that obey him And is called of God from the time of his Resurrestion or exaltation an high Priest after the order of Melchisedech CHAP. 10. Wherein the Priesthood of Melchisedech did differ from the Priesthood of Aaron That Melchisedech did not offer any sacrifice of bread and wine unto God when he blessed Abraham THe office of Aaron and of his Sonnes wee have described Deuteron 10. 8. At that time the Lord separated the Tribe of Levi to beare the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord to stand before the Lord to minister unto him and to blesse in his name unto this day And againe Deut. 18. 3. This shall be the Priests duty c. For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy Tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord him and his Sonnes for ever ver 5. Could Melchisedech's office be greater or his patent ampler especially for duration For sacrifice prayer and blessing are the trinall dimensions of the Priesthood howsoever taken This difficultie perhaps did occasion a foule error in the Romish Church or encourage her followers to maintaine this error brought forth it may be upon other occasions to wit that the office of Melchisedech should properly consist herein especially differ from the Priesthood of AaroÌ„ For that when he met Abraham he offered up bread wine by way of proper sacrifice unto God as a type or pledge of the unbloody sacrifice of the masse unto which the Romanists for the most part restraine the exercise of Christ's Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech 2 To omit their chymicall conceits who labour in vaine to extract some act of sacrificing out of the originall word hotsi Maldonate the most zealous and laborious pleader in this argument because Calvin had held the monkish allegorizars to the literall and gramaticall sense of Scriptures holds it no sin to put a trick of Grammar so they would admit it upon Calvin's followers upon the very text it self For whereas the Romish Interpreters who went before him admit the vulgar edition Et erat Sacerdos Dei altissimi This Critick to despite Calvin will correct Magnificat and renders it thus Et erat sacrificans Deo altissimo His reason for this innovation is because the hebrew Cohen is for it's form a participle of the present tense but surely he was better read in his Gramar then in his Lexicon although better read in that then in the Hebrew Text for although the Hebbrew Cohen be usually taken for a Priest yet to sacrifice is no part of the proper formal signification of the radicall verb Cahan That directly imports no more then ministravit or Sacerdotem egit Whence though it be most true that every Sacrificer is a CoheÌ„ is a Priest or Minister of God yet is not this truth simply convertible that is Every Cohen Priest or Minister of God is a Sacrificer specially if we speak of times before the Law was given or since it expired much lesse will it follow that every act or function which the Minister of God performs should be a sacrifice So that albeit we should give the Criticall Iesuit leave to degrade the Hebrew Cohen and turne it out of a noun in which form and habit it was taken by all his Predecessors into the nature and value of a Participle the Grammaticall sense will amount to no more then this Et erat Ministrans or Sacerdotio fungens Deo altissimo and all this Melchisedech might doe and this he verily did in blessing Abraham not in bringing forth or offering bread and wine The letter of the Text runnes thus And Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine and hee was a Priest of the most high God Suppose a man should here interrupt the Reader or relater of this History thus What if hee were a Priest of the most high God To what purpose is this clause inserted The holy Ghost in the next words clears the doubt or rather prevents the Question And he blessed Abraham In what forme or sort Blessed be Abraham of the most high God! So then Melchisedech is instiled a Priest of the most high God to shew his warrant to blesse in the name of the most high God And for this interpretation I have the warrant or confirmation from Cyril of Alexandria 3 As for his bread and wine hee offered these to Abraham and not to God as Philo Iudaeus a competent witnesse in this Controversie hath informed us For this good Author opposeth Melchisedech's hospitalitie towards Abraham unto Amalech's niggardly and uncharitable disposition towards Israel comming out of the house of affliction Amalech saith hee was excluded from the congregation of the Lord because hee met not Israel with bread and water whereas Melchisedech had met our father Abraham laden with the spoâ—â—es of his enemies with bread and wine He hath not in my opinion erred much in taking the symboles or elements of bread and wine for emblemes of that true pabulum animae which consists in contemplation of heavenly things And yet I am perswaded hee had no expresse knowledge of the true object of such contemplation to wit the body and blood of Christ or of the benefit conveyed to us from them since they were offered in sacrifice unto God by the elements of bread and wine not as mere signes but as undoubted pledges of his body and blood to be communicated to us 4 And although Suidas in his second Paragraph on the word Melchisedech will have our Saviours Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech to take beginning from the night before his passion wherein he tooke bread and wine and blessed them yet in his third Paragraph upon the same word he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Melchisedech brought forth bread and wine unto Abraham But let us suppose what the Text will not support that Melchisedech did offer up a sacrifice of bread and wine to the most high God thus much being granted wee may draw that net which the Romanist sets for others upon himselfe for our next interrogatory should be this Of what sacrifice may we by any analogie of faith imagine this supposed sacrifice of Melchisedech to be the type of the dayly reiterated sacrifice of the masse or of the one only sacrifice of the Sonne of God Surely if Melchisedech be a true type of the everlasting Priest his sacrifice must be a type of this Priest's everlasting sacrifice Now as we read not though Maldonate's reading of the former pâ—â—â—e were true that Melchisedech did offer any sacrifice besides this supposed sacrifice of bread and wine so wee must undoubtedly beleeve that the Sonne of God did offer no more sacrifices then one and that one never to be reiterated because the value of it being truly infinite the efficacy of it must needs be absolutely everlasting If otherwise wee should with the Romanists admit of a sacrifice by succession or multiplication as everlasting as this transitory
prefigured or fore-shadowed either by Zerubbabel the Prince of Iudah or by his associate Iesus the high Priest in conducting Gods people from the land of their captivity into the land of promise Yes there is not one title or attribute mentioned in either prophecy but it is fore-shadowed either joyntly both by Zerubbabel Iesus the high Priest or severally by one of them 4 As he is the Branch of David fore-prophecied by Esaiah Chap. 11. 1. where to both these prophecies of Ieremiah and Zachary have reference hee is more exquisitely prefigured by Zerubbabel then by David himselfe or any other Prince of David's Line The Branch which God had promised to raise up unto David almost an 110 yeares before Ieremiah had uttered his prophecies was to grow up out of the stemme or roote of Iesse as it is Esay 11. 1. that is he was to be a man of meaner parentage then Iesse the Father of David was a man more unlikely to become a Prince or Ruler of God's people then David was when hee kept his Father's sheepe Of David's linage many after the captivity were poore and of as meane ability as Iesse David's Father was Zerubbabel was borne unto Salathiel in captivity and Salathiel himselfe the sonne of Ieconiah a poore captive Prince but whâ—-Salathiel was the sonne of Ieconiah's body or rather his sonne by adoption I have no more to say then was said before Whether this way or that way hee were his sonne if wee consider the potency of the Chaldean Empire when he was borne or the Chaldeans generall aversnesse from the Iewes or their jealousie of the royall race it was more unlikely that any of David's line should be released from captivity or be suffered to returne from Babylon unto their native land then that Israel should be delivered from the Egyptian thraldome by Moses But the same God which had shewed his mighty power in the overthrow of Pharaoh and his powerfull host did as miraculously shew both his power and wisdome in the suddaine surprisall of Babylon and overthrowing the Babylonian Empire by Cyrus Of these two wonderfull deliverances of his people the later in the Prophet Ieremy his esteeme is the greater therefore he saith Ierem. 