Harmony Upon 1 Samuel, Chapter 21

Harmony Upon 1 Samuel · Chapter 21

p. 224CHAP. XXI.

1. Quest. v. 1. Of the citie Nob, whether Dauid fled to Ahimelech the high Priest.

1. DAvid Kimhi saith, that he learned of his father, that this Nob was the citie Ierusalem: ex Pellican. but this appeareth to be otherwise, Isa. 10.32. where Nob and Ierusalem are named as two diuers places. 2. It was a citie situate in the tribe of Beniamin, not farre from Anathoth, where the inheritance lay that was allotted to this familie. 1. king. 2.26. thither Salomon sendeth Abiathar, when he remooued him from the Priesthoode. So Nehem. 11.32. Nob and Anathoth are named together, as beeing cities not farre asunder. Iun. 3. Here at this time was the Tabernacle, the altar, the table of shew bread, which was the cause that so many Priests gaue there their attendance: but the Arke was still at Kiriathiearim in the tribe of Iudah.

2. Quest. v. 2. How the Priest here called Ahimelech, is said to be Abiathar. Mark. 2.26.

1. Some thinke that whereas Abiathar was the sonne of Ahimelech, v. 20. that first Dauid might hauehave some communication with Abiathar, and afterward with Ahimelech: p. 225Mart. but seeing Abiathar is in the Gospel called the high Priest, it can not be vnderstood of the sonne, who could not be high Priest while his father liued. 2. Therefore the better solution is, that both the father and the sonne had each of them two names: they were both called Abiathar,Reconcil. and Ahimelech: this may appeare, 2. Sam. 8.17. Zadock and Ahimelech the sonne of Abiathar, are said to be the priests vnderunder Dauid, and c. 20.25. the Priests were Zadock and Abiathar: the sonne is here called in one place Ahimelech, in the other Abiathar: and so is the father called Abiathar, who in this place is named Ahimelech: Genevens. Bez. in Mark. 3.26.

3. Quest. v. 1. How Dauid is said here to be alone, and Mark. 2.26. he is said to giuegive vntounto those which were with him.

1. Some thinke to dissolue this knot, and answer this doubt, in saying that Dauid is said to be alone, not that none at all were with him: but that he came without any guard of souldiers: but this answer satisfieth not: for Dauid saith, that he had appointed not his souldiers, but his seruants,Reconcil. and yong men, to such and such places, whereby it appeareth, that he had not so much as any seruant at all with him: and Iosephus saith, he was neither famulitio stipatus, nec servis comitatus, attended vponupon by his seruants, nor accompanied with his friends. 2. Therefore the meaning of that place in the Gospel is, that Dauid gaue of the shew bread, not to those which were then presently with him, but to whome he came afterward. Mar. 3. And herein appeareth the inconstancie of Courtly fauour: Dauid, who was before beloued, admired, and reuerenced of all, is now left and forsaken of all. Mar.

4. Quest. v. 2. Whether Dauid were in fault, by this his excuse of the Kings busines, to bring the Priests and their citie into daunger.

1. Some excuse Dauid here that he told the truth, saying, that the King had commanded him a certaine thing: for indeed God the great king of heauen, had appointed him to be king: but neither doth it appeare that Dauid had any such meaning, p. 226and if he had, he had deceiued Ahimelech notwithstanding, who vnderstood him to speake of the king. 2. Some doe excuse Dauids fact herein, that he did no more then any man would, that was in necessitie: and that neither he nor the Priest had done any thing vnlawfull: but that Doeg and Saul onelyonly were the causes of the mischeife following: Dauid was the occasion, but taken, not giuen, as Christs fleeing into Egypt was the cause of the death of the infants. Mar. But if Dauid shewed some infirmitie in deuising an excuse, which was not true, which can not be auoided, then he must needes be in some fault also for the daunger that followed, seeing the Priest was induced by that pretense to doe as he did, whereby he came into that daunger. And further, if Dauid had not feared, nor thought of any such perill, that might hauehave ensued, he had beene cleare: but seeing he himselfe suspected it, as he saith, he knew the same day Doeg would tell Saul, c. 22. 22. and yet did it: it can not but shew some infirmitie in him. Christs example is not like: for there Ioseph was admonished by an Angel in his dreame to flee into Egypt: neither was the like daunger there foreseene, which was suspected and feared here. 3. Therefore, as Dauid himselfe confesseth, that he was the cause of the death of those persons: so we neede not feare to affirme it. And though our Sauiour iustifieth Dauids eating of the shew bread vponupon this necessitie, as Osiander reasoneth: yet eueryevery circumstance of this action is not there iustified: though it were lawfull, hunger compelling him, to eate the shew bread, against the ceremoniall law: yet no necessitie was to compell him to tell an vntruth, against the morall law. I rather therefore herein subscribe to the iudgement of Pellican. Genevens. that this was an infirmitie of Dauid, to teach vsus, that none hath his iustice of himselfe, but receiueth it of Gods merciemercy. Genevens. 4. And further, that Dauid committed here some ouersight, it may appeare by that place, 2. Sam. 23.15. where Dauid thirsting for the water of Bethlehem, as here he is hungrie, three men aduentured their liues to breake through the hoast of the Philistims, and brought vntounto Dauid of that water, who would not drinke it, because it was the price of their blood, but powred it out vntounto God: there Dauid in the like necessitie would not drinke that water, the daunger beeing ouer, much lesse would he p. 227hauehave before commanded them to doe it, where he saw apparant daunger: and here if Dauid had forborne, when he suspected the daunger, the occasion of so great crueltie would hauehave beene cut off. 5. But yet God in his prouidence so disposed of this action, that both by this occasion the iust sentence of God was executed vponupon Eli his house, Mart. as also in this example, the libertie of the Gospel was shewed against the ceremonies of the law, which the Messiah should bring. Borr.

