impared Matrimonie might be better spared And seeing Lords Lairds haue measured Leuies maintenance so as will scarse proue meate to his owne mouth the lesse his burthen were the greater were his libertie in his calling But the difference betweene the Pope and vs is that Nature conformed to Gods Law leadeth vs Mans Law abridging Gods enforceth them If we enacted affirmatiuely that all Ministers must marry as the Pope doth his Negatiue That none shal marry I think it were aeque peccatuÌ„ vtrinque Leui was bound to marry for his only loines could breed a Legal Ministerie but now Iew and Gentil are a like sib to the Gospell the onely spirit begetteth a Minister Secondly I confesse That there is no greater Sacrilege § IV then when Leui himselfe playeth the Limmer Leui Sacrilegious is worst of all that is when a Bishop or a Minister inhaunceth all Bishopricks Abbacies Priories whatsoeuer is deuouted to Leuies Inheritance appropriating things due to the seed of their calling to the seed of their carkas to their onely sonnes what is due to their successors If our Church haue any such the Lord turne himselfe all in Eye to find them out and all in fire to purge them out Achans Achans But let vs heare Bellarmine sound his bels This Law § V of Tithes cannot bee Morall Bellarmines belles against Tithes because it did not oblige euer from the beginning Ans Obliging from the beginning is no sure note of things Morall and Perpetuall for then the Iewish indiuidual Sabbath must haue beene Moral for it was at the very beginning but continued not till the end Againe Incest did not at the beginning so strictly oblige as now shall we therefore hold it for no Morall precept or alterable now Morall then is whatsoeuer beginning at any time before Christ remaineth also after Christ Otherwise the Decalogue shall not be Morall Rom. 7.7 and if we flee to the Law of Nature we haue proued Tithes also by the Law of Nature Another bell of Bellarmines As the Law said Leui must haue all the Tithes in Israel So said it Leui must haue no Inheritance in Israel And so the negatiue must be Morall as well as the Affirmatiue but wee see many Ministers borne to Inheritance and purchasing Inheritance neither due nor descending to the Ministerie Ergo. This is a two edged sword one against the Pope whose chaire maketh him as great a Prince as any in Israel Let Baal plead for himselfe Iudg. 6.32 Another edge against our Ministerie who though they bring no other Inheritance to the Ministerie then the Gospel giueth yet they prouide for their children which Leuie did not I answere first for the children Leui did not prouide for them because hee needed not for God had prouided alreadie sufficiently for him and all his How Leui may haue Inheritance In generall I answere If this Leuiticall Law had bin our first ground for Tithes as it is but a branch of that generall whereby both they and we claime Tithes then Bellarmine had had some colour of his coniunction of the Negatiue and Affirmatiue as of one nature And yet by his leaue That Negatiue was peculiar to that onely Tribe in the diuision of that Land but the Affirmatiue of Tithes flowing from our first Patterne and Patron Melchisedec was common to all Nations as was his Priest-hood For no Nation saue this was enioyned to diuide themselues in twelue or thirteene distinct Tribes and so to diuide the Land among them and kept themselues still distinguished one from another and no people saue this had one onely Tribe reserued wholly and onely to the Ministery Therefore the Affirmatiue must bee Morall The Negatiue Temporall I confesse the Equitie of this Negatiue teacheth clearly § VI That the Sacred and Ciuill calling the Word Sacred and ciuil callings distinct and the World Priest and Prince should euer remaine distinct which two the Pope confoundeth and all such as doe ioyne sacred and secular publike callings in one person Yea I say further though a man bee borne to secular Lordships and Offices and thereafter called to the Ministerie yet must hee liue as hauing no inheritance that is he must abandon all that publike and ciuill calling in his owne person as Negotium huius seculi discharging that by others and so deriue it to his lawfull posterity of his flesh himself standing fast by Christs plough he must not plow with the Word and harrow with the World The Law then is not the patent of our possession § VII Melchisedec is our Patterne Melchisedec is our Patrone Melchisedec gaue our Patent Melchisedec tooke our possession The law as is said serued the owne time It coupled Melchisedec to Christ Great was the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell both touching Calling and Maintenance The Law tyed all and onely Leui to the Calling and so were his children both successors to his Office and heires of his Tithes In the Gospel the Spirit onely directeth all In the Law onely Israel Gods people onely Leui Gods Priest and as they had an externall calling so he gaue them a carnal Maintenance bound to their blood for the Priest-hood went by pedegree Neh. 7.64 But the Gospel touching descent personal in all circumstances is free calling after the manner of Melchisedec Internally and so giueth the maintenance to the Sent not to the Discent No mans seede astricted none debarred Iew and Gentile The patrimony and parentage meete neuer vnder Melchisedec and therefore Leuies Lawes are for Leuies selfe onely For seeing our flesh hath no part with Leui it were hard to debar vs that ordinary natural care which God alloweth all parents ouer their children The moderation heere must be as is said Ne implicent se negotijs huius seculi 2. Tim. 2.4 not to hunt with Esau forgetting their calling Before both Law and Melchisedec the first borne had both the best portion and were also Priests by practise then if a man now borne to secular possessions hauing both wife children which both hath bin and may be vnder the Gospel but neuer could bee vnder the Law be called to the Ministerie must this man either renounce his meanes or his Ministerie May not Leuies Lands and keepe Leuies cattell This were a beggerly rudiment indeed A man then may enioy his meanes and the Church censure his moderation § VIII The Moderatours in all such cases must bee onely Church-men who must giue to euery man his portion according to his neede Num. 26. â—4 33.54 2. Chron. 31. Neh. 13.13 So did God in the diuision of Canaan giue that Tribe most which needed most So were Tithes by Leui taken and by Leui distributed according to their courses To command the people to pay Tithes was Opus Regum but to diuide them Vix Regium Equitie then not Equalitie must leade the ballance for many circumstances may make one of the same calling more or lesse chargeable then another The
