22. And to holy David indeed
it might more justly be said, that he ought not to have been angry;
no, not with one however ungrateful and rendering evil for good;
yet if, as man, anger did steal over him, he ought not to have let
it so prevail, that he should swear to do a thing which either by
giving way to his rage he should do, or by breaking his oath leave
undone. But to the other, set as he was amid the libidinous frenzy
of the Sodomites, who would dare to say, “Although thy guests in
thine own house, whither to enter in thou by most violent humanity
hast compelled them, be laid hold upon by lewd men, and being
deforced be carnally known as women, fear thou not a whit, care for
it not a whir, have no dread, no horror, no trembling?” What man,
even a companion of those wretches, would dare to say this to the
pious host? But assuredly it would be most rightly said, “Do what
thou canst, that the thing be not done which thou deservedly
fearest: but let not this fear of thine drive thee to do a thing
which if thy daughters be willing that it be done unto them, they
will through thee do wickedness with the Sodomites, if unwilling,
will through thee from the Sodomites suffer violence. Commit not
thou a great crime of thine own, while thou dreadest a greater
crime of other men; for be the difference as great as thou wilt
between thine own and that of others, this will be thine own, that
other men’s.” Unless perchance in defending this man one should
so crowd himself into a corner, as to say, “Since to receive a
wrong is better than to do one, and those guests were not about to
do but to suffer a wrong, that just man chose that his daughters
should suffer wrong rather than his guests, acting upon his rights
as his daughters’ lord; and he knew that it would be no sin in
them if the thing were done, because they would but bear them which
did the sin, not consenting unto them, and so without sin of their
own. In fine, they did not offer themselves (albeit better females
than males) to be carnally known instead of those guests, lest they
should be rendered guilty, not by the suffering of others’ lust,
but by consenting of their own will: nor yet did their father
permit it to be done unto himself, when they essayed to do it,
because he would not betray his guests to them, (albeit there had
been less of evil, if it were done to one man than to two;) but as
much as he could he resisted, lest himself also should be defiled
by any assent of his own, though even if the frenzy of others’
lust had prevailed by strength of body, it would not have defiled
him so long as he consented not. Now as the daughters sinned not,
neither did he sin in their persons, because he was not making them
to sin, if they should be deforced against their will, but only to
bear them that did the sin. Just as if he should offer his slaves
to be beaten by ruffians, that his guests might not suffer the
wrong of beating.” Of which matter I shall not dispute, because
it would take long to argue, whether even a master may justly use
his right of power over his slave, so as to cause an unoffending
slave to be smitten, that his unoffending friend may not be beaten
in his house by violent bad men. But certainly, as concerning
David, it is no wise right to say that he ought to have sworn to do
a thing which afterwards he would perceive that he ought not to do.
Whence it is clear that we ought not to take all that we read to
have been done by holy or just men, and transfer the same to
morals, but hence too we must learn how widely that saying of the
Apostle extends, and even to what persons it reaches: “Brethren,
if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore
such an one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself also,
lest thou be tempted.”24132413 The being overtaken in a fault
happens, either while one does not see at the time what is right to
be done, or while, seeing it, one is overcome; that is, that a sin
is done, either for that the truth is hidden, or for that infirmity
compelleth.