16. 14. 15. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that it shall no more be said the Lord liveth that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt but the Lord liveth that brought up the Children of Israel from the land of the North and from all the lands whither hee had driven them and I will bring them againe into their land that I gave unto their Fathers The like you may read Ierem. 23. 7. 8. Cyrus after his strange conquest of Babylon sets Gods people free and authorizeth Zerubbabel the next heire then left unto the Crown of Iudah to conduct them unto Ierusalem there to serve their God as he in his Lawes had prescribed But after their safe arrivall there they are molested by their malicious enemies the building of the City and Temple is after Cyrus his death for divers yeares hindred untill Zerubbabel by his favour and potency with Cyrus his successors procures the revivall of the charter which Cyrus granted and frees himselfe and God's people from further molestation by their enemies as you may read it at large in the Booke of Ezra So that part of Ieremiah's prophecy is verified of him for in his dayes and by his meanes under God Iudah was saved and Israel did dwell securely Though hee were not in name or title a Saviour yet is hee indeed the Saviour of his people from present distresse and danger And thus farre this poore revived Branch of David is a true and lively Type of that Branch of David in whom all the promises of God made unto Abraham and David were fulfilled who was to be a Saviour not in realty only but in name or title and called especially Iesus because hee was to save his people not from bodily distresse or captivity but from their sinnes And as he is in this sensea Saviour Iesus the Sonne of Iehosadech is the lively Type or shadow of him as well in office or function as in expresse name or title for hee being their high Priest and Aaron's successor did make legall attonement for their sinnes did sanctify the Temple Altar and their offerings and performed all legall righteousnesse for theâ— insigne of greater righteousnesse and salvation by that high Priest which was to come whose supreame title was the Lord our righteousnesse 5 But did either Zerubbabel or this Iesus the high Priest and his associates prefigure or fore shadow our high Priest in this royall name or title of being the Lord our righteousnesse Certaine it is that Zerubbabel did not for neither his owne name nor his Fathers nor any of his Progenitors names since Iehosaphat's dayes had any reference to this title nor import the thing signified by it in their grammaticall significations But the Father of this Iâ—shua or Iesus the high Priest was named Iehosadech which signifies as much as the righteousnesse of the Lord or the righteous Lord. 6 But here wee must consider that names are of two sorts Some names agree to the things named substantially and directly Others accidentally or in obliquâ— The former fort expresse the condition and nature of the thing named As the name of Adam which God imposed upon the first man did expresse his nature or substance to wit the red earth out of the which he was framed So the name which Adam gave unto the first woman did truly expresse the nature and condition of the Sex to wit that she was made of man that shee was of his flesh and of his bones so likewise is the name of Eveh a true expression of her nature for she was the Mother and Fonntaine of life unto all posteritie 7 Names otherwhiles though solemnely given expresse or import some circumstance or relation unto the nature or thing it selfe which they primarily and properly signifie So Gideon was called Ierub-baal not that ever he did plead for Baal but in remembrance of his fathers answer unto them which had expostulated with him for cutting downe Baal's grove 8 So Moses called the Altar which he erected Exod. 17. 14. Iehovah-Nissi the Lord my banner Not thereby intending to occasion us to think that the Altar so named was either Iehovah or his defence but only to import or signifie that in that place wherein hee built the Altar and at the time of this inscription Iehovah his God had been the defender and protectour of Israel in miraculous manner against the Amalekites So likewise when our Saviour called Simon Cephas or Petros the name imports not that he was either the rocke it selfe or Corner-stone whereon Christ's Church is founded But only that he had some speciall reference or relation unto the rock or foundation Stone which God had laid in Sion or which is all one that hee was the first which
so truly and sincerely Episcopari nolo as hee did or pray so earnestly that the charge of his Consecration might be mitigated whilst hee was in his agony But how deare soever his Consecration cost him the costs and charges of it though altogether unknown to us were recompenced by the purchase which he gained by it For as it followeth being thus consecrated he became the Author of everlasting salvation to all that obey him and their salvation was and is as pleasant to him as his sufferings whereby he was consecrated were for the present distastfull CHAP. 4. The Consecration of the Sonne of God was not finisht immediately after his Agony in the Garden nor was he then or at the time of his sufferings upon the Crosse an actuall or compleat high Priest after the Order of Melchisedech BVt was his Consecration finished immediately after hee had beene anointed with his owne blood in the Garden or assoone as his prayers and supplications which hee offered up with strong cryes and teares were heard No whatsoever else was required for his Qualification there could be no true and perfect Consecration to his Priesthood without a Sacrifice without a bloody Sacrifice This was one principall part of Aarons Consecration to his legall Priesthood and so of his Successors But here the Iew who is for the most part lesse learned then perverse and captious will in this particular shrewdly object if not thus insult over the negligence of many Christian teachers When your crucified God was convented by the high Priests and Elders when he was arraign'd before Pontius Pilate when he was sentenced to the death of the Crosse tell us plainly whether in any of these points of time mentioned he were truly a Priest or no Priest If no Priest at all what had hee to doe to offer any Sacrifice especially a bloody one For this was a service so peculiar to the legall Priests which were the sonnes of Aaron that it was sacriledge for the sonnes of David For the greatest Kings of Iudah to attempt it If you will say then he was a Priest you must acknowledge him either to have beene a Priest after the order of Melchisedech or after the order of Aaron If you say hee was a Priest after the order of Aaron you plainly contradict this Apostle whom you acknowledge to be the great Teacher of you Gentiles for he saith Chap. 7. v. 14. of this Epistle It is evident that our Lord sprang out of Iudah concerning which Tribe Moses spake nothing concerning the Priesthood And againe Chap. 8. v. 4. hee saith Hee were not a Priest if hee were earth seeing there are Priests which according to the Law offer gifts Now if he could be no Priest were he now on earth then certainly he could be no Priest after the order of Aaron nor did he offer any legall or bloody sacrifice whilst he lived as sometimes he did here on earth 2 Was he then whilst hee lived here on earth a Priest after the order of Melchisedech and by this title authorized to offer sacrifice This I presume you dare not avouch For Melchisedech was a Priest according to endlesse life his Priesthood was an immortall everlasting Priesthood Now although every man be not an high Priest yet every high Priest must be a man and a man taken from amongst ordinary men to offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne The Priesthood is an accident the humanitie or manhood is the subject or substance which supports it Dare you then say that a mortall man whilst he was such could possibly be an everlasting Priest or a Priest according to an endlesse life when he was to dye a miserable and ignominious death the very same day Durum esset hoc affirmare This indeed is a hard saying a point of Doctrine whose intimation did cause the Iews such as were in part our Saviours Disciples or very inclinable to his service to question the truth of his calling and of his sayings Iohn 12. v. 32. c. And I if I were lift up from the earth will draw all men unto me Now this he said saith S. Iohn signifying what death he should dye to wit the death of the Crosse And so his Auditors conceived his meaning and for this reason the people answered him We have heard out of the Law that the Christ abideth for ever and how sayest thou the sonne of man must be lift up Who is that son of man v. 34. This people at that time had a cleare prenotion or received opinion that their promised Messias or the Christ should be a Priest after the order of Melchisedech that is a Priest to endure for ever for the Lord had confirmed thus much by oath Psalme 110. And out of this common prenotion whether first conceived out of that place of David The Lord hath sworne and will not repent thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech or from some other Scripture the people in the fore-cited place questioned whether it were possible hee should be the Christ seeing by his owne confession he was shortly after to dye the death of the Crosse 3 These objections I confesse could hardly be answered if wee should grant what many moderne Divines out of incogitancy have taught or taken upon trust without further examination to wit that the eternall Sonne of God our Lord and Saviour was an high Priest from eternitie or an high Priest from his birth as man or from his Baptisme when hee was anointed by the holy Ghost unto his Propheticall function or whilst he was upon the Crosse But not granting this as wee have no reason to admit any branch of it the answer to the former objection is clear and easie Betwixt a Priest compleat or actually consecrated and no Priest at all datur medium participationis there is a meane or third estate or condition to wit a Priest in fieri though not in facto or a Priest inter consecrandum that is in the interims of his Consecration before hee be actually and compleatly consecrated Such a man or rather such a Priest was Aaron during the first sixe or seven dayes of his Consecration yet dare no Iew avouch that after the first or second day of his separation from common men he was no more then an ordinary man no Priest at all nor that on the seaventh day he was a Priest actually consecrated but as yet in his Consecration He was not till the eight day qualified to offer up Sacrifices unto God but had peculiar Sacrifices offered for his Consecration by Moses 4 Briefly then the Sacrifice of the Sonne of God upon the Crosse whether we consider it as of fered by himselfe or by his Father as it is sometimes said in Scripture to be offered by both was the absolute accomplishment of all legall Sacrifices or services Aaronicall And yet but an intermediate though an especiall part of his Consecration to the Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech not the ultimum
full issue or product of all three dimensions we shall be everlastingly blessed in him For the first we may not so much as beg any blessing or good thing at God's hand but for his sake Hence it is that all our prayers are conceived in this forme either expressely or implicitely propter merita Iesu Christi Secondly of those blessings which it pleaseth God to grant for his sake wee may not entreat no not expect their conveyance should be made unto us by any other person or meanes then by him and the vertue of his sufferings And for this reason it is that we usually conclude our prayers Per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum through Iesus Christ our Lord not propter Iesum Christum That is alway expressed or implyed in the body or beginning of the prayer It was the intention of the Ancients to instruct us by those two usuall clauses of our solemn prayers that whatsoever we aske for Christ's sake wee cannot otherwise obtaine then through him And though the Father be the first granter yet the Sonne immediately bestowes all blessings upon us as the places of Scripture late alleaged testify God's blessings descend to us only by him that they may draw us unto him in whom only we are blessed For that everlasting happinesse of the life to come formally consists in our union with him and cannot be manifested or imparted to us but by the participation of his blessed presence 6 Will yee have a more particular map in what manner the blessing of Abraham descends upon us by this our high Priest Then call to mind in what termes Melchisedech blessed Abraham They were these Blessed be Abraham of the most high God Possessor of heaven and earth Melchisedech if the same be Shem had by vertue of his Father Noah's blessings a manifest right unto the land of Canaan and had some part of it in possession and this right and title hee be queaths to Abraham The chiefe matter of his blessing is that Abrahams posteritie should be Kings and Priests in that land And albeit he were a Priest of the most high God yet his Kingdome was of this world and in this world though a type of the heavenly Kingdome But our Saviour's Kingdome was not of this world for since his Resurrection he hath taken possession of heaven as he is man but in the right and title of the eternall Sonne of God God the Father made all things by God the Sonne whom hee hath made Heire of all things as man which were made by him as God not as an heire in his nonage but as joynt Lord with his Father at whose right hand he is placed so that as man he hath more full and more immediate authoritie to dispose of heaven than Melchisedech had to dispose of Canaan for hee bestowed that upon Abraham by way of prayer as became a Priest of the most high God But this our high Priest who is also the most high God shall dispose of heaven to his servants by royall sentence and authoritie as King Then shall the King say unto them that sit on his right hand Venite benedicti patris mei possidete vobis paratum regnum à constitutione mundi Come ye blessed of my Father possesse yee the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundations of the world This is the accomplishment of that blessing which Melchisedech bestowed upon Abraham and the second part of his benediction must be the everlasting song of such as are blessed in Abraham's seed Blessed be the most high God who hath delivered our enemies into our hands who hath enabled us to overcome the world the Divell and the flesh And though Christ our high Priest were the Sonne of David and of Abraham as man according to the flesh yet as man hee is the first begotten from the dead and Father of the world to come Melchisedech himselfe in respect of the everlasting blessing is his Sonne and must have his portion in it at the last day For if all Nations if every one of any Nation that is truly blessed be blessed in Abraham's seed Melchisedech himselfe must be blessed in him not only by him And therefore hee is that most high God Possessor of heaven and earth in whose name Melchisedech blessed Abraham 7 But to return to our Apostles next passage He. 7. 