of Salem that is King of Peace Without Father without Mother without kindred and hath neither beginning of his dayes neither end of life but is likened to the Sonne of God and continueth a Priest for euer Now consider how great this man was vnto whom euen the Patriarch Abraham gaue the Tithe of the spoiles For verily they which are the children of Leui which receiue the office of Priest-hood haue a commandement to take according to the Law Tithes of the people that is of their brethren though they came out of the loynes of Abraham But he whose kindred is not counted among them receiued Tithes of Abraham and blessed him that had the promises And without all contradiction The lesse is blessed of the greater And heere men that dye receiue Tithes but there hee of whom it is witnessed That he liueth And to say as the thing is Leui also which receiueth Tithes payed Tithes in Abraham For he was yet in the Loynes of his Father when Melchisedec met him § II Now because this is our last re-encounter in this conflict Paul in the speciall of Tithes the last passage of all Scripture touching Tithes yea our A and â— reuiuing as by a circular course our neuer dying Melchis in our eternal Verity Christ wherein almost each word may goe for an argument we must therefore pierce a little more deeply in it by helpe of the same Spirit that proposeth it vnto vs and that so briefely as may be First then of his End next of his forme of arguing in this Chapter The chiefe End of this Epistle being to proue Christ our al-sufficient Sauiour King Prophet and Priest figured by the Law whose Ceremonies must therfore cease he handleth in this Chapter his Priest-hood only His course in arguing goeth from the Types to their Verities in a most perfect comparison both in simili and dissâ—mili The Types are two-fold the one moral perpetuall Melchisedec The other ceremonial and temporall Leui. Their natures are either simple in themselues or in Relation to their Verities Their Simple nature is that the Morall Type is noted heere with no Ceremoniall action for no such thing had he in him and the Ceremoniall Type with nothing Morall as he is compared heere to Christ in simili For though he also Tithed a Morall action yet it holdeth heere but in dissimili Their Relatiue nature with their Verities is of two § III considerations one from the matter of their actions Types how to be matched with their Verities another from the manner or their Orders In matter they hold both thus Whatsoeuer the Types did as Types the Verity must doe or answere being rightly matched as Aaron sacrificed Ergo so must Christ Aaron sacrificed with blood Ergo so must Christ But not Aaron sacrificed Bullocks Ergo so must Christ Our Golden rule in this is to goe no further then Scripture clearely leadeth vs and not from silence of the Apostles or priuatiue speeches to impose a positiue sacrifice of the Masse vpon Christ In manner or Order they hold not so Aarons and Melchisedecs Orders for whatsoeuer Christ did answering to Aaron yet that same did Christ after Melchisedecs Manner and Order not Aarons So that ONCE recorded only of Melchisedecs actions signifieth in Christ EVER and OFTEN to bee done and that OFTEN of Aarons actions signifieth in Christ ONCE onely yet that same ONCE ALL-sufficient in Melchisedecs Order For Perfection and Imperfection Perpetuitie and perishing are the Essentiall differences of their Orders So Christ in Melchisedecs Order perfected both Orders an heauenly difference and worthy to bee obserued Hebr. 7.8 9 10. chap. being fully cleared by the Apostle opposing that two thousand yeeres yeerely offering of Aaron to that One and Al-sufficient of CHRISTS And that ONCE blessing of Melchisedec of Abraham to that Euer blessing of CHRIST of Abraham and his posteritie Our conclusions then go thus through this Epistle from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Melchisedec to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ and from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Aaron to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ for these are the Apostles owne notes Againe hundrethes of Aarons with thousands of his associates thousands of yeeres and millions of redoubled actions binde but only Christ and Christ onely once they binde not the Ministery of the Gospell belonging to Christs Priest-hood But Melchisedecs one onely blessing designing his Priest-hood bindeth Christ euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all his Ministery euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 May we not hereupon inferre then that if Melchisedecs seruice binde our Ministery his maintenance must also be due to them We see then that Vnity or Pluralitie is not euer requisite to passe alike betweene Types and Verities either in Person or action for One as is said may argue thousands and thousands but One otherwise we shal roue to Rome-ward § IV Of these grounds then will it follow that whatsoeuer the Apostle vseth as a Medium to draw on any conclusion from these Types to their Verities it must bee euen as the Types either a Morall or a Ceremoniall thing and the conclusion must follow the nature of the Medium for Aarons sacrifice being Ceremoniall cannot bind a Morall Conclusion on Christ or his Ministery and consequently Tithing being vsed here as a Medium of a Morall and perpetuall Conclusion must it selfe be also Moral and perpetuall as by a true Analysis of our Apostles purpose in the texts cited shall plainly appeare CHAP. V. This Analysis proueth Christs Priest-hood more excellent then Leuies His proofes are from the prerogatiue of Person Blessing and Tithing THe Apostle will proue in those first eleuen verses § I Melchisedecs Order of Priest-hood whereof Christ was the onely High Priest and perfection to be farre aboue and better then the Order of Aaron and Leui and so in it selfe onely al-sufficient He setteth downe first his Priest-hood till the fourth verse then the Collation His Priesthood in two points Function and Order Melchisedecs endlesse Priesthood His Function vers 1. He was a Priest and blessed Abraham He was also accepted and acknowledged as a Priest vers 2. Because Abraham gaue him Tithes of all These two points are the summe and perfection of peaceably setled Priest-hood For Blessing after this sort heere being Real and exhibitiue is the End and perfection of all Priest-hood and Priestly Office for that Legall forme of blessing vnder Leui Num. 6.23 is but as a prayer for Blessing as we yet vse to this day and had no Ceremonie it And againe to giue Tithes as did Abraham heere is the most proper testification of our due obedience to Christs Ministers the very fruits of our faith And this for his Function Next vers 3. commeth his Order Dignitie and Excellency § II thereof Without Father Mother Kindred Beginning Ending like the Sonne of God Remaineth a Priest for euer Those strange notes must be applied and vnderstood as well
