We see the proceeding: it is now examinable, whether this doth not somewhat impeach the credit of Jacobs Plain-Dealing. There have been undertakers of Jacobs justification, or at least excusation in this fact. Let us hear what they say.1 1. Gregory thus excuseth it: that Jacob did not steal the Blessing by fraud, but sibi debitam, accepit, took it as a due to himself, in respect that the primogeniture was formerly devolved to him. The truth is, he that ought the Birthright, might justly challenge the Blessing: but this doth not wholly excuse the fact.2 2. Chrysostom thus mitigates it; that non studio nocendi contexit fraudem, he did not deceive, with a mind to hurt; but only in respect of the promise of God. But this is not sufficient; for there was an intention of hurt, both to Isaac in deceiving him, and to Esau, in depriving him of the Blessing. But whatsoever may be pleaded for the defence of Jacobs dissimulation in outward gesture, there is no apology for the words of his tongue. The meaning of the speech is in the speaker; therefore his tongue cannot be guiltless, when it goes against his conscious heart: but the meaning of the gesture, is in the interpreter, who gives it a voluntary construction. Gesture is more easily ruled then speech: and it is hard, if the tongue will not blab what a man is, in spite of his habit. Isaacs eyes might be deceived, they were dim: his hands, by the roughness of the garments: his nostrils by ⟨p. 14⟩the smell of them: his palate, by the savour of the meat. All these senses yield affiance, what then shall drive Isaac to a suspicion or incredulity? None but this, the ear sticks at the judgement; that says, the voice is the voice of Jacob. To help forward this deceit, three lies are tumbled out, one in the neck of another. 1. I am Esau thy first borne. 2. I have done as thou badst me. 3. eat of my venison. To clear him of this sin of lying, hath been more peremptorily undertaken, then soundly performed.
We see the proceeding: it is now examinable, whether this doth not somewhat impeach the credite of Iacobs Plaine-Dealing. There haue beene vndertakers of Iacobs iustification, or at least excusation in this fact. Let vs heare what they say.1 1. Gregorie thus excuseth it: that Iahob did not steale the Blessing by fraud, but sibi debitam, accepit, tooke it as a due to himselfe, in respect that the primogeniture was formerly deuolued to him. The truth is, he that ought the Birthright, might iustly chalenge the Blessing: but this doth not wholly excuse the fact.2 2. Chrysostome thus mitigates it; that non studio nocendi contexit fraudem, hee did not deceiue, with a minde to hurt; but onely in respect of the promise of God. But this is not sufficient; for there was an intention of hurt, both to Isaac in deceiuing him, and to Esau, in depriuing him of the Blessing. But whatsoeuer may bee pleaded for the defence of Iacobs dissimulation in outward gesture, there is no apologie for the words of his tongue. The meaning of the speach is in the speaker; therefore his tongue cannot be guiltlesse, when it goes against his conscious heart: but the meaning of the gesture, is in the interpreter, who giues it a voluntary construction. Gesture is more easily ruled then speach: and it is hard, if the tongue will not blabbe what a man is, in spite of his habite. Isaacs eyes might be deceiued, they were dimme: his hands, by the roughnesse of the garments: his nosthrills by ⟨p. 14⟩the smell of them: his palate, by the sauour of the meat. All these senses yeeld affiance, what then shall driue Isaac to a suspition or incredulitie? None but this, the eare stickes at the iudgement; that sayes, the voyce is the voyce of Iacob. To helpe forward this deceit, three lies are tumbled out, one in the necke of another. 1. I am Esau thy first borne. 2. I haue done as thou badst me. 3. eate of my venison. To cleare him of this sinne of lying, hath beene more peremptorily vndertaken, then soundly performed.
- 1Hom. 6. in Ezek.
- 2Hom. 53. in Genes.
