1.
Cor.
9.13
,
14.
Do
yee
not
know
that
they
which
minister
about
the
holy
things
,
liue
of
the
things
of
the
Temple
?
and
they
which
wait
at
the
Altar
,
are
partakers
with
the
Altar
?
Even
so
hath
the
Lord
ordained
,
that
they
which
preach
the
Gospell
should
liue
of
the
Gospell
.
THis
whole
period
of
Scripture
,
from
ver.
5.
to
15.
consists
of
one
discrete
axiome
,
in
summe
this
:
Though
I
Paule
haue
power
and
right
to
liue
at
the
charge
of
the
Church
,
ver.
5.
yet
I
haue
not
vsed
that
power
,
ver.
12.
the
reason
whereof
he
giues
;
Least
hee
should
hinder
the
Gospell
of
Christ
,
through
suspicion
of
mercenary
.
Affection
in
preaching
.
Now
for
that
it
might
be
questioned
whether
he
had
any
such
right
or
no
,
hee
avowes
the
truth
of
his
title
;
by
arguments
à
genere
,
he
was
an
Apostle
&
preacher
of
the
Gospell
,
ver.
1.
Ergo
had
right
.
2.
prevētingly
,
à
pari
,
in
the
practise
of
others
;
ver.
5.6
.
as
well
as
Peter
&c.
And
for
that
the
claime
might
not
seeme
equall
betwixt
Paule
and
Cephas
and
the
Lords
brethren
,
he
sheweth
that
to
every
minister
of
the
Gospell
,
maintenance
is
due
for
their
worke
sake
.
By
reasons
,
1.
From
voice
of
nature
and
consent
of
nations
in
other
semblant
imployments
▪
as
who
goes
to
war
,
&c.
ver.
7.
2.
From
mandate
of
the
law
of
God
.
Saith
not
the
law
of
God
the
same
,
&c.
ver.
8.9.10
.
3.
From
excellency
of
blessings
conferred
by
Ministers
,
compared
with
qualitie
of
things
exacted
for
recompence
;
If
we
sowe
spirituall
things
&c.
ver.
11.
4.
From
allowed
practise
of
Leviticall
ministery
,
ver.
13.
Lastly
,
from
expresse
ordinance
of
Christ
,
the
Lord
hath
ordained
,
&c.
ver.
14.
this
the
frame
of
the
text
.
Out
of
all
which
amounts
this
plaine
Apostolicall
conclusion
;
That
maintenance
is
due
from
people
to
Ministers
for
their
worke
sake
.
Other
proofes
then
are
here
set
downe
,
it
is
needlesse
to
vse
.
Wee
haue
here
more
then
two
or
three
witnesses
,
fiue
sound
reasons
inforcing
it
.
The
bare
word
of
an
Apostle
is
enough
to
carry
a
point
more
doubtfull
.
How
much
more
should
it
sway
with
vs
,
when
Gods
spirit
that
spake
in
them
,
is
pleased
by
so
many
reasons
to
avouch
it
?
Is
it
not
then
a
sound
tenent
(
trow
we
)
of
some
,
that
Ministers
maintenance
is
meer
almes
?
and
that
in
iustice
,
and
as
due
,
they
can
challenge
nothing
for
their
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
?
1
Where
then
is
Paules
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
his
right
,
lawful
power
and
authoritie
,
to
receaue
maintenance
from
the
people
,
v.
4
▪
2
?
How
saith
our
Saviour
,
they
are
worthie
of
their
hire
,
[
a
](A11600-e10600-b)
a
Luk
9
7.
Paule
worthy
of
double
honour
[
b
](A11600-e10620-b)
b
1.
Tim
5.17
.
?
3
What
great
thing
was
this
that
Paule
did
in
taking
no
maintenance
,
ver.
12.15
?
By
these
mens
divinitie
he
had
right
to
none
.
2
And
what
ods
is
there
betwixt
this
beggerly
conclusion
of
those
old
beggers
,
and
that
of
late
separats
,
that
make
it
Christs
ordinance
for
Ministers
to
liue
of
their
peoples
voluntary
contribution
;
and
hold
it
as
Christs
owne
Canon
,
that
no
set
maintenance
shoulde
be
allotted
vs
,
no
not
by
humane
ordinance
,
but
the
people
left
at
liberty
to
giue
or
not
to
giue
,
to
giue
much
or
little
,
otherwise
then
selfe
devotion
shall
incline
them
?