changed both Priesthood and Law not from what it was at first in that Typicall action betweene Melchisedec and Abraham but from what it was vnder the Law the other he renued and reuiued The Law then followeth the Priest-hood and therefore the Iudicials are no Iudges of things Sacerdotal and Sacred Such Priest-hood then such Law A Temporall and Ceremoniall Priest-hood Temporall and Ceremoniall Lawes pro rata such was the Priest-hood and Law Leuiticall in many things meerely Ceremoniall and so gone for euer in all things Temporall and so in some things reuiued renued and restored in that first perpetuall and Euangelicall Priest-hood of Melchisedec Aeterna aeternis aptanda is a receiued Maxime Ceremoniall then and Iudiciall are gone There rests but Morall and so if the enumeration of the three Lawes be sufficient and the remotion of the two true it followeth Tithes must be Morall But to Morallize yet a little more with them What shall this Morall be some will haue it all one with Naturall that Character in our hearts as if the Decalogue were but a second edition of this Morall or Naturall Law We may safely yet we neede not yeeld to all this For take him in his true Etymon and Morall will be but whatsoeuer concerneth Manners Now euery particular point of good Manners hath not a perfect Character printed in our fallen hearts Else what say we to Polygamie so long of olde tollerated so much yet and in so many parts held for no sinne What say wee to Pauls Concupiscence which he sayes he had not knowne but by the Law Rom. 7.7 Then Morall and Naturall are not wholly one And was it not a very Morall and Mannerly duetie from Abraham to Christ to pay Tithes for the maintenance of Gods Ministerie How then it came to be not Morall or vnmannerly with Christ let Schoole-men Canonists Ciuilians Common-Lawyers Et quot quot Sacri sacra fame laborant giue good reason for it and I am satisfied Morall then in that tripartite diuision of Lawes is much better ascribed to whatsoeuer thing is brought vnder a perpetuall Law of God neuer after to be abrogated although the perfect Character of it be not imprinted in our corrupt Nature Let vs say then of Tithes We had not knowne them but by the Law as Paul said of Concupiscence yet let them haue the like continuance as that of Concupiscence else giue vs a Legall limit of the Law of Tithes from Scripture But if Law should faile what say you to Melchisedecs Priest-hood and Abrahams practise Dauids Prophecie and Pauls application all these were of Grace and the Promises not of the Law Thus farre for Morall Now let vs consider of this Character by Nature in our hearts they talke so much of It is Naturall say they that the labourer haue his wages the Ministerie a Maintenance but the quota is not of Nature but Positiue Law Ergo An eleuenth ninth or lesse or more part may be assigned as well as a Tenth I answere It is most true that Nature is most liuely instructed with the Generals of all things and the more shee draweth ad Indiuidua the more erronious shee proueth And touching this point of Commutatiue Iustice it is so Naturall that the very beasts yea sauage beasts haue acknowledged it by true Retribution But is it not also a Character of our Nature to draw all Wages to their quota or is there any doing in Nature till this be done Then where Nature so bendeth and cannot binde of it selfe whatsoeuer may or hath power to settle Nature in these particulers must be for euer the onely stay of Nature and Nature neuer trusted to it selfe afterwards more then at first To the point then All Wages are due by a Wager to a Waged Wagers and Waged heere are either God with his Creatures or his Creatures among themselues Creatures in this case haue no power ouer the quota but ex mutuo pacto and so Nature can neuer define it for all and euer but must vary after all Circumstances But betweene God and his Creatures as our question now standeth God onely hath power of all Who shall serue How they shall serue For what they shall serue The quota is first Gods Leuit. 27. who dare refuse it Not Abraham not Israel not Abrahams seed Then God giueth this quota to his Ministerie Melchisedec Leui who dare except These be the true Positiue Lawes enlightning and rectifying our darke and crooked Nature to which we must euer either cleaue or shew where our Nature hath preuailed against them and how wee haue brought the Creator vnder mutuum pactum with his Creatures No he Wageth whom he will for his Wine-yard He giueth the Penny the quota for his wages he that came first to work excepted but proudly and idly against him that came last A penny for all a Tenth for all It is not at our option Though France Spaine Italy Germany the whole world make any other Positiue Lawes they make but so many Lawlesse Positions Such Histories cast but humane mists ouer Diuine Mysteries if we trust too much to them Againe although by Order of Nature as Schooles speake the Generall of Wages goeth before the quota yet in Scripture Method and point of Time there you shall finde the very quota as soone if not sooner then Maintenance in generall Our first is still that of Abraham Tithe of all heere is the onely quota Our second is Iacobs Vow Tithe of all againe the very quota Our third is the succeeding Lawes all the Tithe of the Land is the Lords Leuit. 27.30 Againe I haue giuen Leui all the Tenth in Israel for his Inheritance Is there any thing heere but the quota first the quota and still the quota But this quota say those Clerkes as Selden relates it being but a iudiciall Law M. Seld. ib. pag. 158. proceedeth now in the Gospell by Ecclesiastique Doctrine and only per vim exemplarem or by imitation of the Iewish state ordered by the Almightie and not per vim obligatiuam or any continuing force of it vnder the Gospell And that the Church was not bound to this part but freely might as well haue ordained the payment of a Ninth or Eleuenth according to various opportunitie First we haue said and I hope proued already That the Law of Tithes was no Iudiciall Law Secondly thoâ—e Diuines doe vs great wrong that take no notice of Tithes but as they goe out by that Law peculiar to the Iewish state excluding both that most excellent perpetua l and Euangelicall Type of Tithing in Melchisedec and Abraham reuiued and confirmed by Paul now to the Gospell and also that euer-binding Verbe of Iacob for Tithes Of All both which were the grounds of the Law but braunches of no written Law if not of Nature Moral diuine instinct and Tradition from a Principio Our Vis Exemplaris then should be deriued from our owne peculiar Examples A Priest-hood and Tithing before that
in very Offerings and yet import no Ceremonie For although the Tabernacle once built was a most Ceremoniall Type yet the peoples offering according as they had man and woman gold or siluer silke or linnen as materials to build it withall heere was no ceremoniall offering perfected and abolished by Christ For why may not euery Christian Moyses for building houses to Gods worship command their people Lift vp or offer of their substance to that vse Their Ceremoniall signification floweth neuer from § II the nature and proprietie of the words but because the whole circumstances of the Text shew the matter to be Ceremoniall For example Exod 29.23 c. both words are mixed for the lifting vp and shaking to and fro Leuit. 