5. Quest. v. 4. Of the difference of things common and prophane, and hallowed.

1. Things some are sacred and prophane in their nature, which can not be chaunged: things sacred, which can neuer be prophaned, that is, turned to a prophane or vncleane vse, are the gifts of the spirit, vertue, louelove, faith, patience, and such like, but they remaine sacred and holy in their nature, and are onelyonly giuen vntounto those which are become sacred beeing sanctified by the spirit of God: some things are polluted and vncleane in their owne nature, as the corruption of man, vice, sinne. 2. Some things are not sacred in their nature, but according to the institution, as the ceremonies of the law, which now are prophaned and abrogated by Christ: Borr. so the elements vsed in the Sacraments, are sanctified by the word for that spirituall vse: but that holy action beeing finished, they returne to their nature: such was the shew bread here giuen vntounto Dauid, it was holy by the ceremonie, but as prophane and common in regard of Dauids necessitie.

6. Quest. v. 5. Of the halowed bread, called the shew bread.

1. The law hereof is set downe, Leuit. 24. both concerning the matter whereof it should be made, of the finest flowre, howe much should be in eueryevery loafe, howe many loaues 12. in all: where they should be placed, and how long they should there continue from Sabboth to Sabboth: and in what manner they should be presented, namely, with incense. 2. They vsed fowre kinde of breads: the first was common bread, the second such as the people vsed in their sacred p. 228feasts: the third, such as the Priests eate in their families: the fourth was the most holy bread, which it was lawfull onelyonly for the Priests to eate within the Tabernacle. 3. The holy bread called the face or shew bread, because it was alwaies in the presence of God, was a type of the true bread Christ Iesus, that came downe from heauen. It also shadowed forth the Eucharist of the new Testament, which is celebrated with bread. And there was the same signification of their Sacraments with ours, sauing that ours are more cleare and manifest, beeing a memoriall of Christ alreadie exhibited, whereas theirs did shadow him out beeing to come. Mar.

7. Quest. v. 4. Whether it were lawfull for the Priest to giuegive vntounto Dauid hallowed bread.

1. Seeing our Sauiour Christ doth iustifie and allow this fact of Dauid, Matth. 12.4. there can be no further doubt or question made thereof, but that Dauid might both safely eate thereof, the necessitie of hunger vrging him, and that the Priest might lawfully giuegive thereof vntounto him. 2. The reason hereof is, that ceremonies and externall rites must giuegive place to charitie: for as the second table must giuegive place to the first, as Abraham beeing commanded of God to kill his sonne, (which he did in purpose and counsell) though it be forbidden in the second table to kill, yet Abraham was to yeild his obedience to God, which is commanded in the first table: so the ceremoniall law is wholly to giuegive place to the morall, when as both can not be kept together: as the health, life, and safetie of man, wherein our louelove and charitie is seene, is to be preferred before a ceremonie: our Sauiour healed vponupon the Sabboth day, because the ceremonie of rest, was to giuegive way vntounto charitie: the Macchabees therefore were in error, that refused, necessitie so compelling, to fight vponupon the Sabboth day: so here the Priest and Dauid both should hauehave sinned, if he should hauehave suffered Dauid to perish, and Dauid should hauehave chosen rather to die, then to eate of the hallowed bread. 3. And this libertie, which first was brought in by Christ, and by him communicated to his members, is grounded vponupon the will of the author and instituter of the ceremonies, who would hauehave all morall duties preferred before them: as p. 229he saith, I will hauehave merciemercy, and not sacrifice. 4. Here then their superstition is reprooued,The breach of ceremonies not to be more seuerely censured then the breach of the morall law. which preferre the obseruation of ceremonies, before morall duties, as the Pharisies which neglected Gods commandements, to establish their traditions: as if a Iewe should die, rather then eates swines flesh, in case of necessitie: or among the Papists, a Carthusian should choose rather to starue, then to eate flesh: so in Poperie, they will rather suffer their Priests and Votaries to burne in lust, and to commit vncleannes, then to permit them to marrie: they would punish a man more for eating flesh in Lent, then for committing fornication: which censuring of the transgression of ceremoniall obseruations, beyond the breach of morall duties, is displeasing in the sight of God, wheresoeuer it is practised. 5. But yet this is a different case, when the breach of a ceremonie, carrieth with it the transgression of some morall dutie: for in that case a man ought rather to die, then to be forced to that transgression, where there is no necessitie: as the Iewes did well to offer themselues to death, beeing vrged by cruell Antiochus, then to eate swines flesh, because it would hauehave shewed a renouncing of the law, and flat disobedience to Gods commandement: so for a Christian to eate things sacrificed to Idols for his necessitie, when it may be done without offence, is lawfull, as S. Paul sheweth, 1. Cor. 10. but to eate it, in approbation of an idol, beeing thereunto compelled by the enemie, were a deniall of his profession. sic fere Martyr.

