Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	aaron_n	add_v	priest_n	23	3	5.9711	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67209	Anguis flagellatus, or, A switch for the snake being an answer to the third and last edition of The snake in the grass : wherein the author's injustice and falshood, both in quotation and story, are discover'd and obviated, and the truth doctrinally deliver'd by us, stated and maintained in opposition to his misrepresentation and perversion / by Joseph Wyeth ; to which is added a supplement, by George Whitehead.	Wyeth, Joseph, 1663-1731.; Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723. Snake in the grass.	1699 (1699)	Wing W3757; ESTC R16372	333,418	578

Tythes as being due to that Order of Priesthood That Tythes were due to Melchisedec or to the Order of his Priesthood is gratis Dictum a begging of the Question which I deny the Snake to prove That the Evangelical Priesthood is after the order of Melchisedec is a false Notion deny'd and disprov'd by some of great Note in the Church of England I instance for the present Andrew Willet in his Synopsis of Popery fifth General Controversy p. 315. where writing against the Popish Priests who claim'd by this same Plea which the Snake now claims says It is great Blasphemy to say that every Popish Priest is after the order of Melchisedec And that none may think he says this only of Popish Priests because they are Popish he afterwards adds The Scripture maketh this difference between the Priesthood of Aaron and the Priesthood of Melchisedec that the Priests of the Law were many because they were taken away by Death But Christ 's Priesthood is Eternal he Dyeth not Heb. 7.23 But if there should be many Priests after Melchisedec 's Order there should herein be no difference at all Wherefore seeing Melchisedec's Priesthood only resteth in Christ and is not translated to any other c. Thus far he which plainly shews that he excludes all Priests even the Gospel Ministers from being of the Order of Melchisedec which he confines to Christ only and herein he hath the Warrant of Heb. 7.24 Where the Apostle speaking of the Priesthood of Christ after the order of Melchisedec saith But this Man because he endureth ever hath a Priesthood which cannot pass from one to another To the same purpose Edw. Reynolds Bishop of Norwich in his Works printed 1658. p. 528. speaking of the Priesthood of Christ and shewing that the Popish Priests who as well as the Priests in the Reformation pretend to the Evangelical Priesthood were not after the order of Melchisedec saith thus The Priesthood of Melchisedec as Type and of Christ as the Substance was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Priesthood which could not pass unto any other either as Successor or Vicar to one or the other and it was only by Divine and Immediate Vnction But the Papists make themselves Priests by Humane and Ecclesiastical Ordination Thus he And if the Snake follow his own Principle viz. That a Bishop be to be follow'd as Christ's Vicegerent I see not how he will avoid throwing away his idle and false notion That the Evangelical Priesthood is after the order of Melchisedec because the Priests of England are made such by Humane and Ecclesiastical Ordination Thus Reader by the Testimony of two Eminent Doctors of the Church of England one of them a Bishop is refuted his bold but groundless Assertion that the Evangelical Priesthood is after the order of Melchisedec and consequently his Claim to Tythes as due to that order does of necessity fall to the Ground with it Ibid. p. 267. Nor is Melchisedec 's Tything of Abraham mentioned as the beginning or first rise of Tythes but it is told only occasionally and as a thing well known and received in those early Ages How proves the Snake that it is not there mentioned as the beginning of Tythes or that it was then well known and received since this of Gen. 24.18 is the first mention of Tythes in the Bible But it may here be observed that tho' the Snake would place himself and the rest of the Priesthood Blasphemously as Dr. Willet aforequoted stiles it to be Priests after the order of Melchisedec yet he would have Tythes given them after the order of Aaron Why else would he by a little piece of Priest-craft persuade us that these Scriptures Numb 18.24 Deut. 18.1 and Levit. 27.32 33. which appointed the Ty●he to Aaron's Priesthood are now payable to his falsly pretended Evangelical Priesthood after the order of Melchisedec But further if we should suppose according to his Blasphemous as before observ'd pretence that the Evangelical Priesthood were after the order of Melchisedec and that Tythes were payable to them after the order of Aaron which is most absurd and ridiculous to believe let us a little see how the payment of Tythes at that day quadrate with the Exaction of Tythes in this For the better clearing of which I will set down those four Texts which the Snake quotes but gives not the words because that would have done him Disservice as we shall see anon for this purpose The first Numb 18.24 But the Tythes of the Children of Israel which they offer as an heave-Offering unto the Lord I have given to the Levites to Inherit Therefore I have said unto them among the Children of Israel they shall have no Inheritance The second is Deut. 18.1 The Priests and the Levites and all the Tribe of Levi shall have no part nor Inheritance with Israel They shall eat the Offerings of the Lord made by Fire and his Inheritance The third and fourth are Levit. 