A commentary or exposition vpon the third chapter of the prophecie of Amos Deliuered in vxii. [sic] sermons in the parish church of Meysey-Hampton in the diocesse of Glocester. By Sebastian Benefield Doctor of Diuinitie.

THE Fourteenth Lecture. (Book 14)

AMOS 3.12.

Thus saith the Lord, As the shepheard taketh out of the mouth of the Lion two legs or a peece of an eare; so shall the children of Israel be taken out that dwell in Samaria, in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

THis verse belongeth to the Commination that went before. The Commination was a denunciation or a menacing of the iudge∣ment of God against the Kingdome of the ten Tribes, the people of Israel. The iudgement was a conquest by warre, and that was described by three circumstances, the siege▪ the victory, and the spoile: all which were handled in my last Sermon. Now is the conquest amplified, from the sad and fearefull euent thereof, which our Prophet here deli∣uereth by a Similitude taken from the experience of a Shep∣heard. Such shall be the conquest of the Assyrians against the Israelites, that the Israelites shall be no more able to resist the Assyrians, than a silly Sheepe is able to resist a Lion.

The Israelites trusted in the multitude of their people, in the

valour of their souldiers, in their fenced Cities, among which the chiefe were Samaria and Damascus; for they had enlarged their territories euen vnto Damascus. Therefore it seemed to them impossible, that any forreine power should preuaile against them. To beat downe this vaine confidence of theirs, Amos here bringeth this rurall and pastorall Similitude, assu∣ring them, that those things, whereupon they rely for safety, shall be so farre from doing them any good, that few, very few of them shall escape the hand of the enemie.

For our more easie proceeding at this time, let it please you to obserue with me two things:

• 1 An introduction to a similitude, Thus saith the Lord.
• 2 The similitude it selfe; As the Shepheard taketh out, &c.

The Introduction giues credit and authority to the Simi∣litude.

The Similitude hath two parts, the two vsuall parts of a Simile.

• 1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Proposition.
• 2 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Reddition.

The Proposition: A Shepheard taketh out of the mouth of a Lion two legs or a peece of an eare.

The Reddition: So shall the children of Israel be taken out of the hands of Salmanassar.

The things compared are;

• First, a Lion, and Salmanassar King of Assyria.
• Secondly, a Sheepe, and the Children of Is••ael.
• Thirdly, some fragments of a deuoured sheep••; two legs, or a peece of an eare, and the small number of the Israelites that should escape.

These Israelites are here described ab ipsorum securitate, from their security or lacke of care. They liue nicely and de∣licately in all pleasure and delight, full of confidence, that no euill shall at any time touch them. They dwell in Samaria in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

Samaria and Damascus, Cities of strength and fortifica∣tion, were vnto the Israelites as their beds of repose and rest: They thought themselues safe, and out of danger, by the aid

and succour of Cities so well fenced▪ but were deceiued. For thus saith the Lord, As the Shepheard taketh out of the mouth of the Lion two legs or a peece of an eare: so shall the children of Israel be taken out, that dwell in Samaria in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

Such is the diuision of this Text. I now descend to a speci∣all handling of the parts. The first is, the Introduction to the Similitude.

Thus saith the Lord.

This Introduction I heretofore copiously handled. I met with it in the first Chapter of this booke fiue times,* 1.1 in the se∣cond, thrice; and once before in this: and therefore the lesse need is there, that now I insist vpon it. Yet may I not leaue it vnsaluted, sith our Prophet here repeateth it. And he repea∣teth it to iustifie his calling: to shew, that albeit he formerly liued the life of a Shepheard, yet now he hath his calling to be a Prophet from the Lord, Iehouah. Whence my obser∣uation is:

It is not lawfull for any man to take vpon him ministeriall function in the Church without assurance of calling from God.

This truth is by the Apostle, Hebr. 5.4. thus deliuered: No man taketh this honour to himselfe, but he that is called of God, as Aaron was. Now that Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated to the Priests office by the authority and appoint∣ment of God, it is plaine by the eighth Chapter of Leuiticus, wherein are set downe the sacrifices and ceremonies vsed at the Consecration, together with the place and time there∣of. Thereby it appeareth, that the office of holy Priest-hood was not of man, nor from man; but God Almighty did first institute and ordaine it by his owne expresse commandement. Then being ordained, he confirmed the honour and repu∣tation of it, by that great miracle of the budding of Aarons rod, Num. 17.8. The rod of Aaron for the house of Leui, brought forth buds, and bloomed blossomes, and yeelded Al∣monds. Thus was the institution of holy Priesthood from God alone.

