Lectures Upon Exodus 20, Lecture 8
The eighth Lecture vponupon the fifteenth verſe.
Thou ſhalt not ſteale.
IT hath bene ſhewed before that our neighbour is not to be conſidered in his perſon alone, but in what ſo euer thing is deare vntounto him: as goods, good name, and ſuche like: and therefore that the louelove which we muſt beare towards him, may not be towardes his body alone, but alſo towardes his goods: that our dealing with them may be ſo vpright, as may declare in deede that we doe louelove the man. For if any thing of his, paſsing through out handes, ſhall not finde fidelitie and faythfull dealing, but deceitfull conueyaunce of it or ſome parte thereof to oure ſelues, can it bee truely ſayde, wee louelove the man? there is no man that can ſo iudge of it: that can I ſay perſuade him ſelfe that hee is beloued of thoſe men, when nothing of his goodes commeth to their handes, but it is ſure to be fleeced, and to pay toll before it ſhall depart. The Lord therefore (commaunding ſafe paſſage and louing dealing towardes our neighboures goodes, when ſo euer (according to the manifold neceſsities of euerie man, to deale and communicate with an other in buying and ſelling, or otherwiſe) they hauehave occaſion to paſſe through our handes) hath forbidden ſtealing, and all vnfaithfulneſſe in their goods: condemning it of want of charitie and louelove towardes them ſelues, whoſe goods are diminiſhed by vsus, when ſo euer we ſhal hauehave dealing with thē. And bicauſe we goe ſo cloſely to work, and are ſo cunning to deceiue our ſelues, imagining that wee louelove our neighbours, when in deede there is no ſuch affection in vsus, the holy Ghoſte is compelled as it were to trace vsus, and by ſuch vnfaithful footeſteps as theſe be, to deſcrie vsus. For when we are ſo often taken with vntruſtie dealing, and vnfaythfulneſſe, in our neighbours goods, good name, and ſuch like: is there not iuſt cauſe to areſt vsus for not diſcharging this duetie of louelove, which is ſo due vntounto them?
This vnfaythfull dealing with the goodes of our neighbour, howe greatly it did diſpleaſe the Lorde, and with what lawes he did reſtraine his people of Iſrael from the ſame, the ſtatutes and orders of that gouernement can beſt declare: from whence it ſhall not be amiſſe to take ſome helpe in the interpretation of this commaundement. In Exodus we doe reade,Exo. 22. verſe. 1.4. that if any man ſhould ſteale a ſheepe, and kill it, or ſell it, he ſhould reſtore for that one ſheepe, foure: but if any man ſhould ſteale an oxe, and after kill it, or ſell it, hee ſhould reſtore fiue oxen for that oxe. The reaſon why he muſt pay more for the oxe then for the ſheepe, was, for that his neighbours loſſe was greater in the want of the one then of the other, as bringing more profite to the owner thereof. But if they were found with the theefe aliue, not ſolde nor killed, then muſt hee reſtore but the double of the oxe, aſſe, or ſhepe, for that his obſtinacie in this euil did not appeare ſo greate, as when hee ſhould make ſale of them, and turne them into gaine.
For it might be, while they were aliue, that he being touched with repentaunce, woulde reſtore them againe: but when they were ſolde or killed, the theefe gaue greater token of his impudencie, and confirmed obſtinacie, and the owner alſo was one degree further from any likelyhoode to come by them againe. If the theefe be nothing worth, and ſo not able to make reſtitution, then as it is there declared, he muſt be ſolde.
Thus did the iuſt God in the olde Teſtament, by lawes made for that purpoſe, and puniſhments appointed accordingly, declare his hatred of the euill, and in what reckoning it commeth before his iudgement ſeate: that we might take light at his iudgement, howe to diſcerne of theft, and how to iudge of this kynde of hatred towardes our neighbour, that bewrayeth it ſelfe in ſo vniuſt dealing with his goods.
