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
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
partaker of all thy goods Hoc opus hic laborest § II Leui then being the last receiuer and so long as hee lasted Lord of a large Inheritance Leui dyed not without heires Tithes Our question is How Leui died without heires Or what did Christ the Sonne in putting Leui from his office of typing him whereby his Fathers Inheritance might not descend to the succeeding Officiars that Preach him And why these Beggerly rudiments Galath 4.9 and that perishing Priesthood of the Law had so rich a Patrimonie and the glorious and rich Reuelations of the Gospell so beggerly a Ministery For if Christ who changed both Priesthood and Law had likewise changed maintenance this had beene well Heb. 7.11.12 But since hee hath placed Priesthood for Priesthood and Law for Law why hath he not also put Maintenance for Maintenance First then of Christ himselfe then of his Apostles and that either by Deede or Word Part. 1. cap. 1. ad init Christs Doings in this his Spiritual Patrimony by Separation was euen like that of his Kingdome on Earth For although hee was a righteous King by carnall descent and King of Righteousnesse by diuine Essence yet was he poorer then the Foxes of the field Matth. 8.20 Act. 20.35 or the birds of the ayre So was it euer with him Melius dare quà m accipere both wayes Besides it was not the chiefe Lords part to take vp his owne Inheritance but his Officiars to whom also he gaue them as Inheritance So did the onely Ministery of both the former ages take Tithes Melchisedec and Leui. That Christ did nothing against them it is cleare for if they had signified any Ceremonie to be perfected in him he had doubtlesse by some one action answered it as he did the smallest of all Ceremonies which being once shewed Tithes are ended This for his Deeds His sayings are twice recorded First Matth. 23.25 Woe be vnto you Scribes and Pharisies for yee Tithe Minte and Annise and § III Cumine and leaue the weightier matters of the Law Christs â—ayings touching Tithes Iudgement Mercy and Fidelitie Heere he would seeme against Tithes but goe on These ought ye to haue done viz. Iudgement Mercy and Fidelitie and not to haue left the other viz. Tithing Now if we should inferre vpon this That so long as Iudgement Mercy and Fidelitie are in vse so long must Tithes bee They will answere That at this time Moyses Law was good vntill Consummatum est therefore we leaue this to the Apostles Christs second saying was That comparison betweene the Publican and the Pharisie vanting of himselfe I fast twice a weeke Luke 18 12. I giue Tithe of all that euer I possesse and yet Christ preferreth the Publican wherein hee condemneth not the Pharisie for his paying Tithes nor fasting but for his vaine boasting of his owne workes These are all wee haue of Christ Of all those Sacrilegious Tithers take great aduantage § IV For seeing Christ say they changed both Priest-hood and Law filling their roomes and hath neglected Patrimonie it is euident he hath abolished it No they still erre not knowing the Scriptures For it is most true That seeing he hath not brought in a new he hath not abrogated the olde for to change and to abolish are both one as they are relatiue to Moyses Law So that whatsoeuer Christ changed he abolished putting alwayes somewhat in place of it as carnall things in Spirituall Ceremonial in Substantial and perishing types in Eternal Verities Now one word in all the Gospell either plaine text or Consequence against Tithes Inheritance If nothing against it then saith Tertullian Quod non notat Scriptura negat But they reply heere Christ said nothing for them in the Gospell Ergo Negat quia non notat It followeth not thus vnlesse they say No Scripture speaketh for them and then they say false and therefore better said Lex semel lata non deleta semper obligat Enough then for vs God at first taught it The Law ordained it The Gospell neuer gain-sayed it For we must not expect Christ as a new Legislator of all our Morall duties No Hee came to perfect and abolish the Ceremoniall Law Rom. 8.1.4 to fulfill and make vs able to answere in him the Morall Law § V Against all those fiue points of Gods worship Christ or his Apostles haue spoken All Ceremoniall things abrogate by Christ or his Apostles Iohn 4.21 Marke 2.28 and Mat. 12.8 Col. 2.16 17. in so farre as they were Ceremoniall Against Place Ceremoniall Beleeue mee the houre commeth when yee shall neither in this mountaine nor at Ierusalem worshippe the Father Against Time The Sonne of man is Lord euen of the Sabbath So his Apostles chaunged it And Let no man condemne you c. In respect of an holy day c. Or of the Sabbaths Heb. 7.11 Against Ceremonial Person If perfection had been by the Priest-hood of the Leuites what needed another Priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec And wee see Christ chused Paul and many other Disciples and Apostles not of the Tribe of Leui. Against Worship in manner and matter Christs once Sacrifice defaced all theirs Heb. 13.20 Heb. 10. And we haue an Altar