May
I
not
say
of
this
and
the
former
as
Ioseph
of
Pharaos
dreames
,
[
c
](A11600-e10670-b)
c
Gen
41.25
.
the
dreames
are
one
?
Words
onely
haue
made
a
variation
.
Ministers
must
liue
of
the
peoples
voluntary
contribution
:
me
thinkes
I
heare
St
Pauls
tenour
for
almes
,
[
d
](A11600-e10710-b)
d
2.
Cor.
9.7
.
As
every
man
wisheth
in
his
heart
so
let
him
giue
.
Their
reasons
had
need
be
pregnant
:
let
vs
view
them
.
1.
Forsooth
the
Apostles
thus
lived
.
Resp.
J
yeeld
it
of
some
of
them
:
yea
sometimes
made
their
own
hands
minister
to
their
necessities
:
why
force
they
vs
not
to
mechanicall
trades
?
For
so
lived
some
Apostles
.
But
1
they
had
power
to
exact
maintenance
,
sith
they
had
right
[
e
](A11600-e10740-b)
e
1.
Cor.
9.4
,
5
to
haue
it
.
2
,
Occasionall
practise
binds
not
to
imitation
,
but
in
occurrence
of
like
occasions
When
scandall
inforceth
to
forbeare
exaction
,
we
will
herein
follow
their
holy
example
,
least
by
any
meanes
we
hinder
the
Gospell
;
ver.
12.
and
farther
then
this
,
their
example
vrgeth
not
.
Their
second
reason
is
this
:
because
it
must
be
seene
that
what
the
people
giue
this
way
,
they
giue
of
loue
,
not
for
feare
of
the
law
.
Resp.
and
it
must
bee
seene
that
the
people
[
f
](A11600-e10780-b)
f
Ps.
110.3
.
come
willingly
at
the
daies
of
assembling
.
Therefore
Magistrats
may
not
compell
by
autoritie
to
serue
the
Lord
as
[
g
](A11600-e10800-b)
g
2.
Chr.
34.31
32.33
.
good
Iosiah
did
,
for
now
they
beare
the
sword
in
vaine
.
But
thus
J
reason
and
so
leaue
them
.
To
every
duty
Magistrats
may
bind
by
lawe
,
&
compel
by
punishment
.
Yeelding
maintenance
to
Ministers
is
a
dutie
.
Therefore
thereto
may
Magistrates
binde
by
lawes
.
Miserum
est
(
saith
the
Poet
)
alienâ
vivere
quadrâ
:
if
for
any
,
miserable
;
sure
most
for
a
minister
.
This
if
any
thing
,
breeds
right
trencher
Chaplens
,
&
would
soon
fill
the
Church
with
sweet
tongued
&
mealemouthed
preachers
.
3
I
may
not
leaue
vtterly
vntouched
our
peoples
,
whether
ignorant
or
affectionate
errour
:
that
thinke
of
their
payments
to
Ministers
,
as
of
almes
to
their
beadsmen
;
forsooth
we
liue
by
them
.
I
say
no
more
but
this
,
1
,
If
[
h
](A11600-e10870-b)
h
1.
Cor.
9.11
.
we
by
them
in
carnall
things
,
they
by
vs
in
spiritual
.
Is
the
barter
so
hard
as
should
occasion
exprobration
?
2.
Not
by
you
but
by
the
Lords
ordinance
[
i
](A11600-e10890-b)
i
1.
Cor.
9.14
.
saith
the
Apostle
.
And
that
Lord
that
hath
given
to
the
people
the
nines
;
hath
allotted
to
vs
(
audacter
dicam
)
the
tenthes
as
ours
.
4
J
would
faine
leaue
this
reproofe
,
but
that
J
see
the
errour
hath
wound
it selfe
into
the
minds
of
many
of
holy
profession
and
practise
,
who
yet
delight
to
haue
Ministers
acknowledge
a
debt
,
even
for
receit
of
dues
;
and
desire
to
haue
conscience
free
from
all
bonds
more
then
of
humane
lawes
,
in
this
matter
of
recompencing
our
labours
.