This honour the holy men of God, of old time▪ tooke not to themselues. Nor Esay, nor Ieremy, nor Ez••chiel, nor any of the residue, tooke this honour to themselues, but were all called of God, and in the name of God they declared vnto the people his visions and his words: which is intimated by those passages, very obuious in the writings of the Prophets; asa 1.2 the vision of Esaiah,b 1.3 the vision of Obadiah, the burden of Nineueh in the booke of the vision ofc 1.4 Nahum; the burden which Habakkuk the Prophet did see; the burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachy: the word of the Lord which came to Hosea, to Ioel, to Ionah, to Micah, to Zephaniah, to Haggai, to Zachariah.d 1.5 The Lord hath spoken;e 1.6 Heare yee the word of the Lord: Thus saith the Lord; Saith the Lord. By these and the like passages they shew their calling to haue beene from God; Not one of them tooke this honour to himselfe.

Nor did Christ himselfe take this honour to himselfe, but with warrant of his Fathers calling. For so I reade, H••b. 5.5. Christ glorified not himselfe to be made an High Priest; but he that said vnto him, Thou art my Sonne, to day haue I begotten thee, He, euen God the Father, gaue him this honour. And hereunto doth Christ himselfe beare witnesse, in all those pla∣ces of the holy Euangelists, wherein he acknowledgeth him∣selfe to be* 1.7 sent of God.

The holy Apostles of Christ, whence had they their cal∣ling? were they not all openly ordained by Christ himselfe? Neuer did any of them execute that office, but with protesta∣tion, that they had their calling from God, and therefore their writings beginne:* 1.8 Paul a seruant of Iesus Christ called to bee an Apostle, not of m••n, neither by man, but by Iesus Christ, and God the Father. Iames a seruant of God,* 1.9 and of the Lord Iesus Christ: Peter an Apostle of Iesus Christ:* 1.10 Iude the ser∣uant of Iesus Christ: the reuelation of Iesus Christ, which God gaue vnto him to shew vnto his seruant Iohn. Thus had Christs Apostles the assurance of their calling from God.

So had the blessed Euangelists. So, all those, whom Christ gaue vnto his Church for the instruction thereof, Ephes. 4.11.

He gaue some Apostles; and some Prophets; and some Euan∣gelists, and some Pastors and Teachers. It is true, that Christ himselfe is the chiefe builder; for so he saith, Matth. 16.18. Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam; vpon this rocke will I build my Church, and he builds it through his holy Spirit; yet he doth vse Prophets, and Apostles, and Euange∣lists, and Pastors, and Teachers, as vnderworkmen for this building, euen vnto the end of the world And all these haue the assurance of their calling from God. Who so hath it not, he is not to be vouchsafed the name of Prophet, or Apostle, or Euangelist, or Pastor, or Teacher: for he is an Intruder.

And great is the danger of Intrusion. Euery Intruder was to be put to death. The Law for it is, Num. 1.51. Euery stranger that commeth nigh vnto the Tabernacle, shall be put to death: The stranger, any one that is not of the tribe and fa∣mily of Leui, that breaketh into the Leuites function, and medleth with holy things beyond his calling, he is to bee put to death.

An example hereof we haue in the Beth-shemites, 1 Sam. 6.19. who, because they had looked into the Arke of the Lord, contrary to the Law, were smitten with a great slaugh∣ter to the number of fifty thousand and threescore and ten men.

The like we haue in Vzzah sonne of Abinadab, 2 Sam. 6.6. who because he touched the Arke of God contrary to the Law, was punished with sudden death, and stricken with the im∣mediate hand of God that fell vpon him, to the terrour of others, and to worke reuerence in the hearts of all men to∣ward the sacred things of his seruice.

Adde hereto the example of Vzziah, King of Iudah, 2 Chron. 26.16. He for inuading the Priests office, for bur∣ning Incense vpon the Altar of Incense in the Temple of the Lord,* 1.11 was stricken with a leprosie.

And Gedeon that valiant man, who iudged Israel for forty yeeres, intermedled too farre with the Priests office, when he made the golden Ephod, Iudg. 8.27. All Israel went a who∣ring after it, and it became a snare to Gedeon himselfe, and to his house.

Now from the danger of intrusion, thus laid open, we may inferre the vnlawfulnesse of medling with ministeriall function in the Church, without assurance of calling from God.

The same may be inferred vpon the blame which God layeth vpon false Prophets, Ierem. 14.14. I sent them not, neither haue I commanded them, neither spake I vnto them, yet they prophesie. And Chap. 23.21.* 1.12 I haue not sent these Pro∣phets▪ yet they runne: I haue not spoken to them, yet they pro∣phesied. They haue prophesied? What; but lies, though in my n••me? they haue prophesied false visions, and diuinati∣ons, things of naught, and the deceit of their owne heart. Thus haue they done, but I sent them not, nor commanded them, nor spake vnto them. This blame thus laid by the Lord vpon wicked and false Teachers for running before they are sent, and preaching before they are called, enforceth the acknowledge∣ment of the point hitherto deliuered, that

It is not lawfull for any man to take vpon him ministeriall fun∣ction in the Church without assurance of calling from God.