The louelove that wee muſte ſhewe foorth towardes our neighbour by dealing well with his goods, may not only be ſeene in this law (ſo ſharply puniſhing the thefe for his want of louelove euidently appearing in his theft and iniurie cōmitted) but alſo in the lawe made for him, that ſhould borrow any of his neighbours goods. Which lawe did very well prouide for faithfull dealing with it, in puniſhing the contrarie ſo ſharply, as his vnfaythfulneſſe (howe great ſo euer) ſhould gaine him nothing at all. For thus it is written in Exodus: If a man borrowe ought of his neighbour, Exo. 22.14and it be hurt, or elſe dye, (the owner thereof not being by) hee ſhall ſurely make it good. If it be an hyred thing, he ſhall not make it good, it came for his hyre. It appeareth here plainly, that the owner muſt hauehave his loſſe made good of the borrower, vnleſſe his owne eyes could teſtifie, that the hurt or loſſe thereof came not through any default of the borrower. But he that ſhall lend for hyre, muſt ſtand to the aduenture of the principall if it decay. The reaſon is rendred, bicauſe it came for hyre, and not of louelove alone, as did the thing borrowed. And therefore the reaſon is good, why hee ſhould not be charged in this caſe, as the borrower, to make good that which he hath hired being hurt or dead. Marke well I pray you this lawe of God for lending and hyring: that the borrower muſt make good things borrowed, if they decay, but not the hyrer. Marke it well I ſay, for this is the ground of many thinges that are to be ſpoken of hereafter.
The equitie of this lawe, bringeth great light to diſcerne of the vſuries that are ſo common at theſe dayes. In things borrowed (it appeareth by this lawe) that only the hurt or death of the goods was prouided for. Here is then no helpe for mony that is borrowed or lent, which periſheth not with vſe, but is ſtill of the ſame value and worth that it was at the firſt deliuerie of the ſame. Beſides that, if it were worſſe for the vſe, there is no more required but to make the decay of it good. Howe then can thoſe who lend their monie to vſurie (whiche decayeth not with vſe) clayme any thing aboue that which was deliuered? By this lawe of lending, their recompence was commaunded onelyonly in this title, that the thing by lending was certeinly knowne to be impayred. Howe dare then the vſurers claime a right of recompence, vnderunder none other title, but that it was likely with ye vſe thereof, yt they might in that time, thus and ſo greatly hauehave gained? It is ye equitie of God, to require no recō pence for the vſe of things that are the worſſe with vſing, ſo long as there appeareth no caſuall hurt (as we call it) of the whole. What equitie then muſt it be, that for thinges not worſſe with vſe, contenteth not it ſelfe, no, not with the whole? Here, in this law of God good wil is no better recompenced, but that it be no looſer: Shall a couetous deſire then ſo richly be requited, as that it ſhall bee ſure alwayes to come home a gayner? By this equitie of God, when it is certeinly knowen, that by the vſe of the thing borrowed, the borrower hath good gaine, yet doth the almightie allowe no returne of commoditie to the lender for that gayne. By what equitie then can the vſurer clayme gaine for the vſe, yea oftentimes when it is certeine there is no gaine gotten at all? By this lawe of GOD, the lender could neuer gayne: for there is no other prouiſo made but for his principall: by ouer practiſe, he is euer aſſured of gayne. By that lawe, the borrower was aſſured of the gaine that was to returne to him: by this practiſe, the lender is oftentimes the whole gayner. If it be graunted, that this lawe of God in borrowing and lending hauehave in it any equitie, this practiſe in borrowing and lending of monie, muſt bee condemned of playne wrong and iniurie, as directly ſtanding againſt the ſame.
If this dealing, ſhall feare the ſtrict iuſtice of borrowing and lending, and ſeeke couert vnderunder the libertie of thinges let out to hyre, it is alſo ſhut out there, and findeth worſſe interteynment. For hyred thinges, bycauſe they goe for hyre, hauehave not the ordinarie allowaunce of the principall, if they ſhall decay, which borrowed thinges iuſtly claime, bicauſe they come freely and without hire: therfore the law yt we had of hyred thinges, handleth the vſurer more hardly, thā that law of borrowing & lending. For here, bycauſe of his hyre, he hath no holde of the principal if it decay.
