Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	aaron_n	appoint_v	numb_a	103	3	9.7436	5	false

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

then other humane ordinances 2 Others due by Gods law in as much as the church whose authoritie with them is divine hath enioined their payment So generally Papists 3 A third sort thus due by Gods lawe in respect of their consecration to God either by receaued custome and consent of Churches or by donation of princes or legacie of testatours In which opinion I must needes professe my selfe to haue beene long and never to my knowledge of other til of late being to deliver my iudgment to my people J more purposely set my selfe to see what the truth was And during that mistake I thus thought that they could not without sacrilege be alienated from their general end my reasons were these 1 That J had found Salomon averring it to bee a q Pro. 20.25 curse to devoure holy things and had seene the curse exemplified on many 2. That ordinance of the Lord J held morall perpetuall r Levit. 27 18 19. Nothing separate from common vse no not of those which man had separated might be againe vnhallowed no nor redeemed 3. That saying of the Apostle much swaied with me Å¿ Gal. 3.15 If it bee but a mans testament no man abrogats it .i. no man ought to abrogate it And so much the more for that being once an auditour of that iudicious divine Mr Perkins whose memory is blessed J heard him moue the doubt whether things given to superstitious vses suppose to maintaine malmonging might be alienated And thus assoile to my remeÌ„brance That from the particular intention wherein through ignorance they erred alienation might be but froÌ„ the generall ende maintenance of Godes worship they might not be aliened Thus then vpon these grounds my conclusion is still the same though my media bee other and something more peremptory Now because it is a labour long and needlesse to discusse every of the former differences for the saying is true verum est index sui obliqui J will first propound the conclusion with the explanation 2. Proceed to confirmation And lastly annex solution of Arguments such as J haue met withall having any shew of ground from the word of God to overthrowe the conclusion The Conclusion in few words is this Tithes are the portion at least part of that portion by Gods word allotted to Ministers for their service in the gospell By Tithes vnderstande the tenth part of all the hearers increase t Pro. 3 9. particulars may be read Levit. 27.30 alibi In a word to vse the distinction of Canonists whither they be personall of industry negotiation c. or prediall as of grounds c. or mixt as of cattell the tenthes of the whole encrease not those of Cumin Anise excepted u Mat. 23.23 fal within compasse of our subiect 1 Of Tithes amongst Iews we may finde fowre sorts distinguished by their ends 1. some which for distinction sake we may call stipendary assigned to Levits for recompence of their service Numb 18.24 2 A second sort which wee may call sacrificatory Tithes for sacrifice Some cal them Decimas secuÌ„daneas some Decimas decimarum a tithe of the Levits Tithes to be given to Aaron as an heaue offring vnto the Lord. Numb 18.28 3 A third kinde you may stile Convivales banquetting or feasting tithes appointed for solemne feastes at their generall assemblies to Ierusalem Deut. 14.22 23. 4 The last sort may be tearmed Eleemosynariae Some call them decimas pauperum a tithe which for reliefe of the poore widdowes strangers c. were every thirde yeare to be set out of their goods ever and aboue the other annuall tithes Deut. 24.29 This distinction of tithes I thought good to mentioÌ„ out of the Leviticall law though this I professe not to claime our tithes by the mandate given in lawe Leviticall Now our question is only of those tithes which we called stipendary the rest being two sortes of them apparently ceremonious the third as plainly a iudicial ordinance And of those tithes stipendary this is that we affirme that by the word of God they belong for ever to Ministers of holy things and therefore in these daies to Ministers of the gospell who alone haue now to do with publike ministrations of the worship of God Our reasons are these first grounded on Heb. 7.6.8 He whose descent is not couÌ„ted from them receaved tithes of Abraham and ver 8. here men that die receiue tithes but there he receaveth them of whom it is witnessed that hee liveth Compare Gen. 14.20 The argument which this scripture affordeth hath received much disadvantage by slender collection of many