Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. I. Of raising or reporting false tales.

Vers. 1. THou shalt not report a false tale. 1. Some do read, Thou shalt not receive, because the word nasha, doth as well signify to bear and sustain, as raise and lift up. So read the Chaldee, Septuagint, Latin, with others: Oleaster, Lyranus. Calvin also and Simlerus, do prefer this sense. But it is better translated, Thou shalt not raise a false tale, Iun. As the like law is given, Levite. 19.16. Thou shalt not walk about with tales: and this generally comprehendeth, as well the first author of a false report, as the bearer and carier: and so Lippoman also interpreteth well, Non si • author falsi rumeris, aut fingas in cerdo, &c. Be not the author of a false report, or fain it in thine heart, &c. 2. Some do refer it to the person of the Judge; that he should not punish any, because of an evil report spread of him, Osiander. Or, Vt non audiatur una pars in absentia alterius, &c. That one part should not be heard in the absence of another: for commonly then many tales are devised, Lyranus. Or, that the Judge should not give care to the accuser, before he have heard the party accused also, Borrh. Or, this some make to be the meaning, Non suscipias vocem testium, quos scis mentiri ; Receive not the voice of witnesses, whom thou knowest to lie, Tostat. quaest. 1. But it is better generally understood of all, as well private men as Judges: Vetat falsum rumorem de ullo homine, vel spargi, vel admitti ; It forbiddeth any false rumour to be spread of any, or admitted, Gallas. Praecipue tamen. lex haec ad judicia pertinet, And yet principally this law belongeth to judgments, Simler. because false reports may there do most harm: yet because it is also a fault in private men, to raise false reports, and to be too credulous to believe them, it is better here to retain a general sense.

QUEST. II. What it is to put to the hand to be a false witness.

NEither shalt put thy hand with the wicked to be a false witness. 1. Calvin's joineth this to the former clause, and saith, they are here understood to be false witnesses, qui proximos traducunt, which join their hand with the wicked in traducing of their neighbors. So also Oleaster. But the manner of the phrase here used, of putting to the hand, that is, of binding and combining themselves, importeth a greater matter, than only in carrying or spreading of a false report. 2. Some referring this law unto public testimony in judgment, understand it of the person of the Judge, that he should not be a mean to procure false witnesses: as the Elders of the City, to whom Iez • bel sent, did against Naboth, R. Solomon, Marbach. But the words, In being a false witness, (which is more than procuring) will not bear that sense. 3. Some by putting to the hand, understand, thou shalt not swear, to be a false witness, because they used to lift up their hand, when they did swear, Lyranus. Tostat. But this doth make the sense too particular: for what if he do not swear, but only promise or give his hand to be a false witness? it is directly against this law: therefore, by putting the hand, is signified he shall not aid or assist him, he shall not consociate himself, vel confer operam, or promise his help, or consent unto evil, Iun. 4. And withal, here is forbidden that wicked confederacy and mutual aiding one of another in bearing false witness: as it is a common practice, Da mihi mutuum testimonium, Witness for me, and I will be witness for thee, Gallas. 5. And two things are forbidden: Non adjuvabis causam improbi falso testimonio, &c. Thou shalt not help the cause of the wicked by a false testimony, not make a covenant with him, to do it for him, Lippoma • .

QUEST. III. How great a sin it is to be a false witness.

Vers. 2. TO be a false witness. 1. Falsum testimonium habet tripliceus deformitatem▪ A false testimony hath: a threefold deformity: ex perjury, first by perjury, because witnesses are not admitted but upon their oath: ali • 〈…〉 justitiae, another way by violating of justice: tertio ex ipsa fall • tate, thirdly by the falseness of his testimony, Thomas. These three evils and mischiefs then do accompany a false witness, perjury, injustice, falseness and lying. 2. And in three other respects, is this sin of false witness bearing, odious and abominable: 1. In respect of the author thereof, who is the devil, for when he telleth a lie he speaketh of his own. 2. The inconveniences are great which ensue, the perverting of justice, and the condemning of the innocent. 3. There is also, nominis divini contaminatio, the polluting and profaning of the name of God, Borrh.

QUEST. IV. Whether in this law we are to understand the mighty, or the many.

Vers. 2. THou shalt not follow the mighty. 1. The most do read, many, or, the multitude, as before is shown in the divers readings: and they make two parts of this law, the first to concern all in • enerall, that they shall not follow a multitude to do evil: the second, Judges in particular, not to fol • ow a multitude in judgment, Cajetan, Oleaster. Whether it be to respect the multitude of the parties • riends, that sentence is to be given upon, Marbach. or the multitude of Judges, that consent in a wrong judgment, Simler. And then the meaning is, that in neither case a multitude is to be followed: si • it manifest iniquum vel falsum, if it be manifestly false or unjust which the multitude holdeth: for if it be manifest verum, either manifestly true, vel dubium, or doubtful, which many do affirm, one must not of singularity depart from their judgment, Tostat. quaest. 2.

2. Some in the former clause interpret, rabbim, many, Thou shalt not follow many to do evil: but in the other branch of the law, they understand it not of the quantity and number, but of the quality, neither decline after the mighty, &c. that is, where there are many Judges to give sentence, the inferior should not be overruled by the opinion of the Superior Judges and mighty: and therefore among the Jews this wise course was used, in giving of sentence in the assembly of Judges, that the punies and inferior Judges should deliver their opinion first, lest if the greatest began, the other might be swayed by them: this is also the use among the Divines in the University of Paris, the Juniours and Inferiors begin first, Lyranus. This also is the honorable use of the Star-chamber with us.

3. But seeing the same word, rabbim, is used in both sentences, it is taken in the same sense in both places, and is better interpreted, the mighty, than, the many, for these reasons: 1. Because of the opposition of the poor man, in the next verse: the mighty and the poor are better compared and set together, than the many and the poor. 2. So Levite. 19.15. gadhol, the great, and dal, the poor, are set one against the other, that neither the one nor the other should be respected in judgment. 3. This interpretation of the mighty, comprehendeth also the other, whether they be mighty in number, or in power, Iun.

4. And as respect is not to be had of the multitude, so neither of the paucity and fewness: as the Donatists in times past, and the Anabaptists in these days do brag of their small number, as therefore the best, Gallas.

QUEST. V. How the poor is not to be esteemed in judgment.

Vers. 3. THou shalt not esteem a poor man, &c. 1. The word hadar, signifieth honor, beauty, comeliness. Prohibet blandis sermonibus ornari causam pauperis ; He forbiddeth that the poor man's cause should be set forth with glossing words, and so be made better than it is, Cajetan, Oleaster. Therefore Aristotle giveth a good rule, that in matters of judgment, causa simplicibus sermonibus propeneuda erat, that the cause should be laid forth, and opened in simple and plain speeches, not in eloquent, passionate, or affected words. 2. And as passions may be procured in Judges by speech, so also by the sight of the persons, as if when the poor suitor lamenteth and complaineth, and appear to be very miserable, though he say nothing, Tostat. quaest. 3. 3. The word dal signifieth not only one which is poor in substance, but any other kind of way: as they which are sick and pined away, are called, dallim, as Ammon was thus poor, and pined with love toward Tamar, 2 Sam. 13. Oleaster. So not only the poor, but all other miserable and forlorn persons are here understood, as the widow, fatherless, strangers and such like, Tostat. quaest. 3. 4. Simplie it is not forbidden to respect a poor man, but in his cause: in matter of judgment, nothing must be done, either for rich or poor, praeter merita causae, beside the merit and desert of the cause, Tostat. Cum agitur paupertas, sublevandus est ; When his poverty is pleaded, the poor is to be helped: Cum agiturjus publicum, deponenda est persona pauperis ; When the public right is in question, the poor person must be laid aside, Borrh. 5. And the reason is, because it is better praehonorare veritatem, to prefer and more honor the truth, Lyranus. 6. Although it be not often seen, that a poor man is preferred before a rich in his cause: yet sometime it falleth out, ut ambitio impellat Iudicem, &c. that the Judge through ambition, that he may be spoken of, will respect the poor: & major interdum est pauperum a • dacia, & temeritas, &c. and sometime the poor are more bold, rash, and ready to move suits than the rich, Calvin. And therefore this law provideth for such clamorous poor.

QUEST. VI. How persons are accepted in judgment, and how far the poor may be respected.

IN his cause, &c. 1. The person of the poor is not to be accepted in regard of his cause depending in judgment. Persons are accepted two ways in judgment: 1. When as the Judge aliter distribuit quàm lex mandat, doth determine otherwise than the law commandeth: but where no certain law is set, prescribing the manner and form which is to be followed, in that behalf there can be no acception of persons. And therefore though God in the beginning did elect some, and not others, quia non cogitur aliqualege, because he had no law to compel him, he therein accepted no man's person: as a man giving alms, having no rule set him how much he shall give, may distribute unto one more than unto another, and yet be no accepter of persons. 2. Another way ones person is accepted in judgment, when more is given to one than to another, either of a benefit or punishment, otherwise than is due. As if a man sue for an hundred pound, wherein he can prove but 80. due of just debt, if the Judge shall give him 90. pound, he taketh ten from the one, and giveth it to the other more than is due, and so he is an accepter of the person of the one, more than of the other. And thus a poor man is not to be respected in judgment. 2. Two ways is mercy shown unto the poor in his cause: when one facit illi bonum quod non habet, doth for him, or giveth him that good which he hath not; or, when the Judge so defendeth the poor, ut nemo • ollat e • 〈◊〉 quod haber, that nobody take from him that good which he hath: the first way the Judge cannot have respect unto the poor, without partiality, and perverting of justice, to give unto him that which of right doth not belong unto him: but the other way he may, to see that the poor be not oppressed in judgment, as it followeth afterward, verse. • . Thou shalt not overthrow the right of the poor in his suit. And unto this kind of commis • ration it belongeth, that the Judge is willing to hear the cause of the poor man, and to receive his complaint: for how otherwise should he do him right, and defend him from wrong, if he should stop his ears against the cry of the poor? Tostat. qu. 4.

QUEST. VII. Why mercy is to be shown toward the enemies ox and asse.

Vers. 4. IF thou ma •• thine enemies ox, &c. 1. Because civil suits and controversies for the most part proceed of evil will and enmity: therefore unto the former laws are annexed these two caveats, to cut off enmity, and to maintain love and friendship, Simler. 2. Though an instance be only given of the enemies ox or asse, yet it must be understood, de omni domestico animali, of every domestical beast in like manner, Lyranus. And of whatsoever belongeth unto our neighbor, Lippoman. 3. Neither is this law made concerning oxen, or asses, as the Apostle saith in another case, Doth God take care for oxen? 1 Cor. 9. But the special intendment of this law is, that there might be reconciliation among men. It was some pleasure to the beast, which might otherwise be devoured of some wild beast, if it were not brought home; and to the owner, which might also lose his beast, Tostatus. But the special scope of this law is: First, because the Jews were cruel, to teach them to show and exercise mercy toward brute beasts, Vt eo facilius inducerentur, &c. That they might more easily be induced to show it toward men, Lippoman. Et ut hac ration odientis animum sibi conciliet, And that by this means he might win the heart of his enemy, if he were not altogether implacable, Isidor. 4. There are two words here used, a • ab. which signifieth to be an enemy, and shana, to hate: one may hate not being hated, but an enemy is said to be, where there is mutual enmity on both sides. It is an easier matter to do good to one that hateth, where there is no hatred shown again, than to an enemy that is hated again: therefore both words are used, that we should show kindness, as well where there is a mutual and reciprocal hatred and enmity, as where one is hated, and hateth not again, Tostat. quaest. 3. 5. God by this law doth not either command or permit, that men should be enemies: but being imperfect of themselves, and subject to enmity, he showeth how they should become friends, as when it is said in the Psalm, Be angry and sin not, we are not willed to be angry; but if we chance to be angry, we are taught how to moderate it, that we sin not in our immoderate anger, Tostatus quaest. 3. 6. By this law we learn that there are two kinds of injustice: one of them, qui inferunt injuriam, which offer wrong unto their neighbors; the other of them, qui non propulsant injuriam, which do not keep wrong from them, when it is in their power, Borrh. 7. And further, this law showeth the agreement between Christ and Moses, and between the new and Old Testament, which both command us to love our enemies. Therefore Chrysostom is deceived who thinketh that those precepts, Thou shalt love thy friend, and hate thine enemy, terren • & carnali populo secundùm tempus datae sunt, were given unto the earthly minded and carnal people according to the time: and that Christ gave another rule in the Gospel, to love our enemies: for it is evident that this law commandeth us even to love our enemies. And the Wiseman more evidently in the Proverbs showeth the same, chap. 25.21. If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat, if he be thirsty, give him water to drink, &c. Therefore we see that Christ in the Gospel, non ferat novam legem, sed veterem tantum exponat, doth not make a new law, but only expoundeth the old, Lippoman. That therefore was no precept of the law, but the Pharisees gloss, That they should love their friends, and hate their enemies.

QUEST. VIII. Whether it is to be read, Thou shalt help him, or, lay it aside with him.

Vers. 5. THou shalt lay it aside with him. 1. The most do here read, Thou shalt help him up with it. This sense followeth Calvin, Cajetan, Osiander, Paguine: as the like law is extant, Deut. 22.4. Thou shalt lift them up with him. But the word ghazab is seldom found in that sense, but signifieth ordinarily and properly, to leave, or forsake. 2. Therefore it is best translated, Thou shalt leave, or lay aside the burden, that the asse which cannot rise under his burden, it being put aside, may the better stand up upon his legs. But this sense being retained, there are divers readings used, and interpretations given. 1. Some read it with an interrogation, Wilt thou indeed leave it with him? Vatablus, Oleaster: and so understand here a negative, to answer the interrogation, Nequaquam, No, thou shalt not. 2. Some reading this clause without an interrogation, and understand it of the leaving or laying aside of his hatred. or enmity. So the Chaldee. 3. But the best reading is, to pronounce it without an interrogation, as Montanu • , and to refer it to the burden of the beast, as is before shown, omnino dep • nito cum eo, put it aside together with him, that is thine enemy, Junius. 4. And though mention be made only of easing the asse under his burden; yet all other the like kind of help is understood: as if the beast be otherwise in danger, as like to be strangled, or drowned, whether he have a burden or not: in these cases 〈…〉

QUEST. IX. How the poor man's cause is perverted in judgment.