7.34 of the right shoulder and the breast of the Peace-offering Heere concurre a Priest an Altar an Offering or Sacrifice all which were meerely and onely Leuiticall Ceremonies yea Shaking and Heauing haue there their owne peculiar signification in Christ as all Diuines acknowledge But what if these words doe not import this Leuiticall Ceremonie Num. 8.5 c euen in Leuiticall and Ceremoniall Offerings The Leuites were offered to the Lord in place of the first borne by purification expiation shauing washing sacrificing at the doore of the Tabernacle by the hand of the Priest and so the Leuites are in the translations called a Shake-offering vnto the Lord Heere are all things most Ceremoniall saue only Shaking For neither reade we nor is it probable that so many thousand men could bee really shaken to and fro ad quatuor plagas mundi as was done with the right shoulder and brest of the Ramme aforesaid And if any man will draw Analogie from that Ceremoniall shaking to the shaking and dispersing of the Leuites thorow the foure corners of the Kingdome then as the word is so but Metaphoricall the matter is also Morall for Leuies successors vnder the Gospell are so scattered and shaken § III Of all these we gather a two-fold offering a Ceremoniall Morall offerings and a Morall The Ceremoniall peculiar to the Leuitical Law and performed euer by a Leuitical Priest full of rites as Altar Fire Offering Heauing Shaking or some such signifying Ceremonie as is said The Morall offering also two fold either to God onely and immediately or by mediation Only to God we offer out Prayers and praises Hos 14.2 Heb. 13.15 The calues or fruits of our lips By Mediation we offer to others either for Gods sake or for Gods seruice Act. 10.4 For his sake Thy almes is come vp into a remembrance before God Philip. 4 18. Act. 24.17 A sacrifice pleasant and acceptable to God Almes and offerings To others for Gods seruice euen those Tithes Gods Inheritance for all his officers offered long before that Ceremoniall Law continued so by that Law and why not also after that Law No carnall Priest Place or rite heere for Leui did not offer Tithes heere to God in name of Israel as was the nature of Ceremoniall offerings but receiued Tithes in name of God as Inheritance from Israel All Ceremoniall offerings must bee done at the onely doore of the Tabernacle But Israel offred these Tithes in all the Cities of their trauels as we haue proued All Ceremoniall offerings were due to the Onely Priests Num. 18.8 c. but Tithes are also due and as some thinke onely to the inferiour Leuites Offering then of Tithes heere is no other then Abrahams giuing to Melchisedec and Iaacobs vowing to giue Tithes They are called an offering because they should be freely offered not craued as the custome is to this day euen where Seculars are Tithers who are called vnto cryed vpon yet will scarcely take them hauing a resolution as they robbe the Lord so to ruine the labourer Thus we see Offering of it owne nature How Tithes are to be offered is a word for Gods worship in all ages To offer Tithes then is to giue them in such forme as God requireth in all gifts viz. Speedily as Exod. 22.29 With gladnesse Ecclesiastic 35.9 Not grudgingly or of necessitie for God loueth a cheerefull giuer 2. Cor. 9.7 Without murmuring Deut. 26.14 And finally In libertie of the spirit and liberalitie of the heart as was Abrahams giuing of Tithes to Melchisedec Gen. 14.20 To make Tithes then a true Shake-offering shake off the sacrilegious vse of them and so lift vp thy heart a pure Heaue-offering to the Lord saying with the true Israelite Deut. 26.13 I haue put the hallowed things out of mine house and giuen it to the Leuite c. Lest the Lord one day shake both thy stocke and thy Tithe thy bodie and thy soule CHAP. V. Tithes not Ceremoniall in their End Two points of Leuies seruice and three degrees of Leuites for all which and to all which Tithes were giuen in Inheritance Sacrifices not properly Inheritance The â—ge vnder the Law concluded and more ancient rights preduced § I THe nature of Tithes being freed from Ceremonie their End is now quarrelled thus Whatsoeuer was ordained for the seruice of the Tabernacle must as the Tabernacle it selfe bee Ceremoniall Tithes Inheritance were giuen Leui for that seruice Ergo. The very text is their Assumption Num 18.21 Now God helpe Leuies successors that is such as bee of the Ministerie now a dayes for by this dealing hath Leui been a hundreth fold in better case vnder the Law then they be vnder the Gospell O Rich Aaron Type for a time And poore Melchisedec Priest for euer A great pitie pouertie should be perpetuall No remedie then but vp must the Tabernacle or downe must the Tithes For as to the preaching of that heauenly Tabernacle Christ Tithes not Ceremoniall it must goe for Gra-mercy Yet to say somewhat lest we lose all to the parts of this their Ceremoniall Syllogisme for little or no substance in it Both Proposition and Assumption lacke this word Onely to conclude the question aright For to be tyed to the Tabernacle and not Onely to it will not make a thing Ceremoniall For so shall we make the Decalogue it selfe Ceremoniall for it was also tyed to be read in that Tabernacle by Leui. Ceremoniall then must be Only with or Onely for the Tabernacle And if they say Tithes Inheritance are Onely for it then both Proposition and Assumption are false for two reasons I. The onely Ceremoniall seruice of the Tabernacle § II comprehended not Leuies whole function Two points of Leuies seruice II. Tithes were giuen to the whole Tribe for their whole function Their seruice and function stood in two points according to that Prophecie of Moyses Deut. 33.10 They shall teach Iaacob thy Iudgement and Israel thy Law 2. Chron. 17.7.8.9 They shall put incense before thy face and the burnt offering vpon thine Altar The first point we see is a scattered seruice according to a former Prophecie of Leuies owne Father I will diuide them viz. Leuites in
Kings dale Rom. 4.13 Parties Royall Melchisedec a King and Abraham heire of the world Melchisedec a Priest of the most high God All pâ—sse on Royall points and Abraham Patriarch of all the Faithfull Witnesse Royall The King of Sodom vers 21. Recorder or Clerke Royall viz. Moyses Gouernour of all Gods people Reuiued by a Royall Prophet Dauid Psal 110.4 and re-established in the most Royall dayes of the Gospell Hebr. 7.1 c. May wee not iustly say heere then that Heauen and Earth entred a league When as the true Melchisedec Possessor of Heauen and Earth first King of Iustice then King of Peace blessed Abraham and all his seede the heires of the world When shall this bargaine haue an end On whose part shall it faile So long as Earth is inhabited and by Abrahams of-spring manured so long must God haue his Inheritance Tithes Two Lessons heere not to be neglected in the order § II of this Historie Melchisedec Iustice Peace Religion and Tithing goeth before King of Salem that is Iustice and Righteousnesse goe before Peace and both goe before Tithes that is without Peace no setled Religion Then Peace is the daughter of Iustice and Religion the Garland of Peace Wheresoeuer then the Iust God procureth vs Peace wee ought to settle Religion in all points peaceably And where the Power and Peace is greatest there should Religion be purest not Poorest For Religion once rent Peace is violated and Peace violated breaketh the rod of Iustice This course began heere Abraham our Patriarch and patterne with Melchisedec so soone as by Gods Iustice he was made peaceable from those Kings his enemies he heareth Melchisedec Gods Messenger reuerently he rendereth him his due Tithes thankfully which two points paint out to vs generally the substance of all Religion This before the Law This course kept Moses at Gods command giuing a Law that when they should by Gods Iustice become peaceable in Canaan they should then haue Religion peaceable onely one worship of one God and pay to his Officiars his inheritance Tithes And this course followed all the good Kings vnder the Law So wee would know why this course may not also hold after the Law For heere haue wee the Corner-stone of all our building viz. That how soone a Priest