whereof they haue no authoritie to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Against the ceremonial maintenance of those ceremonial seruices Colos 2.16 and Heb. 13.9 10. Let no man therfore condemne you in meat and drinke c. which are but a shadow of things to come But the bodie is in Christ A precept for all sorts of men So Leui in regard of those restrictions a Ceremoniall Priest though he eat also of Gods Inheritance because he medled also with Gods Morall seruice in teaching his Law abroad he could not make the Inheritance Ceremonial 2 Chro. 17.7 8 9. nor defraud Melchisedec of his due Onely that which began with Leui ended with Leui. And that all those foresaid fiue points had euer in § VI them both a Moral and Ceremonial respect Order and Time of the points of Gods Worship Gen. 1.26 27 c. Gen. 3.15 the Ceremonial Law taking chiefe hold of the latter and so the Morall was euer the former and remaineth still it is cleare thus First Worship consisting before the fall in a perfect obedience 〈◊〉 God And after the fall in those Euangelical promises of our Redemption which with their performances now in Christ are both but one both morall and perpetual before the Law The Typical worship Gen. 4.3 Gen. 2.8 16 17 Gen. 4.3 Gen. 18.16 17 c. both before and after the fall came last For doubtlesse Adam as God taught him taught his sonnes before they sacrificed Which in processe of time came to passe Also vnder the Law the first point in our Legal Priests commission was Moral To teach Iacob thy Iudgements c. and then commeth the Ceremonial Deut 33.10 To put the burnt offering vpon
to such as bee of humble and sanctified hearts Leui then is dead and no man denieth it Melchisedec is risen and some men beleeue it but that hee rose to take Tithes most men laugh at it We will assay therefore first after Leui and from Melchisedec to draw them vpon Christ secondly to deriue them from him to his Ministerie § VIII Paul hauing in the first ten verses compared Melchisedec with Aaron The Type applied by Paul to Christ Anagogice both as Christs Types He proueth vers 11. the weaknesse of Aarons Priest-hood because it was needfull that there should rise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Aaron both in Person Tribe and Order But from Melchisedec in Person onely not Order Then vers 13. commeth on the maine Conclusion by an Anagogicall application binding these prerogatiues of Melchisedec considered in the simple nature of a Type by a relatiue force on the Verity Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For hee of whom these things are spoken c. I thinke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be sufficiently expressed by Of whom for this is true English for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as chap. 5.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of whom we haue much to say All then that is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of Melchisedec is heere by the Apostle inferred and transferred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to vnto and vpon Christ The construction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here with the Accusatiue case signifieth motum remouing or conueyance from one point to another So was Melchisedec but Christs Atturney heere to take seasing of his Patrimony and so must it not remaine still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but returne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All these prerogatiual Prepositions end euer in Christ as first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For whom and by whom all things were Heb. 2.10 Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whom and to whom all must rest and be referred Colos 1.16 17. Thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom all things of Melchisedec were spoken Heb. 5.11 And lastly heere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on whom all rights titles and possessions prefigured by his Type must bee transferred for euer Then we reason thus from Pauls grounds Whatsouer is spoken heere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Melchisedec typically is transferred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnto Christ his veritie Tithing is spoken of Melchisedec typically Ergo Tithes must be transferred vnto Christ his verity Let any Christian shew wherein this doctrine faileth § IX But heere they say there is much made of nothing Tithes why touched hereby Paul The Apostle intended not heere to prooue Tithes due but to settle Christs Priest-hood as perpetual And so say I to Doubtlesse he neuer doubted that Tithes were due neither doubted they with whom he had to do therefore he taketh it with them pro confesso and vseth it as his onely Medium to resolue their doubt of the perpetuitie of Christs Priesthood Hee taketh Tithes hee liueth Ergo An eternall Priest Leui was but a dying Tithing Priest All things recorded of our Melchisedec are still truely affirmed in praesenti Hee Blesseth hee Titheth hee liueth his sacrifice endureth for euer Of Leui not one of all now true