〈1 paragraph〉

QUEST. IX. Against lying in judgment, and how it may be committed.

〈1 paragraph〉

QUEST. XI. Who are meant here by the just and innocent.

Vers. 7. THou shalt not slay the innocent and the righteous. 1. This is to be understood of slaying, by giving sentence against such judicially: for out of judgment neither is the guilty and unrighteous person to be slain, Cajetan. 2. R. Solomon by the innocent understandeth him, that is clear in his own conscience, but yet condemned by false witnesses: that the Judges in this case, when an innocent party goeth from them condemned, if any do stand up to clear them, as Daniel did for Susanna, they should be heard. By the just he would have understood him, that is indeed guilty, but yet freed in public judgment: that in this case if any do appear to prove him guilty, he should not be admitted, &c. But the righteous and innnocent are here taken for all one, as it may appear by the opposite part, I will not justify a wicked man ; the innocent and righteous is set against the wicked. And beside, it is as acceptable to God to punish the wicked man, as to clear and set free the innocent. 3. Cajetan and Tostatus make this difference, Mundus est, qui non commisit homicidium, &c. He is the clean and innocent man, which hath not committed murder, adultery, or any such crime: he is the just and righteous man, which hath done some just thing, or some good work. But this distinction is here too curious and unnecessary: for men use not to be brought in question for their good works, but for evil, whereof they are either justly, or wrongfully accused: and so David taketh both these for the same, Psal. 4.8. Judge me O Lord according to my righteousness, and according to mine innocence that is in me. 4. God therefore here forbiddeth Judges to condemn the innocent for guilty: as Naboth was, Susanna, and Jeremiah, with the rest of the Prophets, Gallas. 5. Judges are not to condemn the innocent, Etiam si à superiori Iudice jub •• mur, &c. Though they should be commanded by the superior Judge: as the Elders of Israel put Naboth to death at the commandment of Jezebel, Lippoman.

QUEST. XII. In what sense God is said not to justify the wicked.

FOr I will not justify the wicked. 1. Some make this to be the meaning of this reason: that God would have Judges look unto him, in whose place they are: that as God doth not justify the wicked, nor condemn the righteous, so neither should Judges, Marbach, Pelarg. 2. R. Solomon maketh this the sense, according to his former exposition; taking the just, for him which is so in the trial of man's judgment, yet guilty in his conscience, and before God, that yet the Judge should not put such an one to death: for though he be freed by the judgment of man, yet he cannot escape the hands of God: he will not justify him. But this exposition is overthrown before, that a just man is not here taken in that sense. 3. Therefore this rather is a menacing speech; that God will be avenged even of the unrighteous Judge, Iun. Quicunque impie facit sive suo sive alieno arbitrio, &c. Whosoever doth wickedly either of his own mind, or following another's direction, the Lord will punish it, Lippoman.

QUEST. XIII. Whether a Judge ought always to follow the evidence, when he himself knoweth the contrary.

BUt here ariseth a great and weighty question, whether a Judge knowing in his own conscience, that the man which is accused before him is innocent, and yet he is by the witnesses and other evidence found guilty: whether he is bound to give sentence according to the evidence, against his own knowledge, and whether in so doing he sinneth not.

1. The affirmative part is maintained by Thomas, Paulus Burgens. Tostatus, who putteth in these cautions: that the Judge knowing the party to be innocent as a private person, yet is to use all means to have the truth come to light: as by giving some secret intimation to the party accused, how to defend himself; by fifting and examining the witnesses narrowly to see if he can make them to disagree, and so overthrow their testimony: and if all this will not serve, to refer the matter to the superior Judge: but if he have no superior, then he is bound to give sentence, secundum allegata, according to the evidence, & in hoc casu Index non peccat ferendo sententiam mortis, and in this case they resolve that the Judge sinneth not in giving sentence of death against the innocent party. Their reasons are these:

1. Index non interficit ipsum, sed illi qui accusant: The Judge that giveth sentence doth not slay him, but they wich accuse him, Thomas. Like as a man holding a sword in his hand, another cometh and moveth his hand with the sword, and so killeth a man: Non est reus qui tenebat gladium: He is not guilty which held the sword, Tostat.

Answ. 1. Though the false accusers are the chief in this action, yet the Judge is accessory, because he consenteth unto them: otherwise Pilate that washed his hands, and knew Christ to be innocent, should not have sinned in condemning Christ. 2. That instance of one holding a sword is nothing like: for his hand is used against his will, and he himself acteth nothing: but the Judge is an agent. And the case is like, as if one having a sword in his hand should be urged himself to kill one, whom he knew to be innocent: for then he should be guilty of the murder.

2. Solius est Dei judicare secundum veritatem quam ipse cognoscit: It belongeth to God only to judge according to the truth which he knoweth in himself. But the Judge must not be informed according to that which he knoweth as a private person, but as it appeareth unto him publicly in judgment, Burgens.

Answ. It doth not follow, but the contrary rather, that because the Lord judgeth according to the truth, the Magistrate being in God's place should do the like also, not to give sentence against the truth: as Jehoshaphat said unto his Officers and Judges: Ye execute not the judgments of man, but of the Lord, 2 Chron. 19.6.

3. Argum. He that judgeth against the law sinneth: but the Judge not following his evidence, judgeth against the law: therefore he herein should sin, Tostat.

Answ. He that absolveth an innocent man condemned by false witnesses, goeth not against the intendment of the law, which would have no innocent man condemned, and all false witnesses to be punished.

4. Argum. If the Judge should clear the innocent man, condemned by false witnesses, he should by this means defame the witnesses, as false men, which he is not able to prove: and this would breed a great scandal.

Answ. 1. Of two evils the less is to be taken: better were it for the witnesses to run into infamy, than an innocent man to lose his life. 2. Neither would any scandal arise at all: for the Judges knowledge and credit may sway against the good name of the witnesses; who by other circumstances may also easily be detected, as the Judge may handle the matter.

5. Argum. Involuntarie actions deserve neither praise nor dispraise altogether, whether they be committed through ignorance, or by violence: but they help to excuse. Therefore the Judge which followeth the public evidence, though he know the contrary himself, is to be excused, because he is both simply forced by the law so to do, and he is in part ignorant, quia nescit ut Iudex, because as a Judge he knoweth it not, though he know it as a private person, Tostat. qu. 6.

Answ. Ignorance cannot excuse the Judge at all in this case, because he was an eye witness to the contrary: neither is there any such violence offered: for he might rather leave his place and office, than to be compelled to give unjust sentence.

Now the contrary part, namely the negative, that the Judge is not to give sentence against his own knowledge, and that in so doing he should sin, is maintained by Lyranus, and Matthias Toring the Replier to Burgensis upon these reasons:

1. Lyranus urgeth this sentence of Augustine: Quomodo apud divinam providentiam à peccato liberi sunt, &c. How can they be free from sin before the divine providence, which for those things which are to be contemned are polluted with man's blood, &c. His meaning is, that a Judge rather than he would leave his place of honor and wealth, should not give a wrong sentence, to shed the blood of the innocent: man's life ought to be more precious than any other worldly thing whatsoever, as it is said, John 2.4. All that a man hath will he give for his life: therefore in this case, if there be no superior Judge to deliver the innocent party, debet priùs dignitatem dimittere, &c. he should rather give over his dignity, than give sentence against the innocent.

Tostatus answereth, that he should do well to give over his place, unless some inconvenience should ensue, as in this case there would: for, infamaret testes, he should by this means defame the witnesses.

Contra. 1. But a greater inconvenience would follow if he do it not, both the innocent party shall be condemned, and the Judge commit a great sin before God. 2. Neither is here any inconvenience to be feared at all: for by this means false witnesses should be detected, not defamed: for they are worthy of all disgrace and infamy for their falsehood.

2. Argum. The Apostle saith, Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. 14.23. But a Judge giving sentence against his knowledge and conscience, cannot do it of faith: therefore therein he sinneth.

Burgens. answereth, that a Judge in those things which concern his private person, may inform his conscience by his private knowledge; but in public matters, he is to take his information by public evidence.

Contra. True it is, if that public information be not against the truth which he knoweth in his conscience; otherwise he sinneth, because his action is not then of faith: which rule of the Apostle serveth not only for private, but for public actions also.

3. Si privata persona peccat, publica non eximitur, &c. If a man's private person sinneth, his public is not exempted, Thoring. This respect of private and public is before man, but the judgment of sin belongeth unto God. A politic human respect cannot dispense then with a sin against God.

4. To these reasons may be added that saying of the Wiseman which is most evident, Deliver them that are drawn to death, and wilt thou not preserve them, that are led to be slain? If thou say, Behold, we knew not of it: he that pondereth the hearts, doth not he understand it? Here all they are found guilty before God which do not deliver the innocent from death: if private men negligent herein are condemned, much more the public Judge. And this place meeteth with that curious distinction, that as he is Judge he knew it not, though he knew it as a private man: for if he knew it in his conscience and before God, it is enough to convince him before him that searcheth the heart.

5. And if it were so, then a Judge condemning an innocent man, cast by false witnesses, even against his knowledge, should be free: then Pilate who condemned Christ, being by false witness, and the malice of the Jews accused, whom he knew to be an innocent man, giving this testimony of him, I find no fault in him at all, John. 19.4. should notwithstanding herein have been without fault.

Therefore upon these reasons, the former conclusion of Lyranus standeth sound and good: that a Judge sinneth in giving sentence against the innocent, condemned and cast by false evidence, if he in his conscience knew him to be innocent: And that he ought rather in this case to give over his office and dignity, if there be no other way to deliver the innocent, rather than to be guilty of his blood.

QUEST. XIV. A Judge is not bound of his knowledge to condemn a man, not found guilty in public judgment.

BUt as the Judge is bound in conscience to deliver the innocent, whom he knoweth so to be, that yet is found guilty through malice and envy: notwithstanding it d • th not follow, that he should likewise condemn him, that is cleared in public judgment, whom he knoweth in his private knowledge to be guilty of the crime, as of murder, adultery, whereof he was accused, but by favor and partiality aquitted: and the reasons of this difference, are these:

1. The law is more ready to spare than to punish, to extend favor than to show rigor: according to that rule in the law, Odia restringi decet, favores convenit ampliari, Hatred is fit to be restrained, and fafour to be enlarged, Tostat.

2. In condemning a man of his own knowledge, he doth more than in dismissing the innocent: for here he doth not absolve him by any sentence, but only suspendeth the sentence of condemnation, and giveth over his place, rather than he will give sentence against him; but here he giveth sentence against the other.

3. If he should condemn any upon his private knowledge only, he should do it as a private man, but so he hath no power to condemn, Lyranus.

4. Yet the Judge knowing the party accused to be guilty, may by some means so work, and give such direction, that his wickedness may be found out, but of his own knowledge, without further process or evidence in judgment, he cannot condemn him whom he knoweth to be guilty.

QUEST. XV. What a dangerous thing it is for a Judge to take gifts.

Vers. 8. THou shalt take no gift. 1. That is, the Judge, when any cause of his is in hand, who bestoweth the gift upon him: otherwise for the Prince or Magistrate to take a present or gift of acknowledgement, which the subjects and inferiors do offer, to show their duty and thankfulness, it is not here forbidden: nay those wicked and unthankful men, that brought Saul no presents, are reproved, 1 Sam. 10.27. Osiander. 2. And a difference is to be made between Judges and Advocates, for these may safely take their fee, so they exact not more than is due unto them: because both they have not their set stipends as Judges have, and beside, they are but pleaders, not givers of sentence, and so the danger is the less: whereas Judges have their certain solarie appointed them, and in their sentence definitive the cause standeth or falleth, Tostat. 3. This also must be understood of extraordinary and unusual gifts: for inferior Judges have by order, certain fees allowed them in every cause, which they may safely take: in some places they have public allowance, maintenance and revenues, wherewith they ought to be contented: as Nehemiah was allowed the bread of the Governor, though he took it not, chap. 5.15. 4. And not he only which receiveth silver and gold, sed etiam qui propter landom judicat male, munus acciple, &c. but he also which for praise doth judge unjustly, receiveth a reward, August. And there are three kinds of taking of gifts; munus à cord est captata gratia à cogitatione, &c. there is a gift from the heart, when a man thinketh to win favor; munus ab ore ; a gift from the mouth, in praise and commendation; munus ex manu, a gift out of the hand, by receiving of a reward, Gregor.

QUEST. XVI. Whether all kind of gifts are unlawful.

1. SOme think that all gifts are not unlawful, which are given to Judges, and they make this difference: some gifts are for gain and lucre, as silver, gold, and such like: some are for meat and drink, and these were by some Laws allowed to be taken, especially after sentence given. And these circumstances, further they would have considered in gifts: 1. Who giveth, if the rich to him that is poor, it is so much the more suspicious: 2. The quantity of the gift, if it be but small it is not like to corrupt the mind: and therefore Tostatus saith, Ecclesia Romana non consuevit in his interpretari accipientem delinquere vel donantem, The Church of Rome useth not to interpret that the giver or taker offend in these small gifts. But it is no marvel, that their Church which loveth gifts so well, according to the saying, Omniae venalia Romae, All things are saleable at Rome, doth give such a favorable interpretation of bribery. 3. The time of giving must be considered: if one give unto him in his necessity, it is not presumed that he did it to corrupt his mind, as to relieve his want, Tostat. As though it be not so much more like to corrupt the Judge, when he receiveth a gift in his great necessity.

2. Therefore, this text seemeth to condemn all gifts, great or small, given to whomsoever, rich or poor; and whensoever, being given to obtain favor in their cause: for a general reason is given; because all such gifts do blind the eyes and judgment of the wise, which are here called the seeing: and as the word ghiver, in piel, signifieth, do not only blind, but pull out their eyes: as in the same mood it is said, Ierem. 52.11. That the King of Babel put or pulled out the eyes of Zedekiah, Oleaster. And in another sense, the word ghur, signifieth, evigilare, to awake: so gifts cause the eyes of the prudent to awake, and attend upon the unrighteous cause, Oleaster. But the other sense is more fit here: they are said to blind their eyes, either that their judgment being corrupted, they see not what is just or right, as lovers are blinded in that which they love: or though they see what is just, yet they are turned by gifts, to give wrong judgment against their own conscience, Simler. These gifts also pervert the words of the just: their heart also is first perverted, but mention is made of words, because, principalis subversio, &c. est in verbis Iudicis, the principal subversion and overthrow of the righteous cause, is in the words of the Judge, Tostat. qu. 8. They are called still righteous, though now corrupted, because they were so indeed before, and seem to be so still to themselves and others, Simler.