thus only pressing it Tithes were paid to Priests before the Levitical law was given therefore their paiment is fouÌ„ded rather on morall then ceremoniall law To which answere is well given that by as good inference sacrificing of beasts may be proved a morality sith it also was in vse before giving of the law by Moses That we may the better see the force of the Argument here given let vs a little consider the frame and summe of the text The Apostle by occasion of the peoples dulnes having digressed from cap. 5.11 to cap. 6.20 returnes now to his purpose namely to shew the excellencie of Christs priesthood aboue that of Aaron by avouching him a Priest after th' order of Melchisedec The conclusion is this Christs priesthood is more excellent theÌ„ that of Levi or Christ is a greater Priest then any after Aarons order The reason principall lyeth thus He that is a Priest after the order of Melchisedec is a greater Priest then the Priests after Aaron But Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedec Ergo c. The minor hath first his proofe 1. from a testimony of David cap. 5.20 2. froÌ„ that absolute agreement betwixt Melchisedec Christ the partes whereof are these 1. as Melchisedec was king and Priest of the most high God so Christ 2. as Melchisedec king of righteousnes and prince of peace so Christ 3. as Melchisedec his parents kindred beginning and end of life are not recorded so Christ as man with out father as God without mother kindred beginning or end of life Therefore Christ is truely a Priest after the order of Melchisedec ver 1.2.3 The maior remaines to be proved and that hath his proofe from ver 4. to 11. the summe whereof is comprised in this principall syllogisme If Melchisedec be greater then Levi then he that is a Priest after his order as Christ is is greater theÌ„ Levi. But Melchisedec is greater then Levi. Ergo c. minor proved greater then Abraham greater then Levi. Melchisedec is greater then Abraham Ergo then Levi. minor proved he to whom Abraham paid tithes of whom he was blessed is greater then Abraham But to Melchisedec Abraham paid tithes Melchisedec blessed Abraham Ergo is greater then hee ver 4.5.6.7 A second argument proving the greatnesse of this Priest aboue those of Aarons order is laid down

What word of God or souÌ„d reason giues liberty to alien seeming superfluities of Ministers rather then of other subiects contentment with necessaries being equally required of all And Moses staies addition of more returnes or aliens nothing of what was brought by the people no not though there were an overplus But secondly grant the proposition with that exception in what case in what times may we not with that limit assume of tithes Their second exception is when alienation is necessary for preservation of the Church Resp An vse of such goods for the time may perhaps in that case bee allowed perpetuall alienation besides facts of some men nothing makes probable The shew bread was made common to David his company in extremitie but might it therefore be perpetually aliened such necessitie ceasing Their last exception when Princes haue no other meanes to remunerate subiects faithfull in common services Resp What I wonder in such case laies open Church goods to the will of Princes rather then the goods of common subiects Thus I reason and leaue them privat goods of subiects Magistrats may not alien from them for recompense of servants much lesse may the Lords portion bee transferred to such vses See Gen. 47.22 Thus then the proposition is cleere as it was propounded let vs grant it with these limits or so many of them as haue any shew of reason to support them And thus conclude The detainment or alienating of things by law consecrated to pure worship of the true God without superfluity anie longer then necessitie requires is sacrilege But tithes haue been by law consecrated to maintenance of pure worship of the true God are not superfluous and now no such necessitie of their alienation Ergo their detainment is sacrilege The fourth reason followes Whatsoever duty prescribed in the word of God not either ceremoniall or Iudiciall that is vndoubtedly of perpetuall observation But payment of tithes is a duty prescribed in the worde of God and is neither ceremoniall nor iudiciall Ergo of perpetuall observation The proposition I thinke none will doubt of sith there is no duty prescribed in the word of God which fals not vnder some member of this distribution and only Iudicials ceremonies were temporary See we therefore whether our assumption for both parts of the predicate