27.32 33. And concerning the Tithe of the Herd or of the Flock even of whatsoever passed under the Rod the Tenth shall be Holy unto the Lord. He shall not search whether it be good or bad neither shall he change it at all then both it and the change thereof shall be Holy it shall not be redeem'd From these Texts of Scripture it appears First that the Tythes were Ceremonial in that they were not given to the Levites till they were first offered as an Heave-offering unto the Lord. Secondly The Priests and Levites who had a portion of the Tythes for their use after they had been so offered as an Heave-Offering had not that portion only for their Service in the Tabernacle c. but because Among the Children of Israel God said they shall have no Inheritance And when thus by a particular Command of God concerning them they were cut off from their portion of Land a twelfth among the Tribes it pleased God to appoint them a Tenth for that their Deprivation But then it is also further to be considered that Tythes were of two sorts 1 st those of every Year Deut. 14.23 24 25 26. of these every one that paid them was also to eat his share ver 23. Thou shalt eat before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall chuse to place his Name there the Tythe of thy Corn of thy Wine and of thine Oil c. And if by reason of distance from the Tabernacle or Temple the Person paying his Tythes cou'd not bring them in kind he was then at Liberty to turn it into Money ver 25. and bestow that Money ver 26. for whatsoever his soul lusteth after for Oxen or for Sheep or for Wine or for strong drink And thou shalt eat thereof before the Lord thy God and thou shalt rejoice thou and thine Houshold This for the Tythes of every Year Then Secondly There was those of every Third Year and they were not only given to the Levite but also to the Stranger

that Spirit blinded the Kings Princes and Rulers and set them against the Lord and against his Anointed which prov'd in the Issue their destruction This is that the Bishops said of the Puritans to the Late King this is that which brought forth the Law in those days against their Meetings to seek the Lord upon pretence of Conventicles and with this the Late King they blinded and set him against these People which became the overthrow of Him his Posterity and Followers and of that Generation and of those that joined with them And this is that Spirit that is now blinding of thee viz. Oliver Cromwell who wast the Lord's Battle-Ax and Weapon of War to the cutting down of him and those whom after this manner it blinded and set against the Lord and his People and which is now setting Thee against the Seed of God which in this fulness of the Dispensation of times he is raising up to reign for ever and ever unto which Spirit if thou continue to hearken and to follow and to be guided by thou shalt be cut off the Mouth of the Lord of Hosts hath spoken it This is part of a Letter which is in that Book and which G. Bishop did send to Oliver as it is there dated the 16th of the 5th Month 1656. By which and much more such plain Dealing in the said Letter wherein he tells him p. 17. Because thou hast hardned thy Heart and turned against him He God hath turn'd from thee his Presence Wisdom from thy Councils Spirit from thy Men of War and Success from thine Vndertakings and is Stripping of thee of thy Fence and Guard and making thee naked and bare and is coming against thee c. It appears from all this according as our Friends in their Declaration to King Charles upon his Restauration had said That the Quakers even in the Days of Oliver c. were a People that did follow after those things that made for Peace c. in that they did faithfully warn the then Powers against that Spirit of Persecution which was as they had foretold their overthrow And that they did not fight but were redeemed out of all outward fighting and through the Vnspeakable Love of the Father were brought to the end of the Wars So that it is false and malicious in the Snake to say the Quakers were Beaten and could Fight no longer when they gave that Testimony in their Declaration that they did Deny and Bear their Testimony against all Strife and Wars and Contentions c. For had they been in that Warring Nature there was space and time when that Letter of G. Bishop to Oliver Cromwell before-mentioned was writ wherein he testifies that the Quakers did witness the end of the Wars it being near four years before the Restauration of the King But tho' there was time and space yet the Quakers did never joyn with them or fall in with them nor were they concerned in places of Trust or Profit under them but when those who were in such places or in the Army did in their own particulars come to be redeem'd out of all outward Wars