Selected quad for the lemma: child_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
child_n	aaron_n	abraham_n	israel_n	52	3	6.5204	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11886	Sacrilege sacredly handled That is, according to Scripture onely. Diuided into two parts: 1. For the law. 2. For the Gospell. An appendix also added; answering some obiections mooued, namely, against this treatise: and some others, I finde in Ios. Scaligers Diatribe, and Ioh. Seldens Historie of tithes. For the vse of all churches in generall: but more especially for those of North-Britaine.	Sempill, James, Sir, 1566-1625.	1619 (1619)	STC 22186; ESTC S117106	109,059	172

Iaacob Gen. 49.7 and scatter them in Israel to wit for teaching the people Gods Law not tyed Onely to that Tabernacle Act. 15.21 c. 2. Chro. 11.14 For Moyses in olde time hath in euery City them that preach him c. This point is Generall Morall and so Perpetuall deriued from the first Adam and by course prorogued to the second comming of the second Adam The second point of their function To put incense c. A seruice indeed Ceremoniall because tyed to the Tabernacle Onely beginning and ending with Leui. Then Morall scattered seruices craue euer a like Maintenance and Ceremoniall tyed seruice the like also and during the Law one Officer Leui discharging both the Morall and Ceremoniall seruices did eate of both sorts of Maintenance And this for proofe of the first point The Onely Tabernacle was not Leuies whole function The second point That Tithes were giuen them for § III their whole function not for one part and also to the whole Tribe and not one part thereof and chiefly if there be any ods to that scattered part and Morall seruice it is proued by the same text brought against vs as shal best appeare by a true Analysis of that whole Chap. Num. 18. Three degrees of Leuites The Tribe of Leui being distinguished by order of Office in High-Priest Priest and inferiour Leuites he setteth downe in this Chapter the Office of all and the Maintenance for all Their offices mixtly from verse 1. till 8. from 8. till 20. their maintenance common to the Priests but not to inferiour Leuites Nehem. 10.37 From 20. till 25. he setteth downe their common maintenance viz. Tithes Inheritance proper to the whole Tribe now because the Leuites were restrained from the portions of the Priests Vpon Deut. 12.6.17 Lyra and others conclude that Tithes heere are only for the inferiour Leuites exempting the Priests But the text is ill taken vp so for from the beginning till ver 20. he treateth only of the Priests Ceremoniall seruice touching Sacrificing and of the Ceremoniall maintenance which ariseth from the sacrifices and offrings in which Inferior Leuites had small handling and so as small a portion But from 20. he setteth downe their Inheritance by the onely name of Tithes This for Lyras guessing Anti 3. lib. 4. cap. 4. C. vita Ioseph fol. 534 I. in the English translation to whom we oppose Iosephus both a Iew and a Leuite yea of the Priests plainely allotting Tithes both to Priest and Leuites So to ascribe Gods inheritance to the least officers only hath no better warrant then Deliria Lyrae § IV But to climbe the tree of Knowledge by the owne true branches Tithes due to the whole Tribe Num. 18.20.21 heare what the Scripture saith Abraham gaue Tithes first to Melchisedec euen a great Priest before the Law And vnder the Law the Lord said to Aaron Thou sh lt haue none Inheritance in their Land I am thy Inherita●ce And I haue giuen all the tenth of Israel for an Inheritance to the children of Leui. Shall not Aaron the High-Priest and the children of Leui comprehend the whole Tribe Further seeing the Priests heere are debarred all ciuill Inheritance as well as the Leuites why should they not liue of the Ecclesiastick as well as Leui Againe Neh. 10.37.38 Nehemiah with the people made a couenant to giue the Tithes of their Land vnto the Leuites in all the Cities of their trauell And a Priest the sonne of Aaron shal be with the Leuites when the Leuites take Tithes Some thinke this Priest the sonne of Aaron was but an ouerseer of Leuies Tithing that by their portion hee might know the true proportion of Decimae Decimarum which the Leuites were to take vp to Ierusalem and giue to his Father Aaron I rather hold with some others that the Priests heere were partners with the Leuites in Tithes Inheritance And that this Priest was not one single person for how could one man ouersee all the Leuites Tithing at one time in all the corners of the Countrey but a Priest in each