Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	authority_n	church_n	law_n	1,028	5	4.5738	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11600	The ministers portion· By William Sclater. Batchelar of Diuinity and minister of the word of God at Pitmister in Somerset	Sclater, William, 1575-1626.	1612 (1612)	STC 21841; ESTC S116822	29,708	56

that the people f Ps 110.3 come willingly at the daies of assembling Therefore Magistrats may not compell by autoritie to serue the Lord as g 2. Chr. 34.31 32.33 good Iosiah did for now they beare the sword in vaine But thus J reason and so leaue them To every duty Magistrats may bind by lawe compel by punishment Yeelding maintenance to Ministers is a dutie Therefore thereto may Magistrates binde by lawes Miserum est saith the Poet alienâ vivere quadrâ if for any miserable sure most for a minister This if any thing breeds right trencher Chaplens would soon fill the Church with sweet tongued mealemouthed preachers 3 I may not leaue vtterly vntouched our peoples whether ignorant or affectionate errour that thinke of their payments to Ministers as of almes to their beadsmen forsooth we liue by them I say no more but this 1 If h 1. Cor. 9.11 we by them in carnall things they by vs in spiritual Is the barter so hard as should occasion exprobratiō 2. Not by you but by the Lords ordinance i 1. Cor. 9.14 saith the Apostle And that Lord that hath given to the people the nines hath allotted to vs audacter dicam the tenthes as ours 4 J would faine leaue this reproofe but that J see the errour hath wound it selfe into the minds of many of holy profession and practise who yet delight to haue Ministers acknowledge a debt even for receit of dues and desire to haue conscience free from all bonds more then of humane lawes in this matter of recompencing our labours Jf ought come else more then law or custome if but a cup of cold water they supererogate surely in respect of the Minister They much forget who said k Philemō 19 thou owest vnto me even thy owne selfe And of the generall thus farre Now the inquiry J take it is not impertinent here sith maintenance is due to Ministers for their worke sake what portion or quātitie that is that by Gods ordinance belongs to them And me thinkes in a dutie so generally though plainely taught the conscience of the hearers should desire a more particular direction Yee will therefore I hope giue leaue something more particularly to examin the matter And herein J hold it not amisse first to propoūd what is yeelded on all sides where is any soundnesse of iudgement 2. Then to adde some other principles as plainely taught in the Scriptures of the new Testamēt Lastly to enquire and resolue of the particular The grants on all sides are these 1. That there is a maintenance h 1. Cor. 9.4 5 ad 15. in iustice due to Ministers and their families for their worke sake 2 It is yeelded that it must be competent not only for supply of naturall necessities but for their furniture to every good work of their calling 3 That it must be m 1. Tim. 5.17 18. liberall not such as every niggardly minde will iudge convenient and competent To which grants let me adde these postulata as plainely determined in the Scriptures 1 That to the Ministers of the Gospell belongs a maintenance as large as to the Leviticall Priesthood this me thinkes excellencie of ministery n 2. Cor. 3. 1. Cor. 9. and blessings conferred thereby enforceth 2 That this maintenance must rise out of n Gal. 6.6 all and every the goods of al and every of the people instructed 3 Shall I adde another to me seeming more thē probable that is that the Lord hath as certainely provided for our maintenance vnder the Gospel as for theirs vnder the law For had the Lord lesse care of vs was there lesse need in respect of the peoples backwardnesse no. But he entrusted magistrats with that care Resp And were there not Magistrats among the Iewes 4 That the Lord in the Leviticall law made provision for vs that were to minister in the Gospell It s cleere by the Apostles twise alleaging that ordinance of o 1. Cor. 9.9 1. Tim. 5.18 not muzling the mouth of the oxe Thus farre I thinke we walke safely sith in the very steps of the holy Ghost leading vs in the newe Testament Let vs now descend toward the particular Some tumbling downe headlong rather then descending resolue of a competency indeterminate so the allowance be competent all is well Resp Then in case of this fancied competency some of the instructed though wealthy perhaps shall be exempted from the