by the Vulgar Can it be thought says he that he gave Tythes of the Best Parts only How stands that with Giving Tythes of All Very well i. e. By Giving Tythes of All out of the Best Parts which was the Custom And it was thought a Neglect of God to Pay His Tythe out of the Worst Parts and not out of the very Best And Mr. Selden owns that the Syriack and Arabick Translations of Heb. vij 2. are Expresly so i. e. That Abram gave Melchisedec the Tythe not only of the Spoils but of All that he had And that this was the Ordinary Gloss of Solomon Jarchi upon these Words in Gen. xiv 20. Against all which he opposes That Josephus and the Targum of Jonathan Ben-Vziel say that Abram gave to Melchisedec the Tythe of the Spoils But this is no Contradiction to the other For if he gave him Tythes of All that he had he gave the Tythe of the Spoils likewise III. Mr. Selden c. 1. n. 2. squints an Objection against Abram and Jacob's Paying Tythe as supposing them to be Priests He supposes Melchisedec to have been Sem and consequently an Elder and a Superiour Priest to Abram But perhaps he thought it Inconsistent for one Priest to pay Tythe to another Priest though of a Superiour Order And hence wou'd not have it thought that Abram paid Tythe though he gave a Tenth Part i. e. that he did not give it under the Notion of Tythe or a Tribute Due to Melchisedec as his Superiour But the Superiority of Melchisedec above Abram is largely Argu'd Heb. vij And under the Law Num. xviij 26. the Levites were to Pay a Tenth of their Tythe to the High-Priest And if in this Sense Abram upon Mr. Selden's Supposition pay'd Tythe to Melchisedec â—hen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. vij 4. is Literally the Tenth of the Tythe for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as before observ'd signifies Tythe And so rarely does it signifie Spoils that except in this Text if it â—e so meant there Mr. Selden can â—nd but one Instance amongst the Greek Authors where it is taken for Spoils at least this must be Granted that Spoils is but a strain'd and â—ery unusual Signification of the Word And Abram supposing him 〈◊〉 Priest paying Tythe to Melchisedec argues the Superiority of the Priesthood of Melchisedec after which Order of Priesthood and not after the Order either of Abraham or Aaron ouâ— Lord Christ was Consecrated And this will Infer all that the Apostle aâ—gues from Abram's Payment of Tythe to Melchisedec Heb. vij as much aâ— if Abram were then a Lay-Man And he might then be a Lay-Man though he were a Priest afterwards For he was then only Abram it wâ—â— before the Covenant God made with him and the Alteration thereupon of his Name into Abraham Gen. xvâ— whereby he was constituted The Fâ—ther of the Many Nations of the Faithful to come But these Things concern not our Present Enquiry Theâ—â—fore let us Proceed IV. The Second Instance abovâ— mention'd for Tythes Gen. xxviij 22. is that of Jâ—cob Against which it is Objecteâ— That this was only a Vow Answ It was a Vow Jacob. But not theâ—â—fore only a Vow Men often aâ— most commonly Vow that which 〈◊〉 their Duty to do without Respect 〈◊〉 the Vow As to Vow to serve Gâ—â— more faithfully than we have done before Thus in this same Vow of Jacob's he Vows that The Lord shall be his God Will any say that The Lord was not his God before And indeed this of Dedicating the Tythe to God was no more than a further Declaration that the Lord was his God Because Offering of Tythe was a Part of the Worship of God And therefore Jacob did by this Declare that The Lord only should be his God because he would Offer his Tythe only unto Him It was the Custom of the Nations among the Heathen to Offer their Tythes to the God whom they Ador'd And therefore some Offer'd their Tythes to One and some to Another of their False Gods But Jacob here Vows to The only True God That He only shall be his God and that he will Offer his Tythes to none other God but to Him alone For to whom we Dedicate the Tythe we acknowledge to have Receiv'd the other Nine Parts from him of which the Offering of the Tenth is 〈◊〉 solemn Acknowledgment And the Vowing or Dedicating them though Due before was Customary with the Jews as well as the Heathen for so it is commanded Ecclusâ— xxxv 9. Dedicate thy Tythes with Gladness And none will say that they were not Due among the Jews eveâ— before their Dedication of them SECT VII That the Gentiles did Pay Tytheâ— to their Gods I. THE Great Opposer of Tytheâ— the Learned Mr. Selden cannot Deny this But in his Histoâ—â— of Tythes cap. 3. he Endeavours tâ— Lessen this as much as he can bâ— offering some of his Conjectures 1. That they were Pay'd only by Particular Vows 2. Not by any Law Enjoining them 3. Not Generally 4. Not Yearly 5. Only to some Particular God as among the Romans to Hercules c. 6. Only of some Particular Things not of all our Increase of every sort In every one of which Particulars he has been sufficiently Confuted by several Learned Answers which have been