is named so soone are Tithes named for his maintenance So Tithes and Priest-hood in generall not Legall Priest-hood are twins of one time They are of Nature Reciprocate that is the one cannot be without the other whereupon these two things will follow Tithes and Seculars neuer matched First That no marriage can be betweene any Secular person and Tithes Secondly That so long as God hath Officiars of his worship on Earth so long must Tithes be their Inheritance § III Obiect Against all this is obiected That before this Historie of Melchisedec our first right the world was some two thousand yeeres old and all this while was God worshipped yet all this while not a word of Tithes And why may not the last age of the world worshippe God without Tithes as well as the first And so Tithes bee onely the Lords Inheritance during the Law that first and onely named them so Sol. Resp First heere is a double question One concerning Tithes another concerning their title Inheritance A generall answere for both all things beginning together The Decalogue came with the Law but must not end with it See part 2. cap. 7. ad fin are not bound to end together and touching the Law it holdeth but in things Ceremoniall for Quod Morale est Mortale non est reade lib. 2. cap. 7. Secondly concerning Tithes wee must marke two things First As they are the goods of men generally Secondly The precise number in quoto as they are a Tenth of their goods And so these first two thousand yeeres though the quota pars Tithes for the first two thousand yeeres was not nominatim defined yet Res ipsa were to the same end employed and so God still worshipped Otherwise wee may also conclude against all the other foure generall points of Diuine seruice viz. God was not for two thousand yeeres worshipped because no Priest named no times affixed no place designed and no speciall forme prescribed and so by a like consequence wee may liue after the Law without all these as before it But we say all fiue were then re ipsa though more confused according to the time The first-borne then discharged the Priests office and the best of all their goods serued them for Tithes Gen. 18.19 So Cain and Abel the Church being then as in her cradle were taught by Tradition before Law Lib. 2. cap. 7. ad fin or by the Law of Nature that whatsoeuer the Earth yeelded vnto them a part yea a chiefe part thereof was due to the Lords peculiar worshippe And so each of them brought out vnto the Lord according to his labours Their Labours euen at first went as large as did Church maintenance vnder the Law out of all the fruits of the ground from Cains tillage And of all the bestiall of the field from Abels pasturage Now he who can discerne in these two brothers the Priest from the Laick may as easily sequestrate their portions Morall and Ceremoniall heere went all in a manner confusedly Tithes then are in quoto precisely named as soone as the Officiar on whom they euer depend is precisely named and both long before the Law And so for Tithes Now touching this title How Tithes may bee held § IV Gods Inheritance during the first two thousand yeeres Haue Inheritance seeing the Law only calleth them so To this we answer It followeth not A thing is not that which it is because it is not named as it is As to say Abraham was no Priest because he is not called by the name of Priest for whosoeuer sacrificed as first borne were Priests It is vsuall in Scripture sometimes to name things peculiarly before they be indeed so as the wandring Tabernacle and the Stone which Iacob erected as a piller Gen. 28.20.21.22 1. Sam. 1.7.9 were both named House of God but were not so till Salomon built there the Temple And sometime againe things are in effect that which they beare no name of till long after as Melchisedec heere was a Priest of an Order but yet not named of an Order till Dauid rose and also Tithes or that which supplied their roome were not called Inheritance til the owne fit time Yet that same right which God had from al beginning in mens goods was euer in effect Gods Inheritance And as the Mysteries of saluation began to be more cleared as heere where God presented to Abraham a Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so he maketh Abraham to offer his goods also Orderly calling them at first Tithes And againe at such times as the Land was to be diuided and Iustice had begotten perfect Peace and that the name of Inheritance could
§ V They say that this Vow doth but bind vs to a maintenance in generall Tithes in quoto are not of the Law but not the same in quoto I answere Such Analogicall equities hold euen from the most Ceremoniall things of the Law to the Gospell But such things as are neither Ceremoniall nor clearely institute ad tempus or arbitrium binde the things themselues vpon vs and we haue shewed that neither Type Ceremonie nor temporall condition fell vpon Tithes That they were not onely nor first Legall Indeed if the only Law and first the Law had designed quot â—mpartem this dispute had been more doubtfull But seeing this Melchisedec that most Euangelicall Priest gaue vs the quote seeing Iacob before the Law as in a perpetuall Law Vowed the quote We see the Law is but a confirmer and Leui but an obseruer of that which was long before freely doted and for euer deuoted to Gods seruice The Law gaue but the same quote to a Priest of another Order for his time and shall that first that Euangelical that Euerlasting Priest-hood now reuiued againe come with dish in hand and say Quod vultis mihi dare And this for our Trinall harmonie in Iacobs Vision and Vow Now are some men much sollicite both heere and in the former point of Melchisedecs Possession What forme of Tithing it was Of what goods Yeerely or no As for Melchisedec the second part of this Treatise shall cleare him As to Iacobs Vow which heere we will end § VI to whom or how he payed it We say Gods promises and Iacobs performances alike Such was Iacobs Vow as was his Vision and such were the performances on his part as were the performances of Gods promises made to him Now God performed not all the points of that Vision to Iacob in his own person because not in that nature promised So Iacob performed not all his Vow in his owne person for the like reason God performed to Iacob himselfe the best part of that Vision viz. the heauenly Canaan and Iacob returneth in his owne person the best part of his Vow viz. The Lord was euer his God So his only seede enioyed the Earthly Canaan and therefore his onely seed payed Tithes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thence is it clearely proued Who are Iacobs Seede That Iacobs Vow concerned as much if not more his seed as himselfe And if they will yet a strict his seede to his onely flesh vnder the Law because after this Iacob was called Israel Gen. 32.28 and the Israelites as Iaacobs seed performed all Let them remember first that the heauenly Canaan was the principall end of Iacobs iourney and so his Vow must stand till his seed goe thither Secondly Seed heere is more of his Faith then of his flesh for all the Families of the Earth which heere are blessed in Iacobs seede were not all of Iacobs flesh Rom. 9.6 but euen Iaphets seede comming home to the tents of Sem The Gentiles called therefore all subiect by Iacobs Vow to Tithing Such as refuse let them renounce both the ends of Iacobs Ladder Heauen and Earth and goe to their owne habitation And this for our Indenture CHAP. IX The Edict of Tithes though in Leuiticus yet proued to be no part of the Leuiticall Law and so Tithes in all points as the Lords Inheritance exempted from the Law § I NExt commeth our last Writ our Edict and that very orderly For God being possessed in Tâ—thes by Abraham contracted by Iacob good beginnings for a promise onely of the Land which must pay all Now after some foure hundred yeeres peregrination for their Faithes triall by the fiery afflictions of Aegypts fornace God intimateth vnto them this publike Edict Leuit. 