8. Quest. v. 4. Whether the Priest did well in requiring of Dauid abstinence and cleannes from women.

1. Some thinke, that this was a preposterous and ridiculous question, as Hierome calleth it: for what if Dauid had not beene free from lying with women, namely with his wife: (for other women the Priest meaneth not, for Dauid beeing an holy man, the Priest could not suspect of incōtinencie) would he hauehave suffered Dauid rather to starue, then to eate of the shew bread? Againe, there can be no precept shewed in all the Scripture, that the companie with the wife did contaminate: to this effect Pet. Mart. who seemeth to denie that the matrimoniall act, did bring so much as a legal impuritie with p. 230it: But this can not be denied, that by Moses law, there was an imputation of some legall vncleannes vntounto carnall copulation: as both appeareth by the analogie of that precept, Exod. 19.15. where the people are commanded not to come at their wiues for three daies, beeing to appeare before the Lord in Mount Sinai: Iun. as also by that law, Leuit. 15.18. which place is truly translated thus: A woman, when a man lieth with her by carnall copulation, they shall both be washed with water: which place, though Pet. Mart. contend to be vnderstood of such as had a flux or running of their seede: yet by comparing it with Leuit. 18.20. it will appeare, to be taken in the other sense: where the same words, shichbath zaragh, is taken for carnall copulation, semen concubitus: But this was no vncleannes in nature, but onelyonly in the ceremonie, as it appeareth by the clensing and purgation, which was onelyonly ceremoniall by water. And the reason of this precept was, that by this meanes, they should liue temperately and soberly in mariage, and not giuegive themselues ouer vntounto fleshly pleasure: seeing after eueryevery such act they were vncleane to the euen.

2. But in the other assertion, that this question propounded by the Priest at this time, was rash and vnseasonable, I rather consent with P. Mart. then vntounto Iunius, who seemeth to thinke, that the Priest consulted with God herein, and was directed by his oracle to require this preparation. Indeede the Priest consulted with God for Dauid, c. 22.10. and it seemeth by the Lords appointment gaue him the victualls and the sword: but concerning that condition of legal puritie, the Priest required it of himselfe: the Lord knew how it was with Dauid at that time, and what if Dauid had beene vncleane, he must not hauehave starued: and for as much as laie persons were vncleane by the law, in respect of eating of the hallowed bread, seeing necessitie dispensed with one part of the ceremonie, it might also with the rest.