And when he euen liued all were not in all respects true for he daily dyed in Person and in end died quite from his office therefore in both imperfect His actions were daily redoubled and where euer repetition must be there can be no perfection Our Melchisedec had neuer a fellow made neuer a default therefore Al-sufficient This for drawing of Tithes vpon Christ § X Now in deriuing them from him we meete with a Cauil How Christ is said to take Tithes we layd for a ground chap. 4. That whatsoeuer the Type did that must the veritie also doe Ergo Seeing Melchisedec tooke Tithes Christ must take Tithes But Christ neuer Tithed c. For answer Christ taketh Tithes now even as his Father tooke them before him viz. by their Officers What was Essential in the Priest-hood of Mechisedec that Christ performeth euer really viz. Blessing But Tithing is onely a proprietie not of the Essence of Priest-hood and so bindeth not the veritie in his owne person for a workeman is not defined by his wages So in this point the Law of al similitudes must haue place nullum simile in omni simile And seeing Christ taketh almes being giuen to the poore may he not take his owne Patrimonie by his owne Officers whom he hath made his Ministers his Ambassadors putting the word of reconciliation in their mouthes 2 Cor. 5.19.20 and so his Inheritance in their hands Thus farre for the APostles arguments from the person taker Melchisedec Followeth from the giuer Abraham CHAP. VII Perpetuall Tithing prooued also by Abrahams deede A comparison betweene Melchisedec Leui and our Ministery The Conclusion of the lawfulnesse of Tithes MELCHISEDEC then Taketh Tithes and Liueth § I But a liuing taker must also haue a liuing giuer Abraham bindeth vs to Tithes Therefore the Apostle telleth vs heere That Abraham with his whole seede must be the Aequiualent giuer lasting as long as Melchisedecs Priest-hood and so Abraham giueth Tithes and liueth That all Abrahams posteritie make vp the person of the Giuer it is thus cleared And to say as the thing is Hebr. 7.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Leui also which receiueth Tithes was Tithed in Abraham Then if Leui was Tithed I hope the other eleuen Tribes his brethren scaped not free But let vs heare why was Leui Tithed Because he was yet in the loynes of his Father Abraham when Melchisedec met him Then all that dare call Abraham Father euen as well that issued out of the loynes of his flesh as that are entered in the fellowship of his Faith are all heere in Abraham Tithed Flesh bringeth in the whole Tribes for they issued out of his very loynes as did Leui Faith includeth all the Families of the Earth as Abrahams seede whereby the poorest Lazarus leapeth to Abrahams bosome And that Faith hath no lesse force heere then Flesh it is cleare by the fourth and sixt verses Abraham the Patriarch was Tithed who had the Promises Then if he be a Father of our Faith let him be also the Father of our thankfulnes If we be Blessed in him let vs also be Tithed in him else our faith is but dead and he is not our Father But what if the seede of his Faith be more bound § II then the seed of his onely Flesh Rom. 9.7 8. Seed of Faith more bound to Tithes then Seede of Flesh Saith not Paul All are not Israel that are of Israel neither are they all children because they are the seede of Abraham c. that is they which are the children of the flesh are not the children of God But the children of the Promise are counted for the Seede Then seeing Melchisedec blessed Abraham our
and comprehend not Herbs vnder that name They deliuer indeede that by Tradition from their Fathers all things growing out of the earth and fit for mans meat are Titheable c. But it seemeth saith Selden well that for this paiment of Herbs the Pharisees were of the truer side from Luke and Mathew allowed by Christ Here now is proued our Historia fallax by M. Seldens owne consent Therefore Out of M. Seldens iust obseruation here against Talmud would I aske leaue to affirme that the proofes from Talmud in others points of Tithing alleadged by him or Scaliger are not to goe for sure grounds seeing himselfe hath found them so erroneus in this And that it is no sure course of arguing the true intent of Precept by the sinistrous extent of Practise For although we had not here Christs latter approbation of that Tithing against the records of Rabbins yet the very Precepts themselues being well pondered will include all such Herbs and much more For euen that place Deut 26.12 Thine encrease Who taught the Talmudists that encrease here must signifie onely Mans meate Why should not Tithing be extended in this Text to all Encreasing And Leuit 27.30 All the Tithe of the Earth of the seede of the Earth of the fruite of the Tree is holy vnto the Lord Is there not much seede of the Earth that is not mans meat Seede here is not onely what by our Sowing commeth but also whatsoeuer by Gods firsts Blessing of all Creatures bringing foorth the kinde History of all times confirmeth this for Hay Hempe Oates Mines Quarries and the like haue beene subiect to Tithing as Selden hath