Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	believe_v	church_n	doctrine_n	1,773	5	6.7675	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77137	A defence and justification of ministers maintence by tythes. And of infant-baptism, humane learning, and the sword of the magistrate; which some Anabaptists falsely call four sandy pillars, and popish foundations of our ministry and churches. In which tythes are proved to be due by divine right to the ministers of the gospel. All common objections answered, and divers cases of conscience humbly proposed: with a light to clear them. / In a reply to a paper sent by some Anabaptists to Immanuel Bourne, late pastor of the church in Asheover in the county of Derby: now preacher to the congregation at Waltham in the county of Leicester. With a short answer to Anthony Peirson's great case of tythes, &c.	Bourne, Immanuel, 1590-1672.	1659 (1659)	Wing B3851; Thomason E1907_1	92,679	184

Ages but this was still a time when the Church was subject to persecution and dangers and many poor and so a necessity to live in Societies as the people of God did in those dayes a full answer you have in my Justification of Tythes to belong to Christ and his Ministers Hom. 23. ad Epist 1. a Cor. ● in cap. 16 Ambros Tom. 5. Serm. in Ascenti Domini by Divine right and yet all places were not in like condition even in those times Now Sir you proceed forward and bring in Hierom and Chrysostome who you say did press payment of Tythes and Ambrose Bishop of Millan about the year 400 after Christ pressed the payment of Tythes Anthony Peirson's case And page 5. Augustine say you in Sermon de tempore in Tom. 10. This is the just custome of the Lord that if thou dost not give the Tenth to him thou shall be called to the Tenth thy self And after Decimae ex debito requiruntur tythes are required as due debt you add Leo Severine and Gregory Mr. Bourn's answer Thus you have now alledged divers Antients who do not only declare for payment of tythes but for payment of them by Divine right or as a duty Gregory's judgement was that the tenth of all was to be given to God as many others and truly any man that rightly considers the Histories of the Church and what is written by the Antients may see clearly that howsoever in the beginning and dangerous times tythes were not pressed for weighty Reasons as I have shewed in my Defence page 44 yet so soon as ever the Church came to a settlement and they were more free from persecution tythes were preached and pressed and payed as a duty not as alms or liberal devotions as you would make men believe Anthony Peirson's case Again page 6. he affirms that from the opinions of these and other antient Fathers who took their ground as he thinks from the Law tythes were brought into the Church but not received as a general Doctrine that Tythes ought to be payed till about 800 years after Christ Mr. Bourn's answer First how know you that these antient Fathers took their ground out of the Law that Tythes ought to be pay'd as if it had been the Levitical Law only why might they not take their ground long before that Law even from that payment of Tythes by Abraham to Melchizedeck the Priest of the most high God and from Jacobs Vow and what Christ spake and his Apostles writ in the Gospel and Epistles especially that to the Hebrews chap. 7. I am sure some of the Fathers do alledge arguments from divers of these See my Book pag. 59 60 61 62 c. and so it might be from a light to the conscience that Tythes are Gods part and Christs right for maintenance of his worship and service hence might press the payment of them For what you say that the Doctrine was not received till the 800 year certain it doth not appear but the contrary for many Writers before that time did assert the payment of Tythes and that as a due yea by Divine right as I have declared in my Defence of Tythes read my Book with Doctor Slater and Doctor Tilseley his Animadversions on Mr. Seldens History and others Anthony Peirson's case In his 7. page and following he endeavours to prove That Tythes belonged to the Poor above 800 900 1000 years after Christ and that the Clergy was not to use them as their own and people had more willing mind to give them for the poor than the Priests but after in the year 1274. there was a Law that people should not give them at their pleasures but to the Church this by Pope Gregory Mr. Bourn's answer I answer that before that time there were amongst the people divers things out of order it was some reason till Ministers of the Gospel were setled people should have more liberty to pay their Tythes where they pleased but yet they were paid and due to be paid long before that time and that Law was good by whomsoever it was made That Tythes should be payed to the Church where Ministers were setled to preach the Gospel or to be pay'd to them for their labour in the Word and Doctrine which was most agreeable to the Divine Institution Peirson's Case Now page 8 9. c. Peirson brings History to witness payment of Tythes I shall not trouble the Reader saith he with a relation of Joseph of Arimathea coming into Brittain