place lifting for his brethren Priests as the Leuites for theirs in the Cities of their residence for they were mixed and dwelt together But if the Priests had no part in these Tithes tell vs whereupon they liued all that time of the yeere they remained at home out of Ierusalem They were diuided in foure and twentie Classes each Classe serued in his turne but for a Sabbath so each Classe came but twice a yeere so it seemeth they liued abroad some eight and fortie weekes and no part of oblations or sacrifices might be transported nor eaten out of Ierusalem Iudicent doctiores But heere they obiect Ios 13.14 The sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel are the Inheritance of the Tribe of Leui as he said vnto § V him So this word Inheritance Sacrifices not properly Inheritance maketh no more for perpetuall Tithing then for perpetuall Sacrificing For this Tremellius wisely noteth this speech to be both Synecdochicall in putting Sacrifices for all sorts of Offrings whereof Tithes was one And Metonymicall in putting Things consumed by fire for things reserued from fire Againe seeing these things were onely eaten by the Priests and their Families and onely at Ierusalem as all Scripture testifieth it is most cleare that Sacrifices were not Inheritance for the whole Tribe And 18. 7. But Iosua explaineth all this in the last of this same Chapter For the Lord God of Israel is their Inheritance as hee said vnto them Marke these last words as he said vnto them This he said onely in Num. 18. and there only Tithes are the Lords Inheritance and that for the whole Tribe as is said The very like Synecdoche is in that speech of gisting the Tithes for their seruice in the Tabernacle of the Congregation where Tithes were as due if not more for their scattered seruice But seeing the principall seruice of the Law was Typicall and Ceremoniall Moyses had reason to talke in Typicall and Ceremoniall termes as by Tabernacle to comprehend their whole seruice and that very iustly seeing all their seruice was discharged in but not onely in the Tabernacle This Synecdoche is frequent to this word Tabernacle of the Congregation for it being properly but that place where the Priests serued yet is it extended to Sanctum Sanctorum where Aarons rod was as in the Chapter proceeding vers 4.7 compared with Hebr. 9.4 and Leuit. 10.9 and Numb 1.49 c. § VI But how is Leui said to haue no Inheritance amongst their brethren How Leui is said to haue no inheritance seeing both of their labours and from their hands they receiue their Tithes and so seeme more to bee mixed among the Tribes then any one Tribe with another First I thinke because they had no such portion of the Land as they secondly for the different prerogatiue of their portions and tenures The Israelites

Apostles by diuers precepts prouided for the poore but chiefly for those of the houshold of Faith Gal. 6.10 1. Cor. 16.1 and late Writers hold this to answere those Tithes for the poore This was called afterward by Moyses Deut. 26.12 The yeere of Tithing because this third yeere encreased one Tithing aboue the other two And such were Tithes payed by the Israelites followeth now The fourth sort of Tithes payed by Leui the Tithe-taker § VII to Aaron and his successors High-Priests The fourth sort of Tithes Num. 18.26 28. When ye shall take of the children of Israel the Tithes which I haue giuen you of them for your inheritance then shall yee t●ke an Heaue-offering of the same for the Lord the tenth part of the Tithe Behold heere Tithe-takers become Tithe-payers and so these Tithes cannot bee the Lords inheritance being defectiue in two of the generall notes agreeing to Gods inheritance viz. Person and Place in Person Vers 28. because they are payed by the Ordinary Officiar of receiuing Inheritance Leui to the onely High-Priest In Place Nehem. 10. ●8 And the Leuites shall bring vp the tenth part of the Tithes vnto the house of our God vnto the Chambers of the Treasure-house Now if all Tithes were brought vp to Ierusalem to what end should hee heere command to bring vp the tenth of them again Al this is ceremonial But marke yet Then it shall be counted vnto the Leuites as the encrease of the corne-floore or as the encrease of the wine-presse Then Tithes inheritance can no way be Ceremonial for heere they are to the Leuites euen as the Land was to the other Tribes And Leui giueth offrings viz. as first fruits Num. 18.11.12.13.27.29 Exod. 22.29 and so doth Ierome translate this place Primitias out of his Tithes as if they were his very Barnes his Wine-presse euen as