This calling, the assurance whereof we are to haue, is either immediate and extraordinary, or mediate and ordinary. The first is, where God calleth immediatly without the ministery of man; so were the Prophets and Apostles called. The other is wherein God vseth the ministery of man▪ as at this day, in the designment of euery Minister vnto his function. Both these callings, as well the mediate as the immediate, the ordinary as the extraordinary, are of God: that of God alone; this of God by man: and of this especially is the doctrine hitherto proued to be vnderstood: we cannot expect a blessing vpon our la∣bours, except God hath called vs: so necessary is Gods calling to the ministery of the Church.

The point hitherto handled serueth for the confutation of the Anabaptist, and other fanaticall spirits, who runne without calling, and preach though they be not sent: contrary to that of Saint Paul, Rom. 10.5. How shall they preach, except they bee sent? And yet will these men, if they meet with a Minister that is lawfully and orderly called, demand of him, Quis te ele∣git? Sir, Who hath chosen you? though themselues haue no

calling at all; no, not from their blind Church: as Gastius hath obserued in his first booke of the errors of the Catabap∣tists. Yea, their assertion is; that, if a man vnderstand the do∣ctrine of the Gospell, be he either Cobler, or Botcher, or Car∣penter, or what else, he is bound to teach and preach. This is obserued of them by Chemnitius in his Treatise of the Church, Chap. 4.

With these Anabaptists I may ioyne the Photinians, who deny the necessity of vocation in the Ministers of the Church. Socinus in his Treatise of the Church, Theophilus Nicolaides, in his defence of that Treatise,a 1.13 Osterodius,b 1.14 Radeccius,c 1.15 She∣malizius, and thed 1.16 Catechist of Racow: all these are against a necessity of calling in the Ministery, and doe here stand conui∣cted of that their error.

So doe all those lay people, men or women, who in the case of supp••sed necessity doe aduenture to administer the Sacra∣ment of Baptisme, which together with the preaching of the word, the Lord hath inuested in the persons of Ministers duly called, Mat. 28.19. Goe ye and teach all Nations, bapti∣zing them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. Goe ye, teach and baptize. Goe ye. It is our Sauiours precept to his Apostles, and in them to their suc∣cessors, Ministers duly called. None of the Laity, nor man, nor woman, hath part in this function. And how can it bee imagined, that women, whom Saint Paul hath excluded from preaching, 1 Cor. 14.34. should be permitted to administer any Sacrament? They may not so much as Baptize.

Its obiected: women may teach their families; therefore they may also baptize.

Our answer is, that the Consequent holds not. Women may teach, as they are priuate Christians, but not as Ministers: Baptize they cannot, but as Ministers; this being euery way, in euery respect and manner proper to a Minister.

It is further obiected from the example of Zipp••rah, Exod. 4.25. Zipporah, Moses wife, circumcised her sonne. In the place of Circumcision, Baptisme hath succeeded; why then may not women now adaies Baptize?

I answer: Circumcision was not of old so appropriated to the Leuites, as Baptisme is now to the Ministers of the Gos∣pell. And therefore its no good Consequence; Some that were not Leuites did Circumcise; therefore some that are not Mini∣sters may Baptise.

Againe, what if Zipporah sinned in Circumcising her child? Must she be a patterne to other women to Baptize? Caluin is not afraid to proue she sinned, and his proofe is sound, in the fourth of his Institutions, chap. 15. §. 22.* 1.17 though Bellarmine la∣bour to refute him. It was doubtlesse an vnexcusable temerity in her to circumcise her childe in the presence of her Husband, Moses, not a priuate man, but a prime Prophet of the Lord, than whom there arose not a greater in Israel, which was no more lawfull for her to doe, than it is at this day for a woman to Baptise in the presence of a Bishop. And how can she bee excused from sinne in that her act, sith she murmured against the ordinance of the Lord, and reuiled her husband? weigh but the bitternesse of her speech: Surely, a bloudy husband art thou to me, because of the Circumcision.

Thirdly, say she sinned not in circumcising her childe (which yet I may not grant) then I say, the fact might be extraordina∣ry, and therefore not to be imitated without like dispensation.

Fourthly, some thinke she was onely the hand of her hus∣band in his weaknesse; and so the fact shall be not hers, but her husbands.

For these reasons, the example of Zipporah doth not ad∣uantage thea 1.18 Papist, orb 1.19 Lutheran, in their errour about Gy∣naecobaptismus, or womens Baptisme.

But may they not Baptise in case of extreme necessity?

No, not then.

Why then, the childe may die vnbaptized, and so be in cer∣taine danger of damnation.