3. Wherefore if all gifts do blind the eyes of Judges, and pervert their words; then it is not safe to receive any gift in that kind, which is given for the furtherance of ones cause. No, it is not lawful for a Judge to take a gift, to give right judgment: Nam de vend • tione justi judicii veniretur ad venditionem nequissimi, Lest from selling of just judgment, they should fall to sell unjust judgment, Tostat. And as it is unlawful to sell justice, so it is also to buy: as S. Paul might have been delivered for a reward, Act. 24.25. but he chose rather to answer at Rome. And in the ancient Church they were noted, which did give money for their liberty, that they might not be compelled to be present at the Gentiles idolatrous sacrifices, Simler.

4. So then, howsoever the Canon law, and the practice of the Church of Rome doth tolerate small gifts, yet it is the safest way, not to accept of any at all. And herein the ancient Roman laws are to be preferred, which, as is extant in their 12. Tabulae, capite puniendum Iudicem, &c. did decree that Judge to be punished with death, which took money to give sentence in a cause. Dioclesian also made a Law, that a sentence pronounced by a corrupt Judge, ipso jure infirmam esse, by the Law should be void, and to be suspended by appeal: Lystat being asked why he received not gifts of the Messerians, answered, Quia in lege justitiae peccatur, He should have offended against the Laws of justice: Innocentius also hath a good saying, speaking of corrupt Judges, Vos non attenditis merita causarum, sed personarum, non jura, sed munera, non quod ratio dictet, sed quod voluntas affectet, non quod lic • at, sed quod lubeat, &c. pauperum causam cum mora negligitis, divitum causam cum instantia promovetis, &c. You do not consider the merit of the cause, but of the persons, not right, but gifts, not what reason enditeth, but what will affecteth, not what is lawful, but what you list, &c. the cause of the poor you neglect by delaying, the cause of the rich you are diligent in promoting: therefore Tostatus here resolveth, and concludeth well, that howsoever the Canons do tolerate the receiving of small gifts, yet it is better, Si volunt effugere conscientiae scrupulum, ut nihil omnino accipiant, If they will avoid the scruple of conscience, that they take nothing at all.

5. A gift then is of great force, it prevaileth much: as the Wiseman saith in the Proverbs, chap. 17.8. A reward is as a stone pleasant in the eyes of them that have it, it prospereth whither soever it turneth. As a precious stone shineth every way, so a gift is available to any purpose. Gifts do much hurt in private matters, as Amphiarans wife, being corrupted with a precious jewel, betrayed him: and Procris chastity was overcome with a gift: but in public affairs gifts do much more hurt, as well in civil, as Philip King of Macedonia, non tam armis, quam auro expugnavit libertatem Greece, did not so much by force and armor, as by gifts and treasure overthrow the liberty of Greece. As also in Ecclesiastical matters, where simony doth as much hurt, as bribery in the Common-wealth: for they which by corrupt means attain to the great preferments of the Church, must needs also corruptly administer the same. A • the Prophet Ezekiel noteth the false Prophets, which for handfuls of barley, and pieces of bread, did prophesy false things, chap. 13.18. Simler. Therefore seeing the Spirit of God hath set it down, that gifts and bribery do corrupt and blind, Nimia eorum est impudentia, &c. They are very impudent and shameless, that will make their boast notwithstanding, that though they receive gifts, they can give right judgment, Gallas.

QUEST. XVII. Why strangers are not to be oppressed in judgment.

Vers. 9. THou shalt not oppress a stranger. 1. Some think that this is a repetition of the former Law, chap. 22.21. Thou shalt not do injury to a stranger, that it may appear, quanta cura domino sint peregrini, &c. how careful God is of strangers, Lippom. And because the Israelites were given to be inhumane and hard toward strangers, as the Jews are to this day, that contemn all people beside themselves: the Lord saw it necessary often to inculcate this precept, Simler. But rather I think with Cajetan and Gallasius, that this is a new Law: Illud communiter, hoc specialiter datur judicibus, testibus, accusatoribus: That was given in general, this in particular to Judges, witnesses, accusers. 2. And to this end God so provided in his wisdom, that the Israelites and their fathers should be strangers and sojourners in other countries, as in Canaan, and Egypt, ut captivitatis & peregrinationis miseriam discerent, to learn by experience what the misery of captives and strangers was, that they might the better know how to have pity on the like: Nemo libentius hospitem sine tecto suo introducit hospitio, &c. No man more willingly receiveth him into his house, that wanteth lodging, than he that was sometime without lodging himself: no man sooner feedeth the hungry, and giveth the thirsty drink, than he that felt hunger and thirst himself, &c. August. 3. And whereas it is added, You know the heart of a stranger: the meaning is, how full of care and grief they are, that you need not afflict them more, Simler. that they are destitute of friends, and had need to be so much the more pitied, Tostat. and seeing strangers are no inhabitants, but such as pass thorough the country, they should not be stayed nor hindered, ut iter suum posset exequi, that they may finish their journey, Lyranus. You know also by yourselves their hearts, how ready they are to call unto God for help against their oppressors, as you did in Egypt, Simler.

QUEST. XVIII. Of the divers festivals of the Hebrews.

Vers. 10. SIx years thou shalt sow thy land, &c. The Hebrews had divers kinds of festival days, which all tended to the honor of God. Now, impendimus honorem Deo, &c. we do give honor unto God either for an eternal benefit, and so they had juge sacrificium, every days sacrifice: or for some temporal, which is either general, as of our creation, in remembrance whereof they kept the seventh day holy: or of our preservation, ideo erat festum Neomemae, therefore they kept the feast of the new Moon every month: or special, as of some special benefit and deliverance, in remembrance whereof they had their festivals of weeks, as Pentecost; of months, as the seventh month; of years, as the seventh year, and the seventh seventh year, which was the Jubile, Thomas.

QUEST. XIX. Why the land was to rest the seventh year.

Vers. 11. BVt the seventh year thou shalt let it rest, &c. 1. The land is said to rest in two respects: First, in a metaphorical sense, as we are said to rest, when we cease from labor; so the earth is said to rest, when we forbear laboring therein. Again, because the earth when it is plowed to bring forth fruit, sendeth out the strength and nourishment thereof, which is abated and weakened by continual bringing forth of fruit: for which cause we see by experience, that Husbandmen do let their grounds lie fallow, and rest to gather strength: therefore in this respect also it is said to rest, Tostat. qu. 9. And although by this rest of the seventh year, both the earth waxed stronger for to bear fruit afterward, and the beasts also of the field were provided for: yet this was not the special end of this seventh year of rest: but these were the reasons of the institution thereof: 1. That the poor might by this means be liberally provided for, when they might freely without any let, reap the fruit of the ground, of vineyard, and olive trees, Tostat. 2. It was a benefit also to the servants, who this year were set at liberty; and as they had every week a day of rest, so now they have every seventh year a whole year of rest and intermission. 3. Beside, the rich hereby were taught to moderate their greedy desire, in gathering and laying up the fruits of the earth without any end, Gallas. And in this year the rich man took care as well as the poor, What shall I eat? Therefore the Lord would teach them by experience what the state of a poor man was. 4. This also was a type and figure of their spiritual rest in Christ, which should be accomplished in the kingdom of God, as this seventh year of rest was made perfect and full in the year of Jubile, Simler.

QUEST. XX. What the poor lived upon in the seventh year.

BUt here a further question ariseth, what the poor did eat this year, and that which they left, the beasts of the field did eat. 1. Augustine is of opinion, that they did sow the seventh year, as they did in the six years, yet they did not reap or gather their fruit this year, but left it to the poor. But this is against the text here: for six years they are bidden to sow, and gather their fruits, but the seventh to let it rest: therefore there here being an apparent opposition between the six years and the seventh, in the seventh they were neither to sow, nor reap; but it is yet more evident, Levite. 25.4. in this seventh year the Lord saith, Thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor cut thy vineyard. And so it is the opinion of Josephus, and generally of the Hebrews: and with them consent Lyranus, Tostatus, Simlerus with others, that the land did rest upon the seventh year from all manner of labor and tillage: for it would have seemed an hard thing to the stiffnecked Hebrews, if they should have sowed, and others reap. 2. Cajetan thinketh that the poor lived by selling of such herbs as grew of their own accord that year in the field: vendebant ease, & ex earum pret •• vive •••• , they sold them, and lived of the price of them: but the text saith, The rest of the land shall be meat for you▪ Levite. 25.6. they then did eat of that which grew in the field. 3. Wherefore they lived not only of the herbs which grew in the fields, but of the fruit of vines, and olives, and other fruitful trees. Beside, they had a kind of harvest, of the seed which was shed the former year: as in some countries yet, that are fruitful, the seed which was left after harvest doth bring forth abundance, Gallas. Simler. and therefore it is said, Levite. 25.5. That which groweth of it own accord of thy harvest, thou shalt not reap, &c. 4. And beside this common provision which came of it self out of the ground, which as well the owner, as the poor, and strangers gathered for their use, Levite. 25.6. the fruits of the sixth year were by God's promise in such abundance, as that they served for three years, the sixth, seventh and eighth, till the ninth year, Levite. 25. verse. 21, 22.

QUEST. XXI. Whether the seventh year were generally neglected in Israel, 490. years together, as Tostatus thinketh.

NOw concerning the observation of this seventh year of rest, Tostatus hath here a singular opinion by himself, that it was neglected generally of the Israelites for the space of 490. years, and kept only during the time of 380. years, as he thus would gather: from the going up of the Israelites out of Egypt till the captivity of Babylon under Nabuzaradan, Nebuchadnezzar's chief Captain, he counteth years 867. which are thus divided: from their departure out of Egypt, unto the building of Solomon's Temple, were 480. years, 1 King. 6.1. from the which he would have aba • ed 40. years, the time of the Israelites being in the wilderness, so there remain 440. from the building of Solomon's Temple until the captivity, he counteth 427. years more: so the whole maketh 867. of this time, 490. years they neglected the seven Sabbath of years: and therefore they were 70. years in captivity: for omitting 70. Sabbatical years, which fell out just in 490. years, as it is said, 2 Chron. 36.21. To 〈…〉 of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had her f • ll of Sabbaths: for all the days that 〈…〉 desolate she kept Sabbath to fulfill seventy years, Tostat. quaest. 1 • .

Contra. 1. But it is not like, that this observation of the seventh year of rest was so long time, or generally neglected: for part of this term of 490. years will reach David's reign: for all the years of the reigns of the Kings after David, until the captivity, make but 440. the other 50. year will comprehend all David's reign, and ten years before, some part whereof might extend to 〈◊〉 time: but it is not like that such an evident Law under those faithful Prophets and Kings would have been omi • ted altogether.. 2. In the corrupt times under the idolatious Kings, it is true that this year of remission was neglected, as may appear, Ierem. 36.8.14. when as the King and Princes proclaimed liberty to their servants according to the Law, and afterward revoked it again: for the which the Prophet th • re sharply reproveth them. Neither would the faithful Prophets of God have spared to tell the Princes and people of this great negligence, if that the Sabbatical year had altogether been discontinued. 3. In Hezekiah his time, this year of rest was not intermitted: for while the City was besieged by Sennacherib, for two years together the land brought forth fruit without sowing, 2 King. 19.29. which blessing was conditional in respect of their keeping of the seventh year of rest, Levite. 25.6.21. They therefore enjoying the promised blessing did in all likelihood perform their due obedience. 4. Beside, captivity is threatened for the neglect of their Sabbaths of all sorts, Levite. 26. • 5. both the Sabbath of days, of weeks, of months, years, and seven years. It is as like that they neglected the Sabbath of days, which was the seventh: of weeks, which was Pentecost: of months, which was the seventh as well as of years: ye the Sabbath of seven years, which was the Jubile, was also intermitted, if the seventh year, from which they accounted it, were not remembered. 5. Further, if they suffered not the land to rest in the seventh year, they likewise abandoned other privileges incident to that year, as the remission of debts, the setting free their servants: which apparent transgressions, nay rebellions, should not have been suffered to slip without some reprehension by the Prophets, and correction from God, especially under the virtuous Kings of Judah.

QUEST. XXII. Why the Law of the Sabbath is so oft repeated.

Vers. 12. SIx days thou shalt labor. 1. Some think that this precept concerning the observation of the Sabbath is repeated by reason of the former Law concerning the seventh year of intermission; lest that the Hebrews, because that whole year was a time of rest, might have taken unto themselves greater liberty in the keeping of the Sabbath, Lyranus. But this seemeth to be no sufficient reason: because although they rested from the works of husbandry all that year, yet they attended other •••• nesse and labor, Tostatus. 2. Some think that the Sabbath is here mentioned in respect of the civil 〈◊〉 thereof, the rest and relaxation of the servants: whereas before it was urged as a part of God's service, Gallas. Siml. 3. But the best reason is, that the Law of the Sabbath is repeated, because it chiefly concerned the worship of God: and therefore so often is this precept i • crated; as chap. 20. Deut. 5▪ Exod. 31. 〈◊〉 and in divers other places, Tostat. quaest. 13. 4. And such respect the Lord hath to the seventh day of rest, which he himself consecrated by his own example, that according to this rule he did proportion the other festivals, as the seventh week, the seventh month, the seventh year: yea in natural experiments the seventh day is observed: as the seventh, fouretenth, and twenty one are the critical days for diseases, as Hippocrates and Gal •• have written, Jerome. 4. The benefit of this day the Lord would have extended to their servants, strangers, yea to the laboring cartell. R. Solomon thinketh, that in the next clause, Ye shall take heed to all things, &c. the implements and instruments which are used to any business or work are understood, as the sword, a • e▪ cutting knife, and such like: that all these things should rest in like manner. But this is too curious, and beside it were superfluous, seeing the men are forbid to labor, without whose hands these things cannot stir or move: therefore this clause either is to be referred to the former duties which concerned the Sabbath, Lyranus. or in general to their obedience to the whole Law, and all the former precepts which were delivered have it, Simler.