may bee avowed And first that this is no dutie ceremonious these reasons evince 1. Ceremoniall ordinances were all shaddowes of things to come the body whereof is Christ This no shaddow of things to come for where is the body which this shadowed some who yet will haue it no ceremony but a iudiciall frame this ceremonious resemblance The number of ten is a number of perfection and by paying in this number as by a signe the offerer makes protestation of his owne imperfection of his expecting perfectioÌ„ in Christ Prettie too too Others thus they were paid in signe of thankfulnesse others in signum vniversalis Dominij Twentie such like a tolerable wit woulde devise but can they shew vs these significations or ends of payment in the Scripture even but obscurely so much as by allusion intimated J dare say no nor any other end no not of their payment to Levits but maintenance and recompense for their service 2 All ceremonies haue an analogicall resemblance of the things they signified Therefore called f Col 2.17 shaddows of things to come because that as the shaddowe carries though a darke yet some resemblance of the body whose shadow it is so ceremonies of Christ therefore tearmed also g Heb. 9.23 Gal. 4 9. similitudes of heavenly things being ordained by their very semblances to teach the rude This hath no Analogicall resemblance either of imperfection or thankfulnesse or Gods vniversall dominion For who can J say not only avow his frame but even frame it except absurdly Giue vs such an analogy of this as we are able to shew of others wee will then beleeue their payment to haue beene levitically ceremonious Of sprinklings and purifyings of Tabernacle of Arke of Propitiatory of high Priest and indeed of what not that was truly a shaddow of heavenly things we finde their analogie in the word of God For instance as h Heb. 9.7.2 high Priest amongst the Iewes alone entered into the holy of holies not without bloud so Christ into heaven c. Can those that so confidently avow tithes to haue been ceremonies thus drawe out the similitude betwixt theÌ„ and heavenly things 3 Whatsoever ordinance was before leviticall lawe not foreshadowing Christ that is no ceremonie But payment of tithes such i Heb. 14 28 Col. 2 Heb. â— 7 c. Ergo. No leviticall ceremony may be vsed after publishing of the Gospel Reclamante mundo libera voce pronuncio ceremonias Iudaeorum pernitiosas esse mortiferas christianis Hierom. epist August 11â— The school men say well Iudicialia post Christum be mortua because they bind not ceremonialia mortifera their very reviving vnlawfull and deadly But payment of tithes by consent of all except Brownists may be retained Ergo. 5 J finde not that the Lord in propheticall scriptures taxeth so much the omissioÌ„ of ceremonies or exacteth in so strict tearmes their performance as hee doth this of tithes k Mal. 3 9. Something J finde of their faultie performance something of their sticking in them with neglect of moralities and this to me is a presumptioÌ„ they were other then ceremonies Lastly J never read Christ speak so much of any Jewish ceremonie as he did of tithes l Mat. 23. these things ought you to haue done Though J confesse as much might haue beene said of ceremonies during those times All these considered may J not conclude of tithing it was no ceremonie See wee whether perhaps it were a iudiciall concerning only the nation of the Iewes and founded on equitie particular to that people This is indeed the olde tenent of Papists But 1. say some Judicials were all of duties from man to man This ordinance of holy things to be done to God Therefore not iudiciall But what trow we imagine Papists to bee the civill equitie of this ordinance particularly concerning the nation of the Jewes Forsooth saith Bellarmine out of Thomas the tribe of Leui being but the tenth or at most the twelfth or thirteenth part of the Jews tenths must be theirs that equitie may be kept and that tribe haue no greater portion then the rest Resp 1. But it is wel answered that this end of their assignement to Levi hath no mention in Scripture they are given to Levi for recompence of this service as the Lords portion primarily other end or reason of their assignation wee finde none 2. If this were the ende of their allotment to Leui surely the Lord much forgat himselfe that besides the tenthes of all mens goods would allot them share in sacrifices and vowes and 48 Citties with Suburbes of so large circuit as we read Numb 35.4.7

Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Text snippets containing the quad