this day Christiās do deliuer to destructiō not half their kingdome, not an other mans heade, but euen their owne soule. And he addeth that where as is wanton daunsing, there the deuill daunseth together with them.
Cōsilium Lao dicenum.In the counsel of Laodicenum it is written: It is not mete for Christian men to daunse at their mariages. Let them dyne & suppe grauelye & moderately, geuyng thankes vnto God for the benefite of mariages. In the same coūsell also it is had: Let not the Clergy come vnto spectacles either on y e stage, or at weddinges. They may in deede be present at mariages: but after there come in [...], that is, singers & players on instruments, which serue for daunsinges, let thē rise & go theyr wayes, least by theyr presence they should seeme to allow that wantonnes. In the counsel of Ilerdenum, Consilium Iler dense. which was had vnder Symmachus, & Hormisda Popes, and Theodoricus the kyng, the same thing is decreed, namely y e Christiās should not daunse at mariages. But in the counsel of Altisiodorenum, which was vnder the Pope Deus dedit, Consilium Al [...]isiodorense. this seemeth to be contracted vnto the Clergy. For there it is prohibited, that any of the Clergy should at a feast either syng or daunse, as thoughe it were in a sorte lawfull for other.
Schoolemen.Of y e same opinion are certayne schoole deuines in the .3. boke of sentences, dis. 37. who refer these prohibitions onely vnto the holy dayes. Ricardus de media villa saith that to daunse on the holy daies is a sinne most grieuous, as though on other dayes it may be permitted. But the opinion of the fathers, & sound counsels is far more seuere then the opinion of these men, who perniciously release those thinges which should be contracted: for as much as they haue y e peril of soules ioyned with them: & not onely perill but all falles that are most greuously to be lamēted. Howbeit it seemeth that these mē borowed this their sentence (wherein they prohibite daunsing on the holy dayes) out of the ciuile lawes. For in the Code, in the title de feriis in the lawe dies festos: We release in deede idlenes on the feast dayes, but we will not haue men geue themselues to voluptuousnes. Wherefore it shall not be lawfull on the feast dayes to vse daunsinges, whether they be for lust sake, or whether they be done for pleasure.
But let vs see what the Ethnikes opinion was as touching this thing. Emilius Probus in the life of Epaminonda sayth: Aemilius Probus. Salust. That to sing & to daunse was not very honorable among the Romanes, when the Greciās had it in great estimaciō. Salust in Cantilinario writeth, y t Sempronia a certayne lasciuious & vnchast woman was taught to sing & daunse more elegātly then became an honest matrone. And there he calleth those two thinges the instruments of lechery. Cicero. Cicero in his .3. booke of offices writeth, y t an honest & good man wil not daūse in y e market place, although he might by y e meanes come to great possessions. And in his oratiō which he made after his returne into y e Senate, he calleth Aulus Gabinius his enemy in reproche saltator calamistratus y t is, the fine daunser: It was obiected to Lucius Murena for a fault, bycause he had daunsed in Asia. The same thing also was obiected vnto the king Deiotarus. Cicero answereth for Murena: No man daunseth beyng sobre, vnles peraduenture he be mad, neyther in the wildernes neyther yet at a moderate and honest banquet. The same Cicero in Phillipicas vpbraydeth vnto Anthony among other his vyces, daunsyng.
The diuersitye of temperature of the men of the East and of the men of the West.But it appeareth that the nature and disposition of the men of the East & of the West was not al one and the self same. They are cheareful of mynde, & nimble in body, and for that cause delight in daunsinges. For to omitte other examples, Dauid the kyng daunsed publikely. And they which come now vnto vs out of Siria, do affirm [...] that the Christians, which liue in those regions, do vpon the Resurrection day & also vpon other famous feast dayes, come into the temple with harpes and [Page 288] violes, & sing Psalmes among thēselues, & daunse together. For their spirites ar more nimble & chearefull, & ours more heauy. Howbeit they say y t they daunse soberly and modestly, the men a part by themselues, & the women also by thēselues.
Now should remayn, Certain thīgs as touching an othe. to speake somwhat of an othe: but bicause to entreate therof would be lōg, therfore I thinke it good to defer it til an other tyme. This thing onely wil I say for the expoūding of this place, y t those othes which ar agaynst the word of god & charity, ar of no strēgth: neither do they bynd y e men y t sweate. They sinned in swearyng rashly, but they sinned more grieuously in performing it, for asmuch as they had made an euill othe. Yet are these elders of Israell to be praised, who althoughe they saw y t their othe was not firme, yet they would not seme opē ly & cōtēptuously to violate it, least by their exāple they should open vnto the rude people a window vnto periuries, which thing also it semeth y t Iosua did vnto y e Gabaonites. For although in very dede they performed not their othe, yet they would by a certayne shew seeme to performe it, and to haue it in estimation. That which remayneth to be spoken of this thyng [...], I will deferre vnto the interpretation of the Hystory of Samuel.