sent by Phillip the Apostle in the Reign of Arviragus as History reports he about the year 600 of Augustine the Monk who came and preached the Gospel in this Land and when they had brought a great part of the Nation to the Faith they began to preach up the old Romish Doctrine that Tythes ought to be paid c. Mr. Bourn's answer For answer I desire the Reader to observe he relates indeed the story of Joseph Arimathea coming into Brittain to preach the Gospel but he leaveth out the History of that gift of Gleab lands in those dayes at Glassenbury for the maintenance of them that preached the Gospel yet he confesseth that when the people were converted to the Faith then they pressed the payment of Tythes this saith he about 600 years after Christ and yet he saith they began to preach the old Romish Doctrine that Tythes ought to be pay'd I would ask first how old the doctrine of payment of Tythes was at Rome 600 years after Christ if it was an old doctrine within 600 years after Christ certain then it was in or near the Primitive times as indeed it was in some places long before the Pope or the universal Bishop of Rome was born for Origen speaks of the payment of Tythes who lived near the Primitive times about 200 after Christ as I have shewed in my Justification of Tythes read page 59 60. Secondly I demand why old Romish Doctrine for Hierom was not Bishop of Rome and yet he approveth of Tythes and Augustine Bishop of Hippo in Alexandria and divers in other places in those times writ of Tythes as due to be paid and due by divine Right but he would fain make Tythes Romish that he might make them odious though they were thought by the Lord the best way to maintain his servants for his worship and service and indeed are Gods right and Christs right for the maintenance of his Ministers to the end of the world Anthony Peirson's case Anthony Peirson goeth on page 9. c. As concerning Laws saith he for Tythes in the year 786. of a King of Merceland and Elswolph King of Northumberland made Decrees that those two Kingdoms should pay Tythes And Ethelwolf King of the West Saxons in the year 855. made a Law that the Tythe of all his own Land should be given to God and he tells us out of the History that at that time the Nation being under heavy pressure by

not as a free gift from him but as Gods Right and an owning of him to be Gods High Priest and Tythes Gods reserved part as I have proved at large in my History of Tythes and upon this account Jacob vowed to pay Tythes not as a will worship odious to God Col. 2.22 and spoken against by the Spirit of God in that holy Apostle Anthony Peirson's Case Again in the same Page he tells us That besides the Tythes the First-fruits also were given to the Priests but yet he would insinuate that they were but as the Owner pleased and at the devotion of the Owner for which he quoteth in the margin Deut. 18.4 and Ezek. 45.13 Mr. Bourn's Answer For answer if the Reader consult those places of Scripture he shall find Deut. 18.3 4. this shall be the Priests due from the people both for Offerings and First-fruits and if due then not at the peoples devotion as Peirson would infer because a direct quantity is not expressed if the First-fruits were a duty then not an arbitrary devotion And here I pray you consider what Doctrines we are like to have of his collection when he endeavours to draw a false Doctrine from the first Scripture he names and to lay this as a Foundation to build his opinion That Tythes and Ministers maintenance are but Devotions arbitrary to be given or not given at mens pleasure as it God had no right in them which is the drift of his History And if you read that other Text Ezek. 45.13 the direct part what shall be offered is expressed and what ground is there then of gathering a Doctrine hence of arbitrary devotion as if no command from God but at mens pleasure as he would have Tythes to be the Lord open his eyes to see his Error I pass over what he hath said little to this purpose Anthony Pierson's Case Page 3. He proceeds A view of the Doctrines Decrees and practises of Tything from the Insancy of the Christian Church to this day And in this view he tells us that when Christ was preached the Apostles and Ministers of Jesus Christ did not go about to establish the Law by which Tythes were given in the former Priesthood but preached freely and did not require any setled Maintenance but lived of the Free Offerings and Contributions of Saints Hierom. in vita Mar. Philo Judaeus for which he alledgeth Scriptures Acts 11.29 1 Cor. 16.2 and that Christians lived together in societies for which he alledgeth other testimony Mr. Bourn's answer For answer I grant this to be so in those Primitive times as Acts 4.31 c. when they had all things common then the Apostles and Ministers of Christ had their part yea when men sold their Lands and brought their money into the common Treasury of the Church they laid it down at the Apostles feet Read my Book p. 55. then was no need to desire Tythes or any setled maintenance they having no certain dwelling-places But I have answered this at full in my Defence of Tythes to which