We make a great difference betweene want of baptisme and the contempt thereof. The contempt euer damneth; so doth not the want. By want I meane, when God so preuenteth by death, that Baptisme cannot be had according to the manner allowed in the holy Word of God. In this case the childe

that dieth vnbaptized is not in any danger of damnation. For as Comestor in his Euangelicall History, cap. 197. saith, Sine Baptismo saluatur homo cum eum excludit articulus necessita∣tis, non contemptus religionis: A man may be saued, though he be vnbaptized, if Baptisme be excluded through the in∣stant of necessity, and not by contempt of religion. So before him taught Saint Bernard, Baptismatis fructu priuatur, qui baptizari contempsit, non qui non potuit: It is in his Epistle to Hu∣go de S. Victore, Ep. 77. He is depriued of the benefit of Bap∣tisme, that despiseth Baptisme, not hee that cannot haue it. This truth he supporteth by two chiefe pillars of the Christi∣an Church, Saint Ambrose, and Saint Augustine.

Saint Ambrose in his funerall Oration of the death of the Em∣perour Valentinian, doubteth not to say, that Valentinian was Baptized, because he desired Baptisme, not because he had it. Certè quia poposcit accepit, doubtlesse because he desired it, he had it. God accounts vs to haue, that we vnfainedly wish.

Saint Augustine, lib. 4. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, cap. 22. saith that faith is auaileable to saluation without the visi∣ble Sacrament of Baptisme, but then, Cùm ministerium Bap∣tismatis non contemptus religionis, sed articulus necessitatis ex∣cludit; When the ministery of Baptisme is excluded not of contempt, but of necessity:

I could here shew vnto you from the testimonies of our lear∣ned aduersaries, that the absolute necessity of Baptisme is not iustifiable by the practise of primitiue antiquity: but I stand not in this Mount of God to reade a Controuersie. I shut vp this Discourse with the words of Saint Bernard in the Epistle aboue alleaged; Nequaquam omnino possum desperare salutem, si aquam non contemptus, sed sola prohibeat impossibilitas: I can∣not altogether despaire of the saluation of such as depart this life without Baptisme, if it be not done of contempt, but when as Baptisme cannot possibly be had.

Now of the soules of Infants, who liue not to desire Bap∣tisme, what shall I say? May not the desire of others be theirs as well as the faith of others beleeuing, and the mouth of others confessing is theirs? Here it is safe to suspend, and dangerous

to passe iudgement. Secret things belong to God. Hee that made all soules knoweth what to doe with them, neither will he make vs of his counsell. Our resolution must be to honour good meanes and vse them; to honour Baptisme and vse it if we may; and in the necessary want thereof to depend vpon God, who can worke, beyond, without, and against meanes.

You see how farre I haue beene carried with the obiection drawne from women baptizing in case of necessity, whereby they are intruders into that function which is appropriate to the Ministers of the Word. If they will needs be medling with a calling, I will shew them a calling of their owne, where∣with they may busie themselues.

As the Minister holds his calling from God, so doth euery other member of the Church. There is not a member of the Church, man or woman, but holds a particular standing and function from God, and is ranked in order by Gods speciall prouidence and calling. And it is to great purpose, that you all know this in your owne particulars. For

First, it enforceth diligence. If God hath set thee in thy calling, then it stands thee vpon to discharge the duties of thy calling with all sedulity and alacrity.

Secondly, it may admonish thee not to passe the bounds of thy calling. Seeing thou art in thy place by the Will of God, thou must take heed that thou goe not beyond thy limits, either by vsing vnlawfull courses, or by intruding into other mens functions.

Thirdly, it may teach thee that thy particular calling is to serue the generall. Euery Christian hath two callings; a parti∣cular, and a generall. The particular, which is also personall, is the externall designment of a man, to some outward seruice in the Church or common wealth, to the discharge of spe∣ciall duties in regard of the distinction betweene man and man. The generall calling is the calling of Christianity; it is the singling out of a man by speciall sanctification to glorifie God, and to seeke out his owne saluation in the things of the Kingdome of Christ: this is common to euery member of the Church, to all beleeuers. Both these callings, generall and par∣ticular

must be ioyned together in our life, as the body and soule in man. Where they are not ioyned together, there may be a shew of Christianity, but the substance will be ab∣sent.* 1.20 Christs Commandement, that men seeke first the King∣dome of God and his righteousnesse, is a demonstration, that men ought not so to follow their outward businesse and em∣ployments, as to omit the meanes of knowledge and grace. The particular calling must serue the generall.

Fourthly, from this consideration, that we hold our par∣ticular callings from God, we are to learne contentment in the willing vndergoing of the daily molestations, troubles, and crosses, that doe befall vs in our seuerall courses and kinds of life. It is a lesson, in the practise whereof Saint Paul had well profited. I haue learned, saith he, in whatsoeuer state I am, therewith to be content, Philip. 4.11. He knew how to bee abased; and he knew how to abound. Euery where and in all things he was instructed both to be be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. Let vs set him for the patterne of our imitation, and we will be content with what we haue, be it much or little. If we haue little, our account shall be the lesse; if more, we are bound to doe the more good.

I haue done with the Introduction to the similitude: It is time that I proceed with the similitude it selfe.