And now I thinke good to adde this, The Israelites erred in y t they asked no [...] counsel of god. y t it is no meruail that y e Israelites sware a foolish othe, and excercised their sharpenes towardes their brethren more cruelly then was mete: and also admitted & gaue counsell to that rapt such as it was, for asmuch as they neither asked counsel of god, nor of y e highe priest, nor of the Prophet concerning these thinges. God in deede had promised thē the victory, yet had he not geuen thē this commandemēt cleane to destroy the tribe of Beniamin, & to kil al their women, also to slay all the women of the Iabenites, they had no cōmaū dement out of the word of god. The negligēce of the Priestes is to bee meruayled at. But the negligence of y e highe Priest & Priestes is most of all to be meruayled at, which did not of their owne accord offer thēselues, although the elders asked not counsell of them. But Pinhas (as I suppose) was at this tyme sore worne in age, & the other Priestes raking all things vnto thē, they cared not how, very coldly regarded thinges pertayning vnto God, for asmuch as there was no king in Israel nor stoute Magistrate, whiche should haue kept y e Hebrues in the duty of the lawe. Wherfore the people not being holpen by the holy ministery so much as nede required, committed many thinges thorough folishnes & fury, & gathered such fruites of their workes as the hystory rehearseth. For they should not haue ben so outragious to haue slayne al y e maydens of the Beniamites, for asmuch as the law had prohibited, that children should be slayne for the sinnes of their parētes. Neither ought the Israelites to haue bound thēselues by an othe, not to mary theyr daughters by any meanes to y e Beniamites. It was also to cruelly done to destroy all the women of the Iabenites which were not virgins. Neither ought they to haue committed that kynd of rapt to saue theyr othe vpright, which was but a vayne othe and of no force.
Neither is this to be passed ouer, that the virgine maydens, The punishement of the abuse of religiō. by that rapt wer punished for the contempt of religion. For as I haue before said, they abused the rest of y e holy day. Vndoubtedly the Israelites were not cōmaunded to assemble before at certayn tymes of the yeare in the holy congregation of the Lord, to the end they should apply themselues to daunses and playes. The sonne of God when he was twelue yeares of age, came vnto the temple, An example of Christe beyng yet a childe. & there (as it behoued) applied himself to y e busines of his father: which thing if y e maidens of Sylo had done, they had not ben rapted. Wherfore it is the part of virgins when they came to holy assemblies, religiously to geue themselues to things deuine, and to abide nyghe vnto their parētes, & not to runne about daunsing in the fieldes, townes, streetes & vineyardes. For as often as they are out of the sight of their parentes & kepers, The parentes of the maidens y t were rapted did sinne. they are ready for raptors, and for the impotent fury of young men. This also is to be considered that the parentes of the maydens that were rapted, were iustly punished, bycause they negligently kept their daughters on the feast day. For God geueth children vnto the parentes to kepe as a pledge, and that not carelesly but warely.
And ye shall by violence take vnto you euery man his wife. An argument against hauing mo wiues thē one called Polygamia, The elders doo not geue Counsell vnto the rest of the Beniamites to take mo wiues then one, but they wil euery man to take his own wife. And a litle after it is added: They tooke vnto [Page] them wiues according to their number. Vndoubtedly if plurality of wiues should haue at any tyme ben admitted for the procreation of children, here it seemed most of all to haue bene nedefull, for asmuch as the tribe of Beniamin was in a maner destroyed, & needed a speedy instauration or renewyng. But the elders althoughe they carefully studyed for the restitution of the Beniamites, yet they thought it not mete to flye vnto the remedy of Polugamia: whiche is an argument, that in theyr iudgement that was not allowed.
Euery man departed from thence vnto his owne inheritaunce. Being (as it is to be thought moued in their myndes with sundry and dyuers affections. They partly reioysed for the victory whiche they had obteyned: partly they pitied the Beniamites, and were sory they had made so vncircumspect an othe: and had raged with to cruell and vnaduised a zeale. They lamented also theyr brethren and fellowe souldiers, whom they had in that expedition lost by two ouerthrowes. Wherfore let the greuous & horrible punishment of the Beniamites be a warnyng vnto vs to auoyde and eschew vnhonest and filthy lustes, as pernitious pestilences, as wel of the soule as of the body, and also of al good thynges.
The fruite of the readyng of this hystory.But for asmuch as we are by the fauour of God come to the end of this booke, it is our part, as it were in a table to set before our eyes this foresayd hystory, to beholde in it the gouernement, whereby God defended and gouerned his Church and publique wealth, he doth in deede punishe sinnes greuously, but after his fatherly correction he doth with an vnmeasurable goodnes restore the hurtes and losses, wherin men oftentymes incurre by theyr owne error & faulte. In all these things we may see an Image of our tymes. For we are infected with the same infirmityes that our fathers were: neither doth the deuill and his mēbers with lesse diligence at this day vexe the congregatiō of the godly, then he did in the old time.
Wherfore let vs praye vnto God our most louyng father thoroughe his sonne Iesus Christ, that euen as from the begynning he hath holpen and noorished hys Churche in most great daungers, so also he would now keepe and defende it, when it is almoste ouerwhelmed with euils and calamityes. Let vs desyre him also, that euen as he from tyme to tyme stirred vp Iudges and deliuerers vnto the Hebrues, by whom he restored both liberty and health: and as in our tyme he hath geuen Heroicall and most excellent men, namely Luther, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Phillip Melanchton and suche like setters forth of the doctrine of the Gospel, so he would vouchsafe to go forwarde, and in conuenient tymes stirre vp certayn lyghtes, by whiche he may illustrate the mindes of hys elect, and kindle their heartes to keepe & amplifie the Church of Christ, that at the lēgth he may haue it raygning with him in heauen, without spot or wrinkle. Amen.