3. As they are in one extreame, which will not admit so much as a legall impuritie, which is no disparagement to mariage, seeing the virgine Marie after that holy birth, was also purified according to the law, from a legal imputation: Luk. 2.22. So they are further wide in an other extreame, that would make it an Euangelicall impuritie, forbidding any immediately after such carnall knowledge, to communicate in p. 231the Eucharist: As it standeth thus in the decrees fathered vponupon Hierome, Sciatis fratres charissimi, quod quicun que vxori debitum reddit, non potest vacare orationi, nec de carnibus agni comedere licet: Knowe ye brethren, that whosoeuer rendreth the due to his wife, can not giuegive himselfe to prayer, nor eate of the flesh of the lambe. Caus. 33. qu. 4. c. 1. For if the duties of mariage hindred praier, then they must altogether be omitted, and so consequently mariage it selfe abolished, seeing we ought to pray continually, as the Apostle exhorteth, 1. Thess. 5.17. No day nor night is to be intermitted without praier: then by this reason, men that are married should refraine both day & night. Indeed the Apostle would hauehave them that maried to abstaine for a time with consent, to giuegive themselues to fasting and praier, 1. Cor. 7.5. but he meaneth extraordinarie praier, such as is ioyned with fasting, not ordinarie and daily praier, which is not to be intermitted: then as abstinence is to be vsed from meate, to make our praiers more feruent, so also from wiues: but the ordinarie exercise of praier is no more hindred by matrimoniall duties, tempered with sobrietie, then by naturall offices in the sober vse of meate and drinke. Concerning the other point of such abstinence before the receiuing of the Sacrament: as I deny not, but sometime it may be conuenient, not in respect of any vncleannes in the thing, but in regard of that intemperancie and lust, which often concurreth with it, so neither is such abstinence to be held necessarie for all: for if mariage be in it selfe an holy thing, as beeing of Gods institution, the vse of mariage in it selfe also is holy, beeing not by mans corruption defiled: as the Apostle saith, Mariage is honourable among all, and the bed vndefiled, Heb. 13.5. how then can that which is in it selfe, holy, honourable, and vndefiled, defile a man, and make him vnfit for holy things? And in this case, that rule of the Apostle holdeth, omnia munda mundis, to the cleane all things are cleane. Tit. 1.15.Whether it be requisite to forbeare the matrimoniall duties, before the receiuing of the communion. But yet because many times that matrimoniall dutie may be an impediment to spirituall meditation, and it draweth with it carnall delight, it is not inconuenient, nay it is very fit therein to vse that abstinence, which is in meates and drinkes: that as he that can endure to be so long fasting, to receiue the Sacrament as his first sustenance, doth not amisse, who also may eate first, p. 230duplicate page p. 231duplicate page p. 232if his strength serue him not: for as Augustine saith, Liquido apparet, quando primi acceperunt discipuli corpus & sanguinem Domini, eos non accepisse ieiunos: it is euident, that when the Disciples first receiued the bodie and blood of Christ, they did not receiue it fasting. lib. resp. ad Ianuar. c. 6. So they which can vse their strength in the other kinde of abstinence, doe therein well: yet here none are to be forced, but to be left vntounto their godly discretion. In this point, that resolution of Gregorie is excellent: Si quis sua coniuge, non cupidine voluptatis captus, &c. If any man vse his wife, not taken with lust of pleasure, but for procreation sake: de sumendo corporis & sanguinis Dominici mysterio suo relinquendus est arbitrio, quia à nobis prohiberi non debet accipere, qui in igne positus nescit ardere: concerning the receiuing of the mysterie of the bodie and blood of Christ, he is to be left to his owne discretion, seeing he is not to be forbidden to take it, who can be in the fire and not burne.

4. But the Romanists doe yet presse this place further, that if it were required of Dauid, that he had kept himselfe from women, before he did eate of the hallowed bread: then it is fit that the Priests of the new Testament should alwaies abstaine, and be perpetuall virgins, seeing they continually consecrate the Sacrament: to this purpose Bellarmine alledgeth out of Hierom. lib. 1. de Cler. c. 19.

Contra. 1. I confesse that some of the Fathers doe make such collection, beeing much addicted to the praise of virginitie: but Hierome among the rest, is too farre caried that way too much to the disgrace of marriage: as he saith, Quale bonum est, Contr. Single life not to be imposed vponupon the ministers of the Gospel.quod prohibet accipere corpus Christi? what manner of good thing is that, which hindereth to receiue the bodie of Christ? May not the like be said of meate, quale bonum quod impedit ieiunium? what kinde of good thing is that, which hindreth fasting? Therefore we must not so much consider, what they write according to their owne fansies and inclinations, but how it is grounded vponupon Scripture, that they write. 2. This collection is very weake, to reason from the legall obseruations, to Euangelicall constitutions: that because the law commaunded a certaine puritie ceremoniall, that men should be obliged thereunto vnderunder the Gospel. 3. Nay, this reason enforced not the Priests of the law themselues, p. 233which daily ministred in the beginning, before they were in Dauids time sorted out into their courses, and yet it was permitted vntounto them to be married. 4. Further, if virginitie should be imposed vponupon them, which daily minister the Eucharist, then vponupon them also which daily receiue it, as the vse was of some Churches in Augustines time, of the which custome he writeth thus, Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere, nec laudo nec vitupero, omnibus tamen Dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo: EueryEvery day to communicate in the Eucharist, I neither commend nor discommend, but eueryevery Lords day I perswade to communicate. de Ecclesiast. dogmat▪ c. 53. If all these should hauehave refrained, that did communicate eueryevery day, then in those places there should hauehave beene no mariage at all.

8. Quest. v. 5. What Dauid meaneth, when he saith, The vessells of the young men were holy.

1. The most doe interpret these wordes of the bodies of the young men: for so are the bodies of Christians called vessells: as 1. Thess. 4.4. That eueryevery one of you should know, how to possesse his vessell in holines and honour: and in the same sense, women are called the weaker vessells: sic Mar. Bor. Pellican. Genevens. and so they make this to be the meaning, that the young men had kept themselues from women, and so their vessells, that is, their bodies were holy. But Dauid had spoken before sufficiently of the purity of their bodies in that behalf, hauing said, that women had beene secluded from them three daies: for so long it was, since Dauid came from home, it was now the third day: therefore Dauid hauing signified so much in plaine tearmes, there was no cause he should deliuer the same againe in obscure words, seeing he was in hast, & went in danger of his life, and had no time now to speake any thing superfluously. 2. Vatablus vnderstandeth their garments by their vessells: but there was no occasion offered for Dauid to speake of their cloathes: therefore Iunius better vnderstandeth here by vessells, the instruments which were necessarie for their iourney, as their bagges and sachels, and such other necessary implemēts: so is the word chelei, vessels, taken c. 9.7. p. 234the bread faileth in our vessells. Therefore whereas the Priest first asked, whether they were kept from women: Dauid maketh a full answer, that not onelyonly their bodies were cleane, which should receiue the hallowed bread, but the vessells also, wherein they should carrie the bread, were kept from pollution. And that the vessells are taken in this sense, appeareth by the vse of the same word in the ende of the verse, where the bread is said to be sanctified in his vessell, that is, in the dishes and instruments, wherein it was put.