As the shepheard taketh out of the mouth of the Lion two legs or a peece of an eare, so shall the children of Israel bee taken out that dwell in Samaria, in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

Hereof I finde diuers expositions. Some will haue this similitude to signifie, that few of the Israelites shall be deliue∣red from the spoile of Samaria, and those such as shall be sicke, weake, and feeble, and therefore shall be despised and left be∣hind as vnprofitable, and of no vse to be carried into capti∣uity. And this is the exposition of Theodoret, Vatablus, Isi∣dore, Rupertus, and Montanus. Christophorus à Castro thus giues it in his paraphrase: As when a Lion hath eaten his fill, and hath satiate his hunger, the shepheard findeth two legs, or a leg, or a peece of an eare, to shew that the sheepe hath beene wor∣ried:

so of the whole body of Samaria, one or other, a few, a very few shall be deliuered from the slaughter of the enemy, and they vnprofitable, as being wretched and sicke, lying by couples in the side of a couch, as well in Samaria as in Damascus.

Others will haue this similitude to be vnderstood by a Sar∣casme or Irrision, as if our Prophet here scoffed at the Israe∣lites for their vaine confidence which they put in Samaria, and Damascus, thus: As a shepheard vseth to saue from the mouth of a Lion that hath deuoured a sheepe, one or two legs, or the tip of an eare: so surely shall the children of Israel saue them∣selues from the mouth of the Assyrians, trusting in the strength of Samaria, and in the helpe of Damascus or of the King of Syria, in whom they thinke, as a wearied man is re∣freshed in his bed, so themselues to bee safe from their ene∣mies: whereas indeed it shall be nothing so. And this is the exposition of Saint Hierome, Remigius, Albertus, Rupertus, Hugo and Dionysius.

The third exposition is Lyraes; He will haue this simili∣tude to signifie, that very few of the Israelites shall bee deli∣uered, and they such, as shall escape by flight either to King Ez••kiah, to the Kingdome of Iudah, to saue themselues there in plagû lectuli, in the side or corner of a bed, that is, in Ieru∣salem, where the Temple was Dei lectulus, Gods bed, as its called, Cant. 1.16. Lectulus noster floridus, our bed is deckt with flowers; or to the Kingdome of Syria, to saue themselues there in Damasci grabuto, in a couch at Damascus.

Of these expositions I preferre the second, which I tou∣ched in my diuision of the Text. Now let vs a little looke vpon the words. The Proposition is,

A shepheard taketh out of the mouth of the Lion two legs or a peece of an eare] This he doth according to the Law, Exod. 22.13. If a sheepe be torne in peeces by wild beasts, the shepheard is to bring it, or the remnants of it, a leg, or an eare, or the like, to the owner for a witnesse that it is torne, and he shall not need to make restitution thereof vnto the owner, so he did his best to rescue it. For a shepheard is of duty to rescue his flocke. Dauid

did it valiantly. As he kept his fathers sheepe, there came a Lion, and tooke a Lambe out of the flocke; and he went out after him, and smote him, and deliuered it out of his mouth: and when the Lion arose against him, he caught him by his beard, and smote him, and slew him, 1 Sam. 17.34. My shep∣heard here is not so happy to saue his sheepe: but his sheepe being deuoured, he findeth some part of it, two legs, or a peece of an eare, whereby he may excuse himselfe to his Master for his lost sheepe. These parcels, legge or eare, he taketh Ex ore Leonis.

Out of the mouth of the Lion] Non ex ore Lupi, sed ex ore Leonis. He saith not, out of the mouth of the wolfe, but out of the mouth of the Lion. For a thing is recouered with more difficulty and with greater danger from a Lion than from a Wolfe. Iohannes Leo in his description of Africke: Credat qui volet, quicquid Leo prehenderit, etiamsi Camelus foret, rostro aufert; Beleeue it he that wil, whatsoeuer a Lion catcheth, though it bee a Camell, hee beareth it away in his mouth. Hence its prouerbially said, Ex ore Leonis, out of the Lions mouth, for, out of extreme danger: and its vsed when a man hath deliuerance beyond hope. Saint Paul vseth it, 2 Tim. 4.17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I was deliuered out of the mouth of the Lion: the Lion, not the Deuill, as Ambrose saith, nor Festus the President of Iudaea, as Primasius affir∣meth; but Nero, proud and cruell Nero, persecuting Nero, as its expounded by Chrysostome, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Aquinas, and* 1.21 Eusebius.

The royall Prophet hath it, Psal. 22.21. Serua me ex ore Leonis. The words are a part of Christs Prayer, Saue me from the mouth of the Lion. Some will haue that Lion to bee the Deuill; some Pilat, some Caiaphas, some Herod. Lorinus will haue him to betoken Principe•• & potentes, all the chiefe Priests, Scribes, the Elders of the people, all that were the cru∣cifiers of Christ.

Here it is in proper termes, without a metaphor, The shepheard taketh out of the mouth of the Lion two legs, or a peece of an eare. Yet will Albertus haue this Lion to be, either the

King of Babylon, or the Deuill. He addeth by way of expli∣cation, Os tyranni violentia est, os Diaboli peccatum: the mouth of a Tyrant is violence, the mouth of the Deuill is sinne.

