A17642:988
The commentaries of M. John Calvin upon the Acts of the Apostles, faithfully translated…The commentaries of M. Iohn Caluin vpon the Actes of the Apostles, faithfully translated…
The commentaries of M. John Calvin upon the Acts of the Apostles, faithfully translated out of Latin into English for the great profit of our country-men, by Christopher Fetherstone student in divinityThe commentaries of M. Iohn Caluin vpon the Actes of the Apostles, faithfully translated out of Latine into English for the great profite of our countrie-men, by Christopher Fetherstone student in diuinitie
Londini: printed by Thomas Dawson, 1585
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.
19 That we must not trouble. He denieth that the Gentiles must be driven from the Church through the disagreement about ceremonies seeing they were admitted by God: yet it seemeth contrary to himself, when he denieth that they ought to be troubled, & yet prescribeth certain rites. The answer is easy, which I will hereafter more at large prosecute. First, he requireth nothing at their hands, but that which they were bound to do by brotherly concord: secondly, these precepts could no whit trouble or disquiet their consciences, after that they knew that they were free before God, and that false and perverse religion was taken away, which the false Apostles sought to bring in. The question is now, why James doth enjoin the Gentiles these four things alone. Some say that this was fet from the ancient custom of the fathers, who did not make any covenant with any people, which they could enforce to obey them, but upon this condition. But because there is no fit author of that thing brought to light, I leave it in doubt & undecided. But here appeareth a manifest reason why they gave particular commandment concerning things offered to Idols, blood, & that which was strangled. They were in deed of themselves things indifferent: yet such as had some special thing in them, more than other rites of the law. We know how straitly the Lord commandeth to eschew those things which are contrary to the external profession of faith, & wherein there is any appearance or suspicion of Idolatry. Therefore least there should any blot of superstition remain in the gentiles, & least the Jews should see any thing in them which did not agree with the pure worship of god, no marvel if to avoid offence they be ⟨p. 373⟩commanded to abstain from things offered to Idols. The word alisgema which Luke useth doth signify all manner of profanation: therefore I have not changed the common translation, which hath pollution or filthiness. Yet it is sometime taken for sacrifices: which sense should not disagree with James his purpose, & peradventure it shall be more plain and natural so to expound it in this place: because where Luke doeth shortly after repeat the same decree, he will put Idolothyta, or things sacrificed to Idols. As concerning blood and that which was strangled not only the Jews were forbidden by the law of Moses to eat them:1
19 That we must not trouble. He denieth that the Gentiles must be driuen from the Church through the disagreement about ceremonies seeing they were admitted by God: yet it seemeth contrary to himselfe, when he denieth that they ought to be troubled, & yet prescribeth certain rites. The answere is easie, which I will hereafter more at large prosecute. First, he requireth nothing at their handes, but that which they were bound to do by brotherly concord: secondly, these precepts coulde no whit trouble or disquiet their consciences, after that they knew that they were free before God, and that false and peruers religion was takē away, which the false Apostles sought to bring in. The question is now, why Iames doth inioyne the Gentiles these foure things alone. Some say that this was fet from the auncient custom of the fathers, who did not make any couenāt with any people, which they could inforce to obey thē, but vpon this condition. But because there is no fit authour of that thing brought to light, I leaue it in doubt & vndecided. But heere appeareth a manifest reason why they gaue particular cōmādement cō cerning things offred to Idols, blood, & that which was strangled. They were in deed of thēselues things indifferent: yet such as had som special thing in thē, more thā other rites of the law. We know how straitly the Lord cōmandeth to eschew those things which are contrary to the externall profession of faith, & wherin there is any appearance or suspitiō of Idolatry. Therfore least there should any blot of superstitiō remain in the gentiles, & least the Iewes should see any thing in thē which did not agree with the pure worship of god, no maruel if to auoid offēce they be