A17384:2561
A commentary: or, sermons upon the second chapter of the first epistle of Saint Peter wherein method, sense, doctrine, and use, is, with great variety of matter, profitably handled; and sundry heads of divinity largely discussed. By Nicholas Byfield, late preacher of God's Word at Isle-worth in Middlesex.A commentary: or, sermons vpon the second chapter of the first epistle of Saint Peter vvherein method, sense, doctrine, and vse, is, with great variety of matter, profitably handled; and sundry heads of diuinity largely discussed. By Nicholas Byfield, late preacher of God's Word at Isle-worth in Middlesex.
London: printed by Humphrey Lownes for George Latham, 1623London: printed by Humfrey Lownes for George Latham, 1623
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Lastly, it shows, men must so acknowledge the glory of Princes, as that especially we have respect unto the glory of God, who is King of Kings: we must obey Kings in the land, so as God be not disobeyed.
Lastly, it shewes, men must so acknowledge the glory of Princes, as that especially we haue respect vnto the glory of God, who is King of Kings: we must obey Kings in the land, so as God be not disobeyed.
Thus of the Proposition, the Exposition follows.
Thus of the Proposition, the Exposition followes.
The Apostle labours to clear this doctrine from ⟨p. 603⟩divers scruples might be conceived by Christians, whether they arise from the diversity of the sorts of Magistrates, or from their sovereignty. For the sorts; he shows they must obey Magistrates of all sorts, both superior, and inferior; the highest, and those which are subordinate to them, both Kings and Governors also for their sovereignty. He teacheth them to observe the supremacy of Kings and Monarchs.
The Apostle labours to cleare this doctrine from ⟨p. 603⟩diuers scruples might be conceiued by Christians, whether they arise from the diuersitie of the sorts of Magistrates, or from their soueraignety. For the sorts; he shews they must obey Magistrates of all sorts, both superior, and inferior; the highest, and those which are subordinate to them, both Kings and Gouernors also for their soueraignety. Hee teacheth them to obserue the supremacy of Kings and Monarchs.
In general, we may learn from the Apostles care, to prevent mistaking herein; that he accounts it a pernicious thing, to err about the authority of Princes, and their Governors: and experience shows it to be pernicious sometimes to the persons of Kings, who are often by treason murdered, upon wicked and erroneous grounds; and sometimes to the subjects, who draw upon themselves not only fearful sins, but miserable punishment also, by erring herein: sometimes it is pernicious to religion it self, and religious causes, giving not only scandal, but procuring desolation in the Churches through errors: sometimes on the left hand, and sometimes on the right hand.
In generall, wee may learne from the Apostles care, to preuent mistaking herein; that he accounts it a pernicious thing, to erre about the authority of Princes, and their Gouernours: and experience shewes it to bee pernicious sometimes to the persons of Kings, who are often by treason murthered, vpon wicked and erroneous grounds; and sometimes to the subiects, who drawe vpon themselues not onely fearefull sinnes, but miserable punishment also, by erring herein: somtimes it is pernicious to religion it selfe, and religious causes, giuing not onely scandall, but procuring desolation in the Churches through errors: somtimes on the left hand, and sometimes on the right hand.
Whether to the King.]
It may be questioned, whom the Apostle means, by the word King? Such as understand the Epistle to be written to the Jews, may perhaps conceive, that the Kings that ruled by deputation in Judea, should be meant; such as were Herod and Agrippa. But in as much as the Jews were scattered through the Provinces, and those provincial Jews were most in quiet: and in as much as for the reasons afore ⟨p. 604⟩given, it is likely, that the Epistle was written to all Christians, both Jews and Gentiles; therefore by the King he meant Caesar. And then a more scruple ariseth, for the Romans hated the name of a King, and Caesar was an Emperor: to which divers things may be answered.
It may be questioned, whom the Apostle meanes, by the word King? Such as vnderstand the Epistle to be written to the Iewes, may perhaps conceiue, that the Kings that ruled by deputation in Iudea, should be meant; such as were Herod and Agrippa. But in as much as the Iewes were scattred through the Prouinces, and those prouinciall Iewes were most in quiet: and in as much as for the reasons afore ⟨p. 604⟩giuen, it is likely, that the Epistle was written to all Christians, both Iewes and Gentiles; therefore by the King hee meant Caesar. And then a more scruple ariseth, for the Romans hated the name of a King, and Caesar was an Emperour: to which diuers things may bee answered.
First, that though the present governor was an Emperor; yet the Apostle, knowing that the most monarchies in the world would rest in the title of King in all ages, therefore he useth that title that may concern the most of the Elect in all ages.
First, that though the present gouernour was an Emperour; yet the Apostle, knowing that the most monarchies in the world would rest in the title of King in all ages, therefore hee vseth that title that may concerne the most of the Elect in all ages.
Secondly, that though amongst the Romans the title of King was not used; yet the Grecians, in whose language he writ, did familiarly use the word,1 which we translate King.