This Lion Carthusian in his morall explanation expoundeth by the Deuill, so doth Salmeron in his Tropologie. And I deny not but that the Lion doth many times in a morall and tropolo∣gicall sense signifie the Deuill. But if we will follow the letter of my Text, this Lion doth well resemble the King of Baby∣lon, or the King of Assyria, Salmanassar.

It is not vnusuall for a Lion to resemble a King. This re∣semblance is, Prou. 19.12. The Kings wrath is as the roaring of a Lion. The roaring of a Lion is fearefull and terrible to the beasts of the forest, so is the wrath of a King to his subiects. The like is that, chap. 20.2. The feare of a King is as the roa∣ring of a Lion. The feare of a King; the terrour which the anger or wrath of a King striketh into his subiects, is as the roaring of a Lion, very terrible. The Lion hath a Beare for his associate, Prou. 28.15. As a roaring Lion and a ranging Beare; so is an vngodly Prince ouer the poore people. An vn∣godly Prince is vnto the people ouer whom he ruleth, as a roa∣ring Lion or a ranging Beare to a Lambe or Kid. Thus doth a Lion resemble a King, either in good or vngodly.

Not amisse then is it, that Salmanassar, King of Assyria,* 1.22 that great and mighty King, who was to carry away into captiuity the ten Tribes of Israel, is here compared vnto a Lion: according to the sense aboue giuen. Such shall be the conquest of the Assyrians, vnder the conduct of Salmanassar against the Israelites, that the Israelites shall bee no more able to resist the Assyrians, than a silly sheepe is able to resist a Lion.

Now to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Reddition, the other part of this Similitude.

So shall the children of Israel be taken out, that dwell in Sa∣maria in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

Of both these Cities, Samaria and Damascus, I haue here∣tofore entreated out of this place: Of Damascus vpon the first

Chapter of this, vers. 3. and 5. Of Samaria vpon the ninth verse of this Chapter.

* 1.23Samaria was the City royall of the ten Tribes. King Omri bought the hill of Samaria of Shemer for two talents of sil∣uer, and built a City thereon, and called it after the name of Shemer, the owner of the hill, Samaria. It remained the chiefe seat of the Kingdome, as long as the Kingdome endured.

Damascus was the Metropoliticall, the chiefest City of Syria.* 1.24 Esay calls it the head of Syria. Iulian in his Epistle to Sarapion stiles it the City of Iupiter, and eye of the whole East, Holy and Great Damascus. Tzetzes vpon Lycophron, the Trophee of Iupiter, because Iupiter there conquered the Titans.

These two Cities, Samaria and Damascus, Cities of strength and fortification, were vnto the Israelites as their beds of repose and rest:* 1.25 here they thought themselues safe, did eat, were filled and became fat, liuing nicely and delici∣ously in full ease and pleasure. So much is meant by this their dwelling in Samaria in the corner of a bed, and in Damascus in a couch.

In the corner of a bed, in a couch.] Sermo est de lecto discu∣bitorio siue tricliniari, saith Villalpandus in Ezech. 23. The speech is of a triclinary or parlor-bed, of such a bed, whereon of old time men vsed to take and eat their meat. It was the vse of old to haue a dining roome, Chamber, or Parlour, wherein stood three beds whereon they sate at meat, com∣passing the table on three sides; the fourth side was left free and cleere for waiters. To this ancient custome our Prophet here alludeth: as also he doth, Chap. 6.4. They lie vpon beds of iuory, and stretch themselues vpon their couches, and eat the Lambes out of the flocke, and Calues out of the midst of the stall, and Chap. 2.8. They lay themselues downe vpon clothes laid to pledge by euery Altar. When I handled those words, I spake at large of this custome. Amos now againe allu∣ding to it, giueth vs to vnderstand, that the Israelites desi∣ring to lye in angulo lecti, that is, in capite lecti, at the beds

head, in the chiefest place, feasted it sumptuously and deli∣ciously as well in Samaria, as in Damascus: Little thought they of going into Captiuity.

Now take the similitude to the full. As when a Lion hath eaten his fill, and hath satiate his hunger, the shepheard findeth two legges, or the tip of an eare, to shew vnto the owner, that his sheepe was worried: so the children of Israel, here a man, and there a man, few of them, very few, shall be taken out of the mouth of the Lion, King Salmanassar, though they trust in the strength of Samaria, and in the succour of Damas∣cus, thinking thereby to be safe, as in a bed of rest or feasting.

We haue gone the greater part of our iourney; let your at∣tentions beare mee company, for the little that is behind. Our Prophet here deriding or scoffing at the Israelites, for their confidence in the multitude of their people, in the valour of their souldiers, in their fenced Cities, in the strength of Samaria, in the succour of Damascus, teacheth vs, that

All confidence in creatures, strength of man, or munition of Cities, is vaine and sinfull.