Apostles iniunction for suppose some one or two of the well disposed hearers shall out of their privat make a competent allowance the rest shall now reap our spirituall things and not sow their carnall For as the saying is rife enough in a ministers maintenance Enough is a feast Gal. 6.6 but saith the Apostle Let him .i. every him that is instructed make his instructer partaker of all his goodes 2. See conclusion sixt duly weighing it tell me whether thou find conscience satisfied with this imaginary competency For is there no certaine provision for Ministers of the Gospell but this vncertaine competency who shall iudge of it Every man mallem Cerberum metueres as the Orator speakes The Magistrat why would not the Lord leaue this to Iewish Magistrats no not to Moses a man so gratious with him and leaue it to magistrats vnder the Gospell 3. How hath he committed this to Magistrats absolutely or with limitation if with limits what are these bounds forsooth a competency Perceaue you not circling and meere vncertainties Leaue we this fancy and see whether wee may find some other more certaine particular to resolue of And surely when wee haue in vaine turmoiled our selues to avoid Iudaizing in this point of ministers maintenance we shall be forced at length to acknowledge Tenthes which some call Jewish to be the Ministers appointed portion That the truth may the better appeare J will propound the different opinions that J haue met withal in this point 1 Brownists in this question thus peremptorily resolue That Tithes are so meerely ceremonious and Leviticall that they cannot without betraying Evangelical liberty and disavowing Christs Priesthood be retained as maintenance of Ministers of the Gospell And how full soever of dotage this dreame may seeme yet this J will say for them They are madd with more reason a great deale then any others which hold them ceremonies Levitical Jf the assumption were true their conclusion woulde soundly followe by doctrine of the Apostle Gal. 4. 5. Col. 2. c. 2 Some others thinking them iudicials resolue part that they may be lawfully retained as the Ministers stipend part that they are the most convenient maintenance can be allotted vs. 3 A third sort that they are due by Gods law to Ministers of the Gospell but these in explanation of them selues diversly deriue them thence 1. some thus due by Gods law enioyning obedience to the magistrate in things lawfull and convenient These giue them no other ground in Gods word

are to bee baptised yet taught in the new Testament t Act. 2.38.39 Mar. 10.14 1. Cor. 7.14 Act 10.47 sith to whome promises kingdome covenant spirit belong to them baptisme Ergo to infants These doctrines are all taught in the newe Testament because generals principles or equivalents are there taught And so haue wee tithes prescribed in the new Testament vt supra Yea more thē so implicite as in former reasons hath already appeared It s by this occasion nowe in my minde that Tertullian hath in his treatie de spectaculis where bēding himselfe to disswade Christians from presence at such prophane and barbarous spectacles as were then in vse hee thus shapes answer to a reason of this mould Quorundam fides saith he aut simplicior aut scrupulosior ab hac abdicatione spectaculorum de scripturis autoritatem exposcit se in incertum constituit quod non significanter neque nominatim denuncietur servis Dei abstinentia eiusmodi Some mens faith saith Tertullian whether over simple or over scrupulous demaundes our authoritie from scriptures for this abandoning such sights and makes it selfe doubtful because such abstinence is not there expresly and by name inioined to the servants of God Whereto he answers planè nusquam inuenimus c. It s true saith that autor we finde not in any place that as it is apertly said thou shalt not kill c. so it s expresly defined thou shalt not goe to the circle or Theater c. but wee finde that general of David to touch this particular Blessed is hee that hath not walked in the counsell of the vngodly nor stand in the way of sinners if in no way of sinners then not in this Nam apud spectacula in via statur c. There needs no application Now this argument the same for substance some haue vrged with this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In scriptures of the newe Testament where Ministers maintenance is purposely treated of no mention is to be found of tithes And that is at least a presumption their payment is no perpetual ordinance of God For is it likely the particular would haue