QUEST. XXIII. What manner of mention of strange gods is here forbidden.

Vers. 14. AN • ye shall make no mention of the name of strange gods. 1. The Latin Translator readeth, Thou shalt not swear: but the word zachar signifieth to remember: which is more than to swear, which is too strictly taken: they must make no mention, non solum jurando, sed landand • , probande, abtestande: not only in swearing, but in praising of them, approving, protesting by them, Lippoman. 2. The Jews do run into another extreme, making this precept too general: they think it not lawful at all once to pronounce the names of the Gentiles Idols: but the Prophets which inveighed against them, could not but pronounce their names with their mouth: the meaning then is, nullus loquatur honorabiliter, none should make honorable mention of them, Cajetan. 3. This phrase then is to be understood, as S. Paul would not have fornication once named among them, Ephes. 5.3. that is, that more should be committed, none named with desire or delight, Simler. therefore here only is forbidden • onesta 〈◊〉 , &c. non inhonesta & cum detestatione, &c. the comely and reverent mention of their gods, not the i • reverent mention with detestation. 4. Cajetan thus distinguisheth the sentence: the first part biddeth, ut praeteriti d • non memorentur, that the former strange gods should not be remembered, but be forgotten, as though they never had been: the other part, neither shall it be heard out of thy mouth, showeth, ut de moderuis diis nemo honorabiliter loquatur, and of the gods present none should speak honourably. But indeed the meaning is, that generally the memory of all false gods should be extinguished: as they 〈◊〉 commanded to abolish the very names of them, Deut. 12.3. that neither in their oaths, nor in their familiar talk they should revive the memory of them: see the practice thereof, Psalm. 16.4. Neither will make mention of their names within my lips. So the Lord saith by his Prophet, I will take away the 〈◊〉 of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall be no more remembered by their names, Hos. 2.17. Iun. 5. By the name of strange gods are here understood, all which the Heathen worshipped, whether by images or without, whether things in heaven, in the earth, or under the earth: which are called strange gods; not because they are gods at all, but so reputed in the opinion of their idolatrous worshippers: and strange they were, because such were worshipped only of strange nations, and not of the people of God, To • tat. quaest. 13.

QUEST. XXIV. Why it is forbidden to swear by the name of strange gods.

Vers. 13. YE shall make no mention of the name of other gods, &c. 1. If it be unlawful to make any honorable mention at all of the names of strange gods, no not in usual talk, much less is it lawful to swear by them, because in taking of an oath, invocatur Deus tanquam testis veritatio, God is called upon as a witness of the truth: so to swear by the name of God, is actus •• reiae, an act of divine worship, and therefore it cannot be given unto any other beside God: and again, one Idols, because they are false gods, non possunt esse testes veritatis, cannot be witnesses of the truth, Lyranus. 2. 〈◊〉 observeth here this difference between the Law and the Gospel: there, per nomen Dei jurure non 〈◊〉 , they are not forbidden to swear by the name of God: Evangelica veritat non recipit juramentum ▪ But the Evangelical truth admitteth no oath, because the speech of a faithful man ought to be instead of an oath, &c. He thinketh that by this Law the Hebrews had liberty given them to swear at their pleasure, so they did swear only by the name of God. But I rather here approve Calvin's annotation, Non incit • t Deus p • p • l •• ad jurandi licentiam, &c. God doth not hereby incite his people to swe • ing, or give them liberty to swear: sed ubi opus fuerit, & vel necessitat & justa ratio id posta •• bit, but where need it, and necessary, or just cause do so require, &c. otherwise the Law doth forbid all unlawful swearing, as well as the Gospel. 3. And the reason why they ought not to swear by strange gods, is, ne frequenti juramento i ••• cantur ad cult ••• 〈◊〉 , &c. lest that by often swearing they be induced to worship them, Glos. interli •••• . 4. And as an Hebrew then, and so a Christian now, was not himself, so neither were they to compel a Gentile to swear by them: yet as Augustine determineth it is lawful for a Christian, recipere ab eo juramentum in Deo suo, &c. to receive an oath of a Gentile by his god, to confirm some covenant or contract: se Gentilis obtularis se facturum, if the Gentile do of himself offer it, Lyranus, Tostat.

QUEST. XXV. Whether a Christian may compel a Jew to swear by his Thorah, which containeth the five books of Moses.

VPon this occasion, how far a Christian may compel another of a contrary religion to swear, as a Jew or Turk, Tostatus bringeth in divers questions, which it shall not be amiss here briefly to touch: as first, whereas it is an usual thing with the Jews at this day to swear upon their Thorah, which is nothing else but a volume containing the five books of Moses, yet bound up in silk, and laid up very curiously in their Synagogue, whereout they use to read the lectures of the Law: the question is, whether it be lawful for a Christian Judge to urge a Jew to take his oath upon his Thorah ; for upon the Gospels, he will rather die than take an oath. For the resolution of this doubt, divers things are to be weighed and considered.

1. That there is great difference between the Idols, and 〈◊〉 gods of the Heathen, and the Jews Thorah: for this 〈◊〉 a part of God's word, and containeth nothing but the truth and it is all one, as if the Jew did lay his hand upon the Pentateuch or five books of Moses: as any Christian may take his oath upon the Gospels, or any other part of God's word.

2. And like as a Christian laying his hand upon the Gospels, doth not 〈◊〉 by the book • , for 〈◊〉 were unlawful, in giving the honor due to the Creator unto a creature: but hath relation unto God, whose verity and truth is contained in that book: So a Jew swearing upon his Thorah, yet sweareth by God the Author of the Law, and in so doing sinneth not.

3. Yet it may so fall out, that a Jew may sin in swearing upon his Thorah, as having an opinion, that all the contents of that book, as namely the ceremonials, are yet in force, which are abolished in Christ: and yet the Judge may not sin in requiring the Jew to swear upon his Thorah: for he doth not consider of those things, quae sunt in voluntate agentis, sed de ipso actis, which are in the mind and intent of the doer, but of the act it self: therefore the act of it self being lawful, a Jew may be required to do it: Sic Tostat. qu. 14.

QUEST. XXVI. Whether a Jew may be urged to swear in the name of Christ.

BUt as the Jew may be urged to swear upon his Thorah, which they hold to be a book of truth, as Christians do, yet the case is not alike, if a Christian should compel a Jew to swear in the name of Christ; for although Christ be in deed and in truth very God, yet the Jews hold him to be worse than any Idol: and therefore the Jew in taking such an oath should do against his conscience, and consequently commit a great sin: or if a Jew should require a Christian to swear by the name of Christ, whom he holdeth to be no God, nor yet a good man, therein the Jew should also sin against his conscience: for it skilleth not a thing to be so or so indeed, dum aliter concipiatur, as long as a man otherwise conceiveth and is persuaded in his mind, Tostat. qu. 15.

QUEST. XXVII. Whether a Saracene may be urged to swear upon the Gospels or in the name of Christ.

NOw, although a Jew cannot be compelled without sin to swear in the name of Christ whom he holdeth worse than an Idol, or upon the Gospels which they think contain nothing but fables; yet the reason standeth otherwise for a Saracene or Turk: he may be required to swear in the name of Christ, or upon the Gospels. And the reason is, because the Saracens have a good opinion of Christ, and believe that he was sent of God, and that he was a great Prophet, and a good man: and for the most part they do assent unto the Gospels, and believe that Christ spake the truth. And therefore they in taking such an oath do not against their conscience, and therein sin not. Now if it be objected, that the Saracens differ more from the Christians than the Jews, and therefore can no more lawfully take an oath in the name of Christ than the Jews: the answer is, that although the Jews consent with the Christians touching the canonical books of the Old Testament, as the Saracens do not: yet as touching Christ they do totally dissent from the Christians, and so do not the Saracens, Tostat. qu. 17.

QUEST. XXVIII. Whether a Christian may swear upon the Jews Thora.

BUt it hath been before shown, that a Jew may be without sin urged to swear upon his Thora, which is nothing but the Pentateuch, containing the five books of Moses: another question is moved, whether a Christian may safely take his oath upon the Jews Thora. And that it is not lawful so to do, it may be thus objected.

1. It is a sin, Iudaizare, to Judaize, to do as the Jews do: as to be circumcised, to observe the Jewish Sabbath, and such like: But to swear upon the Thora, is to Judaize, that is, to do as the Jews do, Ergo, &c.

Answ. 1. To Judaize is not simply to do that which the Jews do, but that which they alone do, and none other: as to believe that which they only believe; as that the ceremonies of the Law are still in force: or to do that which they only do, as to be circumcised, and to abstain from certain kind of meats, as Saint Paul chargeth Saint Peter that he compelled the Gentiles Iudaizare, to Judaize concerning their meats: for he did eat with the Gentiles before the Jews came, and afterward he withdrew himself from them: otherwise to believe as the Jews and others also believe, and to do likewise; as to hold the world to have been created, the Israelites to have been delivered, and all other things in the Scriptures to be true, as they are there set down: this is not to Judaize. 2. So, because the Thora, which is the Pentateuch, is not only received of the Jews, but of the believing Gentiles: and the truth of the Law we subscribe unto as well as the Jews: therefore simply to take an oath upon their Thora, is not to play the Jew: but a Christian may as lawfully do it, as to swear upon the Gospels, or any other part of the divine Scriptures.

2. Dare favorem errori Iudaeorum, &c. To give way, or show favor unto the error of Jews is sin: but a Christian swearing upon the Thora should give way unto the Jewish error. Ergo.

Answ. To swear upon the Thora, where any scandal or offense may grow unto the weak, or any occasion of hardening to the Jew, it is unlawful: yet this showeth not, but that where no such danger is, simply so to take an oath is not unlawful.

3. To make this a lawful act then for a Christian to take an oath upon the Jews Thora, these things must be considered: 1. If he swear upon it, not as upon any other book of the same contents; that is, comprehending the five books of Moses: but as it is a monument of the Jews, bound up in silk, and laid up in their Synagogue, so is it not lawful, because to be addicted to such superstitious observations is sin.

2. Though there be no difference between their Thorah which is written in Hebrew, and our Pentateuch in Latin or English, in respect of the substance; but one indifferently may lay his hand upon the one or the other, for there is no difference of languages before God: yet if a man make difference in his own opinion, thinking the one not as lawful as the other; herein he should offend, doing against his own conscience.

3. Or if an Hebrew should require a Christian to swea • e upon his Thorah, rather than upon the Gospels, it were not lawful: for hereby we should confirm him in his error.

4. Or if one Christian should require another to swea • e rather upon the Jewish Thorah, than upon the Gospels, it were not safe so • o do: because such an one giveth occasion of suspicion that he doth not firmly and steadfastly believe the contents of the Gospel.

5. But if a Christian of himself, without any such motion made by another, do willingly take his oath upon the Thorah, either of necessity, because there is no other book of Scripture present: or because he maketh no difference between one book of Scripture and another, he may do it lawfully, so it be done without offense unto others, Sic Tostat. quaest. 16.

QUEST. XXIX. That it is not lawful for a Christian to swear upon the Turks Alcaron, or Muhammad's thigh, nor for a Turk himself.

BUt though a Christian may swear upon the Jews Thora, the former considerations being observed: yet is it altogether unlawful for him to swear either upon Muhammad's thigh, which is kept as an holy relique among the Saracens and Turks, or upon their Alcaron.

1. The first is evident, because this being a moral precept to swear by the name of God only, and not by the name of any strange gods, bindeth all believing people forever: now to swear by Muhammad's thigh, is to swear by a strange god, and therefore it is unlawful as well for the Jew as the Christian to take such an oath, seeing they are both bound to keep the moral precepts and Commandments, Tostat. quaest. 19.

2. The other also is unlawful, as it may thus be shown: for an oath is made three ways, either 〈◊〉 God alone without any other external sign or symboll, which is a lawful and sufficient oath: or by the creature alone, which is an unlawful oath; for so the glory which is only due unto God, should be given unto the creature: or by God and some creature together with reference unto God, as when in taking an oath the hand is laid upon a book. But such a creature is used as an external symboll in an oath: as in quo nihil est mendacii, wherein there is no lie: and it must immediate e nos ducere in cognitionem Dei, bring us immediately to the knowledge of God: therefore we lay not our hand upon a stone, because it hath no instruction in it as a book hath. But the Gospel hath both these properties: there is no falsehood or untruth in it: and it doth bring us immediately and directly to the knowledge of God. The Turks Alcaron hath neither: for both it containeth many falsehoods, fables, and untruths: and it can never bring us to the knowledge of the true God, having many errors in it. So then a Christian taking his oath upon the Alcaron, thereby should confess all to be true which is there contained, and so blaspheme God, and beside give great offense unto Christians, and so secondly his brethren: therefore it were better for a Christian to choose rather to die, than to take such a blasphemous oath, Tostat. qu. 20. The like judgment is to be given of the Jews Talmud, which containeth many fables, and blasphemies against Christ.

And for the same reasons before alleged, even a Turk or Saracen sinneth in taking an oath upon Muhammad's thigh, though he directly make it not God; because he useth such an unholy superstitious and abominable thing, in taking of a sacred oath: likewise he offendeth in swearing upon his Alcaron, which containeth abominable lies, and the same most pernicious, even concerning the end of all our happiness in blessedness in the next world, which their Alcaron placeth, and maketh to consist in the carnal pleasures of eating and drinking, and the use of women, Tostat. quaest. 21, 22.

QUEST. XXX. Why three feasts are only named, wherein they had more.