All such confidence is with all diligence to bee shunned▪ Diuine prohibition is against it, Psal. 118.8. Put no con∣fidence in man, no not in Princes: and Psal. 146.3. Put not your trust in Princes, nor in any sonne of man. The prohibi∣tion is diuine: Put no confidence in man; and therefore all such confidence is to be shunned.

Now the reasons why no confidence is to be put in man, are diuers.

One is, because it is manifest idolatry so to doe. To with∣draw and remoue the affections of the heart from the Lord, and set them vpon other things, cannot bee lesse than Idolatry.

A second reason depending hereupon, I take from the de∣scription of confidence. It is described to be indubitata spes futuri auxilij; It is the vndoubted hope of future succour, which is due to God alone. And therefore to put our confi∣dence in man, is to deny God his due.

A third reason is taken from the condition of man, in whom some put their trust. The condition of man! What is that? Dauid breakes forth into admiration of it; Lord, what is man, that thou takest knowledge of him? or the sonne of man, that thou makest account of him? And then shapes vnto him∣selfe an answer; Homo vanitati similis factus est; Man is like to vanity, Psal. 144.4. Like to vanity! Well were it for him were he onely like vnto it; Veruntamen vniuersa vanitas, omnis homo viuens; Verily euery man at his best state is alto∣gether vanity, Psal. 39.5. Euery man at his best state altoge∣ther vanity! Surely, men of low degree are vanity; and men of high degree are a Lie. Lay them in the balance, they are al∣together lighter than vanity, Psal. 62.9.

What! Man, who hath an admirable feature, and aboun∣deth with created ••xcellencies, is he made like vnto vanity? Nay, is he altogether vanity? Nay, is he lighter than vanity? What then can his life be? Paul saies, its but a tabernacle, 2 Cor. 5 4. and if a tabernacle stand a yeere, its much. Peter calls it grasse. Epist. 1. Chap. 1.24. and grasse growes but a Summer. Dauid calls it a flower, Psal. 103.15. and a flower hath but his moneth. Esay describes it by a day, Chap. 21.12. and a day hath but a morning and an euening. Iob compares it to a shadow, Chap. 14.2. and a shadow hath neither yeere, nor summer, nor month, nor day, but an houre. Moses likens it to a thought, Psal. 90 9. and of thoughts there may be an hundred in an houre. So short a life what else doth it argue, but that man is vanity?

And what so little a creature is there, that yeelds not an ar∣gument to proue mans vanity? A littlea 1.26 haire in milke strangles Fabius; the stone of a Raison Anacreon; a flye Pope Adrian the fourth. The Myuntines were chased from their habitations byb 1.27 Gnats; the Atariotes by frogs, some Italians by mice, some Medians byc 1.28 sparrowes, the Aegyptians often∣times by grashoppers. And ifd 1.29 Pharaoh aske, who is the Lord? Frogs, and Lice, and Flies, and other the basest vermine shall be his Challengers, and Conquerours, and Iaylors; and aske, who is Pharaoh? so vaine a thing is man.

The fourth reason against confidence in man, I take from the dangerous effects thereof. First, it bringeth vpon vs the curse of God: for thus saith the Lord, Ierem. 17.5. Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arme. And he whom God curseth, shall be accursed. Secondly, it makes vs liable to Gods iust vengeance. So were the people of Iudah, for the confidence they had in Rezin and Remaliahs sonne, Esay 8.6. So they, who strengthened themselues in the strength of Pharaoh, and trusted in the shadow of Aegypt. The strength of Pharaoh was their shame, and the shadow of Aegypt their confusion, Esay 30.3. And so (to omit many other) the Israelites in my Text, for relying vpon the multi∣tude of their people, the valour of their souldiers, their fenced Cities, the strength of Samaria, and the succour of Damascus.

Thus haue you the reasons of my Doctrine: why there is not any confidence to be put in creatures, either in the strength of man, or the munition of Cities.

The vse is to admonish vs, that we depend not vpon the vaine and transitory things of this life, but vpon God alone, who onely is vnchangeable and vnmoueable: that we resigne our selues wholly into his hands, and confesse before him, in the words of the Psalme 91.9. Tu es Domine spes mea: Thou art, O Lord, my hope.* 1.30 Sweet is the meditation of Saint Bernard vpon the place: Let others pretend merit, let them bragge that they haue borne the burden and heat of the day, let them tell of their fasting twice a weeke, let them glory that they are not as other men; Mihi autem adhaerere Deo,* 1.31 bo∣num est, pouere in Domino Deo spem meam; but its good for me to cleaue fast vnto God, to put my hope in the Lord God.

Sperent in aliis alii, Let others trust in other things; one in his learning, another in his nobility, a third in his worth, a fourth in any other vanity, Mihi autem adhaerere Deo, bonum est, but its good for me to cleaue fast vnto God, to put my trust in the Lord God.