and to be obedient to that Convincement they laid down such their Places or Arms which is more than can be truly said of many fawning Priests and Professors And what is more the Quakers from the first even all the time of those several Changes in Government before the Restauration were great Sufferers by them because of that Truth and Plainness which they witnessed forth both to Governors and Governed And thus G. Bishop not soothingly but plainly told O. C. in his time wherein his safety and danger stood Thus he told R. Cromwell in his time wherein his safety and danger stood Thus he told the General Council of the Army wherein their safety and danger stood Thus he told the then Parliament wherein their safety and danger stood Thus he also told the Council of State wherein their safety and danger stood viz. In Establishing that equal and just Liberty and Freedom of Conscience in matters of Worship which near all of them in their turns promised and engaged to do but did it not therefore were they as he shews overthrown And when the King was Restored George Bishop did also Warn Him and his Parliament as in his piece A Book of Warnings c. p. 2 it is seen where after having recounted the Mercies of God to the King and Them he says And now what doth the Lord require of you That you take not upon you to rule over his Kingdom or to prescribe to his Dominion whose Kingdom is an Everlasting Kingdom and his Dominion that which shall never have end that of him in the Conscience Thus Reader under the different Governments his Advice was that Persecution might be taken away and in great Plainness without Soothing or Flattering of any to whom his Messages were he did it appears deliver them Ibid. p. 232. But after all this Sweetness as soon as ever the King was Restored Anno. 1660. the Quakers stoutly deny that ever they had Complemented Oliver or they had forgot it What the Snake calls Sweetness that We the Quakers did shew to Oliver we take to be our Duty as required by the Lord to shew to all whom it shall please God come to have Government That is to Advise that they Govern for God and his Truth that all Profaness Immorality and all Wickedness may be discouraged in which the Blessing both of Governors and the Governed doth consist This O. C. was frequently admonished of but he rejecting his Vows to God his Pretences to Men and the Admonition which God by his Servants did frequently send Several of our Friends in great Truth and Plainness did foretel him of his Overthrow which none of those his Soothing and Flattering Priests did dare to do The same plain Dealing our Friends did use to the other Changes in Government and also to Richard Cromwell not Complementing nor Flattering any And when W. Caton in his Truth 's Character of Professors said that the Priests and Professors did Sooth and Flatter O. Cromwell and his Son and made great Promises to him the Proof was apparent by their Addresses to him which in that Book he does briefly give What less than Flattery was it when the Priests c. of Suffolk in their Address to Richard Cromwell upon the Death of his Father told him Although our Sun is Set no Night hath ensued And what less was it in the Priests of Norfolk who did solemnly Promise and Engage Faithfully to serve and obey his most serene Highness for so they then called R. Cromwell as his Leige People in the Defence of his Person and Government with their Lives and Estates It 's true they did afterwards so soften the terms of their Allegiance that they found themselves ready to embrace another Shelter when the Gourd was withered and thus they turn'd to the Rising Side But after all if all this was

who received the Office of the Priesthood had a Command to take Tythes of the People What can be plainer Yet more if needed might be urged from vers 18 where it is said There is verily a disannulling of the Commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof What Commandment was this which was disannulled That Carnal Commandment mentioned vers 5 16. after which the Levitical Priesthood was made and maintain'd Here then that Law that Commandment by which the Levitical Priesthood took Tythes of that People is declar'd to have been chang'd and that Change explain'd by the word Disannulled If this be not one word against Tythes or any thing like it Let the Reader Judge Ibid. But on the Contrary there are plain Intimations in the Gospel of their Continuance particularly 1 Cor. 9.13 14. Intimations Oh! Oh! is it come to that must the world be Decimated by Intimations Does God's Right God's Due God's Tythes depend upon Intimations at last Must all our Kings and Parliaments from Hen. 8. till now all the Nobility Gentry and others concern'd in with-holding Impropriations from the Priests be Damn'd for Sacrilege upon Intimation only This sufficiently Intimates what sort of Fellow this Snake must be Well let us see how plain his Intimations are 1 Cor. 9.13 14. The words of the Text are Do ye not know that they which Minister about Holy Things live in the Margin feed of the things of the Temple And they which wait at the Altar are Partakers with the