Vers. 14. THree times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year. 1. They had divers other festival days beside these three which are here named, the Pasch, called the feast of unleavened bread; Pentecost, named the feast of first fruits; and the feast of Tabernacles, called here the feast of gathering fruits in the end of the year: which said three feasts are not named, because they were more strictly observed than the rest: for the Sabbath was more straitly kept, wherein it was not lawful to kindle a fire, Exod. 35.3. nor consequently to do any work about preparing of their meat: neither in the feast of reconliation was it lawful to do any work at all, Levite. 23.28. whereas in other feasts only servile works are forbidden: and in the feast of the Passover, such works as were about their meat and drink were permitted, Exod. 12.16. But therefore are these three feasts named, because in them only the people were bound to come up before the Lord. 2. And these three were special feasts above the rest for these causes: 1. Because in them only the people were required to appear before the Lord. 2. Special oblations were offered in these feasts. In the Passover was offered a sheaf of the first fruits, Levite. 23.10. in the feast of Pentecost they presented the first fruits of their wheat harvest, fair flower baken with leaven, Levite. 23.17. And in the feast of Tabernacles they were commanded to make them boothes of boughs, ibid, verse. 40. 3. Those feasts excelled the other in respect of the multitude of sacrifices which were to be offered therein, as is prescribed, Numb. 28.29. 4. And in regard of their continuance: for two of them, the Pasch, and feast of Tabernacles continued each of them seven days: the Pasch held from the 15. day of the first month unto the 21. day: and the feast of Tabernacles likewise began the 15. day of the seventh month, and ended the 21. day. Pentecost only hath one day allowed, which was the 50. day after the Passover, Levite. 23.16. Tostat. 5. These feasts also were observed in remembrance of three great benefits: the Passover, of their deliverance out of Egypt: the Pentecost, of delivering the Law: and the feast of Tabernacles, of their preservation in the wilderness, Lyranus.

QUEST. XXXI. Of the feast of the Passover.

Vers. 15. THou shalt eat unleavened bread. 1. This was the feast of the Passover, or of unleavened bread, which were not two feasts concurring together, as Cyril seemeth to think, Alia est solemnitas Paschae, ilia azym • rum, licet conjuncta vidiatur, &c. There was one solemnity of the Pasch, another of unleavened bread, though they seem to be joined together. 2. Mention is not here made of the Paschal lamb, but only of unleavened bread, not as Cajetan thinketh, Quia non singulis annis omnes tenerentur ad immotandum agnum Paschalem, &c. Because all were not bound every year, to offer a pascal lamb, but to eat unleavened bread seven days they were bound, &c. For the contrary appeareth, Exod. 12.24. they were bound to keep the Passover, as an ordinance forever; but the feast hath the denomination of the greater part: because they did eat the Passover but one day, but unleavened bread they did eat seven days together. 3. In this feast, they offered a sheaf of the first ripe corn, which as Josephus writeth, was done in this manner, Siccantes spicar •• manipulum, & commandentes, &c. They dried an handful of ears, and so rubbed or bruised them, and then offered them, lib. 3. Antiquit.

QUEST. XXXII. Why Pentecost is called the feast of the first fruits.

Vers. 16. THe feast of the harvest, of the first fruits of thy labors. This is called the feast of first fruits, and yet in the feast of the Passover the first sheaf was offered. 1. Quod primi pa • es nunc offerebantur Deo, sicut in fine Paschae primae spi • ae, &c. Because the first bread or loaves of the new fruit was then offered, as in the end of the pasch the first ears, Cajetan. which were not then so ripe to make bread of. 2. Or because now they presented the first fruits of all their labors, that is, of all that they had sown: but before, they brought the first fruits of someone kind of grain only, which was first ripe, Tostat. 3. Or then they offered only the first ripe ears: as if a man went into the field, and espied 〈◊〉 aliquas appropinquantes ad maturitatem a •• e alias, some ears hastening to be ripe before the rest, them he gathered, and offered unto the Lord: but now in the feast of Pentecost, they brought the first fruits of all, Lyranus. 4. This feast was celebrated, propter benefictum legis data, for the benefit of the giving of the Law, Lyranus. Which was given the 50. day after their going out of Egypt, Tostat. And in remembrance ingressionis in terrum promissam, of their entrance into the Land of promise, when they did first eat of the fruit of the land, Theodoret. And it was a sign of the giving of the holy Ghost, which descended on the 50. day after the resurrection, Lyranus.

QUEST. XXXIII. How the feast of Tabernacles is said to be in the end of the year.

Vers. 16. THe feast of gathering in the end of the year. 1. Oleaster and Tostatus are of opinion, that the common account of the year began in the seventh month, when it was thought that the world was created: but that upon occasion of the deliverance of the Israelites in the first month of the spring, that was consecrated to be the first, as touching the keeping of their feasts: but the former order remained still for the account of civil matters. But it is before shown, that the institution of Abib to be the first month, was rather then revived, than of new ordained; and that is the more probable opinion, that the world was created in the spring; and that in remembrance thereof, that was counted the first month. 2. Cajetan saith, It is called the end of the year, in regard of the fruits of the earth, which were then all gathered, as both grapes and olives; not in respect of the season of the year, for September was the first month of the next year: and so it should rather have been said in the beginning of the year, than in the end. But seeing the same month was both the end of one year, and the beginning of another, it may be said to be in the end of the year, though in the first month of the civil year, quod medicùm distat, inesse videtur, it might be said to be in it, though it were distant a little, Tostat. So also Lyranus. Immediately after the end of the year. 3. And we are here to understand the gathering of all the fruits, not only come which was before inned and in the barn, seeing it was ripe four months before, in the feast of Pentecost; but all other fruits, as wine and olives, which were then gathered, as Deut. 16.13. Tostat.

QUEST. XXXIV. Which were the three feasts, wherein they were to appear before the Lord.

Vers. 17. THree times in the year, &c. 1. The Israelites had divers festival times in the year: as beside the continual and daily sacrifice they had seven other feast days; every week upon the Sabbath, every month upon the first day thereof: the feast of the Pasch, and Pentecost: and in the seventh month they had three more, the feast of blowing of Trumpets upon the first day, the feast of Reconciliation upon the tenth, and of the Tabernacles upon the 15. which continued until the 21. Thomas. Now they are not bound to come together in all these feasts, but only at three of them. 2. Though it be not expressed here, which three feasts they were to go up in; yet it is evident in other places, the feast of the Passover was one, Deut. 16.2. they were to offer it in the place which the Lord should choose: and the continual practice showeth the same, as is evident, Luk. 2.41. the parents of our blessed Savior went up every year to the Passover. So in the feast of Pentecost, they were all to rejoice before the Lord, they, their sons and daughters, servants and maids, Deut. 16.11. 3. Only the question is, concerning the third time of their appearing before the Lord, which some think was at the feast of the blowing of Trumpets, in the 1. day of the seventh month: and so they continued there during the two other feasts of the Reconciliation, in the • 0. day; and of Tabernacles, which began in the 15. Osiander. But here I approve rather Calvin's reason, Gravin fuisset tam diuturna mora, So long abode together at Jerusalem, had been burthensome, for the space of three weeks together: from the first day of the seventh month, to the 21. when the feast of Tabernacles ended: therefore this third time of their going up, was against the feast of the Tabernacles, as is evident, Deut. 31.10. and that these were the three times in the year, is directly mentioned, Deut. 16.16. These three times in the year shall all the males appear, &c. Tostat. quaest. 25.

QUEST. XXXV. Who were bound to appear before the Lord, whether their servants.

Vers. 17. SHall all thy men children appear. 1. The women were not bound by this Law to appear, because it was necessary that they should be left at home to attend the domestical affairs, and have a care of the young children: yet they might come up voluntarily, as Anna the mother of Samuel did, and Marie the mother of our blessed Savior: especially those which dwelt near to Jerusalem. 2. Concerning the males, Tostatus thinketh that all the males, after they were come to years of discretion, ascended: as Christ being but a child, according to the custom of other children, went up with his parents: But it is more like that none went up under 20. year old, only those males, qui ira • sibant sub censum, which passed under the account, Calvin. Some think also, none above 50. years: but that is not like: the children might go up with their parents also, but that was not of any necessity. And left it might have seemed a dangerous thing to the country, if all the males together should have been absent, the Lord promiseth, that their enemies should not desire their land in the mean time while they appeared before the Lord, Exod. 34.24. 3. Neither were the males of their own children only bound to go up, but their servants also, as is expressly mentioned, Deut. 16.12. that their son, daughter, servant and maid should rejoice with them before the Lord. Of their Hebrew servants there was no question, because they were of the same profession, and they were but their servants for a time. And concerning other servants bought with their money, they were to circumcise them, and then they were to eat of the Passover, Exod. 12.44. Now if they were circumcised, they were thereby bound to keep the whole Law, as the Apostle showeth, Galath. 5.3. And seeing they also were to eat the Passover, which could not be offered but before the Lord, Deut. 16.2. they were also necessarily to appear before the Lord. 4. But if all their servants were bound to go up with them thrice in the year, and that from the furthest parts of the land, this would seem to have been a great prejudice to their masters, and an hindrance to their business, to spare their servants so long. Lyranus and Tostatus here answer, that they which dwelt far off were dispensed withal, and it was sufficient for them to come up only once in the year at the Passover. But no such dispensation is extant in the Law: I rather insist upon that other answer of Tostatus, that damna animae plus vitanda sunt quàm damna corporis: the detriment of the soul is more to be shunned than the detriment of the body. Therefore seeing their appearing before the Lord concerned the health of their souls, all worldly respects ought to give place unto it: and the Commandment of God was to be preferred before all, Tostat. quaest. 26.

QUEST. XXXVI. To what end the people were commanded to meet together.

THis general meeting of all Israel thrice in a year before the Lord was profitable for divers ends: 1. Ad concordiam religions & doctrinae conservandam, &c. To keep and preserve concord and unity in doctrine and religion, Simler. for if they might have sacrificed where they would, the people might soon have declined and fallen to strange worship. 2. Ingenti multitudinis concursu alii alios incitabant, &c. By this concourse of the multitude one helped to stir up and provoke another to the more cheerful setting forth of the praise of God, Gallas. 3. It was effectual also, Ad coalitionem animorum, &c. For the knitting together of their hearts and minds, the maintaining of love and charity among them, Marbach. 4. Solemnia festa angustiora fieri tanto conventu: The solemn feast days by this company of the people were thereby more adorned and set forth. 5. And this was a figure also of Christ: that as they had but one Sanctuary, one Altar, on high Priest: so Christus est unicus servator: Christ is our only Savior and high Priest, Simler.

QUEST. XXXVII. Why the people were not to appear empty before the Lord.

Vers. 15. NOne shall appear before me empty. 1. Though this precept be annexed here to the solemnity of the Passover: yet it is to be referred not only to that feast, as Tostatus seemeth to take it, but to all the rest of the three, Cajetan, Gallas. 2. Some understand it thus, that none should appear empty, or in vain before the Lord, but they should receive some blessing at his hand: but it is plain, Deut. 16.17. that it is meant of such gifts and oblations as they should bring with them, to offer before the Lord, Simler. 3. Which offerings and oblations served for the repairing of the Temple, and the maintaining of the Levites, and for other such uses belonging to the service of God, Simler. 4. This presenting of gifts unto the Lord, was to testify their thankful mind: Non enim satis erat verbis gratitudinem testificari: For it was not sufficient in words only to testify their thankfulness, Gallas. And to this end they did it, ut personarum & rerum fiat Deo oblatio, qui dat & personas & res omnes: that they might offer unto God as well their substance as their persons, who giveth all, both the persons and all things beside, Cajetan. 5. Though we are not bound unto this Law, seeing it is abolished, veritas tamen a • uos pertinet, yet the truth thereof belongeth unto us, Gallas. that if we have money, or any other substance, we should first relieve the poor, tunc demum Deo preces fundamus, and then offer our prayers unto God: Saltem animam non à bo • is operibus vacuam Deo offeramus, &c. At the least we should not present our soul unto God empty and void of good works, Theodoret. To the same purpose Chrysostom, idcirco paupers ante sores sunt, ut nemo vacuus ingrediatur, &c. intras ut misericordiam consequaris, prior ipse miserere, &c. Therefore the poor stand at the Church door, that none should go in empty: thou encrest to obtain mercy, first show mercy thyself, &c. Gregory applieth it to the appearing before the Judge at the latter day: he which spendeth his time here in heaping up of wealth, in gathering of riches, Quia cunctae haec quis{que} moriens deserit, ante Dominum vacuus apparet ; Because everyone leaveth these things when he dieth, he appeareth empty before the Lord.

QUEST. XXXVIII. In what place they appeared before the Lord, while the Ark and Tabernacle were asunder.

Vers. 15. APpeare before the Lord. While the Ark and Tabernacle remained together, there was no question at all, but that coming to the Tabernacle, they appeared there before the Lord: but afterward when the Tabernacle and Ark were asunder, as they continued at the least the space of 90. years, all the time of Samuel and Saul, which was 40. years; and all David's reign, till the eleventh year of Solomon, when the Temple was finished, 1 King. 6.36. when the Ark and Tabernacle were joined together again, 2 Chron. 5.5. The doubt is all this while of the separating and dividing of the Ark from the Tabernacle; which was the place where the people assembled to keep their • easts. 1. Simlerus thinketh, that where the Ark was, they assembled before the Lord. So also Junius, That thither the Tribes went up to keep their solemnities. 2. But herein the opinion of Tostatus is more probable, that where the Sanctuary and Tabernacle was, there was the place of the solemn assemblies in their feasts: for these reasons: 1. The Ark was taken from the Tabernacle by the Philistines, and kept among them seven months, and returned in the beginning of the wheat harvest, which was about Pentecost. If now their festivities were solemnized only before the Ark, then at this time in the space of those seven months, in the absence of the Ark, it would follow, that two of their great solemnities of the Pasch and Pentecost were omitted, which is not to be granted: 2. There the meeting of the people was, where the Altar of burnt offerings was, and the Priests gave their attendance: but that was not where the Ark was placed, but where the Tabernacle was pitched: as is evident, 1 Sam. 21. where Ahemelech the high Priest, with other Priests, were at Nob attending at the Tabernacle: the Ark then remaining at Kiri •• hi • a • im, 1 Cor. 6.1. 3. After the captivity, in the second Temple the Ark was not, being lost in the destruction of the Temple: and yet there their festivities were kept. 4. Now this concourse of the people to the Tabernacle, rather than to the Ark, was not because it was more worthy than the Ark: for the Ark was more worthy of reverence than the whole Tabernacle: but by reason of the other implements, which went with the Tabernacle, as the Altar, and table of show bread, and the rest; and because the Priests gave their attendance there. But if the Tabernacle had been destroyed, and the Ark only had remained; then without all question the Priests and people would have flocked to that place, Tostat. quaest. 28.