the other Tribes did of their Barnes and Wine-presses Their offerings were all Ceremoniall their Inheritances not § VIII Obiect If they obiect The Policie and possessions of the whole Tribes were but Temporall and ended at Christ Ergo So must Leuies Inheritance Sol. We answere both ended on their parts but neither on Gods God hath yet the same generall interest in Canaan that he had from the beginning for Domini est terra plenitudo eius And the same peculiar interest in his owne patrimonie separated to his owne seruice If they yet reply The other Tribes were onely Temporall but Leui both Temporall and Ceremoniall Ergo So were Tithes his Inheritance Heere a peece of sacrilegious Sophistrie to conclude from His Priest-hood to Gods Patrimonie They are not of one nature nor both the sonnes of one father His Priesthood bred onely by the Law This Patrimonie long before both Leui and the Law His Priest-hood bringeth with it only Aetatem but this inheritance Aeternitatem That sort of Priest-hood was Leuies onely this sort of Patrimony was his also but not onely his And so in the diuision of the Land God said not This shall be Leuies inheritance Num. 18.20.22.24 but I am his inheritance And I haue giuen not I will giue Leui all the Tithes They were but Leuies secundariô they were and are the Lords primò Hauing setled the Tenth of Tithes in Aaron he subioyneth § IX vers 31. And yee shall eate it in all places c. This IT cannot be the Tenthes of Tithes as some gesse but it must bee Tithes Inheritance For first otho the Hebrew Pronoune is Masculine and must be Relatiue to Prouentu● area in the former verse which in the remainder was Tithes inheritance as the learned may perceiue Secondly Yee shall eate is spoken here to the Leuites but what reason had they to eate the Priests portions which themselues were to pay them Thirdly In all places cannot agree with things once tied to Aaron and Ierusalem vnlesse we dreame they carried them backe againe to all the places of their residence thorow the Countrey The true meaning then is this As the other Tribes must first giue God his Tithes before they might vse their nine parts so must Leui giue to Aaron his Tithe before hee put hand to Tithes his Inheritance And this done Tithes Inheritance were accounted vnto Leui as the encrease of their owne Barnes and Wine-presses though they had none and so they might eat them in all the places of their trauels Thus haue we brought these confounded matters to a method and sent each Tithe to his owne place But wonder it is to see the strange subtiltie of Sacrilege seated once in the hearts of men how they can alledge those texts Bring all the Tithes to Gods house to conclude this Bring no more Tithes to the Lords house for doubtlesse if it were not more for loue of the Tithes then the Text this Theologie should neuer be so frequent CHAP. IV. Tithes not Ceremoniall of their nature How to discerne a Morall offering from a Ceremoniall Tithes a Morall offering § I THe Text we see is full of Tithes and Tithes full of tentation to hungrie-zealed men Sacri Sacra fames so that we shall sooner solue their Syllogismes then dissolue their Sacrilege From the Institution of Tithes to Leui they reason two wayes First from their Nature Secondly from their End From their Nature thus All offerings of the children of Israel vnder the Law were Ceremoniall Tithes euen Inheritance were offered by Israel vnder the Law Ergo Tithes Inheritance were Ceremoniall And consequently cannot be due to the Gospell The Proposition they take The Assumption they proue thus For the Tithes of the Children of Israel Num. 18.24 which they shall offer as an Offering some reade Heaue-offering vnto the Lord I haue giuen the Leuites for an Inheritance Tithes by nature not Ceremoniall We confesse the Assumption truely read But because of the diuersitie of Translations we must looke vnto the Originall word and distinguish it in the Proposition Two Hebrew words Rum and Nuph are vsed by Moyses in diuers sorts of offerings the first signifying to Heaue or lift vp the second to Waue or shake to and fro Sometimes these words retaine their simple and common signification though the subiect bee sacred sometimes they import a meere Leuiticall Ceremony tending and ending in Christ For example Exod. 14.16 Lift thou vp thy rod c. Deut. 8.14 Lest thy heart be lifted vp c. Here is the first word without any Ceremony For the second word Exod. 20.25 In building the Altar a thing Deut. 27.5 both Sacred and Ceremoniall hee forbiddeth to lift vp or shake a Masons toole or instrument for hewing of it Heere was no Ceremonial end in Lifting but only God would haue these Altars during the time of their peregrination so built as they might be easily ouerthrowne and not serue for the superstition of others after their departure Exod. 35.21 c. Are both words vsed How to discerne the Ceremony and

