The Fathers proue his innocencie in this fact.And touching this fact of Iacob, where (if euer any-where) might seeme to be some great sinne, S. Augustin at large proueth that he did not herein sinne at al: That which Iacob did (saith he li. cont. mendacium c. 10.) by his mothers instruction to deceiue his father, if it be diligently considered, was no lie, but a mysterie, and therfore for the familiar counsel of the Holie Ghost, which his mother had receiued, he is excused from sinne. The same he confirmeth. q. 74. in Gen. l. 16. c. 32. de ciuit. & li. 22. c. 34. cont. Faust. The same also teach S. Chris. ho. 53. in Gen. S. Hiero. Epist. 125. S. Theodoret. q. 79. & 80. in Gen. S. Gregorie, ho. 6. in Ezechielem. S. Bede, Isidorus, Innocentius 3. Rupertus & others vpon this place, Euerie lie is a sinne.al agreeing absolutely that euerie lie is a sinne, declare that Iacob lied not, but stil spake the truth, confirming their exposition by other like places of Scripture. As when our Sauiour said of S. Iohn Baptist (Math. 11.) He is Elias, meaning that he was Elias in spirite not in person. So Iacob said truly that he was Esau, not meaning in person but in right of the first-borne, by Gods ordinance: Esau also hauing condescended therto by couenant and oath. In that also he deceiued his father, was no sinne. Some deceit good.For it was a lawful and good deceit, such a one Ho. 6. ad Col.
Hier. 20.(saith S. Chrisostom) as Hieremie speaketh of, Lord thou hast deceiued me, and I am deceiued, so Isaac was deceiued not as we commonly cal deceit, but to his owne and others good, by Gods disposition.
It was good that Isaac know not Iacob when he blessed him.23. Knew him not.) Epist. 125.S. Damasus demanding of S. Hierom, what might be the reason why God would suffer his holie seruant Isaac not to know Iacob, but to be deceiued, and through ignorance to blesse whom he would not, declareth that it happened not only to Iacob, but also to manie other like holie men, to be ignorant of manie things, and to be deceived in errour of opinion: and that this errour was profitable to Isaac and his house. For if he had giuen this blessing (which was a spiritual Iurisdiction) to Esau, as he purposed, he had committed a noxious errour indeed, by preferring a bloudie man, one that was readie, if he could, to haue killed his brother. (v. 41.) omitting him that was sincere and very vertuous, and had done his owne wil, not Gods wil therin.
But why would not God reueale his wil to Isaac (as he had commanded a farre greater thing to Abraham, to sacrifice the same Isaac) that he might wittingly haue blessed Iacob by Gods commandment? Good in respect of Esau.The Fathers doe probably alleadge this for one reason, that if Esau, being a fierce and cruel man, had perceiued that his father had willingly preferred Iacob, he would haue been incensed against his father, conceiued and attempted euil against him. More to Gods glorie and Iacobs commendation.Ho. 53. q. 79. in Gen.Another reason S. Chrisostom and Theodoret do yeald, that by this strange manner of imparting this blessing, it might more manifestly appeare to be Gods wil and ordinance, and not to proceed from mans affection, that Iacob should be preferred.
