the Sonne of Iehozadeck's head was the modell of the Crowne of David which was to flourish upon Iesus the Sonne of David's head as it is Psalme 132. v. 18. But upon himselfe shall his Crowne flourish 6 Briefly the protestation which the Angell in the verses following makes to Iesus the Son of Iosedech is but a renewing or repetition of the promise which God had made unto Abraham and David concerning their seede The tenour of God's promise here renewed or repeated unto Iesus the high Priest is the same And the Angell of the Lord protested unto Ieshua saying thus saith the Lord of boasts if thou wilt walke in my wayes and if thou wilt keepe my charge then thou shalt also judge my house and shalt also keepe my Courts and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by These words containe as ample a patent for the temporall or legall Priesthood unto Iesus the Sonne of Iosedech and his posteritie as David had for continuation of the temporall Kingdome in his race or progeny both the promises and patents were conditionall But that there should arise an everlasting Priest as well as an everlasting King one in whom God's promises should not be conditionall but yea and amen that is absolute and irrefragable the Prophet Zachary addes Heare now O Ieshua the high Priest thou and thy fellowes that sit before thee for they are what are they monstrous persons saith our former English or men wondred at saith the later Viri portendentes saith the vulgar The Prophets meaning is that they are men set for types or signes of great matters to come The word in the originall is the same Ezech. 12. 11. Say I am your signe like as I have done so shall it be done unto them that is to the Princes of Ierusalem and house of Israel they shall remove and goe into captivity As Ezechiel his digging through the wall in the peoples sight and carrying forth his stuffe upon his shoulders in twilight with his face covered that hee should not see the ground was a signe or prognostication of Zedechiah's stealth or flight from the Chaldeans army which besieged him So Ieshua the high Priest and all his fellowes in all this action or solemnity specially in laying the foundation of the Altar and Temple were prognosticke signes or prefigurations of Iesus the everlasting high Priest and of the spirituall Temple the holy Catholique Church which he was to build by the ministry of the Apostles So it followeth for behold I will bring forth my servant the branch For behold the stone that I have laid before Ieshua upon one stone shall be seven eyes behold I will engrave the graving thereof saith the Lord of hoasts and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day CHAP. 22. Of the harmony betweene the Prophet Ieremy and the Prophet Zachary concerning the man whose name is the branch How his growth or springing up was prefigured by Zerubbabel the sonne of David His name and title as our high Priest fore-pictured by the name and title of Iesus the Sonne of Iosedech That he was as truly the Son of God before all time as the sonne of David in time THat this man whose name was the Branch was to build the Temple of the Lord that he was to take his investiture unto his priestly dignity by Iesus the Sonne of Iehosadech as by his proxie is apparent from the sixt Chapter of the Prophet Zachary 11. Take silver and gold and make Crownes and set them upon the head of Ieshua the Sonne of Iosedech the high Priest and speake unto him saying thus speaketh the Lord of hasts saying Behold the man whose name is the Branch and hee shall grow up out of his place hee shall build the Temple of the Lord even hee shall build the Temple of the Lord and he shall beare the glory and shall sit and rule upon his throne and he shall be a Priest upon his Throne and the counsell of peace shall be betweene them both 2 This place and the former are pregnant that the Servant of the Lord whose name was Zemah the Branch whose office was to build up the Temple of God should be a Priest and should sit upon his Throne as Priest But it cannot from either place be gathered it is not so much as intimated that hee should either be a Priest after the order of Aaron or of Melchisedech or of the seede of Aaron as Iesus or Ioshua the Sonne of Iehosedech was But as the Prophet affirmeth not that hee was to be Priest after the order of Aaron or Melchisedech so neither in plaine termes doth hee deny it true but as every Prophet of God speakes nothing but the truth so neither doth one of them speake all the truth or all that is requisite for us to believe concerning Iesus our Saviour That the man whose name was the Branch the same party of whom Zachary here speakes should not be of the seed of Aaron or a Priest after the order of Aaron is evident from the prophecy of Ieremiah Ier. 23. 