11. c. If therefore perfection were by the Leviticall Priesthood for under it the people received the Law what further need was there that another Priest should arise after the order of Melchisedech and not be called after the order of Aaron For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessitie a change also of the Law The full discussion of this twelfth verse because it containes matter of Controversie amongst us Christians and betweene severall profest members of reformed Churches as whether Christ were a Law giver or wherein the Law which hee gave did differ from or excell the Law of Moses whether Leviticall or Morall must be referred to another Treatise The Law saith our Apostle made no thing perfect but the bringing in of a better hope did So our later English reads the Text yet proffers to us another reading in the margine which in mine opinion is more consonant to our Apostle's meaning to wit That the Law was an introduction of a better hope by which we draw neare to God And this drawing neare to God is that perfection which the Law could not effect But the principall point whereon our Apostle pitcheth forevincing the priesthood of Christ to be farre more excellent then the Leviticall Priesthood was was reserved to the last place and pathetically though briefly avouched v. 20. And in asmuch as not without an oath for those Priests to wit after the order of Aaron were made without an oath but this to wit Christ with an oath by him that said unto him The Lord sware and will not repent thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech By so much was Iesus made the surety of a better Covenant And they truly were many Priests because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death But this man because hee continueth for ever hath an unchangeable Priesthood Wherefore hee is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him seeing hee ever liveth to make intercession for them And againe v. 28. For the Law maketh men high Priests which have infirmities but the word of the oath which was since the Law maketh the Sonne who is consecrated for evermore These two last passages require a fuller discussion of a Point often touched upon in some printed Treatises and diverse Sermons A point much neglected by many good Divines and carped at by others through their ignorance in true antiquitie videlicet What the interposition of God's speciall oath doth import more then his largest promises without an oath SECT 3. Of the calling or destination of the Seede of Abraham and Sonne of
a lie unto salvation The elegancy of which word in the original is well expressed by our vulgar English an hors is but a vain thing to save a man But why alie or vanitie Because he that relies upon it too much or more then upon God may come to suddaine destruction according to the same dialect that fest or Anchor-hold unto which the Iewes in stormes of warre or calamitie did too much trust to wit Templum Domini Templum Domini were as the Prophet calls them lying words And no better are many mens perswasions of the absolute certainty of their owne salvation only because they beleeve in Christ alone and seeke unto no other Meditators or Intercessors Indeed if they beleeve in Christ as Abraham and Isaac and Ioshua did in God that is if they follow the footsteps of these men or rather the wayes of God wherein these walked with a faithfull and unfeigned heart then their Election is sure and firme in it selfe although in many cases to them uncertaine But the principall meaning of our Apostle is that the blessing promised by oath unto Abraham is immutable and everlasting in the life to come and this wee are bound to beleeve certitudine fidei by assurance of faith without doubt But whether we our selves in particular shall be undoubtedly actuall partakers of such salvation wee have no better assurance from this place then the assurance of hope and strong consolation for so it followeth this hope or as Oecolampadius would have it this consolation wee have as an anchor of the soule both firme and stedfast and which entreth into that within the vaile The implication is that this hope is not of temporarie blessings but of everlasting life through Iesus Christ our Lord now King and Priest in our nature of the coelestiall Sanctuary CHAP. 20. The former Importance of God's Oath to Abraham and the contents of it specified in the two immediately precedent Chapters more fully confirmed by the tenour of God's oath to David and to his seed described at large by the author of 98 Psalme most concludently by the Apostle Heb. 7. ALL that which hath beene observed out of the tenour of God's Oath to Abraham is implyed in the Psalmist's paraphrase upon the same Covenant renewed by speciall Oath unto David Psalme 89. That the Author of this Psalme should be David himselfe no Interpreter which I have read doth affirme besides some few and those of no great skill for interpreting Scriptures who thinke that all these Psalmes were written by David himselfe But this opinion may be clearely convinced both from the matter and forme of this Psalme besides the inscription For if we should acknowledge David to be the Author of this Psalme there will be no affinitie betwixt the matter of subject of it and the character or expression Evident it is that the house and linage of David were in great distresse and subject to grievous temptations of distrusting God's promises at the time wherein this Psalme was written And hee that will diligently peruie the sacred history from David's Election or nomination to the Kingdome of Israel untill the returne of God's people from Babylonish Captivity or the death of Zerubbabel will hardly find more periods of time then two wherein the occasion or matter of this Psalmist's complaint can have any cognation with his character or expression which is a fundamentall rule for all Intelligent Writers to follow and most exactly observed by such as wrote by divine inspiration The two periods of time wherein this Psalme can with probability be imagined to be written are either from the death of good Iosiah unto the Babylonish Captivity or as my conjecture leads me shortly after the forraging of Iudah and ransacking of Ierusalem by Sesac King of Aegypt in the dayes of Rehoboam after the departure of the tenne Tribes from Iudah The best determination of this doubt or Quaerie depends upon Chronologies or certaine discoveries of the time wherein Ethan the Ezrahite did live The Psalme it selfe as the title sheweth is a Psalme of instruction and begins with praise and thankesgiving and ends with praiers and benedictions As for the intermediate complaints or seeming expostulations with God as if hee had forgotten his Covenant made to David these I take it are rather lively representations of the murmuring and discontentments of the people in that age then true expressions of the Psalmist's owne apprehensions concerning the true tenour of God's promise unto David For this is usuall to most Psalmists in times of calamity a point which if the Spanish Iew or Rabbin mentioned by many good Authors had considered hee would not haue interdicted his Country-men or Scholars to read this Psalme 2 But to come to the explication of this Psalme it selfe or the meaning of the holy Ghost in it After many ejaculations of praiers and thankesgiving or recitations of God's mercy The Lord is our defence and the holy one of Israel is our King Then Thou spakest in vision to thy holy one and saidst I have laid helpe upon one that is mighty I have exalted one chosen from among the people I have found David my servant with my holy Oyle have I anointed him c. The text upon which he made this sublime and long paraphrase following is recorded 2. Sam. 7. 11. And as since the time that I commanded Iudges to be over my people Israel and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies Also the Lord telleth thee that he will make thee an house and when thy dayes be fulfilled and thou shalt sleepe with thy Fathers I will set up thy seede after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels and I will establish his Kingdome v. 13. He shall build an house for my name and I will establish the throne of his Kingdome for ever I will be his Father and he shall be my sonne If he commit iniquitie I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of men But my mercy shall not depart from him as I tooke it from Saul whom I put away before thee And thine house and thy Kingdome shall be established for ever before thee thy throne shall be established for ever According to all these words and according to all this vision so did Nathan speak unto David Divers passages aswell in this Text as in the fore-cited paraphrase in the Psalm upō it have been literally verified so me in David others in Salomon but exactly fulfilled according to the mysticall sence in David's seede by promise unto whose person and to no other some few speciall passages according to the literall sense doe referre The next labour is so to distinguish betwixt these severall passages as that David and his sonne Salomon may have their due without derogation to the prerogative of David's seede by promise who was to be and now is both Salomon's and David's Lord. The 12 th and 13 th verses according to