Jf
ought
come
else
more
then
law
or
custome
,
if
but
a
cup
of
cold
water
;
they
supererogate
surely
in
respect
of
the
Minister
.
They
much
forget
who
said
,
[
k
](A11600-e10930-b)
k
Philemon
.
19
thou
owest
vnto
me
even
thy
owne
selfe
.
And
of
the
generall
thus
farre
.
Now
the
inquiry
J
take
it
,
is
not
impertinent
here
;
sith
maintenance
is
due
to
Ministers
for
their
worke
sake
,
what
portion
or
quantity
that
is
,
that
by
Gods
ordinance
belongs
to
them
.
And
me
thinkes
in
a
dutie
so
generally
,
though
plainely
taught
,
the
conscience
of
the
hearers
should
desire
a
more
particular
direction
.
Yee
will
therefore
(
I
hope
)
giue
leaue
something
more
particularly
to
examin
the
matter
.
And
herein
J
hold
it
not
amisse
,
first
to
propound
what
is
yeelded
on
all
sides
,
where
is
any
soundnesse
of
iudgement
.
2.
Then
to
adde
some
other
principles
,
as
plainely
taught
in
the
Scriptures
of
the
new
Testament
.
Lastly
to
enquire
and
resolue
of
the
particular
.
The
grants
on
all
sides
are
these
.
1.
That
there
is
a
maintenance
[
h
](A11600-e10970-b)
h
1.
Cor.
9.4
,
5
ad
15.
in
iustice
due
to
Ministers
and
their
families
for
their
worke
sake
.
2
It
is
yeelded
that
it
must
be
competent
;
not
only
for
supply
of
naturall
necessities
,
but
for
their
furniture
to
every
good
work
of
their
calling
.
3
That
it
must
be
[
m
](A11600-e11000-b)
m
1.
Tim.
5.17
18.
liberall
;
not
such
as
every
niggardly
minde
will
iudge
convenient
and
competent
.
To
which
grants
,
let
me
adde
these
postulata
,
as
plainely
determined
in
the
Scriptures
.
1
That
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
belongs
a
maintenance
as
large
,
as
to
the
Leviticall
Priesthood
;
this
me
thinkes
,
excellencie
of
ministery
,
[
n
](A11600-e11030-b)
n
2.
Cor.
3.
1.
Cor.
9.
and
blessings
conferred
thereby
,
enforceth
.
2
That
this
maintenance
must
rise
out
of
[
n
](A11600-e11050-b)
n
Gal.
6.6
.
all
and
every
the
goods
of
al
and
every
of
the
people
instructed
.
3
Shall
I
adde
another
to
me
seeming
more
than
probable
?
that
is
,
that
the
Lord
hath
as
certainely
provided
for
our
maintenance
vnder
the
Gospel
,
as
for
theirs
vnder
the
law
.
For
had
the
Lord
lesse
care
of
vs
?
was
there
lesse
need
in
respect
of
the
peoples
backwardnesse
?
no.
But
he
entrusted
magistrats
with
that
care
.
Resp.
And
were
there
not
Magistrats
among
the
Iewes
?
4
That
the
Lord
in
the
Leviticall
law
made
provision
for
vs
that
were
to
minister
in
the
Gospell
.
It
s
cleere
by
the
Apostles
twise
alleaging
that
ordinance
of
[
o
](A11600-e11090-b)
o
1.
Cor.
9.9
.
1.
Tim.
5.18
.
not
muzling
the
mouth
of
the
oxe
.
Thus
farre
I
thinke
we
walke
safely
,
sith
in
the
very
steps
of
the
holy
Ghost
leading
vs
in
the
newe
Testament
.
Let
vs
now
descend
toward
the
particular
.
Some
tumbling
downe
headlong
rather
then
descending
,
resolue
of
a
competency
indeterminate
;
so
the
allowance
be
competent
,
all
is
well
.
Resp.