5. uttered more then seventy yeares before Zachary began to prophecy Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch and a King shall raigne and prosper and shall execute judgment and justice upon the earth In his dayes Iudah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely and this is his name whereby he shall be called the Lord our righteousnesse It is plaine then out of the fore cited prophecy of Zachary that God's servant the righteous Branch was to be a Priest It is evident againe out of Ieremiah that he was to spring out of the seede of David and to raigne as King over Iudah and Israel as David had done And these two put together will directly conclude that this Branch of David was to be that sonne of David concerning whom the Lord had sworne and would not repent that hee should be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech who was both King and Priest and by interpretation the King of righteousnesse and King of peace both which titles are expressely given to this Servant of God and Branch of David the one by the Prophet Zachary the other by the Prophet Ieremiah 3 But is it intimated or fore-told by either of them that he should be as truly David's Lord as David's Sonne Yes Ieremy implies this in fuller termes then David himselfe doth Psalm 110. for David saith the Lord said unto my Lord Adonai not Iehovah whereas the Prophet Ieremy tells us that the supreame style or title of this Branch of David should be not Adonai Tzadkenu but Iehova Tzadkenu Iehovah our righteousnesse So that hee whom David in spirit calleth his Lord was to be as essentially Lord and God as he that said unto him sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy foot stoole But was he according unto this name or title
that obey him And is called of God from the time of his Resurrestion or exaltation an high Priest after the order of Melchisedech CHAP. 10. Wherein the Priesthood of Melchisedech did differ from the Priesthood of Aaron That Melchisedech did not offer any sacrifice of bread and wine unto God when he blessed Abraham THe office of Aaron and of his Sonnes wee have described Deuteron 10. 8. At that time the Lord separated the Tribe of Levi to beare the Arke of the Covenant of the Lord to stand before the Lord to minister unto him and to blesse in his name unto this day And againe Deut. 18. 3. This shall be the Priests duty c. For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy Tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord him and his Sonnes for ever ver 5. Could Melchisedech's office be greater or his patent ampler especially for duration For sacrifice prayer and blessing are the trinall dimensions of the Priesthood howsoever taken This difficultie perhaps did occasion a foule error in the Romish Church or encourage her followers to maintaine this error brought forth it may be upon other occasions to wit that the office of Melchisedech should properly consist herein especially differ from the Priesthood of AaroÌ„ For that when he met Abraham he offered up bread wine by way of proper sacrifice unto God as a type or pledge of the unbloody sacrifice of the masse unto which the Romanists for the most part restraine the exercise of Christ's Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech 2 To omit their chymicall conceits who labour in vaine to extract some act of sacrificing out of the originall word hotsi Maldonate the most zealous and laborious pleader in this argument because Calvin had held the monkish allegorizars to the literall and gramaticall sense of Scriptures holds it no sin to put a trick of Grammar so they would admit it upon Calvin's followers upon the very text it self For whereas the Romish Interpreters who went before him admit the vulgar edition Et erat Sacerdos Dei altissimi This Critick to despite Calvin will correct Magnificat and renders it thus Et erat sacrificans Deo altissimo His reason for this innovation is because the hebrew Cohen is for it's form a participle of the present tense but surely he was better read in his Gramar then in his Lexicon although better read in that then in the Hebrew Text for although the Hebbrew Cohen be usually taken for a Priest yet to sacrifice is no part of the proper formal signification of the radicall verb Cahan That directly imports no more then ministravit or Sacerdotem egit Whence though it be most true that every Sacrificer is a CoheÌ„ is a Priest or Minister of God yet is not this truth simply convertible that is Every Cohen Priest or Minister of God is a Sacrificer specially if we speak of times before the Law was given or since it expired much lesse will it follow that every act or function which the Minister of God performs should be a sacrifice So that albeit we should give the Criticall Iesuit leave to degrade the Hebrew Cohen and turne it out of a noun in which form and habit it was taken by all his Predecessors into the nature and value of a Participle the Grammaticall sense will amount to no more then this Et erat Ministrans or Sacerdotio fungens Deo altissimo and all this Melchisedech might doe and this he verily did in blessing Abraham not in bringing forth or offering bread and wine The letter of the Text runnes thus And Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine and hee was a Priest of the most high God Suppose a man should here interrupt the Reader or relater of this History thus What if hee were a Priest of the most high God To what purpose is this clause inserted The holy Ghost in the next words clears the doubt or rather prevents the Question And he blessed Abraham In what forme or sort Blessed be Abraham of the most high God! So then Melchisedech is instiled a Priest of the most high God to shew his warrant to blesse in the name of the most high God And for this interpretation I have the warrant or confirmation from Cyril of Alexandria 3 As for his bread and wine hee offered these