9. Quest. v. 5. Of the meaning of the next words: And it is in a manner common, specially seeing other shall be … this day in the vessell.

1. Some vnderstand the first words of the prophane way, making this the sense, that although their busines, whereabout they went, were prophane and worldly, not belonging to religion, yet, it, that is, the bread, should be sanctified in their vessells: that is, their bodies beeing cleane: Osiand. some applie it to the way and iourney it selfe, that though they could not choose, but meete with diuers pollutions and prophanations in the way, yet their present necessitie did sanctifie the bread vntounto them, that is, make it lawfull for them to eate it: Pellican. some, referre the latter part to themselues, that they after they had eatē the bread, should be more carefull to be sanctified in their vessells: Genevens. some thus, the bread should be kept in his purenes in their vessells, wherein they caried it: it should not be prophaned by any pollution. Vatab.

2. But, the words are better translated, and it is in a manner common, that is, the bread: 1. for in that sense it is called before, chol lechem, common bread: it is not like, that the Priest would speake in one sense, and Dauid in an other. 2. Beside, derech, the way, is of the feminine, chol of the masculine, therefore they must not be ioyned together as substantiue and adjectiue. 3. It is vsuall in Scripture, to take derech in that sense, for ratio, or modus, a manner, or respect: as Isa. 10.26. After the manner of Egypt. 4. That which is said to be prophane, is the same that is sanctified in the vessells, but the bread is said to be sanctified: for so v. 4. the opposition is p. 235betweene chol lechem, and lechem kodesh, common bread, and hallowed bread: this then is the meaning, that the bread was in a manner common, that is, vntounto the Priests, specially seeing that (for so the wordes veaph chi, rather signifie, then how much more: Iun. A.P.) other bread, was sanctified in the vessells: that is, vponupon the Sabboth new hote bread was consecrated, and the old was taken away for the Priests vse. Iun. This to be the best interpretation is euident, both by Ahimelechs question before-going, and by the words following: for Ahimelech made two exceptions to Dauids motion: first, the bread was hallowed bread, and so not for any but the Priests to eate of: and then, it might be that they were not cleane from women. Dauid answeareth to both these: for the second which he toucheth first, he answeareth, that not onelyonly themselues were cleane in that behalfe, but the vessels also and instruments of their iourney were pure: for the first he telleth the Priest, that the hallowed bread, when it was taken from the dishes, and other put in place thereof, was in a manner as common bread to the Priests, and so it might be lawfull for Dauid also in respect of his necessitie to eate thereof. The words also following shew this to be the meaning, where mention is made of taking away the shew bread the same day from before the Lord, and putting hote bread in stead thereof. v. 6.

10. Quest. v. 7. Of Doeg the Adomites staying in the Tabernacle.

1. Whereas Doeg is called, as the most read, an Edomite, yet in the original he is said to be an Adomite, either of Adam a citie of Nephthali, Iosh. 19.36. Iun. or rather of Edom: for the transmutation and change of pricks and points is vsuall in the Hebrew: he was an Edomite by nation, but in profession an Israelite: as Ahimelech one of Dauids followers is in the same sense called a Gittite. c. 26.6. Iun. Mart. 2. This Doeg was staied before the Lord, either for the religion of the Sabboth, or by occasion of some vow: Iun. he staied not in the inward, but in the outward court, whether the people had accesse. Mar. 3. This his beeing there about a religious office, was the cause, by his wicked accusation, of the cruell p. 236murder following: yet was not the exercise of religion the cause, but his bloodie mind abusing religion: Pellic. for hypocrites though they pretend sanctitie, yet doe reteine malice in their hearts still. Osiand. 4. This Doeg is fitly by some made to be a type and forerunner of Iudas, who betraied Christ, and brought his Apostles into danger, as here Doeg accuseth Dauid, & worketh the ouerthrow of the innocent Priests. Mar. 5. Yet Gods secret prouidence is here to be considered, which by this meanes maketh good his sentence against the house of Eli. Borr.