the Sonne of Iehozadeck's head was the modell of the Crowne of David which was to flourish upon Iesus the Sonne of David's head as it is Psalme 132. v. 18. But upon himselfe shall his Crowne flourish 6 Briefly the protestation which the Angell in the verses following makes to Iesus the Son of Iosedech is but a renewing or repetition of the promise which God had made unto Abraham and David concerning their seede The tenour of God's promise here renewed or repeated unto Iesus the high Priest is the same And the Angell of the Lord protested unto Ieshua saying thus saith the Lord of boasts if thou wilt walke in my wayes and if thou wilt keepe my charge then thou shalt also judge my house and shalt also keepe my Courts and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by These words containe as ample a patent for the temporall or legall Priesthood unto Iesus the Sonne of Iosedech and his posteritie as David had for continuation of the temporall Kingdome in his race or progeny both the promises and patents were conditionall But that there should arise an everlasting Priest as well as an everlasting King one in whom God's promises should not be conditionall but yea and amen that is absolute and irrefragable the Prophet Zachary addes Heare now O Ieshua the high Priest thou and thy fellowes that sit before thee for they are what are they monstrous persons saith our former English or men wondred at saith the later Viri portendentes saith the vulgar The Prophets meaning is that they are men set for types or signes of great matters to come The word in the originall is the same Ezech. 12. 11. Say I am your signe like as I have done so shall it be done unto them that is to the Princes of Ierusalem and house of Israel they shall remove and goe into captivity As Ezechiel his digging through the wall in the peoples sight and carrying forth his stuffe upon his shoulders in twilight with his face covered that hee should not see the ground was a signe or prognostication of Zedechiah's stealth or flight from the Chaldeans army which besieged him So Ieshua the high Priest and all his fellowes in all this action or solemnity specially in laying the foundation of the Altar and Temple were prognosticke signes or prefigurations of Iesus the everlasting high Priest and of the spirituall Temple the holy Catholique Church which he was to build by the ministry of the Apostles So it followeth for behold I will bring forth my servant the branch For behold the stone that I have laid before Ieshua upon one stone shall be seven eyes behold I will engrave the graving thereof saith the Lord of hoasts and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day CHAP. 22. Of the harmony betweene the Prophet Ieremy and the Prophet Zachary concerning the man whose name is the branch How his growth or springing up was prefigured by Zerubbabel the sonne of David His name and title as our high Priest fore-pictured by the name and title of Iesus the Sonne of Iosedech That he was as truly the Son of God before all time as the sonne of David in time THat this man whose name was the Branch was to build the Temple of the Lord that he was to take his investiture unto his priestly dignity by Iesus the Sonne of Iehosadech as by his proxie is apparent from the sixt Chapter of the Prophet Zachary 11. Take silver and gold and make Crownes and set them upon the head of Ieshua the Sonne of Iosedech the high Priest and speake unto him saying thus speaketh the Lord of hasts saying Behold the man whose name is the Branch and hee shall grow up out of his place hee shall build the Temple of the Lord even hee shall build the Temple of the Lord and he shall beare the glory and shall sit and rule upon his throne and he shall be a Priest upon his Throne and the counsell of peace shall be betweene them both 2 This place and the former are pregnant that the Servant of the Lord whose name was Zemah the Branch whose office was to build up the Temple of God should be a Priest and should sit upon his Throne as Priest But it cannot from either place be gathered it is not so much as intimated that hee should either be a Priest after the order of Aaron or of Melchisedech or of the seede of Aaron as Iesus or Ioshua the Sonne of Iehosedech was But as the Prophet affirmeth not that hee was to be Priest after the order of Aaron or Melchisedech so neither in plaine termes doth hee deny it true but as every Prophet of God speakes nothing but the truth so neither doth one of them speake all the truth or all that is requisite for us to believe concerning Iesus our Saviour That the man whose name was the Branch the same party of whom Zachary here speakes should not be of the seed of Aaron or a Priest after the order of Aaron is evident from the prophecy of Ieremiah Ier. 23. 5. uttered more then seventy yeares before Zachary began to prophecy Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch and a King shall raigne and prosper and shall execute judgment and justice upon the earth In his dayes Iudah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely and this is his name whereby he shall be called the Lord our righteousnesse It is plaine then out of the fore cited prophecy of Zachary that God's servant the righteous Branch was to be a Priest It is evident againe out of Ieremiah that he was to spring out of the seede of David and to raigne as King over Iudah and Israel as David had done And these two put together will directly conclude that this Branch of David was to be that sonne of David concerning whom the Lord had sworne and would not repent that hee should be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech who was both King and Priest and by interpretation the King of righteousnesse and King of peace both which titles are expressely given to this Servant of God and Branch of David the one by the Prophet Zachary the other by the Prophet Ieremiah 3 But is it intimated or fore-told by either of them that he should be as truly David's Lord as David's Sonne Yes Ieremy implies this in fuller termes then David himselfe doth Psalm 110. for David saith the Lord said unto my Lord Adonai not Iehovah whereas the Prophet Ieremy tells us that the supreame style or title of this Branch of David should be not Adonai Tzadkenu but Iehova Tzadkenu Iehovah our righteousnesse So that hee whom David in spirit calleth his Lord was to be as essentially Lord and God as he that said unto him sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy foot stoole But was he according unto this name or title
did solemnely confesse and acknowledg Christ Iesus to be as truly God as man The matter or object directly signified by these words is the only true and reall Foundation of faith as Christian of the Catholique Church it selfe Of this ranke or sort of names is the name Iehosadech as it was given unto the Father of Iesus the high Priest but this doth no way import that he was either Iehovah or a man more righteous thē other high Priests had beene and yet so called not by chance or out of vain ostentation of his parents but by divine instinct or appointment of God Or whatsoever intent his parēts might have in giving him this name God did so direct their intentiōs as he did Caiphas his speech to be a kind of prophecy of what was to come We may say of Iehosadech as the Angell said of Iesus and his fellow-Priests that hee was vir portendens his very name and office did portend or bode that Iehovah himselfe the righseous Lord should become our high Priest And in as much as the Sonne of Iehosadech was the first high Priest the first of all the sonnes of Aaron that was called Iesus that is a Saviour this likewise did portend or fore-shadow that the Saviour of God's people the high Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech should be the son not of David only but of Iebovah the righteous Lord or Lord of righteousnesse And if he were to be as truly the Sonne of Iehovah the righteous Lord as he was to be the sonne of David then questionlesse hee was to be as truely Iehovah that is as truly and essentially God as hee is truly and essentially man For the relation betwixt the Father and the Sonne is much more strict in the Divine nature then it can be amongst men 9 Amongst men it will follow that if the Father be a man the Sonne must be a man if the Father be mortall the Sonne must be mortall but it will not follow that if the Father be a righteous or potent man the Sonne likewise must be a righteous or potent man The reason is because they are divided in substance But in as much as the Sonne of God is of the same substance or essence with his Father it will directly follow not only that if the Father be God the Sonne is God but also that if the Father be Lord of righteousnesse the Sonne also must be Lord of righteousnesse Yet in as much as not Iehosadech the Father but Iesus the Sonne became legall righteousnesse or a temporall Saviour to God's people in captivity this truly fore-shadoweth this truth unto us that although God the Father be as truly the Lord of righteousnesse as God the Sonne both being of one substance yet is Iehovah become our righteousnesse and our salvation not in the person of the Father but in the person of the Son CHAP. 23. The obiection of the Iewes against the interpretation of the former Prophecy Ierem. 