to Abraham and not to God as Philo Iudaeus a competent witnesse in this Controversie hath informed us For this good Author opposeth Melchisedech's hospitalitie towards Abraham unto Amalech's niggardly and uncharitable disposition towards Israel comming out of the house of affliction Amalech saith hee was excluded from the congregation of the Lord because hee met not Israel with bread and water whereas Melchisedech had met our father Abraham laden with the spoâ—â—es of his enemies with bread and wine He hath not in my opinion erred much in taking the symboles or elements of bread and wine for emblemes of that true pabulum animae which consists in contemplation of heavenly things And yet I am perswaded hee had no expresse knowledge of the true object of such contemplation to wit the body and blood of Christ or of the benefit conveyed to us from them since they were offered in sacrifice unto God by the elements of bread and wine not as mere signes but as undoubted pledges of his body and blood to be communicated to us 4 And although Suidas in his second Paragraph on the word Melchisedech will have our Saviours Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech to take beginning from the night before his passion wherein he tooke bread and wine and blessed them yet in his third Paragraph upon the same word he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Melchisedech brought forth bread and wine unto Abraham But let us suppose what the Text will not support that Melchisedech did offer up a sacrifice of bread and wine to the most high God thus much being granted wee may draw that net which the Romanist sets for others upon himselfe for our next interrogatory should be this Of what sacrifice may we by any analogie of faith imagine this supposed sacrifice of Melchisedech to be the type of the dayly reiterated sacrifice of the masse or of the one only sacrifice of the Sonne of God Surely if Melchisedech be a true type of the everlasting Priest his sacrifice must be a type of this Priest's everlasting sacrifice Now as we read not though Maldonate's reading of the former pâ—â—â—e were true that Melchisedech did offer any sacrifice besides this supposed sacrifice of bread and wine so wee must undoubtedly beleeve that the Sonne of God did offer no more sacrifices then one and that one never to be reiterated because the value of it being truly infinite the efficacy of it must needs be absolutely everlasting If otherwise wee should with the Romanists admit of a sacrifice by succession or multiplication as everlasting as this transitory
Christ once for all Hebr. 10. 10. Every Priest standeth dayly ministring and offering oftimes the same sacrifices which can never take away sinnes but this man or rather this Priest after he had once offered one sacrifice for sinnes for ever sate downe on the right hand of God and henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool For by one offering he hath consecrated for ever them that are sanctified ver 11. 12. 13. 5 As many as have reaped or hereafter shall reape any benefit either from Gods's Oath to Abraham concerning his seede in whom all the Nations of the earth were to be blessed or from the Renewing of this Oath to David concerning his son which was to be the Dispenser of this blessing and to be made a Priest after the order of Melchisedech who blessed Abraham all and every one of them are consecrated to the patticipation of this blessing by the Consecration of this our high Priest the Sonne of God The Law saith the Apostle makes men high Priests which have infirmity but the word of the Oath which was since the Law maketh the Sonne high Priest who is consecrated for evermore and by this his Consecration wee even all the Israel of God are consecrated by an everlasting Consecration So saith the Apostle Revel 1. 5. Iesus Christ the first begotten of the dead and Prince of the Kings of the earth hath washed us from our sins in his owne Blood and hath made us Kings and Priests that is Priests after the order of Melchisedech unto God and his Father By this his Consecration likewise to his everlasting Priesthood we are hallowed and consecrated as Temples to our God so saith S. Peter 1. Pet. 2. v. 4. 5. To whom comming as to a living stone disallowed indeed of men but chosen of God and precious yee also as lively stones are built up a spirituall house an holy Priesthood to offer up a spirituall sacrifice acceptable to God by Iesus Christ 5 But to take the severall bloody sacrifices which were offered at the Consecration of Aaron and his sonnes into more particular consideration Albeit these sacrifices were all imperfect not only absolutely or in respect of our high Priest's everlasting sacrifice but even in respect of these spirituall sacrifices mentioned by S. Peter which wee are to offer unto God yet were they all in their kind most perfect The best and chiefest in the whole ranke of legall or Aaronicall sacrifices they are as so many lineaments pourtraying in part or fore-shadowing that body or accomplishment not of them only but of all other sacrifices All meet in it as so many lines in their Center The first bloody sacrifice that was offered at the Consecration of Aaron was a Bullock The Priests might offer no other sacrifice then this for their owne sinne-offering because this was of all other the best and yet in comparison of this saith the Psalmist in the Person of this our high Priest in his affliction I will praise the name of God with a song and will magnifie him with thanksgiving this alâ—o shall please the Lord better then a bullock which hath hornes and hoofes that is beginning to spread the horne and hoofe for at that time they were most fit for sacrifice Psal 69. ver 30. 