Then
in
case
of
this
fancied
competency
,
some
of
the
instructed
though
wealthy
perhaps
,
shall
be
exempted
from
the
Apostles
iniunction
:
for
suppose
some
one
or
two
of
the
well
disposed
hearers
,
shall
out
of
their
privat
,
make
a
competent
allowance
;
the
rest
shall
now
reap
our
spirituall
things
,
and
not
sow
their
carnall
.
For
as
the
saying
is
rife
,
enough
in
a
ministers
maintenance
,
Enough
is
a
feast
:
Let
him
.i.
every
him
that
is
instructed
,
make
his
instructer
partaker
of
all
his
goodes
2.
See
conclusion
sixt
;
&
duly
weighing
it
,
tell
me
whether
thou
find
conscience
satisfied
with
this
imaginary
competency
?
For
is
there
no
certaine
provision
for
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
,
but
this
vncertaine
competency
?
who
shall
iudge
of
it
?
Every
man
?
mallem
Cerberum
metueres
,
as
the
Orator
speakes
.
The
Magistrat
?
why
would
not
the
Lord
leaue
this
to
Iewish
Magistrats
?
no
not
to
Moses
,
a
man
so
gratious
with
him
?
and
leaue
it
to
magistrats
vnder
the
Gospell
?
3.
How
hath
he
committed
this
to
Magistrats
?
absolutely
or
with
limitation
?
if
with
limits
,
what
are
these
bounds
?
forsooth
a
competency
.
Perceaue
you
not
circling
and
meere
vncertainties
?
Leaue
we
this
fancy
,
and
see
whether
wee
may
find
some
other
more
certaine
particular
,
to
resolue
of
.
And
surely
when
wee
haue
in
vaine
turmoiled
our selues
to
avoid
Iudaizing
in
this
point
of
ministers
maintenance
,
we
shall
be
forced
at
length
to
acknowledge
Tenthes
,
which
some
call
Jewish
,
to
be
the
Ministers
appointed
portion
.
That
the
truth
may
the
better
appeare
,
J
will
propound
the
different
opinions
that
J
haue
met
withal
in
this
point
.
1
Brownists
in
this
question
thus
peremptorily
resolue
.
That
Tithes
are
so
meerely
ceremonious
and
Leviticall
,
that
they
cannot
without
betraying
Evangelical
liberty
and
disavowing
Christs
Priesthood
,
be
retained
as
maintenance
of
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
.
And
how
full
soever
of
dotage
this
dreame
may
seeme
:
yet
this
J
will
say
for
them
;
They
are
madd
with
more
reason
a
great
deale
,
then
any
others
which
hold
them
ceremonies
Levitical
.
Jf
the
assumption
were
true
,
their
conclusion
woulde
soundly
followe
by
doctrine
of
the
Apostle
.
Gal.
4.
&
5.
Col.
2.
&c.
2
Some
others
thinking
them
iudicials
,
resolue
;
part
,
that
they
may
be
lawfully
retained
as
the
Ministers
stipend
;
part
,
that
they
are
the
most
convenient
maintenance
can
be
allotted
vs
.
3
A
third
sort
,
that
they
are
due
by
Gods
law
to
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
;
but
these
in
explanation
of
them selues
diversly
deriue
them
thence
.
1.
some
thus
:
due
by
Gods
law
enioyning
obedience
to
the
magistrate
in
things
lawfull
and
convenient
.
These
giue
them
no
other
ground
in
Gods
word
,
then
other
humane
ordinances
.
2
Others
,
due
by
Gods
law
:
in
as
much
as
the
church
(
whose
authoritie
with
them
is
divine
)
hath
enioined
their
payment
.
So
generally
Papists
.
3
A
third
sort
thus
:
due
by
Gods
lawe
;
in
respect
of
their
consecration
to
God
,
either
by
receaued
custome
and
consent
of
Churches
,
or
by
donation
of
princes
,
or
legacie
of
testatours
.
In
which
opinion
I
must
needes
professe
my selfe
to
haue
beene
long
;
and
never
to
my
knowledge
of
other
;
til
of
late
being
to
deliver
my
iudgment
to
my
people
,
J
more
purposely
set
my selfe
to
see
what
the
truth
was
.
And
during
that
mistake
,
I
thus
thought
;
that
they
could
not
without
sacrilege
be
alienated
from
their
general
end
▪
my
reasons
were
these
,
1
That
J
had
found
Salomon
averring
it
to
bee
a
[
q
](A11600-e11320-b)
q
Pro.