23. answered In what sense Iudah is truly said to be saved and Israel to dwell in safety by Iesus the Sonne of God and Sonne of David YEt here the Iew will object that this prophecy is not yet fulfilled because Iudah is not fully saved nor Israel planted in their owne land But the Apostle hath fully answered this objection if wee could as rightly apply his solution All saith he are not Israel that are called Israel Rom. 9. 6. Yet many are true Israelites indeed which are not so in name Nor is he a Iew that is one outwardly but that is one inwardly The Apostle in the same place gives us to understand that many are Iewes or of Iudah inwardly which are not of Iudah outwardly or so called by name Whosoever is inwardly or in heart that which the name of Iudah importeth he is truly of Iudah though not the seede of Iudah or of Abraham concerning the flesh Now the name of Iudah or Iew importeth as much as a confessor or true professor of Abraham's faith and every one is a true Israelite that is so qualified as Nathaniel was one in whose spirit there is no guile unto all such and only unto such the Lord imputeth no sinne and all they unto whom the Lord imputeth no sinne all such as truly confesse Christ to be the Sonne of God and promised Branch of David are saved by him whether they be the somes of Iacob or of Abraham or Gentiles according to the flesh So that in conclusion all ludah and all Israel according to the full extent of this prophecy are saved by this Iesus for all of them dwell in safety they are not become afraid of themselves but possesse their soules with patience To become Iewes or Israelites in this sense is the first degree of salvation and this degree they likewise have from Iesus through whom and in whom they are to expect the accomplishment of their salvation Christ then first saves us from our sins that are inherent in us or as the Apostle speaks hee first sets us free from the Law of sinne by the spirit of life which is in him and finally exempts us from the wages of sinne which is everlasting death And thus much is contained in that fore-cited promise Ierem. 16. and in the close and conclusion of that prophecie Ierem. 23. concerning the saving of Iudah and Israel by the branch of David whose name or title is The Lord our righteousnesse Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that they shall no more say the Lord liveth which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt but the Lord liveth which brought up and which led the seede of the house of Israel out of the North country The Hebrew phrase Meeretz zaponah according to the usuall and ordinary rate of that language signifies indeed from the North-land yet the originall of this signification or importance of these words was from a conceit which the Iews or such as had their habitation neere unto the Aequinoctiall line had That those parts of the world which were more remote from the Aequinoctiall or Southerne climes were hidden from the sun and were at least in respect of their Country lands of obscurity and darknesse The very prime and native signification of the originall words in the Prophet rendred by our English from the North land or Country is verbatim from the land of obscurity or darknesse And whatsoever the land of Chaldea whereof Babylon was the chiefe City or Metropolis was unto others it was unto the captive Iewes a country of darknesse a land of obscurity the very shadow of death And their deliverance from it was a true type or shadow of our deliverance from the region or land of darknesse it selfe The full importance of the Evangellicall mystery included in the fore-cited passage of the Prophet Ieremy according to the most proper and most exquisite literall sense is expounded unto us by our Apostle S. Paul Coloss 1. 12. 13. God the
he had not commanded them upon his Altar And seeing that although they had put off all the respect of the obedience of his sonnes yet could he not put off the affection of a loving Father towards them or suddenly cease to mourne for their untimely death whereas to have eaten the Sacrifices in the holy place with a sad countenance or heavy heare had been to pollute it So that this sad and ivofull accident made the eating of the sinne-offring in the holy place unlawfull or unexpedient to him and his sonnes which ordinarily or in case no such accident had befallen them had not only been lawfull but necessary But seeing the blood of the Bullock offered for Aaron's sinne-offering at his CoÌ„secration had not been brought into the Sanctuary and seeing no such wofull accident or legall impediment had at this time befallen Aaron and his sonnes it may justly be questioned what was the reason they did not eate the flesh of this their sinne-offring or Attonement It was a sufficient warrant unto them not to eat it because the Lord had forbidden it Exod. 29. 14. But if it be demanded what was the reason or intent of this Law or rather of this particular exception from the generall Law by which they were commanded to eate it Some make answer that Aaron and his sonnes were not as yet compleat Priests or Priests already consecrated but in their Consecration only and therefore were not comprehended under the generall Law which commanded the Priest forbidding all others to eate the flesh of the sinne-offering whose blood was not brought into the Sanctuary But this reason concludes only in probability against Aaron and his sonnes who did now attend their Consecration it no waies concludes against Moses who did consecrate them who was not only permitted but commanded by God to eate of all the Sacrifices or offrings which Aaron's sonnes or Successors might lawfully eate yet did not Moses eate any part of the Bullock offered at Aaron's Consecration for a sinne-offring or Attonement for God had expressely commanded it to be burnt without the Campe. Their answer therefore to that former demand is more pertinent who say that no high Priest whether ordinarily called or extraordinarily as Moses was for the Consecration of Aaron and his sonnes might eate of any sacrifice which was offered for a sinne-offring or Attonement for the Priests themselves although the Blood of it were not brought into the Sanctuary Of the Sinne-offrings for the people whose Blood was not brought into the Sanctuary the Priests might eate they were to eate 2. This commandement for them to eate of the peoples sinne-offring argues the sinnes of the people were to be borne or taken away by the Priest The prohibition for the Priests to eat the Sinne-offrings made for themselves argues the sinnes of the Priest could not be borne or taken away by the Priests of the Law or their sacrifices but were to expect a better sacrifice of a better high Priest The legall sacrifices in the meane time were to be offered in a place prefiguring the place wherein this better Sacrifice was to be offered a place without the gates of Ierusalem Whiles the people wandred in the wildernesse without any setled habitation or City to dwell in the Sacrifice or substance of the Sinne-offring was to be consumed with fire without the trenches or bounds wheresoever they did encampe as Souldiers doe in the open field neere unto the Arke of the Testament But after the Arke had found a setled habitation or resting place in the Temple which Salomon built the City of Ierusalem in which the Temple stood became the Campe of Israel And this and other like sodeiâ—â—ties