this part 7. cap. 5. § 2. adding from Nehem. 11. how they brought by lot but one man of ten to dwell at Ierusalem the nine parts liuing alwayes abroad in their Cities Seeing then onely the tenth man stayed at Ierusalem and that Tithes were their Inheritance why should this Inheritance be all carried vp and so nine parts againe downe like Post-wages according as they came and went by their courses Leuite then Num 18. from vers 20 to 25. hauing no cleare limitation nor distinction in the text must include the whole Tribe in their gift to Tithes Vers 20. He first debarreth Aarons Inheritance with Israel vers 21 and 24. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Causals as all translate For For saith he I haue giuen the children of Leui euen Aaron and all another Inheritance All the tenth of Israel Therefore seeing one and the same reason debarred all by expr●sse name heere from that Ciuill inheritance the same reason that is this Sacred inheritance must bee alike one and the same to all And I pray you marke the course and coherence of these texts Thou Aaron shalt haue no Ciuill Inheritance in Isra●l vers 20. For vers 21. I haue giuen the children of Leui all the tenth of Israel What was this to Aaron that Hee must want his Inheritance because the onely inferiour Leuites had got an Inheritance vnlesse Aaron goe as a childe of Leui in that reason And Ioseph is plaine That Tithes were giuen for Leuites Antiq. lib. 4. cap. 4. C. Engl. in Vita Ios and Priest and Tribe Neither tooke I Tithes that were due to me as Priest from such as brought me them If men apply these to decimarum decimae first Ioseph was not now at Ierusalem whither these Tithes must beene brought Secondly Ioseph was no High-Priest Thirdly I neuer read those Tithes vnder one single name but still Tenthes of Tithes Otherwise the Priests had no Tithes Inheritance at all in Israel For their Decimarum decimae were not Tithes of Israel but of Leui and Leui in these accounts is no more an Israelite Indeed the Materia prima of both is one to wit the Tenth of Israel g uen to Leui whereof they againe gaue the other tenth but in Person Place and End they wholly differ and in these onely differences standeth the true difinition of what is M ral or Ceremonial Perpetual or Temporal in them Then the text giueth vs those two Syllogismes first All Tithes inheritance are payd by Israel to Leui. ver 21.24 Tenth of Tithes are not payd by Israel to Leui but by Leuie to Aaron 26. Ergo Tenth of Tithes are not Tithes-inheritance Againe The children of Leui had this inheritance giuen them All Priest were the children of Leui. Ergo All Priests had this Inheritance giuen them And for confirmation Deut. 18.1 The Priestes of the Leuits and all the Tribe of Leui shall haue no part nor inheritance with Israel but shall eate of the offerings of the Lord made by fire and his inheritance And Ezech 44 28. The Priesthood is their Inheritance And Iosu 13.14 Onely to the Tribe of Leui gaue he no inheritance Ergo as the whole Tribe was frustrate so the whole Tribe was supplied by this new inheritance Tithes But if we distinguish not according to other Scriptures those Offerings from the proper Inheritance we shall confound all for many oblations might the Priests and their males onely eate of and no inferior Leuit some might not remaine vneaten till to morrow but all tied to the Temple onely and Ierusalem So such Priests to wit nine for one as liued dispersed could not liue by those oblations So those oblations were not their inheritance They must haue no inheritance with or among Israel sayth the text yet must they liue mixed with and among Israel therefore their proper Inheritance must run dispersed with and among Israel and not confined to so small a part of Israel as onely Ierusalem But saith not Paul plainly Heb. 7. The sonnes of Leui receiuing the Priesthood haue a command to Tithe the people Is not here the command of Tithing directly giuen to the sonnes Priests and to take from the people Ergo Tithes are inheritance to Priestes as well as Leuites And yet Master Selden Reuiew pa 454. in it would proue from this same place of Paul that Priests were not partners in these first Tithes But what if this decima decimarum were not properly primò due to the