20.25
.
curse
to
devoure
holy
things
,
and
had
seene
the
curse
exemplified
on
many
.
2.
That
ordinance
of
the
Lord
J
held
morall
&
perpetuall
,
[
r
](A11600-e11340-b)
r
Levit.
27
,
18
,
19.
Nothing
separate
from
common
vse
,
no
not
of
those
which
man
had
separated
,
might
be
againe
vnhallowed
,
no
nor
redeemed
.
3.
That
saying
of
the
Apostle
much
swaied
with
me
,
[
s
](A11600-e11360-b)
s
Gal.
3.15
.
If
it
bee
but
a
mans
testament
no
man
abrogats
it
.i.
no
man
ought
to
abrogate
it
.
And
so
much
the
more
,
for
that
being
once
an
auditour
of
that
iudicious
divine
Mr
Perkins
,
whose
memory
is
blessed
;
J
heard
him
moue
the
doubt
,
whether
things
given
to
superstitious
vses
,
suppose
to
maintaine
malmonging
,
might
be
alienated
.
And
thus
assoile
to
my
remembrance
.
That
from
the
particular
intention
,
wherein
through
ignorance
they
erred
,
alienation
might
be
;
but
from
the
generall
ende
,
maintenance
of
Godes
worship
,
they
might
not
be
aliened
.
Thus
then
&
vpon
these
grounds
my
conclusion
is
still
the
same
,
though
my
media
bee
other
,
and
something
more
peremptory
.
Now
because
it
is
a
labour
long
and
needlesse
to
discusse
every
of
the
former
differences
(
for
the
saying
is
true
,
verum
est
index
sui
&
obliqui
:
)
J
will
first
propound
the
conclusion
with
the
explanation
;
2.
Proceed
to
confirmation
;
And
lastly
annex
solution
of
Arguments
,
such
as
J
haue
met
withall
,
having
any
shew
of
ground
from
the
word
of
God
,
to
overthrowe
the
conclusion
.
The
Conclusion
in
few
words
is
this
.
Tithes
are
the
portion
,
at
least
part
of
that
portion
,
by
Gods
word
allotted
to
Ministers
for
their
service
in
the
gospell
.
By
Tithes
vnderstande
the
tenth
part
of
all
the
hearers
increase
:
[
t
](A11600-e11450-b)
t
Pro.
3
9.
particulars
may
be
read
,
Levit.
27.30
.
&
alibi
.
In
a
word
to
vse
the
distinction
of
Canonists
,
whither
they
be
personall
,
of
industry
,
negotiation
;
&c.
or
prediall
,
as
of
grounds
,
&c.
or
mixt
,
as
of
cattell
:
the
tenthes
of
the
whole
encrease
,
not
those
of
Cumin
&
Anise
excepted
[
u
](A11600-e11470-b)
u
Mat.
23.23
.
,
fal
within
compasse
of
our
subiect
.
1
Of
Tithes
amongst
Iews
we
may
finde
fowre
sorts
distinguished
by
their
ends
.
1.
some
,
which
for
distinction
sake
,
we
may
call
stipendary
,
assigned
to
Levits
for
recompence
of
their
service
.
Numb.
18.24
.
2
A
second
sort
which
wee
may
call
sacrificatory
:
Tithes
for
sacrifice
.
Some
cal
them
Decimas
secūdaneas
,
some
Decimas
decimarum
:
a
tithe
of
the
Levits
Tithes
to
be
given
to
Aaron
,
as
an
heaue
offring
vnto
the
Lord.
Numb.
18.28
.
3
A
third
kinde
you
may
stile
Convivales
,
banquetting
or
feasting
tithes
,
appointed
for
solemne
feastes
at
their
generall
assemblies
to
Ierusalem
,
Deut.
14.22
,
23.
4
The
last
sort
may
be
tearmed
Eleemosynariae
.
Some
call
them
decimas
pauperum
,
a
tithe
which
for
reliefe
of
the
poore
,
widdowes
,
strangers
,
&c.
were
every
thirde
yeare
to
be
set
out
of
their
goods
,
ever
and
aboue
the
other
annuall
tithes
,
Deut.