27.30 Also all the Tithes of the Land both of the seed of the ground and of the fruit of the trees IS not shall be the Lords All in Leuiticus not Legall or Ceremoniall Though this be in Leuiticus yet is it not of the Leuiticall Law because it containeth no Precept and therefore no Law yea it is a plaine exception from that Leuiticall Law For Moyses treating heere of the nature of Legall Vowes and of what things the people might Vow he telleth them Tithes were alreadie the Lords long agoe and therefore they might Vow none of their Tithes For to what end Iacob vowed them alreadie yet was not his Vow Legall or Ceremoniall as is said but Morall as was his vowing God should be his God Further Vowes of the Law here are voluntary at mans option to doe or not to doe Tithes not so And as this place of Leuiticus is but an Edict of Gods right so is it no right for Leui for Leuies right came not till Num. 18. In which also hee keepeth euer the same method first telling them Tithes are the Lords vers 20. and then giuing them to Leui vers 21. § II And though vers 26. he vseth the like phrase of the first borne as he doth heere of Tithes forbidding to vow any such for it is the Lords yet that same IS is relatiue to a preceding precept Exod. 13.2 Sanctifie vnto me all the first borne c. But no such Law for the ground of Gods Inheritance but Euangelicall Libertie and liberality proceeding from the instinct of God in man or tradition to and from the first man because Vt fides ita fidei opera ex auditu But the very Ethnicks as Paul saith not hauing the Law by nature did the things of the Law So they doted Tithes to their Gods And thus farre for our Possession Indenture and Edict prouing clearely Tithes to be the Lords before the Law with such euident conclusions drawne from the perpetuall equitie thereof teaching Tithes must also reach after that Law as also the title that God had from the beginning in all mens goods containing the two first ages Followeth the last age of the word SACRILEGE FOR THE GOSPELL THE SECOND PART CHAP. I. Christ and his Apostles concerning Tithes They did abrogate all Ceremoniall things GOD thus hauing from all beginning § I an heritable title to all mens goods and that by Natures light Transitio as is said not Moyses Law two thousand yeers And this his right by nature also defined euen In quoto to be a tenth part foure hundred yeeres before the Law And these same both Right and Quota by Commandement and Law continued til Christ came some two thousand yeeres Now are we to examine the Worlds last age vnder the Worlds onely Blisse Christ whether he hath yet any right in our goods or not and if a right whether the same in quoto or not The first will no man deny 1. Cor. 9.13.14 The last maketh most men adoe The Apostle cleareth the first That the one Minister must liue of the Gospell as the other did by the Law But whether hee did intend the same quota in saying Galath 6.6 Make him
Tithing of them Pauls meaning to the Hebr. for that time was not come as is said they were poore new conuerted Christians euen those for whom Paul had gathered that collection in Achaia Asia and Româ— Paul onely as is said would draw them from Leui to Christ and that in the power and prerogatiue of Melchisedec in all things belonging to Leuies Priest-hood specially Blessing and Tithing They knew Tithes were due but not due to Christ this Paul teacheth them Let euery Christian ballance these arguments in the scales of an vpright conscience fixed and setled on the word of God and accordingly dispose of his affections § VIII Behold then lastly how fitly all things are matched in those types Comparison of Melchisedec Aaron and Christ and their veritie Christ Grace is ioyned to Eternitie and Law Bondage brought to an end Melchisedec Christs first freest and most perfect Priestly type and kingly too met Abraham freely without law and before Law and as a King fed him as a Priest blessed him all in freedome Abraham againe in whose loynes we were all then both fedde and blessed like a thankefull soule met also freely the free graces of God in Melchisedec likewise before Law And so Christ our true Melchisedec not commanded litle expected least of all deserued freely meeteth Abraham and all his seede ever feeding blessing to saluation and therefore must all we the seede of Abrahams flesh and faith returne to him 2 Cor 5.19.20 and to those in whom he hath put the Ministerie of reconciliation Tithes freely not as Legally coacted And this for Grace and Eternitie Now betweene Melchisedec and Christ interuened another solemne and great high Priest also Aaron But how quite after an other order and manner long after both Melchisedec and Abraham all in bonds called commanded his very sacrifices brought by force to the Altar nothing freely And so Abrahams posteritie gaâ—e him the like meeting Tithes by force of law Bondage and bonds on both sides Grace then beginneth and Grace endeth The Law coupled Melchisedec to Christ The Law goeth betweene as a bond coupling Grace to Grace Melchisedec to Christ And so Melchisedec as Gods Priest and Christs type with the Ministerie of Christs Gospel make vp both but one poynt in the Office-worke of our saluation Euen as an Euening and a Morning Gen. 1.5 made vp but one day in the Creation Christ was but as in dawning then he shineth now In Melchisedec he put the Word of benediction in his Ministerie he hath put the Word of Reconciliation Melchisedec typed Euerlasting promises in Christ his Ministry preach euerlasting performances in Christ Now glad promises and glad tydings of their performances are but one and therefore their maintenance iustly one Tithes Inheritance Leui a linke of the same chaine also a Priest of the same worke in effect though different in forme a Remembrancer for supporting the weaknes of those dayes interuening betweene the promises and the performances typing and foretelling by numbers of rites thousands of times Christs comming in their carnal sacrifices till they poynted him out as by a fingerly demonstration whom our Ministerie now Preach in a heauenly contemplation The dores of Faith in those dayes were much their Eyes Hic est and so trustâ—es Thomas must first put his finger in his side and then beleeue The dores of faith in our true Melchisedecs dayes are most our eares by hearing and so euen Abraham beleeued hic erit and it was imputed to him for Righteousnesse And he sawe the day of the Lord and reioyced But wee Hic fuit and therefore Blessed are they that haue not seene and yet beleeue So the generall end of all is one and the generall Inheritance for all still one Leui was vnder the Law as a tenent at will