Thus if it ſhould be graunted that monie may be hyred, which I thinke neuer can be proued: yet muſt it bee with hazard of the principall, according to the equitie of this lawe. That by the equitie of this lawe, (which is the equitie of God) it can hauehave no better allowance (if it ſhall bee proued lawfull to let it out for hyre,) then to ſtande to the daunger and decaye of the principall, theſe reaſons will plainely proue: The goods whiche naturally yeald commodities in the vſe of them to him that poſſeſſeth them, as ſheepe, and ſuche other, muſte ſtand to the aduenture of decay, if they be hyred: therefore muche more muſt they doe ſo, which naturally and of them ſelues yeald no commodities.
The goodes that in yealding their commodities doe ſpend and we are away them ſelues, are contented with their hyre, and lay no clayme to hauehave the whole repayred. By what iuſtice then may goodes that are neuer a whit the worſſe for wearing, beſides their hyre, binde a man to vphold the whole? If it bee equitie, that thoſe goodes which naturally of them ſelues yeald by vſe a certeine gayne, ſhould not be charged with the daunger of decay, it is againſt all equitie, yt thoſe things which neyther of them ſelues, nor yet with like certentie yeald the commoditie, ſhould beſide their hire, hauehave the whole vpholden. To conclude, if thoſe goods which (by all mens iudgement) may moſt lawfully hauehave conſideration for their vſe, be not better conſidered, it ſeemeth to me good reaſon, why thoſe goods (which the moſt thinke are not at all to hauehave hyre for their vſe, and all men thinke, they may not ſo iuſtly require it as the other) ſhould hold them ſelues well contented, whē their allowance is as good as theirs is, whiche beſt do deſerue it.
If any man ſhall replie, and ſay that ſome of great deſeruing in the Church of God, men of ſingular learning and iudgement, hauehave thought and taught otherwiſe: Let them vnderſtand, that there is no vſurie that is nowe in vſe with vsus that can be vpholden by their doctrine. For proofe whereof, I referre my ſelfe vntounto that, whiche is written by that worthie inſtrument of God Maiſter Caluine vponupon this matter in his Commentaries vponupon Ezechiel Chapter eighteene:Eze. 18. a man that hathe ſayde the moſt for the allowance of vſurie in ſome ſpeciall caſes, his wordes are theſe: Nunc videndum eſt, quando, & a quibus, accipere foenus liceat. Hîc autem valere debet ſententia illa, ne que paſsim, ne que omnia, ne que ab omnibus. Hoc quidem dictum fuit de muneribus: & lex illa impoſita fuit praeſidibus prouinciarum: ſed optimè quadrat huic cauſae. Non omnia igitur accipere conuenit: quia ſi modum excedat quaeſtus, (quia id pugnat cū charitate) etiā repudiandus eſt. Diximus quo que morē & vſum cōtinuū, vitio nō carere. Iā ne que paſsim, quia foenerator (vt dixi) locum habere non debet neque ferri in Eccleſia Dei. Deinde nō ab omnibus, quia a paupere ſemper foenus accipere nefas erit. Nowe wee muſt conſider when, and of whome, we may take vſurie. And here that common ſaying taketh place, not euerie where, not alwayes, not al things, not of all men. This was ſpoken of giftes: and this lawe was made for the rulers of prouinces: but it agreeth verie fitly vntounto this cauſe. A man may not therefore take all gaine, for if it exceede meaſure (bycauſe that is againſte charitie) it is to be refuſed: and we hauehave ſayde already, that often to vſe it, and to make a common and vſuall practiſe of it, can not be without fault. Neither is it to be allowed euerie where: bycauſe the vſurer (as I hauehave ſayde) ought to hauehave no place, nor once to be ſuffered in the Church of God.