11. Quest. v. 9. Of the meaning of these words, Behind the Ephod.

1. The most doe so take these words, as though the Priest should describe the place, where Goliaths sword lay wrapped vp in a cloath, behinde the place, where the Ephod, the high Priests garment lay. Genevens. Vatab. Osiand. But to this interpretation it may be excepted: that if Goliaths sword were wrapped vp, it is like the holy Ephod, whereto was annexed the brestplate with twelue precious stones, with the Vrim and Thummim, lay not open and vncouered, to be a marke to finde out the sword by: and againe, the Ephod was kept and laid vp in the holy place, whether it was not lawfull for Dauid to come, yet here the Priest doth bid him take it: and further, the Priest gaue it him, c. 18.10. Dauid tooke it not: which it should seeme he did, if these words did cary any such sense. 2. Therfore the meaning rather is, after the Ephod, that is, after he had applied the Ephod and consulted with God: whereof mention is made, c. 22.10. but in no place but this, is it touched, that he consulted with God: beside thus interpret the Chalde, and one Ieshaia an Hebrew interpreter: the like phrase also see Deut. 24.20. thou shalt not gather the grapes after thee, that is, after thou hast made an ende of gathering. Iun.

12. Quest. v. 9. Whether Dauid sinned in taking Goliaths sword.

1. Some thinke that Dauid offended in taking that sword to conuert it to prophane vses, which was consecrated vntounto p. 237God, as a monument of that great victorie against Goliath: and by this meanes in bringing the Priest into danger. Pellic. 2. But, although it be acknowledged, that it was Dauids ouersight, in the presence of Doeg, whom he suspected, to aske and receiue these things of the Priest, as is shewed before, v. 4. And beside, it might hauehave giuen occasion also to hauehave endaungered Dauids person among the Philistims, when they saw Goliaths sword: yet simply in vsing the sword, there beeing no other, Dauid is excused by his necessitie, as before in taking of the shew bread. As the Iewes to redeeme their peace, gaue vntounto the Chaldeans the vessels of siluer and gold, and were not reprooued therefore by the Prophets. And who doubteth but that the Church may and ought, where there is no other remedie, to sell the Church vessels to redeeme poore captiues. Mart. Beside, Dauid tooke this sword the rather, to put him in minde of Gods former deliuerance, that he might by the sight thereof be stirred vp to waite vponupon him still. Osiand. And further it is not vnlike, but that Dauid afterward when he was King, restored this monument againe. Mar. 3. By this example of Dauid it is gathered, against the phantasticall opinion of the Anabaptists, that it is lawfull for the seruants of God, where their cause is good, to weare armour and weapons. Mar. And much vnlike vntounto this high Priest, who had no other armour or weapons but Goliaths sword, are the high Priests of the Church of Rome, that professe themselues to be warriours, and wage battell: beeing more addicted to warre then praier, to weapons then workes. Osiand.

13. Quest. v. 13. Of Dauids chaunging of his behaviour before Achish, whether he offended in so dissembling.

1. The word here vsed tagham, signifieth properly the outward tast, and by a metaphor, the inward faculty of discerning: some read, he chaunged his speech. P. B. his countenance. L.S. his sense. A. his habit. V. his shew. I. any of these interpretations may safely be receiued: but the best is, he chaunged his discretion: for so the word is vsed, c. 25.33. blessed be thy discretion or counsell, saith Dauid to Abighail: he altered his countenance, words, and behauiour.

p. 2382. Now to decide this question, whether Dauid did well herein, many things must be considered. 1. There is great difference to be made betweene dissembling in words, which properly is to lie, and in signes: for signes are not so properly ordained to expresse the minde, as words are: it may be lawfull for a man to dissemble in his behauiour, when he can not in speech. 2. There are three things in the act of semblance or dissimulation to be obserued, the minde of him that dissembleth, the thing and subiect wherein, and the ende: for first, if he dissembleth to saue himselfe, of a distrustfull or diffident minde, he sinneth: not, if vsing this as a meane, he still depend vponupon God, and trust in him: as Dauid did in this place, as is euident, Psal. 34.6. He cried still vntounto God, euen when he chaunged his behauiour, as the title of the Psalme sheweth: secondly, in some things it is vtterly vnlawfull to dissemble, as in religious matters: as for a man to make a shew of religion, to aspire to honour, as hypocrites doe: as Simon Magus was baptized: or for one to dissemble his religion, as to bow to an Idol, which he hateth in his heart: thirdly, if his dissimulation tend to an vncharitable ende: as Cain spake faire to his brother, to entise him into the field, there to kill him. If the outward semblance or pretense, which one maketh faileth in any of these, it is vnlawfull: otherwise it is not condemned: as Dauid obserued all three: he put his trust in God, it was not in any religious matter, which tended to the deniall of his faith, but in his ciuill behauiour: neither did any receiue hurt thereby, but he intended his own deliuerance without dammage to any. So our Sauiour vsed a kind of semblance, when to take triall of the disciples humanitie, he made shew, as though he would hauehave gone further: but Peter offended, and was iustly reprooued of S. Paul, Gal. 2. that in a religious matter dissembled, withdrawing himselfe from the Gentiles, with whome he had eaten before, for feare of them of the circumcision, and so made a difference betweene the beleeuing Iewes, and the beleeuing Gentiles.