24.29
.
This
distinction
of
tithes
I
thought
good
to
mention
out
of
the
Leviticall
law
:
though
this
I
professe
,
not
to
claime
our
tithes
by
the
mandate
given
in
lawe
Leviticall
.
Now
our
question
is
,
only
of
those
tithes
which
we
called
stipendary
;
the
rest
being
two
sortes
of
them
apparently
ceremonious
;
the
third
as
plainly
a
iudicial
ordinance
.
And
of
those
tithes
stipendary
,
this
is
that
we
affirme
,
that
by
the
word
of
God
they
belong
for
ever
to
Ministers
of
holy
things
,
and
therefore
in
these
daies
to
Ministers
of
the
gospell
,
who
alone
haue
now
to
do
with
publike
ministrations
of
the
worship
of
God
.
Our
reasons
are
these
:
first
grounded
on
Heb.
7.6.8
.
He
whose
descent
is
not
counted
from
them
,
receaved
tithes
of
Abraham
;
and
ver.
8.
here
men
that
die
receiue
tithes
,
but
there
he
receaveth
them
of
whom
it
is
witnessed
that
hee
liveth
.
Compare
Gen.
14.20
.
The
argument
which
this
scripture
affordeth
,
hath
received
much
disadvantage
,
by
slender
collection
of
many
,
thus
only
pressing
it
;
Tithes
were
paid
to
Priests
before
the
Levitical
law
was
given
:
therefore
their
paiment
is
founded
rather
on
morall
then
ceremoniall
law
.
To
which
,
answere
is
well
given
,
that
by
as
good
inference
,
sacrificing
of
beasts
may
be
proved
a
morality
,
sith
it
also
was
in
vse
before
giving
of
the
law
by
Moses
.
That
we
may
the
better
see
the
force
of
the
Argument
here
given
,
let
vs
a
little
consider
the
frame
and
summe
of
the
text
.
The
Apostle
by
occasion
of
the
peoples
dulnes
,
having
digressed
from
cap.
5.11
.
to
cap.
6.20
.
returnes
now
to
his
purpose
;
namely
to
shew
the
excellencie
of
Christs
priesthood
aboue
that
of
Aaron
,
by
avouching
him
a
Priest
after
th'
order
of
Melchisedec
.
The
conclusion
is
this
:
Christs
priesthood
is
more
excellent
than
that
of
Levi
;
or
Christ
is
a
greater
Priest
then
any
after
Aarons
order
.
The
reason
principall
lyeth
thus
;
He
that
is
a
Priest
after
the
order
of
Melchisedec
is
a
greater
Priest
then
the
Priests
after
Aaron
.
But
Christ
is
a
Priest
after
the
order
of
Melchisedec
,
Ergo
,
&c.
The
minor
hath
first
his
proofe
,
1.
from
a
testimony
of
David
,
cap.
5.20
.
2.
from
that
absolute
agreement
betwixt
Melchisedec
,
&
Christ
:
the
partes
whereof
are
these
;
1.
as
Melchisedec
was
king
and
Priest
of
the
most
high
God
,
so
Christ
;
2.
as
Melchisedec
king
of
righteousnes
and
prince
of
peace
,
so
Christ
.
3.
as
Melchisedec
his
parents
,
kindred
,
beginning
,
and
end
of
life
are
not
recorded
:
so
Christ
,
as
man
,
with
out
father
;
as
God
,
without
mother
,
kindred
,
beginning
,
or
end
of
life
.
Therefore
Christ
is
truely
a
Priest
after
the
order
of
Melchisedec
.
ver.
1.2.3
.
The
maior
remaines
to
be
proved
and
that
hath
his
proofe
from
ver.
4.
to
11.
the
summe
whereof
is
comprised
in
this
principall
syllogisme
.
If
Melchisedec
be
greater
then
Levi
,
then
he
that
is
a
Priest
after
his
order
as
Christ
is
;
is
greater
than
Levi.
But
Melchisedec
is
greater
then
Levi.
Ergo
,
&c.
minor
proved
,
greater
then
Abraham
greater
then
Levi.
Melchisedec
is
greater
then
Abraham
.