made to that Book of his Dr. Comber last of all has Collected these and added to them And put that Matter I think past a Reply But I intend not to trouble the Reader with a Repetition of any of these Because what Mr. Selden himself allows is abundantly sufficient to my Present Purpose And indeed to Confute himself in every one of these Heads to which I have reduc'd all his Pretences whereby he Endeavours to invalidate the Practice of the Gentiles from being a Testimony to the Divine Right of Tythes For However they paid their Tythe 1. Whether of Every thing or only of Some sorts of their Encrease 2. Whether to one or to more of their Gods 3. Whether Annually or Occasionally 4. Whether Generally or only the Devouter sort 5. Whether thereunto Requir'd by their Municipal Laws or not Or 6. Whether with or without a Particular Vow Yet this remains uncontroverted upon either side of these Questions That the Notion of Tythes as being due unto some God or other was receiv'd among the Gentiles and that time out of Mind which is all the Use 〈◊〉 have at Present to make of thiâ— Custom or Tradition of the Gentiles And of which I will shew the Forâ—â— in summing up the Evidence In the mean time let me enlargâ— so far as to shew the Reader how fâ—â— Selden himself do's yield the Cause iâ— all these Captious Questions which hâ— puts in Prejudice to the Divine Rigâ—â— of Tythes II. But first I must obviate a Mistaâ—â— which may arise from the Use of thâ— word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First-fruits For thâ—â— in the Levitical sense of the word 〈◊〉 is distinguished from
High God Answ 1. The Argument of the Apostle Heb. vij runs wholly upon his Priesthood And Drawing a Parallel betwixt his Priesthood and that of Aaron And shews that our Saviour was a Priest of his Order which was a Superiour Priesthood to the Levitical He does not say that Christ was a King but a Priest after the Order of Melchisedec And how did Levi in Abram pay Tythes to the King of Salem Did this make all the Posterity of Abram the whole Nation of the JEWS Subjects or Tributaries to a Foreign King And why is it said That Levi paid Tythes more than any other of the Posterity of Abram It is Plain That a Comparison was here made betwixt the two Priesthoods that of Melchisedec and that of Levi. And Levi's Paying Tythes to Melchisedec is brought as an Argument that the Priesthood of Melchisedec was Superiour For Without all Contradiction says the Apostle the Less is Blessed of the Better And thence infers that Melchisedec was Greater than Abram whom he Blessed Which cou'd not be if he Blessed him only as a King that is Wished well to him or Pray'd for him for that an Inferiour may do to his Superiour But to Bless in the Name of God and by Virtue of his Office belongs to Priests and not to Kings And of such Blessing the Apostle here Speaks and Argues from it Which is no Argument nor Sense if it be not thus Understood It is true That orginally the Priesthood was join'd with the Regal Power and Kings were Priests as Melchisedec here And we have many Later Instances in other Nations of the same Whence Arose that Mistake in some That Tythes were paid to Kings as Kings not considering that this was a Tribute paid to them as Priests And if Kings have Preserv'd a Tenth to themselves out of Lands they Gave to their Subjects as any other Landlord may do Or if Kings Exacted a Tenth by way of Tax or such a Tax was given to them yet this is not the Tythe of God concerning which we now Speak for that being a Sacrifice was to be Given only into the Hands of the Priests it being Part of our Worship of God And such was the Tythe paid by Abram to Melchisedec For how did he owe him that Tribute as King of Salem Or how was that an Expression of Abram's Thankfulness to God for the Great Victory he then Obtain'd Which Paying the Tythe of the Spoils to God by the Hands of His Priest was And the Blessing of God pronounc'd by the Mouth of His Priest was His Acceptance of it and Assurance of His Favour to Abram II. Mr. Seldon endeavours to Enervate this Example of Abram History of Tythes c. 1. n. 1. by Criticising upon the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ver. 4 which is Translated Spoils And thence wou'd infer That Abram gave to Melchisedec only the Tythe of the Spoils which he had taken Answ If this Criticism were just it proves nothing but that Spoils taken in War are Tythable as well aâ— any Profits gain'd by our Labours iâ— Peace For the Reason will hold strongeâ— for the Tything of the Increase of ouâ— Fields and other Fruits of Peaceâ— And they were more Generally Paid and more Expresly Reserv'd than thâ— Tythes of the Spoils of War Though the Tythe of Spoils were Paid and aâ—â— knowledg'd as Due to God even bâ— the Heathens themselves as shall bâ— shewn in its Place Therefore this Criticism of Mr. Selden's instead of an Objection doeâ— more strongly Enforce the Obligation of Tythes and Extends them farther than if