I desire the Reader to look back where he may find full satisfaction this community of Goods in those times of necessity and danger doth nothing hinder but that when better times came and Churches were setled the Duty of Tythes might be required and paid as it was in after ages as I have evidently manifested and this as a due by Divine Right to the Ministers of Christ Anthony Peirson's Case pag. 4.5 And all those humane testimonies he brings of Tertullian in Apologet cap. 39. the practise of the Church according to St. Paul's direction 1 Cor. 16.2 And Eus bius that this custome continued till the great Persecution under Maximinian and Dioclesian Eus●bius lib. 4. c. 22. as appears by divers as Origen that Lands were given to the Church c. and used in common Ministers had but their maintenance with the people not by Tythes Mr. Bourn's Answer I grant that in those times of persecution it was the best way for Ministers to live and for the Church they having many poor to maintain of the common treasury Justification of Tythes p. 55 56. but this will nothing disprove the Divine right of Tythes to be paid to Gods Ministers as it was when times of persecution were ended as I have proved at large in my Justification of Tythes Anthony Peirson's Case For that he saith page 3. They preached the Gospel freely Mr. Bourn's Answer I answer for that direction of Christ Mat. 10.7 8. Freely you have received freely give this relates to that power of working miracles of healing the Sick cleansing the Leapers raising the Dead for these freely you have received freely give But for preaching of the Gospel Christ when he sent his Apostles he giveth them no provision yea wisheth them to take none but to receive and expect their maintenance from their hands to whom they brought the Gospel and this out of Christ his part which was in their hands for we must not think that Christ would have his Labourers paid out of other mens estates but out of his own and out of that they must be payed for saith he The Labourer is worthy of his meat Mat. 10.8 9 10. and worthy of his reward Luke 10.7 c. and this to be paid out of Christs own reserved part not out of other mens goods as if Christ had said fear not provisions for the people to whom I send you to turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God they have my goods in their hand viz. the Tenth of every encrease or else the price of the redemption of it and I will rule their hearts to pay You my Labourers out of my part in their hands for your labour in my work This not as a free benevolence but as a duty due to me and to you Luke 10.7 for it is my Ordinance that those that preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel 1 Cor. 9.14 as afterward the Apostle Paul did witness so that this preaching doth nothing hinder the Divine right of Tythes as in my Defence to which I refer the Reader I have declared at large Our Friend Anthony Peirson brings in divers more humane testimonies to the same purpose to prove as he would have it no right of Tythes nor setled maintenance to be given as a due for the Ministers of the Gospel but to live of the benevolence and charity of the peole together with the poor Anthony Peirsons case For this he brings Origen Homily upon Gen. and Urban Bishop of Rome Anno about 227 after Christ Cyprian Bishop of Carthage Prosper and others about 250 years after Christ in which times it seemeth that Lands were given to the Church for maintenance of poor Saints as well as the Ministers and Ministers were thus maintained not by Tythes Mr. Bourn's answer If I grant this as I may yet this hinders not that Tythes were Gods right in all

the Danes Bernredus King of Mercia and Edmund King of Eastangles being present he called a Counsel and they to remove the judgements then over them granted the Tythe of all their Land to God and his servants and divers other Princes after made Laws for the payment of Tythes thus Anthony Peirson Mr. Bourn's answer To which I answer that even this making Laws for Tythes and that when Judgements of God were upon the Land this certainly doth witness evidently that they were perswaded in their consciences that Tythes were due to God and his servants and the detaining of them was a sin and therefore they made Decrees and Laws to pay them to God as due to him and his servants by divine right for had they not believed that the payment of Tythes had been well pleasing to God they would never in that time have made Laws that Tythes should be pay'd to God for his servants Anthony Peirson's case Now that the Reader may understand saith he the ground that some men pay'd Tythes I have in the margin declared the grant of King Stephen pro salute animae meae c. For the health of my soul c. I Stephen King of England do grant Tythes c. Mr. Bourn's answer I answer still though there was some errour in king Stephen yet this doth witnesse that there was a Conscience in him perswaded that Tythes were Gods due and therefore he confirms Tythes as other Princes upon the same ground had done before him Peirson's Case In the tenth page Wickl●ffe saith he did make a complaint to the