Moreouer, it is not to be taken of all men, bycauſe it ſhall alwayes bee extreme wickedneſſe to take vſurie of a poore man. This is the opinion of that man, who of all other giueth moſte libertie, and is thought to bee moſte fauourable in this cauſe. As for him that liueth vponupon vſurie, as the husbandman doth vppon his husbandrie, his iudgement is that he ought to be thruſt out of the ſocietie of men. Thus muche for his iudgement, whome ſome vſurers in this matter pretende to build vppon. We ſee in this commaundement, what hedges and fences the Lorde hath made for the ſafetie of our goods, to reſerue the proprietie and benefite thereof vntounto our ſelues: and to keepe vsus alſo from witneſsing any want of louelove, by breaking in vponupon any other mens goods, vnlawfully. This want of louelove, witneſſed by euill dealing with oure neighbours goodes, was likewiſe prouided for by lawes made for their faithfull dealing, that had any thing giuen them to keepe. We reade in Exodus,Exo. 22.7. that if a man deliuer his neighbour monie or ſtuffe to keepe, and it bee ſtolne out of his houſe, if the theefe be found, he ſhall pay the debt: if the theefe be not founde, then the maiſter of the houſe muſt be brought vntounto the Iudges to ſweare, whether hee hauehave put his hand vntounto his neighbors goods to defraud him of it or no: not beeing acquitted of that ſuſpicion, before he had purged him ſelfe by an othe. But if a man ſhall deliuer vntounto his neighbour to keepe, aſſe, oxe, or ſheepe, or any beaſt, and it die, or be hurt, or taken away by enimies, and no man ſee it, the owner (hearing him teſtifie by an othe that there was no deceit of his part in the matter) muſt holde him ſelfe contented therewith. If it were ſtolne from him to whom it was giuen to keepe, hee muſt make reſtitution to the owner thereof, bycauſe therein appeared his negligence. If it were torne in peeces (which might bee, notwithſtanding his diligence were neuer ſo good) he muſt bring ſome part of it, and ſhew that it was deuoured, and in ſo doing, hee is not bound to make it good,Exo. 22.11 12.13. as appeareth in Exodus. Theſe teſtimonies are here brought in, to teſtifie how carefull the Lorde is of faythfull and louing dealing with our neighbours in their goods, and to let vsus ſee and vnderſtand, that wee are not ſo free from duties in that behalfe, as commonly we are wont to eſteeme our ſelues to bee: but that wee ſtande bound before the Lord, to leaue recordes behinde vsus of our louing affection towards them, when ſo euer by any occaſion wee ſhall hauehave to deale with their goods.
What naturall man canne bee perſuaded, that there is any conſcience binding to reſtore goodes that were put in truſt vntounto him, if they ſhould be ſtolne? What naturall man would not fret and fume at this, that when his neighbour maketh requeſt vntounto him to keepe it, hee ſhould notwithſtanding bee bound to aunſwere it if it were ſtolne, or be troubled for his goodwill, to purge him ſelfe before a magiſtrate by an othe, that there was no vnfaithful dealing on his parte with thoſe goodes? Would not fleſh and bloud ſtorme at this, as an vnlawfull and vniuſt thing? But the iuſt Lorde, by theſe lawes letteth vsus ſee that wee ſtand more bound vntounto louing dealing with our neighbours in their goodes, than our corrupt nature woulde willingly yealde vntounto. And thoſe lawes are good glaſſes for vsus thus farre to looke into them, that wee may learne that wee are bounde to ſhewe more fidelitie and louelove towardes oure neighbours in their goodes, then our corrupt nature can bee brought with any goodwill to acknowledge.