and services which were commanded to be performed without the Campe whiles the people wandred in the wildernesse were to be performed without the gates of Ierusalem albeit the Sacrifice was to be offered in the Temple whence seeing our Saviour's Body was the offring for sinne or the Sacrifice of Attonement by which the mysteries imported by all other Sacrifices were fulfilled it was to be consumed or brought into the dust of death in Mount Calvary or Golgotha or some place without the City So that the Apostle's argument Heb. 13. drawne from the annuall Sacrifices of Attonement concludes as punctually for this Sacrifice of Aâ—â—onement or Sinne-offring at Aaron's Consecration We have an Altar whereof they have no right to eate which serve at the Tabernacle for the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary by the high Priest for sinne as also of those beasts which were offered for the Priests Sin-offring at the Consecration albeit their Blood were not brought into the Sanctuary are burnt without the Campe. Wherefore Iesus also that he might sanctifie the people with his owne Blood suffered without the gate Now this sanctification of God's people by Christ's Blood was their Consecration with him to be Kings and Priests as he was now made King and Priest that is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech and as he himselfe saith Iohn 17. 29. For their sakes I sanctifie my selfe that is I undergoe the rites of Consecration prefigured by the Law that they also may be sanctified through the truth or truly sanctified that is after a better manner then they could be sanctified or consecrated by the legall Sacrifices ceremonies or services of the Law 3 The second sort of bloody Sacrifices offered by Moses at the Consecration of Aaron and his sons were two Rammes the one for a burnt offring to the Lord for a sweet Savour and offring made by fire unto the Lord. Exod. 29. 18. The mystery hereby fore-signified at our Saviour's Confecration is expressed by the Apostle Ephes 5. 1. 2. Be yee therefore followers of God as deare Children and walke in love as Christ also hath loved us and hath given himselfe for us an offring and a Sacrifice to God for a sweete smelling savour The other Ramme was to be offered as a peace offring and is called by Moses Exod. 29. the Ramme of Aaron's Consecration ver 26. because Aaron and his sonnes were to be annointed with the Blood of it CHAP. 27. In what respects the Ramme of the Consecration and the Ramme which God did provide for a burnt offring instead of Isanck did prefigure the sacrifice of the Son of God Of other speciall rites wherein Aaron at his Consecration and in the function of his Priesthood did prefigure the Consecration and Priest hood of the Son of God NOw if we consider the speciall references of the Aaronicall Priesthood there could no fitter Sacrifice be offered for Aaron and his sonnes at their Consecration then the Sacrifice of Rammes no other Sacrifices used in the Law could be so fit an embleme or representation of our high Priest's Sacrifice at his Consecration The points whereto the Aaronicall Priesthood whether during the time of their Consecration or after Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated Priests had peculiar reference
upon the tip of the right eare of Aaron and upon the tip of the right eares of his sonnes and upon the thumbe of their right hand and upon the great toe of their right foot and sprinkle the blood c. This ceremony or service was literally and punctually fulfilled in the Consecration of our high Priest The high Priest of the Law was consecrated with forreigne blood with the blood of Rammes The high Priest of the New Testament was consecrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his owne blood and in this blood not only his hands his feet or eares were sprinkled or annointed but his whole body was annointed or bathed For though he was alwaies internally sanctified and though this his internall sanctification was most absolute and perfect from the wombe yet would the Lord have him thus visibly and externally consecrated with his owne blood that we by the same blood might be sanctified and consecrated after a better manner then Aaron was by the blood of the Ramme of Consecration The morall implyed in sprinkling of Aaron's right eare the thumbe of his right hand and the great toe of his right foot is this Our eares which are the sense of discipline and the gate by which faith entreth into our hearts must be consecrated and hallowed by the blood of our high Priest that wee may know God's will our hands and feet likewise which are the instruments of service are hallowed and sanctified by his blood that we may walke in his wayes and doe his will Finally as both our bodyes and soules have beene redeemed by his blood so both must be consecrated in it and enabled by it unto his service 7 Another ceremony or service at Aaron's Consecration was the offering up of one loaf of bread one cake of oyled bread and one wafer wherewith Aaron's and his sonnes hands were first to be filled and afterwards to be burnt upon the Altar for a burnt offering for a sweet savour unto the Lord. Exod. 29. ver 23. 25. The mystery signified by this and the other bloody sacrifice may best be gathered from that which hath afore been said concerning the circumcision of Isaack and of Abraham's seed or concerning God's demanding Isaac for a burnt offering which was then observed out of Rupertus an ancient Writer God did demand at Abraham's hands that he might thereby tye himselfe to give his own sonne unto Abraham and his seed To which may now be added the testimony of S. Chrysostome in his comments upon our Saviours words to the Woman of Samarin Da mihi bibore give mee to drink The Fountaine of life sitting besides the Fountaine calls for drink not that he was desirous to take but rather to give drink Give me to drink saith he that I may make thee drink the water of immortality I thirst after the salvation of mens soules not that I might drink but that I may give them salvation to drink I imitate my Father who said to Abraham offer me up thy Sonne thy only Sonne Isaac whom thou lovest for a burnt offering this he said not as if he had desired to accept Abraham's sonne but that he determined to give his owne Sonne for the sinnes of the world as S. Iohn saith Chap. 3. ver 16. In like manner God required the flesh and blood of Bullocks and of Rammes with unleavened bread to be offered up in sacrifice unto him at the Consecration of Aaron not that he stood in need to eate the flesh of Bulls or bread of wheat or drink the blood of Rammes but that he then purposed to consecrate for us and to give unto us his only Sonne whose flesh is meat indeed whose blood is drink indeed whose body is the bread of life which commeth downe from heaven which who so eateth shall live for ever for he that truly eateth is consecrated by it to be a King and Priest for ever unto God the Father CHAP. 28. A briefe Recapitulation of what hath been said in this parallel between the Consecration of Aaron and the Consecration of the Sonne of God the conclusion of the whole Treatise concerning it TO recapitulate what hath been said before The beginning of the everlasting Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedch is the determining of the Aaronicall Priesthood unlesse we shall say as perhaps we ought that this Priesthood with the legall rites and sacrifices did expire with the last mortall breath of him who is now immortall 2 The everlasting sacrifice whereby he is consecrated an everlasting Priest was then accomplished and the cessation of the Aaronicall Priesthood proclaimed when hee said consummatum est and commended his spirit unto God Yet is it not probable that his Consecration or the Consecration of the everlasting Sanctuary were at the same instant accomplished His sacred soule perfumed with the fresh odour and fragrancy of his sweet smelling sacrifice annointed with his most precious blood into whatsoever other place it afterwards went instantly repaired into the Holiest of Holies into Paradise it selfe This is the accomplishment of our Attonement prefigured by the high Priest's entring into the holy place with blood and the period of all sacrifices for his owne or our Consecration 3 That the vale through which the high Priest after the order of Aaron did enter into the most holy place should rend asunder at the very instant wherein the soule and spirit of this our high Priest did passe through the vale of his flesh rent and torne into his coelestiall Sanctuary was a lively embleme to all observant spectators that hee was no intruder but called by God And reason they had to observe this signe or accident in that hee had promised to one of them that were crucified with him Hedie mecum erit in Paradiso 4 The publike solemnitie of Consecration hath ever been a speciall testimony or adjunct of lawfull calling and Christ's Consecration was more solemne and publique then Aaron's was Such it was as flesh and blood could not affect such as nothing but filiall obedience to his heavenly Father could have moved this our high Priest to admit because it was to be accomplished by a lingring and a bloody death Moses at the Consecration of Aaron is commanded to gather all the congregation together unto the doore of the tabernacle Levit. 