Altar Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which Preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel Here 's not so much as the Name of Tythes and will he call this a plain Intimation that Tythes should be continu'd So far from it that this place neither speaks of Tythes nor the Levites who took them For to the Levites were the Tythes given Numb 18.21 not to the Priests they were to have but the Hundredth Part the Tythes of the Tythes vers 26 27 28. and the Levites were so far from Ministring about the Holy Things that they were not permitted to touch them Numb 4.15 No nor to see them vers 20. on pain of Death But Aaron and his Sons the Priests were commanded to take down the Tabernacle upon any remove and to pack up and cover close all the Parts and Utensils therof vers 5 c. before the Levites might come near to take up and carry their Burdens which was the service of the Tabernacle they were appointed to But it is evident that the Apostle 1 Cor. 9.13 spake not of the Levites but the Priests them that Ministred about Holy Things them that waited at the Altar them that Liv'd Eat or Fed of the Things offer'd on the Altar and so partook with the Altar Hence this place is so far from Intimating a continuance of Tythes that if a continuance of any thing were intimated here it must be a continuace of those Offerings at the Temple and at the Altar which belonged to the Ceremonial Law which as on all occasions the Apostle shews was abrogated so he would in no wise Intimate the continuance of it But further if the Apostle had spoke of the Levites and mentioned the Name of Tythes in his comparison yet his Allusion to those Legal and Shadowy things wou'd still have as what he mentions hath served his purpose very well to convince the Corinthians that since Christ had ordained Luke 10.7 8. that they who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel as well as they who under the Law ministred about Holy Things and waited at the Altar were then to partake with the Altar And thus he and the rest of the Apostles might freely and without blame live of the Gospel while they preached the Gospel by receiving such necessaries as were freely offered them by those that received and embraced the Gospel Ibid. p. 271. But we need no new Commandment for them in the Gospel if they are not forbidden and abrogated by Christ. The contrary way of arguing is of more force viz. There needed not a positive or express Prohibition or verbal Abrogation of Tythes in the Gospel For if they are not expresly Commanded to be continu'd under the Gospel they are not of force that Law being temporary by which they were Commanded and now expired It was adapted to the Oeconomy of the Jews made to answer that Dispensation appropriated to that Levitical Tribe and Typical Priesthood restrained to the Land of Canaan no other spot of Ground under the Sun being Tythable by vertue of that Law and all this limitted to the Time of Reformation Heb. 9.10 The coming of Christ in the Flesh and offering up himself to his Father on the Cross an Attonement for Mankind So that an Express Abrogation of Tythes in the Gospel was no more necessary than an Express Repeal of an Act of Parliament which was but Temporary and would expire of course at the end of that Term for which it was appointed Ibid. They are no part of the Typical or Ceremonial Law and nothing else of the Law was abrogated by Christ. Indeed Snake this is striving against the Stream and giving the Lie to Protestant Writers both at home and abroad For the Readers satisfaction I shall mention some Dr. Fulk on Heb. 7. § 4. says The payment of Tythes as it was a Ceremonial Duty is obrogated by Christ. Dr. Willet in his Synopsis of Popery before quoted Fifth General Controversie p. 314. arguing against the Rhemists who with the Snake affirm'd that the payment of Tythes is a Natural Duty that Men owe to God in all times and to be given to his Priests in his behalf for his Honour says St. Paul saith in flat words If the Priesthood be changed of necessity also there must be a change of the Law Heb. 7.12 But the Priesthood of the Law is altered and changed ergo also the Law of the Priesthood and so consequently the Ceremonial Duty of Tythes Thomas Wilson in his Christian Dictionary on the word Tythes tho a zealous contender for them acknowledges that they were a Shadow and Figure as other Oblations were figuring Christ. Among Foreigners I shall first instance Chemnitius in Harm Evang. C. 109. He having distinguished Tythes into Political and Ecclesiastical says of the Ecclesiastical Tythes thus Porro quia ex hac Disputatione Christi cum Pharisaeis patet Christum decimarum solutionem inter Ceremoniales Leges rejecisse opponit enim iis Judicium Charitatem Dei hoc est forenses morales Leges Ceremonialis autem Lex per adventum Christi est sublata ideo non inepte quaeritur c. Moreover seeing by this Dispute of Christ with the Pharisees it appears that Christ threw off the payment of Tythes among the Ceremonial Laws for to them he opposes Judgment and the Love of God that is the Judicial and Moral Laws and the Ceremonial Law is taken away by the Coming of Christ therefore