The negligence, whereby an other man ſuffered loſſe or damage in his goodes, was accounted as a kynde of deceite and iniurie before the Lord: & he was bound to make it good, through whoſe negligence it did periſh, according as it is written in Exodus:Exo. 21.33. When a man ſhall open a well, or dig a pit, and couer it not, and an oxe or an aſſe fal therin, the owner of the pit ſhal make it good, and giuegive monie to the owners thereof, but ye dead beaſt ſhal be his. What ſhall we then think of thē that of deliberate purpoſe, wittingly and willingly ſhal bring damage or loſſe to their neighbours? when careleſſe negligence (not being ioyned with any purpoſe to hurt or impoueriſh) is boūd to make good the hurte and damage of his negligence, and yet nothing is ſo common nowe a dayes (euen among chriſtians and goſpellers) as vponupon the leaſt grefe or diſpleaſure conceiued, to force a man to ſpend his monie and goods in ſuite of lawe. Theſe men are farre from fearing the puniſhment of negligence, while their deliberate purpoſe without any lawfull cauſe to impaire his wealth, is accounted as no fault with them, no not halfe the price of their diſpleaſure, be it neuer ſo vniuſtly or without cauſe conceiued.
We hauehave heard how carefull the Lorde is to make ſafe paſſage for our goodes, whether they come within the coaſt of the borrower, receyuer, or careleſſe paſsinger. The ſame care hath he alſo of them, when they muſt paſſe by the buyer or ſeller. For euen the buyers and ſellers hauehave charge to deale well with them, that there appeare not lacke of louelove towardes the owners, by the their doings and dealings with their goods. And therefore our owne greedie affections muſt not make the market, nor ſet the price vppon the thinges that are to be ſolde, but the worthineſſe of the thing it ſelfe that is to be bought or ſolde, & the benefite that it is likely to yeelde to him that ſhall inioy it, muſte ſtrike the ſtroke.
A lawe was giuen vntounto the people of Iſrael for fidelitie and faithfull dealing in buying & ſelling, as appeareth in Leuiticus:Leuit. 25.14.15.16.17. When thou ſelleſt any thing to thy neighbour, or buyeſt at thy neighbours hand, ye ſhal not deceiue one another, but according to the nūber of yeres after the Iubilie, thou ſhalt buy of thy neighbour: alſo according to the number of the yeeres of the reuenewes hee ſhall ſell vntounto thee: according to the multitude of yeeres thou ſhalt increaſe the price thereof, and according to the fewneſſe of yeeres thou ſhalt abate the price of it: for the number of fruites doeth he ſel vntounto thee. Oppreſſe not yee therefore any man his neighboure, but thou ſhalt feare thy GOD, for I am the Lorde your GOD. Theſe are the verye wordes of the texte. At the yeere of Iubilie euerie manne returned againe to his landes and poſſeſſions that he had ſolde and made away: therefore as that yeere was further off or neerer, ſo they bought and ſolde thinges deare or better cheape. And the reaſon and equitie of this lawe is added: for (ſayeth the holie Ghoſte) the number of fruites doeth hee ſell vntounto thee, and thoſe canſt thou not hauehave after the yeere of Iubilie, and therefore if he ſhoulde ſell otherwiſe then after that rate, hee ſhould take in ſome money of thee, not giuing any thing out for it: for the number of fruites doeth he ſell vntounto thee. As if he ſhould ſay, he hath not righte to take, but in regarde of that fruite and commoditie that doeth come vntounto thee, by that which he doeth ſell thee. For he maketh this the reaſon (why he muſt abate according to the neere approching of Iubilie,) becauſe the other after that time, could receiue no benefite of that whiche hee bought: as if it were an vndoubted trueth, that there muſt be ſome equalitie of mutual benefite betwene the buyer and the ſeller, that a man may not take money for nothing of his neighbour, but muſt giuegive him a penie worth for his penie. The yeere of Iubilie is gone, with other the like lawes made for the gouernement of that people: but the reaſon and equitie of this lawe ſtandeth, and bindeth vsus to hauehave conſcience in our buying and ſelling, & not to let our couetous affection ſet the price vponupon that we hauehave to ſell.