31. His meaning was that this sacrifice of thanksgiving should be more acceptable unto God then the very best sacrifice of the Law and so it was especially whilst offered by our high Priest even when he offered his bloody sacrifice upon the Crosse and after his enemies had given him vineger in his thirst to drink For after he had uttered that pittifull Song of the Psalmist Psal 22. whether only out of his griefe or anguish or upon other respects and intentions My God my God why hast Thou for saken Me he finally commends his soule his spirit unto his Father in the words of the Psalmists Song Ps 35. Father into thy hands I coÌ„mend my spirit The uttering of both these Songs in this anguish of soule argues hee lov'd his God and our God his Father and our Father with all his soule with all his heart with all his strength and his performance of this great Commandement as the Scribe which approved his answer to the Pharisees to the Herodians and the Sadduces had a litle before confest upon his answer to his Question was more then all whole burnt offrings and sacrifices Mat. 12. from v. 12. to 34. CHAP. 26. In what respects the Bullock offered at the Consecration of Aaron c. and the rites of offering â—â— did prefigure the bloody sacrifice of the Sonne of God especially the circumstances of the place wherein it was offered BVt you will aske wherein did the Sacrifice of the Bullock which was offered for a sinne-offering or Attonement at Aaron's Consecration or the circumstances in offering it punctually fore-shadow the bloody Sacrifice which our high Priest offered at his Consecration or the manner or circumstance of his offering it It did in circumstance at least prefigure the Sacrifice of our high Priest after the same manner or in respect of the same circumstance that the annuall sacrifices of Attonement did prefiure it of which hereafter Inasmuch as the head and flesh c. of the Bullock for sinne-offering or Attonement for Aaron at his Consecation was to be offered or burnt without the campe not to be burnt upon the Altar It fell under the same Law and undergoes the same considerations which the annuall-Sacrifices in the feast of Attonement did For so it is expressely commanded Exod. 29. 14. That the flesh of the Bullock and his skinne should be burnt without the Camp because it was a sin-offering Now it was an universall and peremptory Law that no flesh of any Sacrifice whose Blood was brought into the Sanctuary to make Attonement should be eaten by the Priests in the Sanctuary 2 It was againe a Law as peremptory that the Priests especially the high Priests might that is had power to eat the flesh of any Sacrifice whose Blood was not brought into the Sanctuary For to this purpose Moses Levit. 10. 17. expostulateth with Aaron's sonnes which were left after the death of Nadab and Abihu Wherefore have yee not eaten the sinne-offering in the holy place for it is the holy of holies and it vz. the flesh of the sin-offring he hath given to you to beare the iniquity of the Congregation to make Attonement for them before the Lord Behold the Blood of it was not brought in behold indeed you should have eaten it in the holy place as I commanded you Aaron in his Apologie for his sonnes against this accusation of Moses in no case questions the truth or extent of this commandement but rather excuseth himselfe and his sonnes for not observing the purport of the Law as the case stood with them his two sonnes Nadab and Abihu being lately consumed with fire issuing out from before the Lord for offering strange fire which
and Embassadours not to the end of the earth but to the ends of the World 4 Some of the Ancients and among the rest S. Austin if my memory faile not thinke they have found out S. Paul charactered in the fore cited prophecy there was litle Beniamin their Ruler c. And assuredly 't was not a matter of meere chance or fancy that this great Apostle of the Gentiles should have his name changed from Saul unto Paul a name borrowed as some thinke from Sergius Paulus and Paulus in the Latine signifies a litle one And this was a name better be fitting this great Apostles disposition after his calling then the name of Saul which was the name of the first King of Israel and one of the greatest of his Tribe That Saul was litle in his owne eyes before hee was King but great after whereas this Apostle Paul was litle in his owne eyes but great in the eyes of the Lord after hee was made Ruler of the people but to wave this conjecture of the Ancients and not to dispute the reason why Beniamin should be called litle by David in that Catalogue wherein hee had the precedency in order of Iudah most other passages throughout this 68. Psal from the 19. ver are eminently propheticall Blessed be the Lord who dayly loadeth us with benefits even the God of our salvation Hee that is our God is the God of salvation and unto God the Lord belong the issues of death ver 19. 