3. But it will be objected, that the place where the Ark was, must needs be that place where they appeared before the Lord; because there the Lord manifested himself, and from thence delivered his oracles, not only while it remained with the Tabernacle, Numb. 7.89. but when it was apart, 2 Sam. 6.2. But in this it may be answered, that the Lord did not only give answer from the Ark, but from the Tabernacle also, Exod. 29.42. and there Ahimelech asked counsel of God for David, though the Ark were not there, 1 Sam. 22.10. yea the Priest with his Ephod consulted with God, though neither the Tabernacle nor Ark were present: as David asked counsel of God by the Priest Abeathar, that had the Ephod, 1 Sam. 23.10. therefore that argument followeth not, Tostat. ibid.

4. But though I herein consent with Tostatus, that the solemn assemblies and sacrifices were in the place where the Tabernacle was, rather than where the Ark was: yet herein I dissent from him. He thinketh, that it was not permitted, sacrificia habere nisi 〈◊〉 in loco, to have sacrifices but in one place; because by this occasion the rude people might have thought there had been many gods, if they should have sacrificed in many places: and for this cause the rest of Israel took exception to the two tribes and half beyond Jordan, because they erected an Altar, supposing they had made it to sacrifice upon.

Contra. 1. But it is evident, while the Ark and Tabernacle were divided, that they offered sacrifices in both places; as 1 Sam. 6.14. the men of Bethshemesh offered a burnt offering before the Ark, rejoicing at the return thereof. And at Nob, where David and the show bread given him, to what end should the Priests have given their attendance, but for the sacrifices? 2. Neither was there any fear of bringing in a plurality of gods by this means, seeing all Israel knew, that both the Ark and Tabernacle were made at the appointment of one and the same God of Israel by the hand of his servant Moses. 3. And the reason is not alike concerning that Altar which was made by the two tribes and half, which the other tribes had in jealousy; because that was erected by the direction and advice of men: but both the Ark and Tabernacle had their institution from God: and therefore there could be no such fear for sacrificing to either of those places.

QUEST. XXXIX. What sacrifice • commanded here not to be eaten with unleavened bread.

Vers. 18. THou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread. 1. Some do understand this generally of all sacrifices, which were to be offered without leaven, Levite. 2.11. Pelican. Oleaster. And the other Law, Neither shall the 〈◊〉 of my sacrifice remain till the morning. Some likewise understand of other sacrifices▪ for although the flesh of the sacrifices might remain till the next day: adeps tamen incendi debebat eodem die, yet the fat was to be burned the same day, Cajetan. As is prescribed, Levite. 7.3. But it is better referred to the Paschal lamb, as the Chaldee Interpreter expoundeth, that they should remove leaven out of their house, before they offered the Passover, Tostat. Simler. Calvin. And by far, 〈◊〉 principal, is understood whatsoever remained of the Paschal lamb; as is further declared, Exod. 34.25. Iun. Where it appeareth, that both these precepts are specially given, concerning the Paschal Lamb. 2. And the reasons thereof were the • e, 〈…〉 , &c. Because the fat do • th easily corrupt and putrefy: which was an 〈◊〉 thing, that any part of the sacrifice should be suffered to putrefy, G • llas. As also, lest the 〈…〉 the next day, Sacerdotes comeder • nt quod Dei •• at, the Priests might eat 〈◊〉 which was the Lord's 〈◊〉 Oleaster.

QUEST. XL. When the Passover was to be killed.

NOw concerning the place, where the Passover was to be offered. 1. It must be considered, that they were not in the yearly keeping of the Passover, to do as they did in the first institution in Egypt; everyone killed it in his own house: that was to be done then, because they were to strike the blood upon the door posts, that it might be a sign of their deliverance from the plague, while the Angel passed over to smite the Egyptians, chap. 12.23. but afterward they were required to sacrifice the Passover in the place which the Lord should choose, Deut. 16.2. 2. Neither was it enough to bring the Passover up to that place where the Tabernacle was: but they were to present it at the door of the Tabernacle, where the Passover was to be killed, as other sacrifices, and the blood to be poured by the Altar: 1. Because this was the general Law for all sacrifices, Levite. 17.3. but the Passover was a sacrifice: as here the Lord calleth it, my sacrifice: and Numb. 9.13. he that was negligent to keep the Passover, should be cut off from his people, and this reason is yielded thereof, Because he brought not the offering of the Lord in due season. 2. And again, it had been to small purpose, to enjoin the people to come to the place of the Sanctuary with their Passover, to that end, that they should observe no other rites and ceremonies therein, than were appointed by the Law: if everyone might have killed the Passover in his own house; for then they might have followed what rites they thought good, Tostat. quaest. 27.

QUEST. XLI. Wherefore they were to eat only unleavened bread in the Passover.

THou shalt not offer the blond with leavened bread, &c. 1. The unleavened bread, which they were commanded to eat for seven days together, is called the bread of tribulation, Deut. 16.3. that as it is an unpleasant and unsavory bread of it self; so it should call to their remembrance the affliction which they endured in Egypt, and consequently their deliverance from the same, Simler. Calvin. 2. But to us it hath this signification: first, it forbiddeth, quicquam Aegyptiacae doctrina divinis rebus admisceri, &c. that any Egyptiacall, or false doctrine should be mingled with divine things, Theodoret. As our blessed Savior in this sense, chargeth his Apostles to take heed of the leaven of the Pharisees, Mark. 8. Secondly, the leaven signifieth, malitiae & nequitiae amaritudinem, the bitterness of malice and wickedness, Rabanus. which we must seek to purge forth, as S. Paul applieth it, 1 Cor. 5.

QUEST. XLII. What first fruits are here mentioned in this Law.

Vers. 19. THe first of the first fruits of thy land. 1. Some think that this Law is understood of the solemn oblation of the first fruits, which were of three sorts: novarum frugum, of their new corn in the feast of the Passover; panum de novis frugibus pistorum, of bread baked of the new corn, at Pentecost; & novorum fructuum, and of the new fruit, as of wine and oil, in the feast of Tabernacles. But this solemn oblation of the first fruits, was before rehearsed in particular, verse. 15, 16. 2. It is rather therefore meant of those first fruits, which every man was bound to offer unto the Lord in particular: as the first fruits of their trees, Levite. 19.25. Iun. The first fruit of their dowe, Numb. 15.21. and of other things: which was to this end, to acknowledge their thankfulness unto God for the fruits of the land which he had given them, Deut. 26.10. Simler. 3. Lyranus addeth further, that these first fruits are specially understood of the seventh year, when they did not sow anything: that because mention is made before▪ only of the first fruits of their labors, verse. 16. this is added, that even they were to give the first fruits of that, which the earth brought forth of it self in the seventh year without their labor: that first in common they should offer the first fruits to the Priests, before any did gather of them to their own use: which they were the rather to do in the seventh year, because those fruits were given them without their labor, they were only of God's sending: and for that in that year they could not pay any tithes unto the Levices: for the tenth part could not be set out from the nine parts; because they did not gather the fruits of the earth together, as in other years▪ but as they needed them, and the remainder was for the beasts of the field; therefore they could not gosse at the tenth, and the tenth was due from the owner, where he took the nine parts to himself: but here the owner took no more than another; the fruits of the seventh year were common unto all, Tostat. qu. 29.

QUEST. XLIII. What it is to seeth a kid in the mothers milk.

Vers. 19. THou shalt not seeth a kid in his mothers milk. 1. Some think the meaning of this Law is, that they should not offer a sucking kid in sacrifice, while it was yet tender, and under the damme, Pelican. But this cannot be the sense: for after seven days, it was lawful to take anything from the damme, and sacrifice it, Exod. 22.30. And we read that Samuel offered in sacrifice a sucking lamb, 1 Sam. 8. Beside, the flesh of kids, when they are weaned, are not so sweet and pleasant as before, Simler.

2. Some interpret this Law by that, Levite. 22.28. that they should not kill the cow and ewe, and the young both in one day: and Deut. 22.6. that they should not take the dam with the young, Theodoret. Vatab. But it is a divers thing to seeth the kid in the dams milk, and to seeth or kill the kid with the damme together, Pelarg. Oleaster.

3. Some do understand this Law according to the letter, that they should not indeed dress and seeth a kid in the dams milk: and they give this reason; because it seemeth to be a cruel thing, si lac matris quod datum ei est pro nutrimento, adhibeatur ad consumptionem, if the milk of the damme, which is given for nourishment, should be used to waste and consume it, Thomas, Lyr •• m. Others add this reason: Prohibetur ritus Idololatrarum lixantium 〈◊〉 in last matris: The rite and fashion of Idolaters is forbidden, which seeth the kid in the dams milk, Cajetan. And the Hebrews affirm, that the Ishmaelites had such an use to seeth kids in the dams milk for more delicacy sake, Simler. The Gentiles also used to sacrifice a kid sod in the mothers milk to the 〈◊〉 of the fields, that they might have plenty, Tostat. And this is the special reason which they insist upon that follow this sense, to take it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , according to the words and letter, because it is thrice repeated in the same phrase, in this place, and Exod. 34.26. and Deut. 14.21. Pelarg. Simler. and Calvin seemeth to approve the same sense.

Contra. But against this exposition it may be thus objected: 1. The word bashal here used signifieth as well to roast, as seeth: as Deut. 16.7. Thou shalt roast the pascal Lamb, for it was not to be sodden in water, Exod. 12.9. Piscator, and so Tostatus thinketh that in this place it may be taken indifferently, pro decoctione, vel assatione, for boiling or roasting: but the kid could not in this literal sense be roasted in the mothers milk, though they might imagine it to be boiled therein.

2. Augustine objecteth thus: Quid si mortua matre ejus ab alia o • e lactaretur? What if the own dam being dead, another ewe gave it suck? it could not be then sod in the mothers milk. Lyranus therefore understandeth it de omni lacte, of any milk whatsoever. But now they which press the literal sense, by this means are forced to depart from the letter.

3. Again, there is the same reason of other young things, as of fowls and of birds, as there is of the young of beasts: but they cannot be sod in the dams milk, and yet they might be abused, as well as other young things: therefore these words do restrain such an abuse about meats, as is incident to the flesh of fowl, as of cattle. The conceit then of Andreas, reported by Lyranus, hath no ground: that it must be understood, de carnibus animalium, &c. non de carnibus avium, of the flesh of cattle that are nourished with milk, not of the flesh of birds.

4. Concerning that superstitious rite of Idolaters, there is no certainty of it. Horace indeed maketh mention of offering milk unto Sylvanus the god of the fields, in this verse: Tellurem porco, Sylvanum lacte piabant, They appeased the goddess Tellus with a swine, and Sylvanus with milk. But whether they offered a kid sod in milk it is not certain, and so Tostatus confesseth, quaest. 37.

5. Neither is that any good reason, why it should be taken precisely according to the words, because it is thrice rehearsed: for in all those places it may well bear another sense more fitting and agreeable, as shall be even now shown.

6. This pressing of the literal sense hath given occasion to the Jews, receiving herein the exposition of their Rabbins, of great superstition: for hereupon the Jews to this day refrain to boil any flesh at all in milk; or to dress or prepare cheese and flesh together, because it is made of milk: nor to cut flesh and cheese with the same knife, Gallasius: neither will they eat cheese after flesh, nisi been perfricuerint dentes, unless they have thoroughly rubbed their teeth before.

4. Some therefore not finding how to give a fit sense of the words, do flee unto allegories. Augustine saith, Hoc quomodo observetur ad proprietatem, aut non est, aut non eluc • t, &c. How this should be observed according to the propriety of the words, either it is not at all to be found, or else it appeareth not. Therefore he approveth that mystical and figurative sense, in referring it to Christ: Quod hac prophetia praedictus est non occidendus infans, &c. Who is foretold by this prophecy, that he should not be killed in his infancy, when Herod sought to slay him, &c. The same figurative application followeth Thomas. But Augustine addeth further, that it may be applied to the time of Christ's passion, who suffered about that same time of the year, when his mother began to be conceived with him: and women are said, ex quo conceperint lac colligere, from the time they conceive to gather milk, &c. But neither of these senses can fitly agree unto Christ, who is called the lamb that was slain, but not the goat. Some insist upon a moral sense: as Rabanus by the goat understandeth the sinner, who must not be sod in his mothers milk, Id est, non purgandus mediocribus Ecclesiae disciplinis, sed austerioribus praeceptis: That is, he must not be purged with the mild discipline of the Church, but with austere precepts. Procopius and Lippoman following him, do make a quite contrary application: Infantes in negotio Christi impossible est ducere per ignem & tribulationes, &c. They that are infants in the faith of Christ, cannot be lead thorough sire and tribulation, &c. tolerandi, non opprimendi sunt, they must be tolerated, not urged. And this uncertainty there is in men's collections, when everyone followeth his own sense.

5. Wherefore the meaning is no more but this: they should not bring for the first fruits of any cattle, any kid, or other beast, dum est adhuc lactea, while it is yet but milk, that is, before it be seven days old. And as they were not to offer such unto God, so neither to use it for their private food, Deut. 14.21. Iun. Piscator. And this to be the meaning may appear; because here, and Exod. 34.26. this precept is annexed to the Law of first fruits: and yet more evidently it is explained, chap. 22.30. where having made mention of the offering of the first fruits of their oxen and sheep, this is added, seven days it shall be with his damme: which may serve to explicate this clause: that so long it is but as the dams milk, till it be eight days old. And as they were not to offer any such young thing to the Lord, so neither privately were they to use any such delicacy in feeding of young and tender things, which were but yet as milk and froth: which precept is given them, not so much, ut curam haberent valetudinis, that they should have care of their health, Marbach. Deus his legibus altius spectavit: For God in giving these Laws looked to higher matters: therefore by this Law, cohibetur intemperantia, both their intemperance is restrained, Gallas. & humanitas & clementia commendatur, and humanity and clemency even toward the brute beasts is commended. For they which are cruel toward beasts, are for the most part cruel also toward men, Simler. therefore among the Athenians, boys that pricked out the eyes of crows, were punished: and Domitian among the Romans, that fly-killer, proved a savage tyrant and killer of men, Pelarg.