Parliament which he sets down in Wickliffes words Ah Lord God that people should be constrained to find a worldly Priest unable both in life and cunning in pomp and pride covetise and envy drunkennesse gluttony and lechery in symony and heresie with fat horse and jolley with gay saddles and bridles c. when within few years they pay'd Tythes and Offerings at their own wills to the worship of God and fairness of the holy Church c. Mr. Bourn's answer Let the Reader observe Wickliff doth not complain that Tythes were paid but to such prophane wicked men still this doth argue a due of Tythes to be paid and that for Gods worship whatsoever Anthony saith to the contrary Anthony Peirson's case Anthony Peirson proceeds to add to Wickliff VValter Boute and VVilliam Thorpe and others whose arguments saith he are at large in Fox his Acts and Monuments they did in their dayes bear testimony against Tythes for which some of them suffered in flames as he thinks this page 14. Mr. Bourn's answer To this I desire the Reader if he can to read the History in the Book of Martyrs page 669 670 c. and you cannot find that they or any other were burned or suffered flames because they spake against Tythes for there were other Articles which were more fundamental for which they suffered death had there been nothing else but Tythes no doubt they would not have laid down their lives against Tythes as Anthony Peirson would make men believe Again particular mens opinions do not determine the right which God hath in the world and the encrease of the earth for the maintenance of his worship and service the Scripture-proof is sufficient to witness perpetuity of Tythes Anthony would handle the Question whether Tythes be due or not Anthony Peirson's case But Peirson alledgeth the Laws for Tythes page 15 16 17. c. some made by the Pope and Papal decrees and the opinion of Schools Popes exemption c. as if Tythes had not been Gods part before Mr. Bourn's answer I answer if tythes be due to the Ministers of the Gospel by divine Right as I have proved these several claims of several men do not infringe nor can these Laws or Cannons of Popes hinder Christ or his Ministers from challenging tythes as Gods reserved part for his worship and service I may say the same for the Laws of King Henry the Eight and since Edward the 6. Queen Elizabeth thus we bless God for these good Laws and confirmations and settlement of the paiment of tythes to the Ministers of the Gospel by so many Honourable Parliaments for whom we pray that God will guide them still in his waies for the maintenance of his worship and service and for the good of the Common-wealth yet this will not therefore conclude against the Divine right of tythes good Parliaments and godly men have been and are more willing to pay and establish the paiment of tythes because they are perswaded a godly Ministry ought to be maintained and countenanced and this way of tythes is a way which God himself hath prescribed of old and the Kingdoms that have received the Gospel have approved and practised in several ages of the world this still confirms the divine right of tythes I let pass his seeming Answers to Objections as to Abrahams paiment and Melchizedecks receiving of tythes before Levies Priesthood page 17 18 20 c. and the rest I have given answer to that in my Justification of Ministers maintenance by tythes which may satisfie any good man that is not prejudiced against the Ministers of Christ or hath not some self-end in his not being satisfied Anthony Peirson's Case But Anthony Peirson cryeth out page 25. VVhat a shame it is that a man should be compelled to set out the tythes of his own Goods c. Mr. Bourn's answer I answer though the goods be his own the Corn Hay c. yet the tenth is not his own nor ever was neither theirs or their Fore-fathers never bought nor sold with the Land but are Gods reserved part as we have proved to the full and they are by right from Gods Law to be tythed and by the good Laws of the Nation to which Ministers may lawfully appeal for recovery of their just Rights Paul did appeal to Caesar for his just defence Acts 25.1 Anthony Peirson's case But Anthony Peirson objects if any claim tythes by my Ancestors gift may I not ask him to whom and for what my Ancestors gave them all those tythes since Augustine the Monk were given to Popish Priests for superstitious uses or causes Popish Mr. Bourn's Answer I answer there were no tythes given them as if those that gave them had any right of their own in them originally they did not give them to God but restore them to God again when they had been stollen and unjustly detained from God and abused that continuing to be pay'd they might be for maintenance to Christs Ministers in times of Reformation and this no more than what duty men owe to God witness our Saviour Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars and to God the things that are Gods Mat. 22.21 for his other Objections page 14. c. I have answered see my Book Anthony Pierson's Case And for that Anthony Peirson alledgeth out of learned Mr. Shepheard page 28. that tythes was never claimed in respect of any