Secondly, that though amongst the Romans the title of King was not vsed; yet the Grecians, in whose language hee writ, did familiarly vse the word,1 which wee translate King.
Thirdly, the Apostle might have respect unto the signification of the word, as unto a word which was most effectual to note the highest dignity among men: For it notes him that is the stay or foundation of the people, or the common-wealth: and though ambitious men sought new titles, as higher; yet the Apostle knew, that this was most majestical and honourable: for the term of Emperor, in the signification of it, may agree to any subordinate rule, who governs or commands other men.
Thirdly, the Apostle might haue respect vnto the signification of the word, as vnto a word which was most effectuall to note the highest dignity among men: For it notes him that is the stay or foundation of the people, or the common-wealth: and though ambitious men sought new titles, as higher; yet the Apostle knew, that this was most maiesticall and honourable: for the tearm of Emperour, in the signification of it, may agree to any subordinate rule, who gouernes or commands other men.
Fourthly, it may be, that the Apostle, knowing the hypocrisy of those Emperors (who only disclaimed the name of Kings, to avoid the hatred of the people; and yet sought the full right of Kings, and so to destroy the liberty of the people) giveth the name they sought in substance, though ⟨p. 605⟩not in term. Where by the way we may note, how hateful hypocrisy is to God,1 and how vain it is. God will unmask even Kings, if they dissemble with him: He that trieth the hearts & reins, judgeth according to truth, and will not be deceived with pretences. Though men durst not charge Caesar to affect the kingdom, yet God dares, and will require at his hands the ambition of his heart: And if God will not bear with dissimulation in Kings, much less will he bear it in meaner men: he hates hypocrisy, and feigned pretences, and painted shows wheresoever he finds it; which should teach us all to labour for a plain and upright heart in all things, to direct our words and carriage, according to the true intent of our hearts. For besides that God will plague men for their dissimulation, which cannot be hid from him: it falls out usually, that such as use dissembling, are perpetually suspected (all their fair pretences notwithstanding) as those Caesars were.
Fourthly, it may bee, that the Apostle, knowing the hypocrisie of those Emperours (who onely disclaimed the name of Kings, to auoid the hatred of the people; and yet sought the full right of Kings, and so to destroy the liberty of the people) giueth the name they sought in substance, though ⟨p. 605⟩not in tearme. Where by the way wee may note, how hatefull hypocrisie is to God,1 and how vaine it is. God will vnmaske euen Kings, if they dissemble with him: He that tryeth the hearts & reines, iudgeth according to truth, and will not bee deceiued with pretences. Though men durst not charge Caesar to affect the kingdom, yet God dares, and will require at his hands the ambition of his heart: And if God will not beare with dissimulation in Kings, much lesse will he beare it in meaner men: hee hates hypocrisie, and fained pretences, and painted showes wheresoeuer hee findes it; which should teach vs all to labour for a plain and vpright heart in all things, to direct our words and carriage, according to the true intent of our hearts. For besides that God will plague men for their dissimulation, which cannot be hid from him: it fals out vsually, that such as vse dissembling, are perpetually suspected (all their faire pretences notwithstanding) as those Caesars were.
Lastly; the Apostle may name Kings, to prevent rebellion in the subjects, which either should fear such as affected the title, or live under such as professed themselves to be Kings, and so the meaning is, that he would have them obey even Kings, how hateful soever naturally that kind of government did seem unto them.
Lastly; the Apostle may name Kings, to preuent rebellion in the subiects, which either should feare such as affected the title, or liue vnder such as professed themselues to bee Kings, and so the meaning is, that hee would haue them obey euen Kings, how hatefull soeuer naturally that kinde of gouernment did seeme vnto them.
It may be that the Apostle mentioneth Kings, as the last kind of government: a Monarchy being in many respects the most excellent form of government; as being such a form of government, as comes nearest to the similitude of God, who is ⟨p. 606⟩not only one in nature, but in government also, and is most agreeable to nature, which doth affect unity, as well in the body politic, as in the body natural. But I let this pass as a question belonging rather to the Politics, then to Divinity, to be discussed at large.
It may bee that the Apostle mentioneth Kings, as the last kinde of gouernment: a Monarchy being in many respects the most excellent forme of gouernment; as being such a form of gouernment, as comes neerest to the similitude of God, who is ⟨p. 606⟩not onely one in nature, but in gouernment also, and is most agreeable to nature, which doth affect vnity, as well in the body politicke, as in the body naturall. But I let this passe as a question belonging rather to the Politickes, then to Diuinity, to be discussed at large.
Thus conjecturally of the reason, why the Apostle useth this term.
Thus coniecturally of the reason, why the Apostle vseth this tearm.
Concerning Kings, I propound these things to be considered of.
First, the Original of Kings.
First, the Originall of Kings.
Secondly, the excellency of Kings: both these tend to work in man the care of obedience to them and their Laws.
Secondly, the excellency of Kings: both these tend to work in man the care of obedience to them and their Lawes.