QUEST. XLIV. Who is understood here to be this Angel.

Vers. 20. BEhold I send mine Angel before thee. 1. Cajetan understandeth this Angel to be Moses: but that cannot be, for he brought not the people into the land of Canaan, as this Angel should and did, verse. 23. Simler. And this Angel should not spare their misdeeds, verse. 23. but Moses often spared their iniquities, and prayed for them, chap. 34. Oleaster. But Cajetan addeth further, that Moses should have brought them into the land of Canaan, but that, ipse peccando impedimentum praestitit, he procured the let himself by his sin: and so this is to be understood conditionally. But Tostatus taketh away this answer: Prophetia cum impletur secundùm divinam praedestinationem intelligitur, Where a prophecy is fulfilled, it must be understood not conditionally, but according to God's certain predestination. And therefore seeing here the Lord brought them by his Angel into the land of Canaan, and yet he did not bring them in by Moses: it followeth that Moses could not be that Angel.

2. Tostatus therefore thinketh, that this Angel must be understood to be Joshua, for he brought them into the land of Canaan: neither did he spare their iniquities, for he punished Achan, Josh. 7. And God's name was in him, both because he was an Israelite, which is interpreted one prevailing with God, Rabanus: and he is called Joshua, which is the same with Jesus, a Savior: and his name being before Oshea, God took one of the letters of his own name Jehovah, the first letter jod, and put it to his name, and so made it Joshua, which signifieth a Savior, Tostat. So also Lyranus.

Contra. 1. But by name is here understood, not any title or appellation consisting of syllables, but power and authority, and the essence of God, which was not in Joshua, Genevens. 2. And the peculiar and proper name of God is Jehovah, which was never given unto any mortal man, Gallas. 3. Neither did Joshua punish all their transgressions, though he met with some public and notorious offenses, Simler. 4. And if Joshua should have been this Angel, car • isset populus ductore Angelo, &c. the people should have wanted this Angel their guide, as long as they sojourned in the wilderness, Calvin. 5. And further, the Lord saith to Moses, Mine Angel shall go before thee, Exod. 32.34. But Joshua went not before Moses ; he came after and succeeded him, Calvin.

Borrhaius here understandeth both Joshua as the type, and Christ the great Angel of God, secundum veritatem, in truth. But this cannot agree unto Joshua at all, no not as the type of Christ; for the reasons before alleged.

4. Lyranus and Lippomanus do interpret this place of a created Angel, the same which went before them in a pillar of fire: and in that he saith, My name is in him, the meaning is, Quicquid loquitur, 〈◊〉 nomine loquetur, &c. Whatsoever he speaketh, he shall speak in my name, Lippoman.

Contra. 1. That Angel which went before the people in a cloudy and fiery pillar, was no created Angel, but God himself: for he is called Jehovah, chap. 13.21. Gallas. 2. Whereas the Lord said to Moses, that he would not go himself with them, but send his Angel, chap. 33. 2. and yet afterward being entreated by Moses, granted that his presence should go with them, chap. 33.14. hence it is evident, that th •• was not such an Angel as he said he would send, and not go himself, but such an Angel wherein his presence should be, Simler.

5. Wherefore this Angel is none other but Christ, that great Angel of God's counsel, whom God sent into the world: as appeareth evidently by these reasons: 1. The text saith, My name is in him: Pro naturali divinitate, eodem quo & ego, censetur nomine, In respect of his Deity, which he hath by nature, he is called by the same name that I am, Rupertus▪ Ferus. 2. Augustine taketh him to be the same Angel which wrestled with Jacob, and changed his name, Gen. 32. which was God himself, Christ in human shape wrestling with Jacob: for Jacob is called Israel, because he had prevailed with God. 3. This is the same Angel which is called the Angel of God's covenant, Malachi. 3.1. Ferus. But herein he is deceived, he thinketh this to be majorem Angelum, a greater Angel, than that Angel which went before them in a cloud: whereas he is the very same Angel. 4. This Angel is called Jehovah, chap. 13.21. Iun. Piscator. 5. They are bidden not to provoke this Angel: But it was Christ whom they tempted and provoked in the wilderness, 1 Cor. 10.9. and Heb. 3.9. Simler. 6. Angelus iste judex statuitur. &c. This Angel is appointed their Judge, if they did offend, He will not spare your misdeeds, Calvin. 7. Again, he saith, If thou hearken unto him, and do all that I speak, &c. signifying, parem ab illis secum obedientiam flagitare, that he requireth of them the same obedience with God himself, as being of the same power, majesty, authority: as our blessed Savior saith in the Gospel, John. 10. I and my father are one, Marbach. 8. Iudicium occultorum eidem tribuitur, &c. Unto this Angel is given the judgment of secret things: he will not spare▪ &c. Simler. Pelarg. Etsi enim Magistratus non omnia delicta vidit & novit, &c. For although the Magistrate do not see and punish all offenses: yet God seeth, and in time will be avenged, Osiander. 9. This was the same Angel, which here performeth that which was promised to Abraham long before, I will curse them that curse thee, Gen. 12.3. as here he saith, I will be an enemy to thine enemies: and that was Jehovah, Gen. 12.1. Pelican.

QUEST. XLV. Why in this place the prohibition of idolatry is inserted.

Vers. 24. THou shalt not bow down to their gods, &c. 1. This Law is annexed to the former exhortation of obedience; because idolatry is the very root and foundation of all iniquity: and the whole Law and Commandments of God were neglected by Idolaters, so that nothing was more contrary to their obedience to the Law, than idolatry, Simlerus. 2. And seeing they were to cast out the inhabitants of Canaan, which worshipped Idols, they are charged also together with them, to cast out their superstition and idolatry, Tostat. quaest. 81. 3. Quia proclives sunt animi hominum ad superstitionem, &c. Because the minds of men are prone unto superstition, therefore this precept is often here repeated; that they should not serve other gods, nor do after their works, but abolish and destroy all monuments of superstition, Gallas▪ Ferus. 4. And three things are forbidden touching idolatry: First, they must not bow unto them, give them any external sign of reverence: then, they must not serve them, by sacrificing unto them, erecting temples, altars, and such like, Oleaster. Thirdly, nor do after their works, that is, follow other their superstitious rites and ceremonies; and generally, tota eorum conversatio prohibita est, their whole conversation was naught, and therefore is forbidden, Tostat. quaest. 81. 5. And because it was not sufficient to decline from superstition, si religione car • as, if thou want religion, therefore as they are forbidden the worship of false gods, so they are commanded to serve the Lord, verse. 25. Gallas.

QUEST. XLVI. What manner of promises are here made and why.

Vers. 25. ANd he shall bless thy bread, &c. 1. This must be here observed, that these promises here made are only temporal, because the people then were carnal, and only sought such things. In the New Testament, Christ doth not promise these terrene and temporal blessings to his Apostles: non quia illis haec invidebat, &c. not because he did envy them these things, but because he had greater blessings for them: like as the father, when his son is come to age, doth no more entice him with apples, but bestoweth an inheritance upon him, Ferus. 2. Posset abs{que} praemii ullius promissione praeciper • , &c. God might if it pleased him, command without promise of any reward; for he is debtor unto none, and when we have done all which we can, we do no more than our duty: but God to stir up our dullness propoundeth ample and large promises, Marbach. 3. And these blessings of plenty, health, fruitfulness, long life, are here mentioned, because they should acknowledge God the Author and giver of all these blessings, which the Idolaters asked of their Idols, Gallas. 4. First, God promiseth to bless their increase and store, their bread and water; both to give them abundance, and to bless the use thereof unto them: for otherwise, without God's blessing, abundance will soon come to nothing: and because plenty is nothing without health; Secondly, he saith he will take away all sickness: then, because all this would not avail, if they had no heirs, it is added, that none should be barren: and beside, long life is promised: for to enjoy these things but a short time, were no perfect blessing: and lastly, victory is promised over their enemies: for all these blessings had little helped, unless they might have had quiet and peaceable possession of the land, Ferus.

QUEST. XLVII. What is understood by the hornets.

Vers. 28. I Will send Hornets, &c. 1. Some do understand this literally, that as God sent frogs and lice upon the Egyptians; so against the Canaanites, he armed wasps and hornets to show his power, quod per minuta animantia suis auxiliatur, that he can help his by weak and small beasts, Theodoret. So also Procopius giving this note, Deum à coelo de improviso suis missurum auxilium, That God of a sudden can send help unto his out of heaven. So also Cajetan. Simler. Calvin. Gallas. Pelarg. But Augustine's reason may here be urged against this sense: Non hoc logimus factum, &c. We do not read any such thing to have been done, neither in Moses time, under Joshua, the Judges, or the Kings, that hornets were sent against the Canaanites; only the book of Wisdom, hoc dicit imple • um, saith this was fulfilled, chap. 12.8. Thou sendedst forerunners of thine host, the hornets to destroy them by little and little. But this may also be understood of that fear and terror which God did smite the Canaanites with, before the coming of Israel.

2. R. Abraham, and Ibn Ezra, by hornets, understand a certain disease which did consume the Canaanites, where they hid themselves in their caves. But the text saith, that these hornets drave them out; not that they wasted and consumed them.

3. Pelican maketh a metaphorical sense: Ita attonitos eos reddam, ut etiam vespae siat • is superiores ; I will so astonish them, that even flies and wasps shall be able to overcome them, &c. But Joshua found the contrary, when he was discomfited and fled before the men of Hai, that he had not to deal, as with flies and wasps.

4. Therefore I prefer Augustine's sense, Vespae istae aculei timoris intelligendae sunt, &c. These wasps or hornets, are to be understood to be those pricks of mind and terrors which made the Canaanites give place to the Israelites. So also Lyranus saith, they were, Anxietates animi eos pungentes tanquam aculei, Perplexity of mind which pricked them as sharp pricks. And this to be the meaning, the former verse showeth, I will send my fear before thee, verse. 27. the accomplishment whereof is declared, Josh. 24.12. I sent my hornets before you, which cast them out before you, the two Kings of the Amorites, not with thy sword, &c. that is, the fear which God sent upon them, not their sword, discomfited them, Junius, Piscator. As Rahab confesseth, When we heard it, our heart did faint, and there remained no more courage in us, Josh. 2.11. So also Borrhaius.

5. Rupertus maketh this allegorical sense, by the hornets, Quos scimus de aquino stercore nasci, &c. Which we know to be bred out of dung, are to be understood those base and contemptible means, whereby God overcame the power of Satan, &c. He meaneth the Apostles, who were counted as vile and base, whereby the Gospel of the kingdom was published and propagated. But the former sense is to be insisted upon, as the most fit, and consonant to the Scripture.

QUEST. XLVIII. Why God did not cast out the Canaanites all at once before the Israelites.

Vers. 29. I Will not cast them out from thy face in one year. 1. No, nor yet in 400. years were they all cast out, till the reign of David and Solomon: which the Lord did for divers causes: one is here expressed; lest the land should have grown to a wilderness, if it had been dispeopled all at once, and so husbandry and tillage would have been neglected, Gallas. And the wild beasts in the solitary places would have increased, as Wolves, Lions, Bears, which would have been a great annoyance to the people, Tostat. qu. 84. 2. Another cause was, for their rebellion and murmuring, for the which they were punished to wander up and down in the wilderness 40. years, Simler. 3. Eorum culpae imputandum est, &c. It is to be imputed to their own fault, that the Canaanites were no sooner cast out, because they were slothful and negligent therein themselves, as Joshua telleth them, If ye go back, and cleave to the rest of these nations, &c. and shall make marriages with them, know for a certain, that the Lord your God will cast ou • no more of these nations from before you, &c. Calvin. 4. Neither would God cast them out all at once, Vt essent, qui peccantes arguerent, & ut • rudirit in eis Israel ; That there might be some, which should correct those which sinned, and that Israel might be nurtured by them, Rabanus. For God used those nations, as whips and scourges for his people when they fell away from him; as he stirred up the King of Canaan against them, Iud. 4. 5. Another reason was, that the people might have some always to exercise them, that they should not be given over to sloth and idleness, but be trained up in war: this cause is touched, Judge. 3.1. That he might prove Israel by them, as many as had not known the wars of Canaan, Marbach. Pellarg. But this reason is not mentioned here, Ne impatientia defecissent, &c. Lest they might through their impatience have fainted, Lippom. 6. And further, God would not, Vt citra praelia dominium terrae acquirant, That they should without battle get the dominion of the land: for those things which are hardly gotten, we do the more set by, Pracopius. 7. Hoc etiam utile fuit ad cohibendum eorum praceps defiderium ; This was also profitable to stay their preposterous desire; that they should wait the Lord's leisure, and think not all at once to have their desire. Like as now many wish, that the Gospel might be quickly propagated over the world, which although it be much to be desired, yet we must commit and commend the success thereof unto God, who seeth just cause, though it be not revealed to us, why it pleaseth not him at once herein to satisfy our desire, Gallas.

QUEST. XLIX. Of the bounds and limits of the land of promise.

Vers. 31. I Will make thy coasts from the red sea, &c. 1. This Sea called the red, or reedy Sea, in Hebrew Suph, cannot be the dead sea, as Pelican thinketh, into the which Jordan did run: for nowhere in the Scripture is the name of the sea Suph, the reedy or red Sea, given unto it, but only to that sea which lieth upon Egypt, which was divided before the Israelites. 2. Here four bounds are set of the Land of promise: the East bound, which is the red sea, Mare rubrum, quod ab orients intellige, &c. The red sea, understand to be on the East, Gloss. interlinear. Not that it boundeth all the East side, Sed frous orientalis terrae Canaan tangit in aliquo mare rubrum, &c. But because the East side of the land of Canaan confronteth in some part upon the red sea. The sea of the Philistines, which is the great Ocean, called the Mediterranean sea, did bound it on the West: the desert toward Egypt, which was the wilderness of Shur on the South: and the river Euphrates on the North. 3. But in other places of the Scripture, the land of Canaan is otherwise bounded, as Gen. 15.18. two bounds only are described, one the South from the river of Egypt, which was a little river on the North end of Egypt, where it is joined to the country of the Philistines: the other on the North, the great river Euphrates. So Deut. 11. verse. 24. these limits are described, the desert on the South, and Lebanon which is on the North▪ Euphrates on the East; and the uttermost sea on the West, Tostat. So Josh. 1.4. From the wilderness and Lebanon, unto the great river Perah: here Euphrates, in Hebrew called Perah, is the bound on the East: and so it is: pertenditur tamen versus Aquilonem ; yet it extendeth toward the North, Oleaster. And therefore in this place it is set down as the bound Northward. But this divers description, limiting and bounding of Canaan, is all one in effect. 4. Yet the Israelites enjoyed not all this country, till the time of David and Solomon, as 1 King. 4 21. it is said, that Solomon reigned over all Kingdoms, from the river Euphrates, unto the land of the Philistines, Iun. And the reason, why they obtained the whole land no sooner, was because of their sin, Simler. 5. Now this bounding and confining of the land of Canaan, was profitable for these two ends: first, that the Israelites might know against whom they might lawfully fight: for to those countries which were not within the said limits and bounds, they could pretend no right nor title: Secondly, it was necessary to know the compass and circuit of the land, for the more equal distributing and dividing of it among the tribes, Tostat. quaest. 85.