Ergo
then
Levi.
minor
proved
:
he
to
whom
Abraham
paid
tithes
,
of
whom
he
was
blessed
,
is
greater
then
Abraham
.
But
to
Melchisedec
Abraham
paid
tithes
,
&
Melchisedec
blessed
Abraham
.
Ergo
is
greater
then
hee
,
ver.
4.5.6.7
.
A
second
argument
proving
the
greatnesse
of
this
Priest
aboue
those
of
Aarons
order
,
is
laid
down
,
ver.
8.
A
tithe
taker
.i.
Priest
,
of
whom
it
s
testified
that
he
liues
,
is
greater
than
a
tithe
taker
that
dyeth
.
But
the
Priest
after
Milchisedec
is
a
tithe
taker
of
whom
it
s
testified
that
he
liveth
;
Levits
take
tithes
and
die
.
Ergo
the
Priest
after
Melchisedec
his
order
is
greater
then
the
Priests
Leviticall
.
This
is
in
my
simple
Logique
the
disposition
of
the
text
.
As
for
illustrations
or
amplifications
by
prosyllogismes
,
prolepses
,
or
otherwise
,
I
purposely
omit
them
Now
me
thinks
,
the
text
thus
naturally
resolved
,
there
needs
no
farther
deduction
of
the
Argument
;
yet
that
the
simplest
may
see
what
footing
tithes
haue
here
thus
I
collect
it
.
The
portion
due
to
Christs
priesthood
,
is
due
to
Ministers
of
the
gospell
:
but
tithes
are
the
portion
due
to
Christs
priesthood
.
Ergo.
The
minor
is
thus
proved
.
The
portion
due
to
Melchisedec
his
priesthood
,
is
due
to
Christs
priesthood
;
reason
,
1.
for
that
Christs
Priesthood
and
Melchisedecs
are
the
same
;
or
Christ
is
a
Priest
after
that
order
:
2.
other
things
enunciated
of
Melchisedec
,
are
true
of
Christ
eminently
and
alwaies
:
as
it
s
eminently
and
alwaies
true
of
Christ
,
that
he
is
king
of
righteousnes
and
prince
of
peace
;
eminently
and
alwaies
true
of
Christ
,
he
is
without
parents
,
without
beginning
and
end
of
life
,
that
he
blesseth
Abraham
and
al
his
seed
,
&c.
All
these
are
more
properly
verified
of
Christ
then
of
Melchisedec
his
type
.
Why
not
then
also
this
ever
true
of
him
;
he
taketh
tithes
?
Now
I
assume
.
But
tithes
are
the
portion
due
to
Melchisedec
his
priesthood
,
yea
ever
due
to
that
Priesthood
.
For
1
they
were
paid
by
Abraham
to
Melchisedec
,
2.
in
the
Apostles
Logicke
;
a
Priest
and
receiver
of
tithes
are
equipollents
.
In
steed
of
saying
men
that
die
are
Priests
;
he
saith
,
men
that
die
receiue
tithes
:
in
steed
of
saying
hee
that
liues
is
a
Priest
;
he
saith
,
he
that
liues
takes
tithes
:
as
if
in
his
iudgement
tithes
and
priesthood
were
as
inseparable
as
kingdome
and
tribute
.
Now
the
maior
of
the
principall
syllogisme
if
any
doubt
of
,
to
wit
,
whether
the
portion
due
to
Christ
be
due
to
Ministers
,
let
him
compare
1.
Cor.
9
14.
where
is
the
expresse
ordinance
of
Christ
,
that
Ministers
should
liue
of
the
Gospell
;
2.
who
in
likelihood
should
bee
his
receavers
,
but
these
that
are
in
his
stead
,
as
it
s
said
of
Ministers
,
2
,
Cor.
5.20
?
3.
Besides
the
same
reason
which
the
Lord
assignes
of
Levi
his
sharing
in
things
to
him selfe
reserved
and
sanctified
,
is
true
of
Ministers
,
or
else
of
none
.
[
x
](A11600-e12270-b)
x
Deut.
10
,
8.9
God
is
Levits
portion
.i.
Gods
portion
is
Levits
portion
,
because
they
were
taken
to
Minister
before
him
.