Priests as Mr. Selden seemeth to auouch but to the high Priest The text bids directly giue it to Aaron the high Priest Numb 18.26 28. The beginning of the Chap from ver 8. to 20. he ioineth euer Aarons sons with himselfe as partners of all the oblations of the other Tribes but in this offering of decima decimarum we read no such compartnership not that I doubt but the sonnes of Aaron this Ceremony being performed might thereafter partake in and by him of this offering but the reason and Analogie of this in my iudgement is That as all the Tribes hauing Barne wine-presse must pay first that first Tith inheritance to the tribe of Leui before they durst put hand in their nine parts remaining so the Tribe of Leui must out of his inheritance giue a tenth also answering his Barnes and Wine-presses But to exempt all Priests from this were first to exempt the best though not the greatest part of that Tribe● from acknowledging God by an Offering as did the rest Secondly It giueth Leui a prerogatiue aboue all the rest of the Tribes voyd both of precept and reason The Earth is the Lords the fulnes thereof So the possessors of it acknowledge God by giuing their Tithes Tithes are yet a degree more holy to the Lord being made the generall Inheritance of his Ministers and Leuits but Their Tenths againe holiest of all proceeding from an holy Person the Tribe of Leui out of Holy Barnes and wine-presses the Tithes to holiest persons the High-priests at onely holy Place the Temple Now if it be asked how Aaron shall passe here who is still the Receiuer I answere Vltra Summum Nihil And as Aaron had that transcendent power onely he to offer that yeerly expiatory sacrifice for Prince people and himselfe too so by the same power might hee receiue in name of God the offrings of all subordinat to him and for them and himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fulfill and perfect all those points in his owne person And so albeit the other Priests all those points being duely performed might eate and partake of this Offering in the prerogatiue of Priesthood and Sonne-ship of Aaron yet prima instantiâ and in mounting the scale of this precept they are but Offerers not Receiuers You see Reader how loath we are to loose our interest in Tithes euen from the Law but remember still the law is neither our whole nor sole ground Then let mee aske Who gaue Tithes to Melchis dec Abraham

impared Matrimonie might be better spared And seeing Lords Lairds haue measured Leuies maintenance so as will scarse proue meate to his owne mouth the lesse his burthen were the greater were his libertie in his calling But the difference betweene the Pope and vs is that Nature conformed to Gods Law leadeth vs Mans Law abridging Gods enforceth them If we enacted affirmatiuely that all Ministers must marry as the Pope doth his Negatiue That none shal marry I think it were aeque peccatū vtrinque Leui was bound to marry for his only loines could breed a Legal Ministerie but now Iew and Gentil are a like sib to the Gospell the onely spirit begetteth a Minister Secondly I confesse That there is no greater Sacrilege § IV then when Leui himselfe playeth the Limmer Leui Sacrilegious is worst of all that is when a Bishop or a Minister inhaunceth all Bishopricks Abbacies Priories whatsoeuer is deuouted to Leuies Inheritance appropriating things due to the seed of their calling to the seed of their carkas to their onely sonnes what is due to their successors If our Church haue any such the Lord turne himselfe all in Eye to find them out and all in fire to purge them out Achans Achans But let vs heare Bellarmine sound his bels This Law § V of Tithes cannot bee Morall Bellarmines belles against Tithes because it did not oblige euer from the beginning Ans Obliging from the beginning is no sure note of things Morall and Perpetuall for then the Iewish indiuidual Sabbath must haue beene Moral for it was at the very beginning but continued not till the end Againe Incest did not at the beginning so strictly oblige as now shall we therefore hold it for no Morall precept or alterable now Morall then is whatsoeuer beginning at any time before Christ remaineth also after Christ Otherwise the Decalogue shall not be Morall Rom. 7.7 and if we flee to the Law of Nature we haue proued Tithes also by the Law of Nature Another bell of Bellarmines As the Law said Leui must haue all the Tithes in Israel So said it Leui must haue no Inheritance in Israel And so the negatiue must be Morall as well as the Affirmatiue but wee see many Ministers borne to Inheritance and