remoueable Melchisedec Christs Ministery as Freeholders Oaken-tenants Diuersitie of Orders made not diuersitie of Inheritance Tithes and Priest-hood came and goe together not Tithes and Leuies Priest-hood and therefore must not end till all Priest-hood end for Melchisedec yet liueth a Priest and taketh Tithes See part 1. c. 6. To that question then made part 1 cap. 6. Why the last § IX age of the world may not serue God without Tithes as the first two thousand yeeres did Order once setled must neuer be left The answere is euident We must neuer fall backe from Order to Confusion nor from Substance to Ceremonies This were to go backe againe from Canaan to the Flesh-pots of Aegypt from Heauen to Hel. Why may we not serue God without the Tables of the Law as they did two thousand yeeres They had the Image of that Law by nature and partly doubtlesse by Tradition so were they both by Law of Nature and Tradition prepared to a Tithing as fell out betweene Melchisedec and Abraham The first age was a time of confusion the people had no rest Deut. 12.8 c. and so small order but being once past Iordan they must not doe as of before Now are we past all the Bondages in Christ and must not go back againe to the Bound-Ages of the world Otherwise we inuert the whole method both of Creation and Redemption Creation began from darkenesse to light Euening and Morning made a day Redemption from falling to rising from beggerly rudiments of the Law to the rich reuelations of the Gospel from perishing types to eternall Verities And the Gospel againe in it selfe still growing Heb. 5.13.14 from milke for babes to strong meat for men of age We must euer grow neuer decrease Therefore Christ the first Author of Grace and perfection of all grace hath not cast all againe in the Chaos of Confusion Then seeing Nature at first freely doted The right of Tithes concluded Grace ensuing distinctly defined Iacob instructed in grace solemnely vowed Law succeeding strictly commaunded the Gospel reuiuing hath by reasons â—enued the Primitiue Churches by practise restored Tithes for Gods worship Let vs euer hold that Tithes are onely the true Inheritance of the Church flowing immediatly from God to his Ministerie in all ages as wee defined them part 1. cap. 1. The summe then of all the proofe from the Circumstance of time is Whatsoeuer is due to an eternall Priest is perpetuall by due Tithes were and are due to Melchisedec an Eternall Priest Ergo Tithes are perpetually due And by Consequent this Priest being the High-Priest of the Gospell Tithes are due to the Gospell CHAP. VIII The time of Melchisedecs first Tithing Foure doubts in his posterities Tithing To whom from whom whereof and for what vses Tithes are to be taken and imployed And if Princes may Tithe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what TITHES thus setled as the Churches true Inheritance § I these doubts rest to be resolued How long Melchisedec Tithed First in Melchisedec and Abraham our Fundators Secondly in their succeeding posteritie In Melchisedec touching the time and continuing of his Tithing
What calling was hee oâ— here Secular or Ecclesiastick M. Selden saith Both Abraham and Iacob must be Priests also when they paied Tithes True Hee was but not in the proprietie of this action M. Selden cap. 1 §. 2. ad sin but onely as considered apart iust like 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Categories that in climbing are but Species and comming downe Genera yet not so full as so neither this example fitteth better the subord nate Priestes of the Law all of one Order of one Nature But Abraham and Melchisedec were neuer of one Order of Priesthood so though Abraham in one respect a Priest paied Tithes yet here as Priest he paied none At this time he was not so much as a Priest in priuilegiis primogeniturae bâ—ing the tenth in Linea recta from Sem now Melchisedec and so he paied a tenth as a meere secular sprigge of Sems roote For in this Priesthood by Primogeniture was neither Order Ordination nâ—r Subordination Abraham then here went for a Secular a Prince a Patriarch hauing the Promises Blessed and Tithed but not Blessing or Tithing Next I aske whether this solemne and most antient action betweene Melchisedec and Abraham should direct the after comming Law in the like generals or if that perishing Law should rectifie this euerstanding action doubtlesse we say the former Then seeing euen this Priest of God tooke Tithes euen of Abraham the Father and in his loines of all his seede why shall the Priestes vnder the Law be debarred from Tithes comming from Seculares Here then we haue the Priest the first proprietar The Leuites therefore vnder the Law were but as the Priestes seruants in leauing not the sole owners in enioyning And so much for the first sort of Tithes whether they went all to Ierusalem as Scal. affirmeth or were due to onely inferior Leuites as I take M. Selden to say Of the second sort of Tithes for the Feasts we haue no question with Scaliger therefore we follow him to the third sort Scal. Seguitur apud Tobiam It followeth in Tob. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I gaue the 3. Tith to whom it was meete He calleth it a third which is either to be called Of the third yeere For saith he it cannot be called a Third which is one with the First Scal. pag. 67. post med 68. ad med and againe pa 68. So saith Scal This Tith in the 1 2 4. and 5. yeeres was called prima decima but in yeeres 3. and 6. was called The poores Tithes c. For in the 7. yeere was no labouring and so no Tithing I answere Why not both a Third Tith and of the Third yeere The Scripture giueth vs the yeere and why should Scal cite Tobie for proofe of his first and second Tithes and disclaime him in his third Tithes all in one verse Againe what proofe bringeth he to make the first and second Tith both one in the third and sixt yeeres and to diuide them againe in the first second and fifth yeeres For seeing Scal will haue them as they are Leuites portion the first third and fifth yeeres all carried vp to Ierusalem how liued the poore then all these yeeres And seeing hee will haue them for the poore these other two yeeres here M. Selden pleadeth for mee How should the Leuites and Priests haue their liue-lode of these two yeeres And I hold this for a ground that so long as the end remaineth M. Sel cap 2. § 3. p. 14. so long remaine the meanes deuoted to that end But Leuies seruice being the end for which these first Tithes were deuoted admitteth no intermission but is yeerely the same Ergo so must his meanes be yeerely the same If it be replied that Leui is the first enrolled euen in these fiue and six yeeres with the poore I answere first Leuies meanes is here strangely abridged by encroaching of Strangers Fatherlesse and Widowes where hee was at first one and all now is he but the first partner and yet must he abate no point of his seruice whereas God euer supplied all such wants as in that Sabbaticall cessation of labouring the land the sixt yeere yeelded three yeeres encrease but no such matter for this fourth and sixt yeere the partners but not the portion is encreased So Leui may abound strangely in the one but beg strongly in the other for all the beggars are thrust vpon him Secondly Was not Leui also enrolled for a partner in the Festiuall