3. Some to excuse this fact of Dauid, say, that for the time Dauid was striken with a fitt of madnesse or frensie indeede, and so dissembled not: but the text, shewing that Dauid chā ged his behauiour, maketh it his owne voluntarie act: some say, that Dauid did it by a diuine instinct. Pellican. But we p. 239not seeke any other defence, then this before alleadged, taken from the manner and nature of this dissimulation. Some make herein Dauid a type and figure of Christ, who was counted of the Iewes as a Demoniake, and one beside himselfe: and S. Paul sheweth, that the Gospel was esteemed as foolishnes among the Grecians. 1. Cor. 1.23.

14. Quest. Whether any kinde of lie be lawfull.

1. There are three things which must concurre in the telling of a lie: first, that there be vntruth in the matter, which is vttered: secondly, that he which telleth an vntruth, hauehave a purpose to deceiue: thirdly, that he take a pleasure and delight in it: the first belongeth to the matter of a lie, the other concerne the forme. Mart. But these three are thus further to be distinguished: that in eueryevery kinde of lie all these are not necessarie: as the first, and the third: for if a man hauehave a purpose to deceiue, though vnwittingly he speake the truth, he is guiltie of a lie: as Augustine saith,August. Enchir. 22. cited Caus. 22. q. 2.4. Nec vllo modo liber est à mendacio, qui ore nesciens verum loquitur, sciens autem voluntate mentitur: He is not free from lying, which with his mouth vnwittingly speaketh the truth, but yet wittingly intended to lie. So the third is wanting in some kinde of lie: as when one lieth of necessitie, to saue his owne life, or his brothers: but without the second there can be no lie: as Augustine saith, Qui dicit falsum, quod putat verum, non fallit, sed fallitur, non ita que mendacij, sed temeritatis arguendus est: He that telleth that which is false, supposing it to be true, is deceiued, rather then deceiueth, and is to be reprooued rather for his rashnes, then for lying. August. ibid. And in an other place he giueth this reason: Illud quod non habet duplex cor, ne mendacium quidem dicendum est: that which hath not a double heart, is not to be counted a lie. As if a man receiue a sword of one, and promise to deliuer it againe, and afterward the owner of the sword beeing madde, requireth it, and he refuseth to restore it: in this case he is no lyer nor deceiuer: for he did not once dreame, furentem posse repetere, Augustan Psal. 5. cited Caus. 22. qu. 2. c. 14.Ps 5that he could aske it in his madnesse: to this purpose August. Gelasius putteth an other case, non mentitur, qui animum fallendi non habuit, p. 240he lieth not, which had no minde to deceiue: as Paul, when he purposed to goe into Spaine, and Peter when he said Christ should not wash his feete: for neither of them thought at that time otherwise to doe,Caus. 22. qu. 2. c. 5. then they saide: where then there is not animus fallendi, no minde or purpose to deceiue, there they can not be said to lie.

2. The diuerse kinds of lying are to be considered. Augustine maketh these diuersities of lying: 1. in doctrina religionis, when one maketh a lie in matter of religion: which he calleth capitale mendacium, a capitall lie, and it is worst of all, admitting no excuse. 2. Cum nulli prodest, & alicui obest, when one by his lie profiteth none, but hurteth some. 3. Quod ita prodest vni, vt obsit alteri: a third kinde is, when a lie hindreth one, and profiteth an other. 4. Quod fit sola mentiendi libidine: a fourth kinde of lie is, which is made onelyonly of a desire to lie and deceiue. 5. Quod fit placendi cupiditate, which is done onelyonly with a desire to please. 6. The sixth kinde is, quod nulli obest, & prodest alicui: which hurteth none, and yet profiteth some: which is of three sorts, either when a man by his lie preserueth his owne life, or chastitie, or saueth his brothers goods or life: so Augustine maketh eight kinds of all: the worst he maketh the first, and so the rest in their degree, as they come nearer to,August. lib. de mend. c. 14. cited Caus. 22. qu. 2 c. 8. or further off from the first. But none of them are lawfull: the first is a detestable kind of lying: the second is vnlawfull, because we must not doe wrong to any: the third, quia nulli cum alterius iniuria consulendum est: we must not prouide for one with an others hurt: in the fourth, the very desire and minde to lie is vitious: and for the fifth, seeing the truth must not be vttered to please men, much lesse must we lie to please men. Neither is the last kinde allowable: for as much as the chastitie of the minde, is to be preferred before the chastitie of the bodie: neither is the truth to be corrupted for any mans temporall commoditie.