purchasing Inheritance neither due nor descending to the Ministerie Ergo. This is a two edged sword one against the Pope whose chaire maketh him as great a Prince as any in Israel Let Baal plead for himselfe Iudg. 6.32 Another edge against our Ministerie who though they bring no other Inheritance to the Ministerie then the Gospel giueth yet they prouide for their children which Leuie did not I answere first for the children Leui did not prouide for them because hee needed not for God had prouided alreadie sufficiently for him and all his How Leui may haue Inheritance In generall I answere If this Leuiticall Law had bin our first ground for Tithes as it is but a branch of that generall whereby both they and we claime Tithes then Bellarmine had had some colour of his coniunction of the Negatiue and Affirmatiue as of one nature And yet by his leaue That Negatiue was peculiar to that onely Tribe in the diuision of that Land but the Affirmatiue of Tithes flowing from our first Patterne and Patron Melchisedec was common to all Nations as was his Priest-hood For no Nation saue this was enioyned to diuide themselues in twelue or thirteene distinct Tribes and so to diuide the Land among them and kept themselues still distinguished one from another and no people saue this had one onely Tribe reserued wholly and onely to the Ministery Therefore the Affirmatiue must bee Morall The Negatiue Temporall I confesse the Equitie of this Negatiue teacheth clearly § VI That the Sacred and Ciuill calling the Word Sacred and ciuil callings distinct and the World Priest and Prince should euer remaine distinct which two the Pope confoundeth and all such as doe ioyne sacred and secular publike callings in one person Yea I say further though a man bee borne to secular Lordships and Offices and thereafter called to the Ministerie yet must hee liue as hauing no inheritance that is he must abandon all that publike and ciuill calling in his owne person as Negotium huius seculi discharging that by others and so deriue it to his lawfull posterity of his flesh himself standing fast by Christs plough he must not plow with the Word and harrow with the World The Law then is not the patent of our possession § VII Melchisedec is our Patterne Melchisedec is our Patrone Melchisedec gaue our Patent Melchisedec tooke our possession The law as is said serued the owne time It coupled Melchisedec to Christ Great was the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell both touching Calling and Maintenance The Law tyed all and onely Leui to the Calling and so were his children both successors to his Office and heires of his Tithes In the Gospel the Spirit onely directeth all In the Law onely Israel Gods people onely Leui Gods Priest and as they had an externall calling so he gaue them a carnal Maintenance bound to their blood for the Priest-hood went by pedegree Neh. 7.64 But the Gospel touching descent personal in all circumstances is free calling after the manner of Melchisedec Internally and so giueth the maintenance to the Sent not to the Discent No mans seede astricted none debarred Iew and Gentile The patrimony and parentage meete neuer vnder Melchisedec and therefore Leuies Lawes are for Leuies selfe onely For seeing our flesh hath no part with Leui it were hard to debar vs that ordinary natural care which God alloweth all parents ouer their children The moderation heere must be as is said Ne implicent se negotijs huius seculi 2. Tim. 2.4 not to hunt with Esau forgetting their calling Before both Law and Melchisedec the first borne had both the best portion and were also Priests by practise then if a man now borne to secular possessions hauing both wife children which both hath bin and may be vnder the Gospel but neuer could bee vnder the Law be called to the Ministerie must this man either renounce his meanes or his Ministerie May not Leuies Lands and keepe Leuies cattell This were a beggerly rudiment indeed A man then may enioy his meanes and the Church censure his moderation § VIII The Moderatours in all such cases must bee onely Church-men who must giue to euery man his portion according to his neede Num. 26. ●4 33.54 2. Chron. 31. Neh. 13.13 So did God in the diuision of Canaan giue that Tribe most which needed most So were Tithes by Leui taken and by Leui distributed according to their courses To command the people to pay Tithes was Opus Regum but to diuide them Vix Regium Equitie then not Equalitie must leade the ballance for many circumstances may make one of the same calling more or lesse chargeable then another The