Tithes yet will not Scaliger for this frustrate him of the first Tithes And yet Iunius will making first and second one So haue we of three Tithings a threefold confusion from three learned Authors Iunius the first and second one Scaliger the first and third one Selden the second and third one Which maketh mee rather simply cleaue to the words of the Text then thrust in commentaries for the ouerthrow of it or practise against precept And obserue there is neuer danger in distinguishing these points but euer in confounding For if we distinguish not that Text we shall confound all three At the end of three yeeres thou shalt bring foorth all the Tithe of thine encrease of the same yeere Deut. 14.28 and lay it within thy gates If we giue this word All his largest extent then we must confound all in All all three must be but one which all men denie Therefore we must still distinguish and if so then those three verses Deut 14.22.23 and 28. speake of three diuers Tithings seeing of Tithings Which Iosephus most clearely distinguisheth The English translation readeth all making it a third Tithe each yeere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. One to the Leuites another to the Feasts yeerly a third ioyned to these each third yeer Is not this a faire witnesse for our foresaide Text And against Ioseph and Tobit Selden bringeth but Targum and Talmud Maior vter Another Text Deut 26.12 When thou hast made an end of Tithing all the Tithes of thine encrease the third yeere which is the yeere of Tithing c. Why should this third ye re be termed The yeere of Tithing in the Text since no yeere was without a Tithing safe the Sabbaticall vnlesse a new accrue of Tithes came this yeere aboue the rest as most and best iâ—terâ—râ—ters with Ioseph and Tobit doe hold And seeing it bringeth a new End for Fatherlesse Widdowes Strangers and all Poore why not also a new Tithing There is neither reason nor Analogie to call it The yeere of Tithing because two Tithes in other yeers distinguish dare now confounded much lesse because three new partneâ—s are thrust on one mans portion Laicks on Leuies I confesse I could neuer yet giue a reason why this poore mans Tithe was cast vpon a third yeere seeing they were at all times to bee sustained but for the distinct natures of the Tithes themselues I thinke verily a simple eye may discerne it Mr.
Now this Tithe was meerly Ceremoniall being first an Heaue Offering 2. tied onely to the High-Priest in Person and 3. to Ierusalem for Place Ergo not due now Secondly no proper Succession of the Gospell to the Law onely tempore neither in Person astricted to a Tribe not in the same nature or Order of Priesthood the true Succession is Melchisedec to Melchisedec where all things past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Promise not Rom. 4.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the law so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bringeth in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The intervening Law was but as a droppe yet of Diuine water too in the bottome of a bason appointed for a time to distinguish to diuide nay rather to drawe on and ioyne two streames of approching Grace the Promises and their Performances which meeting this droppe was quite swallowed vp by their fulnesse what it had of the first Fountaine common with those two Streames Naturall or Morall that was still retained being onely graced with new Euangelicall garments What it had in the propertie of a Partition wall Rites and Ceremonies all euanished as Mercurie from the fire So Tithes Inheritance being of the first Fountaine common Morall to all these Water-workes of Gods worship and therefore mixed with that Droppe of the Law could neuer be dried vp but recouer so much greater strength by the meeting of those two Streames as the Performances surpasse the Promises and the Gospell the Law But saies Selden these considerations can onely be M. Selden Ibid. where the knowledge of Fact proceeds For without distinction of these seuerall Tithes any argument drawen from them may soone be found a grosse fallacy that may both deceiue him which maketh it and those whom he teacheth Let the ingenuous Reader thinke of it Of this position would I faine haue a better reason then I can perceiue for our question for who will think that the truth of Diuine precept must rely vpon knowledge of Fact specially when the Fact must be trusted to Fabulous authors in many things Indeed when the Fact is recorded in the Tables of the Precept there may a man argue reciprocally a Causis ad effecta and contra But to bring in Talmud Targum M. Selden Reuiew p. 55 and Gemara to teach vs from what they say was done what should beene done by the Law it is in my iudgement quite out of square For first I may iustly doubt if their relation be true because we all haue found them in some erroneous viz in Tithing Herbs as aforesaid and in confounding the Lords frequent Precepts of keeping so many holy Feasts yeerely and thrice a yeere in a Leape-yeere each third yeere and so making the Tithes for Feasts not paieable each third yeere Certainely if I belieue those men in any thing it shal be more for reuerence of the Text then their Tales Secondly though their relation of the Fact were true in their times yet might it be much degenerate from the former ages Buxtorfus de opere â—almudico For the eldest of them wrote as some hold but at the Captiuitie of Babylon and there writes as we haue them but collected and receiued hundreds of yeere since Christ Thirdly Facts truely recorded doe not alwayes argue Lawes truely exâ—cuted Else the two High-Priests at Christs time must be good in Law because true in Fact and not condemned by any reproach in Scripture other then tacitely in the meaning of the Law at first giuen It is true the not distinguishing of one Tithe from another hath made men confound all and take the Morall for the Ceremoniall But whence I pray shall we draw our true distinction from the Text or Talmud Whether shall the Text tell Talmud what Tithes were to bee payed or Talmud tell vs what Tithes the Text should haue enioyned So Tithes are by Scripture most clearely distinguished and by Talmud meerely confounded Thus farre Reader haue I for thee trod the pathes of Mr. Seldens Historie of Tithes adding my owne Simple iudgement De Iure Both may stand together in regard of my plaine Positions from Scripture for the one and his owne Protestations that he meant nothing to the contrarie in his Historie Yea I ascribe it to Gods speciall prouidence that He and I should at one time as twinnes from one belly both come forth together and that I who as I take it was by conception the Esau and elder brother in this businesse yet in our birth should proue a Iacob catching his Historie as it were by the heele lest the incurious Reader as is said by too hot hunting the wilde Historie might defraud Iacob that is the Promises and Gospell of their due Primogeniture in the Right of Tithes My last aduice then is That howsoeuer Historicall varietie may delight thine eare yet let onely Scripture-Verity leade thine heart and direct thy Conscience to the Conclusion in things pertaining to God to whose Blessing I doe recommend these my Labours for thy Edification Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