QUEST. L. Whether it be lawful to make a league with nations which are enemies to true religion.

Vers. 32. THou shalt make no covenant with them. Here this question will be moved, whether it be altogether unlawful to make any league or covenant with Infidels, or such as are enemies unto true religion, as the Israelites were forbidden to have any society with the Canaanites.

1. The affirmative part, that it is lawful, may seem to be confirmed by the examples of Abraham, that was in league with Aner, Eshcol and Mamre, Genes. 14. of Isaac, that made a covenant with Abimelech, Solomon with Hiram, the Maccabees with the Romans.

Answ. 1. Particular examples cannot infringe a general Law, Legibus vivendum est, non exemplis ; We must live by Laws, and not by examples. 2. Aner▪ Eshcol and Mamre, were not Idolaters: there might be some true worshippers of God among the Canaanites in those days, as appeareth in Melchizedek, that dwelt among them. 3. Abraham and Isaac made no covenant of mutual help, but only compounded a peace concerning their limits and bounds, which was not unlawful, for Paul willeth us, as much as in us lieth to have peace with all men. 4. Of the same kind was the league which Solomon made with Hiram, which was a bond of peace and amity, not of mutual help and society. 5. The example of the Maccabees doth not move us much; for their facts cannot simply be approved, and they had no good success of that league, which they made with the Romans.

2. Wherefore the negative is more agreeable to the Scriptures, that no covenant is to be contracted or made with the wicked.

1. Jehoshaphat is reproved by John the Prophet, for joining in league and friendship with Aba • the idolatrous King of Israel, 2 Chron. 19.

2. The Prophet Isaiah rebuketh the Jews, because they sought unto the Egyptians for help: We 〈◊〉 the rebellious children, &c. which walk forth to go down unto Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth, &c. chap. 30.2.

3. For the same cause the Prophet also reproveth the Israelites, They are gone up to Asshur, &c. Ephraim hath hired lovers, Hosea 8.9.

4. Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians to flee for help unto the tribunals of Heathen Judges, but rather willeth them to suffer wrong among themselves, 1 Cor. 6. And he biddeth, Not to be unequally yoked with Infidels, 2 Cor. 6.14.

5. For all such leagues are unprofitable and in vain; for how should they keep faith with men, who are unfaithful to God?

3. But yet all kind of intercourse is not forbidden between Christians and Infidels, and such as are of contrary religion: For then (as the Apostle saith in the like case) we must go out of the world: yet these conditions must be observed in such leagues:

1. We must not promise to aid and assist the wicked, or bind ourselves unto mutual help, for therefore was Jehoshaphat blamed: Wouldest thou help the wicked, and love them that hate the Lord? 2 Chron. 19.2.

2. Neither must we sue unto Infidels for help; for that were to distrust the Lord: if they offer their help upon good conditions, it is lawful to use it, as sent of God; but we must not seek for it.

3. Ancient leagues which have been made in former times with such, are not to be broken: for the Gospel condemneth truce-breakers.

4. A league for removing of hostility, for intercourse of merchandise, and continuance of peace may be made with nations of strange religion, Simler.

QUEST. LI. What it is to sin against God.

Vers. 33. LEst they make thee sin against me. Every sin indeed is against God, because it is a breach of his Law, but idolatry in a more special regard is committed against God. 1. Like as a double offense may be done toward the Magistrate and Lawgiver: either in general, when his Law is transgressed, though another's person is touched, as in theft, murder: or in particular, when beside the breach of the Law, the person or state of the Magistrate is touched as when treason is intended against him, or his goods stolen. So likewise men trespass against God: first in general, when his Law is violated, though our neighbor only be hurt, as in all the precepts of the second Table: secondly, more specially, when beside the transgression of the Law, actus immediate dirigitur in Deum, the act is immediately directed against God, as in the breach of the first Table, and principally in idolatry, Tostat. qu. 86.

1. Doct. Of divers actions of love, general and particular.

Vers. 1. IF thou 〈◊〉 thine enemies ox, &c. As God's actions are of two sorts, general and particular: the one toward all men, in as much as he suffereth the Sun to shine, and the rain to fall upon all: the other toward the elect, in sanctifying them by his Spirit: So must our actions be toward men. A general love we must show toward all men, Turks, Jews, Infidels, and toward our enemies: in procuring their good, in seeking to do them no hurt, in preserving them and theirs: out of which general fountain of love flow these curtesies, in bringing home his straying ox, and helping up the overladen asse. But friendship, familiarity, society, we must only have with the children of God. This difference the Apostle maketh where he saith, Let us do good to all, but specially unto them which are of the household of faith, Galath. 6.10. B. Babington.

2. Doct. Of Christ's Deity.

Vers. 21. BEcause my name is in him. Hic Moses Divinitatem Christi palam confitetur & exprimit ; Here Moses doth openly confess and express the Divinity of Christ, which the Jews to this day will not see nor acknowledge: for this Angel is Christ, in whom the name of God is: he is called by the same names that God the Father is: as the Lord almighty, eternal, &c. Ferus: as the Prophet Isaiah saith, He shall call his name, Wonderful, Counselor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, &c. Isai. 9.6.

3. Doct. God disposeth and transposeth kingdoms.

Vers. 31. I Will make thy coasts from the red Sea, &c. This showeth that God setteth the limits and bounds of kingdoms, which they cannot pass, nor go beyond: he setteth up kingdoms, transposeth them, and pulleth them down: as Daniel saith, He changeth times and seasons: he taketh away Kings, he setteth up Kings, Dan. 2.21. Marbach. Borrhaius.

1. Confut. Universality and multitude no sure mark of the true Church and religion.

Vers. 2. THou shalt not follow a multitude, &c. As in civil matters it is not safe to follow the custom of a multitude: so in religion it is dangerous to be lead by numbers and multitude. In our blessed Savior's time the people followed the Scribes and Pharisees: only a few, whom he had chosen out of the world, as the Apostles, with some others, embraced the doctrine of Christ. Therefore universality and multitude, which is so much urged by the Romanists, is no good rule to know the right Church and the truth by, Simler.

2. Confut. Against the secret Spanish Inquisition.

Vers. 1. THou shalt not receive a false tale. Although this be a general instruction to all, both public and private persons, that they should not be carried away with false tales: yet it most of all concerneth Judges: which, as Lyranus noteth, saith that the Magistrate is forbidden by this Law to hear the one party in the absence of the other: because many false tales will be devised by the one, when the other is not present to make answer. But Burgensis confuteth Lyranus herein, whom T • oring in his replies maintaineth: who affirmeth truly, that this Law, videtur habere ortum à natura seemeth to take beginning from nature, that when any suit is promoted at the instance of a party, the adverse party should be cited. Yet he maketh exception of some Courts, the process whereof is secret without any such inquisition: as he giveth instance of that great Court in Westphaliae, which is called Iudicium secretum Westphaliae ; The secret judgment of Westphalia. Wherein, beside that he in pretending to defend Lyranus confuteth him, showing that in all proceedings it is not necessary that public inquisition be made; the instance that he giveth is insufficient: what that secret manner of judgment in Westphalia is, he declareth not: but if it be such as the Spanish Inquisition is, which is shuffled up in corners, and in darkness; there being none present, but the Inquisitor, the Scribe, and tormentor disguised like a Devil, and the poor innocent lamb that is tortured, and examined: it is most unjust, cruel, and tyrannical. The Roman Governors were more equal toward Paul, who brought him forth in public to answer for himself, and did not sift him in corners. And what is to be thought of such secret actions, our blessed Savior showeth, Every man that evil doth hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

3. Confut. Against the Manichees, who made the Old Testament contrary to the new.

Vers. 22. I Will be an enemy unto thine enemies, &c. The Manichees, who rejected the Old Testament, and would make it contrary to the new take exception to these and the like places, where the Lord professeth enmity against the Canaanites, and chargeth the Israelites to kill and destroy them: how (say they) is this consonant and agreeable to that precept of the Gospel, that we should love our enemies?

Contra. 1. Jerome answereth, Non tam personarum, quam morum facta est dissensio ; That this dissension and enmity was not in respect of the persons, but of their manners. The Israelites were not so much enemies unto them, as they were enemies to the true religion of the Israelites in worshipping of God aright.

2. Augustine saith, Illa inimicorum interfectio carnali adhuc populo congruebat, &c. That killing of the enemies did agree unto that carnal people, to whom the Law was given as a schoolmaster unto Christ.

3. The Apostle when he delivered over the incestuous young man unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh: Satis declaravit in aliquem inimicum vindictam cum charitate posse procedere, &c. Did sufficiently declare that revenge may be taken of some enemy in charity, &c. Potest ergo dilectio esse in vindicante ; Therefore there may be love in him that taketh revenge; as we see in fathers that correct their children whom they love. And although fathers kill not their children in correcting them, yet God, who knoweth what is best for everyone, cum dilection corrigere, non solum infirmitatibus, sed etiam mortibus temporalibus, &c. can correct with love, not only with infirmity and sickness, but with temporal death: as is evident in the Corinthians, as S. Paul saith, For this cause many are weak, and sick among you, and many sleep • : and that these corrections proceed of love, he presently after showeth: But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, because we should not be condemned with the world.

4. Nec hoc fecerunt justi homines sine authoritate divina, &c. Neither did those just men do this without the divine authority, which sometime is manifested in Scripture, sometime hid: lest any should think it was permitted unto him to kill whom he would at his pleasure.

5. De inimici dilection, &c. in veteribus libris legitur, &c. And yet we read in the Old Testament of the loving of our enemy: whereof David is an example, who, when Saul was offered unto his hand, elegit parcere potius, quàm occidere ; chose rather to spare him, than kill him: ubi ergo nec difficultas fuit occidendi, nee timor, dilectio profecit inimico, &c. where then there was neither difficulty nor fear to kill the enemy, it was love that helped him, &c. Thus Augustine learnedly showeth the Old Testament not to be contrary to the new.

4. Controv. That every man's term of life is certain with God.

Vers. 26. THe number of thy days will I fulfill, &c. Here are two errors to be taken heed of, which through the mistaking of this text have deceived some. The one was of Diodorus Tarseus. whose opinion was, that because the days of the wicked are often time shortened, thought that the term of every man's life is not prefixed, and set down certain with God, Ex Simlero. So also Procopius, Non ostendit singulis praefixum esse certum vita finem ; He showeth not here, that to every man is set a certain end of his life; seeing God according to his pleasure, doth sometime shorten, and sometime prolong it, &c. But this opinion seemeth evidently to contradict the Scripture, which thus evidently testifieth, Are not his days determined? the number of his months are with th •• , thou hast appointed his bounds, which he cannot pass. As God then hath set down with himself the certain time of every ones coming into the world; so also he hath appointed their time of departure and going out of the world: which time in respect of God's prescience is neither prevented nor deferred. But to us it seemeth so to be, when the natural period of any man's life, by some violent and accidental means seemeth to be cut off. Theodorus therefore here resolveth well: Vnusquisquo nostrâm 〈◊〉 dios viv •• , quos Deus pranoscit, &c. Everyone of us shall live out those days which the Lord hath foreseen and foreknown.

The other error is of those which think, C • rtum & • undem 〈…〉 ; That the same certain term of life is appointed to all: wh •• Theodor •• in the same place confuteth: for if it were so, •• que j • stus 〈…〉 ; neither the righteous should enjoy a longer, nor the unrighteous a shorter life. The 〈◊〉 whereof is also se •• e by daily experience: for we see some infants to die before they are a month old, and some men to live above an hundred year.

1. Observ. The virtues of an upright Judge.

Vers. 1. THou shalt not receive a false tale, &c. In these three first verses are set forth three excellent virtues, that ought to be in every Judge. The first is truth, which ought always to be followed in judgment: contrary whereunto are false reports and tales, which a Judge is not to give • are unto. So the Wiseman saith, He that heareth speaketh continually: he that by patient hearing, and wise examining fifteth a cause, may speak without controlment. The second virtue is constancy, not to be swayed by the judgment of the multitude, or by the power of the mighty, to swerve from justice. The third virtue is equality, touched here in the third verse, neither to esteem the person of the rich or poor in judgment. B. Babington.

2. Observ. Not to use the names of the Gentile gods in poems and verses.

Vers. 13. YE shall make no mention of the name of other gods. By this we may gather, hand pie & Christiane fieri ab • is, &c. that it is no Christian or godly use in them, which in their verses and poems do invocate the gods of the Gentiles, as Apollo, Jupiter, Minerva, Marbach. But the Apostle saith, If any man speak, let him talk as the words of God, 1 Pet. 4. verse. 11.

3. Observ. God is to be praised both in the beginning and in the end.

Vers. 16. THe harvest of first fruits, &c. the feast of gathering fruits. God would have them both first and last to acknowledge a benefit: they must offer the first fruits, as a sign of their thankfulness, when their corn began to be ripe; and keep a feast also, when they had gathered in all their fruits. Men nowadays think it enough to make a show of thanksgiving▪ when they begin to taste of a benefit; and forget it afterward. But we must in the beginning and in the end celebrate the praise of God, Olea •• as the Apostle saith, In all things give thanks, 1 Thess. 5.18.