the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were suffer'd to mean what it truly does the First-Fruits the Choicest and Best Parts It signifies Literally the Tops of Heaps which being Generally the Best and Choicest Part of the Heaps were taken for the First-Fruits or Tenths Due to God of whatever Sort and not only the Tenth of Spoils For Suidas tells us That it means the Tenth of the Product of the Field and of Merchandise as well as of Spoils The Etymology or Common Acceptation of the Word in the Greek Authors having no relation at all to Spoils but much rather to the Gathering in of the Harvest where the Sheaves and Corn are put in Heaps and the Tythe taken from the Top or Best of the Heaps Or as Suidas gives another Etymology of the Word to the Heaps of Merchants Goods upon the Sea-Shore when they are Imported out of which the Tythe was taken as of the Product of the Fields But in no Acceptation of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has it any sort of Relation to Spoils more than to any other Tythable Things nor indeed so much It is apply'd to Spoils only in a Secondary and Borrow'd Sense but in the Primary and most Vsual Acceptation of the Word it is understood of Tythes But of Spoils Mr. Selden confesses that elsewhere than in this Text is rarely occurs in this Sense Nor can it be Restrain'd only to the Tythe of Spoils in this Chapter Heb. vij For it is said Ver. 2. That Abram gave to Melchisedec a Tenâ—â— Part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of All And this is before any Mention was made of the Tythe of the Spoils only in the General Description of Melchisedec and Abram That of the Spoils comes iâ— afterwards as a Particular Instance Ver. 4. and cannot by any Necessity of Construction Limit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of All things in the 2d Verse of which it is said that Abram gave the Tythe to Melchisedec Though if it did it wou'd as before has been said only Prove that Tythes were Due out of Spoils but not that they were not Due out of other things And the Universal Custom of Paying Tythes out of other things as well among the Gentiles as the Jews which will be shewn is sufficiently Convincing that nothing which can be Inferr'd from the Text above-quoted can Limit the Payment of Tythes only to that of Spoils taken in War Mr. Selden himself confesses That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth also First-Fruits or the Chiefest Parts Sacred to the Gods among the Gentiles says he and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath in that Sense been turn'd here by de Praecipuis in the Vulgar Thus he Here is a great Authority which he does not answer That the Payment of Tythes mention'd in this Text cannot be Limited to that of Spoils only For in the Vulgar there is no Mention at all made of Spoils but the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the English renders Spoils is more Literally Translated de Praecipuis i. e. of the Chief or Principal In which Sense the Text runs thus That Abram gave to Melchisedec the Tythe of the Chief and Principal Things or out of the Chief and Principal Parts And Mr. Selden confesses that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does very well bear this Interpretation Only he makes this Objection against the Sense of the Text as render'd
is Regarded in the New Testament as well as the Old And says that because Christ is the Author of All therefor Tythes are offer'd to the Priests He is large upon this Subject Hom. II. in Num. as Translated by St. Hierom for we want the Greek Much of which Mr. Selden quotes c. 4. p. 40. and 41. and particularly Origen applies the Text before Debated 1 Cor. ix 13. to the Priests having Tythes under the Gospel and says that Tythes are Due now as well as then etiam secundum Literam according to the very Letter of the Law which in this Case is still obligatory and to Christians as well as Jews He reckons them as having no Remembrance of God as not believing that God gave the Fruits of the Earth who do not Honour Him with them by giving Part of them to the Priests And as I before Quoted this same Homily he likewise cites our Saviour's Command to the Pharisees telling them that they ought to pay Tythe of Mint Annise Cummin c. and shews how this is more strictly obligatory upon Christians and concludes with Proving That the very Letter of the Law must stand for the Payment of the First-fruits of Fruits and Cattel Haec diximus asserentes Mandatum de Primitiis Frugum vel Pecorum debere etiam secundum Literam stare And all that Mr. Selden has to say against this clear Testimony is History of Tythes c. 4. n. 3. p. 41. That though Origen do's mention Tythes in the Premises yet that in the Conclusion before-quoted he only names First-fruits He makes Origen a very bad Reasoner by this But ther is no Ground for it because as before often said by the Word First-fruits Tythes were frequently meant And in this same place Origen uses both these