8. Ad tria voluit Dominus populum congregart Primum ut pro eo sacerdos offerret eumque expearet Secundum ad instituendum sacerdotem ut sciret populus Aaron filios ejus praefici sibi in sacerdotes mediatores de caeterâ— commendavit se illi Tertione esset inter eos aliquis qui postea sacerdotium ambiret postquam omnes sciebant Aarâ—nem à Deo sacerdotem institutum Oleaster 5 For the like reasons God would have the Consecration of his Son accomplished at the Passeover that is as a Father speakes at the Metropolis of Iewish feasts the most solemne publique and universall meeâ—ing that any one People or Nation in
the world ever had besides the concurse and confluence of strangers at the time of our Saviour's Passion The manner of whose death and the signes and wonders then exhibited made the heathen Centurion a man altogether ignorant of these sacred mysteries to confesse that this Iesus whom he had seene crucified was the Sonne of God But the time the manner and consequence of his Resurrection most directly proves as well his Priesthood as his calling to it to have been from God both more excellent then Aaron's was 6 Wee see it experienced Numb 16. 17. that notwithstanding the publique solemnitie of Aaron's Consecration by Moses there wanted not such rebellious spirits then as the world is full of now which thought themselves altogether as holy and as â—it to be high Priests as he After the earth had swallowed up the principals in this conspiracy the â—eaâ—â—â—eâ—â—e multitude though â—eâ—â—â—â—ed for a while with the fearefull disaster of their ring-leaders conspire aâ—â—esh against Moses and Aaron and had utterly perished in this rebellion had not Aaron runne into the midst of the congregation which sought his life and stood with his center as with a shield of defence betwixt them and death But seeing neither the fearefull examples shewed upon Coreh Dathan and Abiram nor Aaron's late compassion towards them when wrath was gone out from the Lord against them and the plague was kindled amongst them were able to quell their jealousies or appease their murmurings the Lord lastly made the Rodde of Levy alone inscribed with Aarons name amongst all the roddes of the Tribes of Israel to bring forth branch leafe blossome and fruit in one night and thus beautified with flowre and fruit which were not to fade in so many yeares as they had been houres inspringing to be laid up in the Arke of the testimony to stay the murmurings of the children of Israel and to be as a witnesse against them whensoever they should question Aaron's calling 7 The Tribes of Israel were never so maliciously and stubbornly bent against Moses and Aaron as the Tribe of Levi and Aaron's successors with their complices were against the sonne of David to whom the Lord destinated the Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech by solemn oath Though the earth did quake and the rocks rent in sunder though the graves did open and give up their dead more desirous to swallow up these rebellious miscreants quick then to swallow up Coreh Dathan and Abiram as doubtlesse they had done unlesse this Priest of the most high God had made an Attonement for them saying Father forgive them for they know not what they doe yet their murmurings cease not with his life their malice pursues him into his grave 8 The last and peremptory signe reserved by the wisdome of God either to stay their murmurings or to condemne them with Coreh with Dathan and Abiram unto the everlasting pit was the causing of this Rodde of â—esse this branch of David whom these cruell and mercilesse men had quite stript of flower of leafe of branch bereft of sappe and as it were scorcht and beaked in the fire of affliction to recover sappe and leafe and flower againe to bring forth the fruit which never shall â—â—de now consecrated to be the tree of life to all the Nations enthronized in the heavenly tabernacle and planted at the right hand of God untill his enemies by the rodde of his power be made his footstoole We have seene in part how fitly that testimony of the Psalmist Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee beeing understood of Christ raised from the dead is avouched by our Apostle to prove Christs calling his Consecration and advancement to the Priesthood here mentioned to have been from God and from the event answering to the Psalmist's prophecy and from that other testimony of Psalme 110. often mentioned doth S. Peter cause the murmuring of the people of Israel to cease For from the two premises Act. 2. ver 36. he thus concludes Therefore let all the house of Israell know assuredly that God hath made the same Iesus whom yee have crucified both Lord and Christ that is as much as if he had said both King and Priest by these declarations he gained three thousand soules which otherwise had perished in their murmurings 9 So then the day of his Resurrection is the day wherein the dignity of everlasting Priesthood is actually collated upon him and as he himselfe testifieth All power is given unto mee both in heaven and earth And if all power then as well the power of Priesthood as the power royall And as high Priest he gives Commission to his Disciples to teach and baptize The day of his Ascension or placing at the right hand of God is the day of his solemne enthronization and immediately upon this hee sent forth the Rodde of his strength out of Sion For by this rodde fore-told by the Psalmist Psal 110. we are to understand that power wherewith his Disciples were to be endued from above which they were to expect in Ierusalem at the feast of Pentecost The effusion of the holy spirit and emplanting the Law of the Gospell in their hearts upon that day or the day following wherein the Law of Moses was proclaimed was as a proclamation to all the world that the Priesthood was translated or changed by this manifest translation or change of the Law SICT. 5. Of the Resurraction of the Sonne of God By what Prophets it was fore-told By what Persons or legall Rites it was fore-pictured or fore-shadowed CHAP. 29 In what high esteeme S. Paul did hold the Article of our Saviour's Resurrection and Ascension c. That the want of explicite beliefe to this grand Article of the Resurrection did argue rather a dulnesse or slownesse to believe the Scriptures then any infidelity or incredulity even in such as had seene his miracles and had heard him fore-tell his death and rising againe untill the event did manifest unto them the truth of his former Doctrine and predictions WHen the Doctor of the Gentiles saith He esteemed to know nothing amongst the great Masters of knowledge save Iesus Christ and him crucified this exception no way excludes the knowledge of his Resurrection from the dead or implies that he had not the knowledge of the Article in equall esteeme with the knowledge of his Crosse How highly soever he did esteeme both mysteries it doth not argue that hee did rate the knowledge of his Ascention into heaven his session at the right hand of God or his comming thence to judge the quick and the dead one mite lower The greatest blessing which hee could either praise God for or pray unto him for whether for himselfe or for his beloved Ephesians was the knowledge as he termes it of these grand mysteries Wherefore I also after I had heard of your faith in the Lord Iesus and love unto all the Saints cease not to give thankes for you making mention of you