beene concealed Resp Perhaps and but perhaps not 1 If either state of the times had borne it or 2. necessitie required or 3. Apostles had beene willing to vrge the vttermost of right But considering first the distresse of the times was such as scarce any could call any thing his owne 2. weighing againe how fully the particular was in the old Testament determined lastly pondering how loth the Apostles were to exact right least any occasion should be given to suspect of mercenary or covetous affection in preaching it was as convenient to omit particularizing the quantitie as to remit the vse of all right as to some Churches some practised 2 But yet this J finde they call for u 1. Tim. 5.17 double honour For x 1. Cor. 9.5 ad 14. maintenance due by law of nature and nations and by ordinance of Christ and that is either tithes or else no certaine particular 3 Who will vndertake to evidence the particulars of all duties of iustice charity temperance even there where hee shall finde such duties purposely prescribed Or be so bold ne quid dicam gravius as to exclude particularities of these duties from intention of Gods spirit because the generals are only handled vpon supposed likelyhoods or presumptions truly presumptuous Leaue we therefore this argument and see whither the rest haue better colour Bellarmine endevouring to disproue the morality of this duty thus reasons Moral duties haue ever bound conscience evē before the law of Moses But the lawe of tithes was not till the times of Moses Ergo. Resp the proposition we acknowledge The minor how will he proue If hee shall reason from the scriptures silence the same may be said of adultery Idolatry periury almost of what not 2. We haue that which is equivalent to a precept the approved practise of the Saints of God yea if Lyra may be credited an implied precept given to Iacob Gen. 35.1 when he is commanded to build an altar at Bethel according to his vow made Gen. 28. Looke backe to what is said in clearing the first Argument and thereby iudge whither the precept of tithing were in those daies given or not His next reason is this Reason naturall teacheth not the payment of tenthes to Priests but only of what is sufficient to their sustentatiō Ergo not morall Resp neither doth reason direct to keeping a seaventh daie but only a separation of some solemne times to Gods worship But who would consult with reason corrupted blinde since the fall to determine of moralities Since al it reacheth vnto even where it hath some helpe frō generall grace are generalities only of morall duties His last reason Matters of vow are no moralities tithes were y Gen. 28.22 vowed by Iacob Ergo not commaunded Resp And are all matters of vow things arbitrary none moralities What thinke yee of that ver 21. vttered in some vow and as it were with the same breath of Iacob If the Lord will go with me and keepe mee in the way that I shall goe c. then shall the Lord be my God Was it a matter Arbitrary to Iacob to haue the Lord and him only to be his God being the substance of the first morall precept Yet was it vowed by Iacob as we see on like conditiō with tithes More instāces might be alleaged but quorsum Proceede wee to argumentes of our owne divines Tithes say some are originally in kings and civill Magistrates and it s their Mishpat i. ius to dispose of them to civill or religious vse For saith the Lord of Israels king Hoc erit ius regis vestri c hee shall take tithes 1. Sam. 8.15 Resp Is it possible men shoulde advisedly thus reason out of this scripture z Levit. 27.30 The Lorde had long ere this declared tithes to be his a Num. 18.24 assigned thē to Levi for his service in the tabernacle and that vnder Magistrats civill though not kings When in his wrath he giues a king to Israel revoked he his ordinance of tithing to Levi Who can think it I stand not to dispute the question whether the words describe a king or rather a tyrant But this I am sure is evident the Lorde there shewes the many mischiefes shoulde befall them as a plague for their reiecting the government by himselfe established such as should make them cry vnder the burthen of his exaction A course beseeming an exorbitant tyrant rather then a regular king Iust yea but this shal be his Mishpat i. his ius ver 11. Resp And why his ius rather then his guise His right rather then his fashion As most render and the word oft signifie See 1. Sam. 27.11 was it his ius to take from the people their fields and vineyards and best oliue yards to giue to his servants As is said ver