Dearely beloued; if we shall sacrifice to our owne nets,* 1.32 burne incense to our owne yarne, put our trust in outward meanes, either riches, or policie, or Princes, or men, or moun∣taines,

forsaking God, God will blow vpon these meanes and turne them to our ouerthrow. Wherefore though we haue all helpes in our owne hands to defend our selues, and of∣fend our enemies, as that, we are fenced by Sea, fortified by ships, blessed by Princes, backed with friends, stored with munitions, aided with confederates, and armed with multitudes of men, yet may we not put our trust herein; for nobis etiam adhaerere Deo, bonum est; its also good for vs to cleaue fast vnto God, to put our trust in the Lord God, who alone giues the blessing to make all good meanes effectuall.

There is not much remaining. The small number of the Israelites that were to be deliuered from the fury of the Assy∣rian, resembled by the two legs, or the tip of the eare taken by the shepheard out of the Lions mouth, yeelds vs this obser∣uation: that

In publike calamities God euermore reserueth a remnant to himselfe.

When God punished the old world, the world of the vn∣godly,* 1.33 bringing the floud vpon them, he saued Noah the eighth person, the preacher of righteousnesse. When God con∣demned the Cities of Sodome and Gomorrah with an ouer∣throw, turning them into ashes, making them an ensample vnto those that after should liue wickedly, he deliuered iust Lot from among them.

There is a remnant left, Esay 1.9. Except the Lord of hosts had left vnto vs a very small remnant, we should haue beene as Sodome, and we should haue beene like vnto Gomorrah. You see a remnant reserued, though it be very small. Yea sometimes there is a reseruation of so small a remnant, as is hardly visible; as in the daies of Eliah, who knew of none but himselfe. I only am left, saith he, 1 King. 19.14. Yet God tells him, vers. 18. of seuen thousand in Israel, which neuer bowed their knees to Baal. I finde, Ioel 2.32. deliuerance in mount Sion, deliue∣rance in Ierusalem, and deliuerance in the remnant, when the Lord shall call. There is then a remnant to be called, euen in greatest extremity.

Wherefore you, the Elect and chosen children of God the

Father, be ye full of comfort: take vnto you, beauty for ashes,* 1.34 the oyle of ioy for mourning, the garment of gladnesse for the spirit of heauinesse, reioyce ye, be glad together and be ye com∣forted. Let the Prince of darknesse, and all the powers of Hell, assisted with the innumerable company of his wicked vassals vpon the Earth, ioyne together to worke your ouerthrow, they shall not be able to effect it. For God, euen your God, will reserue vnto himselfe a remnant.

And what is this remnant, but pusillus grex? Its a little flock, the chaste Spouse of Christ, the holy Catholike Church. Extra eam nulla est salus: Out of it there is no Saluation, for hee that hath not the Church for his Mother, shall neuer haue God for his Father. So much for the explanation of this twelfth verse. And Gods blessing be vpon it.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Vers. 3, 6, 9, 11, 13. Vers. 1, 4, 6.
• a 1.2

  Esa▪ 1.1.
• b 1.3

  Cap. 1.1.
• c 1.4

  Cap. 1.1.
• d 1.5

  Esay 1.2.
• e 1.6

  Ierem. 10.1.
• * 1.7

  Matth. 10.40. Mark. 9.37. Luk. 4.18, 43. Ioh. 3.17, 34, &c.
• * 1.8

  Rom. 1.1.
• * 1.9

  Gal. 1.1.
• * 1.10

  Cap. 1.1.
• * 1.11

  Carthus. in Num. 1.
• * 1.12

  Ierem. 29.9.
• a 1.13

  Institut. cap. 42
• b 1.14

  In Notis ad lib. S••ig••cciip 3.
• c 1.15

  In Refut. Thes. D. Frantz. p. 2. Disp. 4.
• d 1.16

  Tit. de Eccles. cap. 2.
• * 1.17

  Lib. 1. de Sacr. Baptismi. c. 7. §. 11.
• a 1.18

  Bellarm. vbi supra. Salmeron in Mat. 28.
• b 1.19

  Eckhard fascic. contr. c. 19. qu. 4. Gerbard Loc. Theol. 23. ••. 24, &c.
• * 1.20

  Mat. 6.23.
• * 1.21

  Hist. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 22.
• * 1.22

  2 King. 17.3. 2 Esdr. 13.40.
• * 1.23

  1 King. 16.24.
• * 1.24

  Chap. 7.8.
• * 1.25

  Nehem. 9.25.
• a 1.26

  Plin. Hist. Nat. lib. 7. c. 7.
• b 1.27

  Pausan. in Ac••a••••. lib. 7.
• c 1.28

  Diod. Siculus lib 4 cap. 3.
• d 1.29

  Exod. 5.2.
• * 1.30

  Serm. 9. in Psal. Qui habitat.
• * 1.31

  Psal. 73.28.
• * 1.32

  Habak. 1.15, 16.
• * 1.33

  2 Pet. 2.5.
• * 1.34

  Esay 61.3.