20. These are characters of God incarnate or made man or of the man Christ Iesus made salvation it selfe and of this Iesus raised from death for from this title the issues of death or deliverance from it belong to him as his peculiar More apparently are those passages ver 31. c. literally meant at least exactly fulfilled of Iesus Christ after his Resurrection and Ascension to his holy hill or heavenly Sanctuary Princes shall come out of Egypt Ethiopia shall soone stretch out her hands unto God Sing unto God O yee Kingdomes of the earth O sing praises unto the Lord. To him that rideth upon the heaven of heavens which were of old Loe he doth send out his voice and that a mighty voice Ascribe yee strength unto God his excellency is over Israel and his strength is in the Clouds O God thou art terrible out of thy places the God of Israel is he that giveth strength and power unto his people Bbessed be God ver 31. 32. c. 5 As for the prayer conceived first by Moses afterwards assumed by David after the removall of the Arke Let God arise let his enemies be scattered let them also that hate him flee before him and all those menaces of fearefull judgments upon God's enemies pronounced by David in this Psalme as appendices to it these were never so exactly fulfil'd either of the Cananites Moabites Philistims or other enemies of Israel whiles the materiall Arke did remove from place to place or setled in Ierusalem as they have been of the seed of Abraham and of Iacob since their God did arise from death in our nature which he consecrated to be the true and living Arke of God Nor can the truth of God's promises unto Abraham David or their seed no not according to the literall sense of the prophecies which concerne them be any way impeached by taking his punishing hand from their heads and laying it more heavily upon his sometimes-chosen people For seeing they became the sworne enemies of the God of their Fathers revealed in the Arke of his flesh the fore-mentioned prayer or imprecation of Moses and David was more literally and punctually directed against them then against Aâ—â—alek Moab Ammon c. For these whether we take them jointly or severally were no greater enemies of God then other heathen Nations were save only in this that they were greater enemies to his Chosen people the seed of Iacob by reason of their vicinity as bordering upon their costs which alwaies nurseth quarrels betweene Nations dis-united in soveraignty or forme of government whereas the Iewish seed of Abraham which had been sometimes God's Elect people without occasion given became the immediate enemies of their God and for his sake more bloody persecutors of the Gentiles yea of their owne brethren according to the flesh after they with the Gentiles had become his Chosen people Now Moses his prayer or David's imprecation did not aime at the persons of men of what Nation soever but at their malicious qualifications or enmities against God whether direct or indirect so that since the seed of Abraham became the enemies of God and his Christ they may be more truly said to have dashed against the Psalmists or Moses curse then it to have falled upon or overtaken them and yet for all this as wee learne from S. Paul Rom. 11. that other prayer of Moses when the Arke rested shall beare date againe shall be fulfilled for the good of these yet cast-awaies When the Ark rested Moses said returnè O God to the many thousands of Israel Numb 10. 36. This strange devolution of God's mercies and judgments from one people to another making the down-fall of one Nation to be the advancement of another to his free grace and mercy not the points of Election and reprobation as there hath been a mist cast upon them by unskilful Controversers whereas S. Paul had left them cleare enough was that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whose deeper consideration did extort that patheticall ejaculation from him O the depth of the riches both of the wisdome and knowledge of God how unsearehable are his Iudgments and his waies past finding out c. CHAP. 38. That the manner of our Saviours Ascension was more clearly fore seen by Daniel then by David and most exactly fore-shadowed by matters of fact in Mosaicall and other sacred histories A parallel betweene SaloÌ„mon's Consecration of the Temple and our Saviour's Consecration or sanctisying of himselfe and his heavenly Sanctuary WHether David did distinctly apprehend the manner of our Saviour's Ascension and propagation of his dominion over all things in heaven and earth both which he did fore-tell and fore-shadow by matter of fact and service done to the Arke or whether he did at all fore-guesse or suspect the turning of God's heavy hand upon his seed and Iacob's seed according to the flesh is a point not altogether out of question were it fit to be inquired into But as hath been observed heretofore our beliefe or right apprehension of the truth of divine mysteries doth not depend upon their knowledge or appehension which did fore-tell or relate their prefigurations but on the contrivance of divine â—inerting all-seeing providence by whose inspiration and secret instinct both the Prophets and Evangelists did both speake and write But be the former doubt concerning David's apprehension of these mysteries waved or determined as it may be this wee know and may resolve whatsoever in the former Psalme was fore-told or