3. But all these kinds are more cōpendiously reduced to 3. heads. There is mendaciū perniciosum, iocosum, officiosum: a pernicious lie, that tendeth onelyonly to hurt: a pleasant lie, to delight: and an officious lie, to helpe: vntounto the first of these belong the 4. first kinds rehearsed, which may be thus distinguished. A pernicious lie, is either in matters of religiō, which is worst p. 241of all, as Ananias and Saphira lied vntounto Peter concerning such things as was giuen to the religious vse of the Church, Act. 5. and Peter lied in denying his Lord and Master: or it is in other humane and ciuill affaires: wherein a lie is pernicious to others, or to the lier himselfe: to others it is more pernicious, when hurt onelyonly commeth by the lie, and no good to to any, as Doeg accusing the high Priest, as though he had conspired with Dauid against Saul, c. 22.1 3. not making mention how Dauid induced the high Priest to doe as he did, comming in the Kings name: this lie was mischieuous altogether: the lesse pernicious, when good commeth to some, but with hurt and damage to others: as Dauid vttering an vntruth to Ahimelech, that he came vponupon the kings busines, did helpe himselfe, but brought Ahimelech into daunger. The lie pernicious vntounto a man himselfe is, when he lieth, not for any aduantage, but vponupon a custome and delight, which he hath in lying: as the old Prophet lied vntounto the man of God, to bring him backe to eate bread: by which lie, no profit or aduantage at all did accrue vntounto him. 1. king. 13. The fifth kinde, is iocosum mendacium: an vntruth vttered meerely not in earnest, as Iosephs steward, when he had found his masters cup in Benjamins sacke, made them beleeue, that his master could diuine. Gen. 44.5. The sixt belongeth to the officious kinde of lying: whereby either one doth good to themselues, as Rachel by her sodaine and present excuse, (if it were not with her as shee pretended, for otherwise it was not vntruth at all) deliuered her selfe from the blame of her father: or they doe good to others, as the midwiues in preseruing the Hebrewes children, and Rahab, in deliuering the spies from danger. Iosh. 2.

4. Now euen these two sorts of glosing, which is either in sport, or to doe good, though they be more tolerable then the rest, yet are not simply iustifiable: as may appeare by these reasons: 1. according to S. Pauls rule, none must doe euill, that good come may come thereof: for then a man might steale, to giuegive almes with, as well as to tell a lie to doe good. 2. it hindreth the common societie, when faith and truth is not preserued among men. 3. it bringeth such into euill name, that vponupon what good pretense so euer, they sometime tell a lie, they bring themselues into suspition, and loose their credit, p. 242that afterward, when they speake the truth, they can not be beleeued. Mar. Augustines resolution is here excellent: Duo sunt mendaciorum genera, August in Psal. 5. cited Caus. 22. qu. 2. c. 14.Ps 5in quibus non est magna culpa, sed tamen non sunt sine culpa, cum aut iocamur, aut vt proximis prosimus, illud primum non est perniciosum, quia non fallit, secundum ideo minus est, quia retinet nonnullam benevolentiam: There are two kinde of lies, wherein there is no great fault, though they be not without fault: the pleasant lie, or that which profiteth others: the first is not very pernicious, because it deceiueth not: for he knoweth to whome the lie is made, that it is spoken in sport: the other is lesse pernicious, because it retaineth a certaine louelove and good will.

5. So then we may safely subscribe vntounto Augustines iudgement, concerning the nature of a lie: quisquis esse aliquod genus mendacij, quod peccatum non sit putarit, seipsum decipit: who so thinketh there is any kinde of lie, which is not sinne, deceiueth himselfe: which his iudgement is agreeable to the Scripture, for the Apostle saith, no lie is of the truth, 1. Ioh. 2.21. This conclusion then is most true, that eueryevery lie is sinne: but eueryevery thing, that may be taken for a lie, is not a lie: wherein these distinctions are to be obserued: 1. that there is great difference betweene semblance in gesture and behauiour, and vntruth in wordes: it may be lawfull to dissemble, when it is not to lie, as is shewed before in the 13. qu. 2. that which containeth some vntruth in words, is not to be held to be a lie, where there is no minde nor purpose to deceiue, as is before shewed in the beginning of this question. 3. as Augustine saith, aliud est mentiri, aliud verum occultare: it is one thing to lie, an other to hide and conceale the truth, which at all times, and to all persons, is not to be vttered: whether by silence altogether to keepe the truth secret, as our blessed Sauiour did before Pilate, beeing asked what the truth was: or in part to forbeare, not vttering the whole truth, as Samuel did, when going to anoint Dauid king in Ishai his house, he said he went to sacrifice. 4. the last consideration is, that no man take a libertie to lie, by the example of some of the Patriarkes and Fathers vnderunder the law: for he which pretendeth any such defense, may as well say, sibi raptum alienarum rerum, & retributionem iniuriae, quae infirmis illis concessa sunt, Caus. 22. qu. 2. c. 19.nocere non posse: that the taking of other p. 243mens goods, and the recompensing of wrong, which were graunted to them for their weaknesse, can not hurt him now: as Gregorie saith, lib. 18. moral. c. 3.