Out of the equitie of this lawe, which yet remaineth, (beeing the equitie of that GOD which cannot be contrarie to himſelfe,) it appeareth, that the ſeller muſt in ſelling looke what commoditie and benefite it is likely that the buyer ſhall inioy by that which he ſelleth vntounto him, making coniecture thereof according vntounto the vſuall rate of thoſe wares as they go at that time, and to increaſe or abate the price of his wares, or that hee hath to ſel whatſoeuer accordingly. For they muſt buy and ſell according as the yeere of Iubilie (whiche beeing once come they might no longer inioy it) was ſooner or later, increaſing the price, if it were longer to that yeere, becauſe the buyers commoditie ſhould increaſe: and abating the price, if the time were ſhorter, becauſe the buyers commoditie muſt be ſo much the leſſe.
By the equitie and reaſon of this lawe, we may lerne two rules, which wil teach vsus to diſcerne wel of true buying & ſelling, & learne vsus to buy and ſel in the feare of God & with a good conſcience. The firſte is, that our couetous affection muſte not ſett the price of that we vtter. For here we ſee he muſt hauehave an eye to that time, when the others commoditie muſt ceaſſe, and take his rule from thence: ſo that hee is ſent from him ſelfe in making of the price, and muſt looke at an other. This is the firſte rule giuen vsus to buy and ſell by, and is drawen from the equitie of this lawe, whiche is the equitie of our GOD.
A meruaylous good rule, ſauouring of louelove to our neighbour, and brideling ſelfe-louelove, whiche without regarde of others, loketh to it ſelfe alone. If this rule were obſerued, then ſhould theſe ſpeeches ceaſſe in Chriſtian mouthes, and not bee hearde, I may and will ſell thus, becauſe I hauehave had loſſes heeretofore: or I will ſell as I can get for my wares how ſoeuer, becauſe I may hauehave loſſes hereafter, and this muſt helpe to beare when that commeth: As if wee had commiſſion from the Lord, to take vp vponupon ye buyer, our ſhipwracks, or the recompence of our loſſes what ſo euer: or as if we had authoritie, to lay thoſe ſtrokes vppon his ſhoulders, that ſhould firſte deale with vsus, whiche wee hauehave iuſtly borne from the hande of the Lorde.
It were very requiſite, if any doe ſo, that his commiſſion were ſeene why hee ſhould ſo doe: for ſure it is, the Lord giueth not out any ſuche large commiſſion, as by vertue whereof any may challenge a recompence in another mans goods, when ſoeuer the Lord for iuſt cauſes hath thought it good to diminiſh his. The ſecond rule is, that in buying and ſelling, wee driue the commodities giuen and receiued as neere equalitie as poſſibly we can: that ſo farre foorth as wee can gather (by the preſent value, rate, and account that is made of thoſe things exchaunged) there be equall commodities comming to bothe the parties by that exchaunge, & that neither partie be a deceiuer, or oppreſſour of his brother: for ſuche hath the Lorde threatened that he will be reuenged of. Therefore this reaſon is giuen (why hee muſt take leſſe if the time be neerer, when the buyer ſhall forgoe his commoditie:) for (ſayth the texte) thou ſelleſt him the fruites, and the fruites he can no longer inioy: and if he ſhould ſay, hee can no more hauehave commoditie of that which he bought of thee, and therefore muſt thy price bee abated accordingly, that there may be mutuall benefite, & neither parte be found oppreſſing an other. For thou art not licenſed to take any penie from thy brother for nothing.
Thou muſt (as nigh as thou canſt diſcerne) giuegive him as good as thou takeſt: thou art bounde to giuegive him a penie worth for his penie, and a penie for his penie worth. Thou maiſt not doe that to him, which thou wouldſt be loth that he ſhould doe to thee. Thou wouldeſt not that hee ſhould take any commoditie from thee, vnleſſe hee gaue thee the worth of it againe.
I perceiue the time paſſeth, and I hauehave muche yet to ſpeake of this matter: I will therefore heere make an ende, reſeruing the reſte vntill the nexte day. Now let vsus call vppon our heauenly father in the name of his ſonne, that wee may wittneſſe the louelove whiche wee beare vntounto our brethren, by all faithfull and louing dealing with their goods. &c.