obserued yea euen his Ruticilia Ruta caesa Chap 1. § 1 et chap 4. § 2. And true Analogie warranteth History For the Tribe of Leui was to bee supplied in euery their necessitie out of all that the Earth yeelded the other Tribes for their necessities This made Ierom interpret that of Num 18. In vsus et necessaria eorum separaui All the Tithe of the Earth againe may well enough include all Trade-encrease euen where no Seede-encrease is The Earth beareth All both vs and for vs. So whatsoeuer the Earth bringeth vs by way of Encrease yeerely of that wee owe a yeerely portion to God out of a tenth proportion And in this sense may we say Vbi Nummus nummum gignit nummus nummum soluet as Selden hath well obserued in the State of Venice where no Prediall Tithes are and therefore Selicha 7. §. 3. pag. 164. Chap. 7. §. 3. Personall due Now come we to M. Seldens Historie of the Opinions touching the Right of Tithes the third Article of his title handle in his seuenth Chapter § 3 c. and concerneth most our purpose The chiefe question saies Selden among the Diuines comes to this Whether by Gods immediate Morall Law the Euangelicall Priesthood haue a right to Tithes as to their Inheritance in equall degree as the Laie man hath to his Nine If euer Tiths were due by Gods immediate Morall Law they must be euer so this is sure Then our recourse must still be in examining by what Law Tithes were at first due All Priesthood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had euer Tithes Before Law by Practise Tradition Instinct of Gods Spirit Vnder Law by written Law agreeable to the former practise Whether both those were Morall Iudiciall or Ceremoniall wee shall heare anone And so what euer prerogatiue those Lawes gaue the Priesthood aboue the Laitie the same still remaineth The Tenth was euer first to be paied else the nine parts were not the Lay-mans Ibid. Or if saies Selden they haue Tithes onely as by humane Positiue Law and so giuen them for their spirituall labours that is in briefe Whether by originall distributiue iustice or by commutatiue they are payable How Kingdomes are by their owne Lawes Positiue seetled in Tithes is one thing and how they should be another thing And their so great differences among themselues argueth infallibly that they haue varied from the true foundation As to Iustice Distributiue and Commutatiue they hold alike also from the beginning euen in Leui vnder the Law all had the tenths for their Spirituall labour distributed vnto them and so hath the Gospell now As for that Title Humane Positiue Law we must haue a good ground to proue how Diuine Positiue Law which onely doted Tithes to Leui did resigne them vnder the power of Humane Positiue Law for the Gospell Here be strange odds Ibid. But the first opinion was sayes Selden That the Tenth considered quoad quotam partem c. is due onely by Law Positiue and Ecclesiasticall but quoad substantiam suam or Cleri sustentationem c. it is due by the Diuine Morall Law And to the purpose of this distinction they interprete the Leuiticall commandements of Tithes quoad substantiam and quoad quotam The quota being but a Iudiciall or as some will a Ceremoniall Law c And what a strange Distinguo is this to diuide the Tenth and quota as if both were not one The strongest Mathematicall imaginary abstraction cannot seperate them Maintenance indeed generally and so is their meaning may be free of a quota but a Tenth cannot But who taught them that Maintenance was Morall Diuine and the quota but Positiue and Ecclesiasticall Finde they any such trickes in the two Testaments What Positiue Law gaue Tithes to Melchisedec M. Seld ib. pag. 157. ad finem Because forsooth the Maintenance say they of the Ministerie in Generall is Morall or Naturall there being according to consideration of it se farre the very Character of it written in the Tables of mens hearts that is that Spirituall labourers are to be rewarded with temporall bountie as euery labourer is worthy of his hire But quoad quotum it is but a Iudiciall or Ceremoniall Law c. Heere haue wee three Lawes to ponder and to couche our Tithes vnder some one of them Tithes to be Ceremoniall is but a Ceremonie and as soone done as spoken no man euer durst offer a proofe for it To be Iudiciall they cannot First because that practise of Abraham and Vow of Iacob can neuer bee brought within the compasse of the Iewish Iudiciall Law no I say further within no Law meerely or onely Iewish Consider it well Yea Tithes Legally enacted as I doe thinke cannot bee properly Iudiciall For their Iudiciall Lawes properly so called and without mixture did concerne chiefly their Ciuill Common-wealth and so all the Tribes alike But the Law of Tithes went in fauours of onely Leui a Law proper and peculiar to the Priest-hood before and then to to All Priest-hood Melchisedechicall and Aaronicall Euangelicall and Legal Now how can either Melchisedec or Aaron come vnder the Iudiciall Law It is more then I haue yet obserued if the Iudicial Law gaue any order for the Priest-hood yea the Change of the Priest-hood made a change of the Law Heb. 7.12 Melchisedec