Terms where he tells that the Pharisees durst not Taste of the Fruits of the Earth priusquam Primitias Sacerdotibus offerant Levitis Decimae separentur i. e. before they offer'd First-fruits to the Priests and the Tythes were separated for the Levites Where as he uses the Words Priests and Levites so the Words First-fruits and Tythes promiscuously For the Tythes were to be pay'd to the Priests who it is true were likewise Levites that was a General Word like the Clergy among us to Comprehend all the Orders of the Church But the Tythes were not pay'd to the Levites as they were a Distinct Order from the Priests Nor were the First-fruits pay'd more particularly to the Priests than the Tenths were Both First-fruits and Tenths were Offerings to The Lord as before has been shewn and all the Offerings and Sacrifices were offer'd only by the Priests and not by the Levites Yet Origen here uses these Words indifferently as likewise the Words First-fruits and Tenths And to shew contrary to Mr. Selden's Pretence that he meant to bring them both in their Distinct Senses into his Conclusion he draws his Consequence not from One but Both of them speaking in the Plural Number Et Eg◠nihil Horum faciens i. e. Neither offering my First-fruits nor Tenth◠These Word◠immediately follow those above quoted where he shew how strictly the Scribes and Pharise◠pay'd their First-fruits and Tenths and then speaking in the Person o◠a Profane and Careless Christian says Ego Nihil Horum do neither o◠These this comprehends both First-fruits and Tenths to cut off Mr. Selden's vain Distinction and Origen Condemns such a Christian as much worse than the Scribes and Pharisees And his Inferring from hence that the Mandatum de Primitiis the Law for First-fruits ought to stand cannot Exclude the Tenths which he expresly mention'd But shews plainly that by this he meant the Tenths As St. Chrysostom In Hebr. Hom. 12. Tom. 4. p. 497. by the same word of First-fruits expresses the Tythes which Abram gave to Melchisedec calling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. The First-fruits of his Labours And Clemens Alexandrinus who was Origen's Master us'd both these words in the same Sense and taught the very same thing as Origen viz. That the Law of Moses concerning Tythes was still obligatory and of Force among Christians as being a Moral Duty and a Part of God's Worship He says that Moses's Law did teach Piety and Worship towards God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. l. 2. p. 397. Edit Lutetiae 1629. by Giving Him the Tythes of our Fruit and Cattel and of these First-fruits says he the Priests were Maintain'd Here First-fruits and Tythes mean the same thing And so it is in the Apostolical Canons where Can. 38. it is order'd how the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First-fruits or Tythes shou'd be Disposed which is a full Demonstration that they were then Pay'd I will close my Proof of those first Ages with the Great St. Cyprian who Flourish'd A. D. 240. He Reproving the Cooling of the Charity of some and how far they had fallen short of the Primitive Zeal says de Vnit Eccles n. 23. Domos tunc Fundos venundabant at nunc e Patrimonio nec Decimas damus i. e. They then sold Lands and Houses but now we do not so much as Pay the Tythes of our Estates Thereby Reproaching the Covetous and Distrustful of his days who Pay'd not their bare Due that is the Tythe whereas formerly they Gave much more than was Due more than the Tythe they Gave All. Thus far we have seen the Doctrine of the Church as to Tythes for 240 Years after Christ which is all the time Disputed for in the After Ages when a Greater and more Universal Neglect of Tythes had crept in the Fathers are voluminous upon the Subject and Councils express in Requiring them under pain of Excommunication as being Due to God from the Beginning And the Apostolical Canons above quoted were the Canon-Law that was in those times So that we have not only the Testimony of Private Fathers But the Law that then was for the Payment of Tythes before the extraordinary Oblations of more than a Tenth did cease in the Church though they had then no need to Insist upon the Tythe because they Receiv'd a much Greater Proportion Mr. Selden as before quoted owns that these Extraordinary Oblations were still continu'd for the first four hundred Years And if I shou'd take in all the Fathers about this time I shou'd be forc'd to Repeat whole Sermons vindicating the Divine Right of Tythes None will Deny but that they were Full and Express for Tythes at that time and afterwads Only the First Fathers were not so large because they did not Treat expresly upon this Subject only obiter and by the bye having no occasion for it while the Zeal of Christians was not willing to be stinted to the bare Due of a Tenth but gave much more So that it were not strange if we had heard nothing at all from them of it But by Good Providence they have left sufficien◠to Convince those willing to be