Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	aaron_n	bless_v	fat_a	152	3	11.5270	5	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

for Christ was faithful in all his house as Moses Hebr. 3.2 But Christ no where forbids Tythes nor serteth any maintenance instead of Tythes and therefore Tythes certainly are to coninue still by the mind of Christ even to the end of the world for would Christ here provide no settled maintenance for his Ministers who were sure to finde cold entertainment in the world For the Apostle that he did not require Tythes of the Corinthians or Galatians nor claim them as due to Christ's Ministers by Divine right nor other Apostles Peter John James or the rest there are good and sufficient grounds reasons good enough to answer this Objection 1. In those days in divers places and especially at Jerusalem there was a community of goods the Belivers sold ther Estates and laid the mony down at the Apostles feet Act. 4.32.34 and what need was there then of any claim of Tythes when all was at the dispose of the Ministers and Apostles of Christ or of the Church and Deacons and they lived of the common Treasuries what wisdom had it then been to claim Tythes 2. Euseb Ec. Hist lib. 4. cap. 25. Again then were times of persecution as you may read Act. 11.19 12 1 2. c. and this persecution against the Church continued to after times above a hundred and fifty years after hrist as Eusebius relateth Melito Bishop of Sardis in his A pology to the Emperor writeth that the godly people were grieved by new Edicts published throughout Asia and suffered persecution yea impudent Sycophants and greedy gapers after other mens goods having gotten occasion through those Proclamations openly rob and spoile day and night therefore he desires the ●mperor that he would not despise them who were greived and oppressed with that shamefull spoile Diverse persecutions were both before and after and was it then a time for the Ministers of Christ to press or claime the Tythes of poor persecuted Christians certainly no. 3. These Corinthians and Galatians and others Churches were but new Converts living amongst other Gentiles who were unbelievers and though the Apostle did claim and argue for his right of maintenance yet to avoid offence and hinde rance of the Gospels propagation in those infant days of the Church he did not use that power and right he had to take maintenance of them but charged other Churches to spare them not that he had not a right or that other Ministers had not a right but it was not then a fit time to require this right and therefore much less to claim or preach up Christs his right in Tythes 4. In a word the Apostles then were travellers up and down the world in several Countries to preach the Gospel and had no certain dwelling place as Paul himself witnesseth 1 Cor. 4.11 and what then should they have done with Tythes or to have claimed Tythes when Ministers were not setled nor was there any quiet state of the Church And these are reasons sufficient to quiet the Quakers quarrelling spirit if they were not restless in their malice against the Ministers of Christ or any moderate Anabaptist that their maintenance is due unto them by divine right Thus did the Apostle spare the Gentiles of any demand or nameing of tythes but when he writeth to the Hebrews then he names tythes Heb. 7. and declareth them to belong to Christ and so certain to Christs Ministers not from Aaron or Levi but from Christ himself who was a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec But some Quakers or Anabaptists it may be Object have found out that Objection as they pretend Heb. 7.12 The Levitical Priesthood being changed there must needs be a change of the Law Therefore tythes being under the Levitical Law and that Priesthood of Levi being changed there must needs be a change of the Law of Tythes and so Tythes must cease in the Gospel as being Levitical and Ceremonial I answer Answer It is true That the Levitical Priesthood is changed and that Covenant of Levi by Sacrifices and Ceremonies figuring Christ the Messias to come that is changed and ended all being fulfilled in Christ for that Law of Levies Priesthood in what respect it was Typicall Heb. 10.1 2 that had but a shadow of good things to come for it was not possible that the Blood of Buls and Goats could ever take away sin therefore Christ cometh and offers his own body and by that one offering once for all he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Heb. 10.14 so that these Levitical Sacrifices they are all ended by that one sacrifice of Christ But there were divers things which Levi did which were not typical or figurative ceremonies to be ended at the coming or ascention of Christ or in the time of the Gospel As first The Levites did ear and drink and wear apparel for their bodily nourishment and preservation of the life of Nature and this was not ceremonial but nature to be done by the Law of Nature and by the positive Law of God for God commanded our first parents to eat freely of the trees of the Garden Of every tree of the garden thou shalt eat freely Gen. 2.16 and this was not Levitical nor Ceremonial nor to end at the coming of Christ for Christ himself commandeth his Disciples when he sent them abroad to preach the Gospel to eat such things as were set before them Luk. 10.8 And if these actions of Levi were ended in Christ then it was unlawful for any man or woman to eat or drink or to wear apparel which is irrational and contrary to the mind of Christ Lu. 10.7 Secondly The Levites did bless the people this was another action of theirs Num. 6.22 c. And the Lord spake unto Moses saying Speak unto Aaron and his sons and say unto them on this wise shall ye bless the children of Israel And the Lord separated the Tribe of Levi to stand before the Lord and to bless in his name Deut. 10.1 And this was not ceremonial neither nor to end at Christs coming for Christ teacheth his Disciples to bless them that curse them Mat. 5.44 And the Apostles and Ministers of Christ do bless the bread and wine in the Sacrament 1 Cor. 10.16 And it was the practice of the Church and Ministers of Christ to bless or pray for a blessing on the corgregation 1 Cor. 4.16 Thirdly The Levites taught the good knowledge of God for which that good King Hezekiah spake comfortably to them 2 Chron. 30.22 And they did read in the Book of the Law Nehem. 8.8 9. and gave the sense and caused to understand the reading Nehem. 8. And these actions were not ceremonial nor to be abolished by Christ for Christ commands his Disciples that they should go and teach all Nations Mat. 28.19 20. And thus Philip did by the direction of the Spirit of God he opened the Prophet Isaiah to the Eu●uch Acts 8.30.35 And the Apostle tells us

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