Why
not
then
also
Christs
portion
Ministers
portion
,
because
they
only
are
assumed
to
Christ
to
minister
in
the
Gospell
?
A
reason
for
not
tithing
of
so
plain
deduction
out
of
Scripture
,
if
any
can
bring
mee
,
hee
shall
much
sway
me
to
his
sentence
.
This
argument
I
remember
once
to
haue
propounded
something
otherwise
,
to
this
purpose
.
The
portion
due
to
Priesthood
after
Melchisedec
his
order
,
is
due
to
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
.
But
tithes
are
that
portion
.
Ergo.
And
thus
propounding
it
,
I
receaue
these
answers
:
the
proposition
seemes
vntrue
,
except
you
can
proue
your selues
Priests
after
that
order
.
Resp.
Wherto
I
thus
answered
;
that
though
we
be
no
Priests
after
that
or
let
yet
is
there
truth
in
the
proposition
,
sith
Christ
the
high
Priest
of
our
profession
to
whome
originally
they
belong
,
hath
ordained
vs
to
liue
of
his
portion
.
A
second
answer
was
by
limitation
;
the
portion
due
(
by
law
)
to
that
Priesthood
is
due
to
Ministers
.
But
with
that
limitation
the
assumption
is
false
,
Abrahams
payment
being
an
act
rather
voluntary
,
then
by
any
iniunction
from
God
.
But
contra
,
that
that
act
of
Abraham
was
no
act
in
this
sense
voluntary
,
but
rather
an
act
of
necessary
and
inioined
duty
,
is
evident
(
me
thinkes
)
by
these
reasons
.
1.
For
that
gifts
voluntary
proceeding
from
bountie
or
liberalitie
,
imply
a
superioritie
or
excellency
in
the
giuer
aboue
the
receaver
.
For
[
y
](A11600-e12370-b)
y
Act.
20.35
.
its
a
more
blessed
thing
,
in
that
kind
,
to
giue
then
to
receaue
.
But
Abrahams
paiment
of
tithes
was
testimony
of
his
inferiority
.
Againe
the
phrase
it selfe
[
z
](A11600-e12410-b)
z
Heb.
7.4.6
.
implies
as
much
:
Melchisedec
tithed
Abraham
,
ver.
6.
a
phrase
that
looseth
all
his
emphasis
if
no
iniunction
had
subiected
Abraham
to
a
necessitie
of
being
tithed
.
3.
What
mean
they
when
they
say
of
Abrahams
tithing
,
that
it
was
done
without
law
?
would
they
be
vnderstood
of
Abrahams
fact
onely
,
or
of
tithing
at
large
as
it
was
in
vse
before
the
lawe
written
?
Now
sure
I
wonder
how
first
[
a
](A11600-e12460-b)
a
Gen
14.20
.
Abraham
,
and
then
after
him
[
b
](A11600-e12480-b)
b
Gen.
28.22
Iacob
,
should
fall
vpon
a
tenth
rather
then
a
sixt
or
twelfth
part
,
if
there
were
nothing
prescribed
in
their
times
for
tithing
?
2.
How
proue
they
but
probably
that
it
was
without
iniunction
of
law
?
If
this
be
the
reason
for
that
we
finde
no
mention
of
any
law
to
that
end
given
:
by
as
good
reason
may
they
say
of
sacrifices
,
and
sundry
other
actions
religious
,
that
they
were
arbitrary
;
sith
we
finde
no
expresse
mandate
given
of
them
in
those
times
.
But
thus
mee
thinkes
wee
may
better
reason
from
their
practise
to
an
iniunction
;
these
facts
of
theirs
were
approved
of
God
,
therefore
not
done
without
iniunction
from
him
.
And
of
this
argument
and
cleering
thereof
thus
farre
.
The
second
argument
hath
his
ground
,
Galat.
6.6
.
1.
Tim
,
5.17
.
Prov.
3.9
.
where
we
read
thus
;
Let
him
that
is
instructed
,
make
his
instructer
partaker
of
all
his
goods
;
&
elders
that
rule
well
are
worthie
of
double
honour
,
especially
they
that
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
.
And
honour
God
with
thy
substance
,
and
with
the
chiefe
of
all
thine
increase
.
Out
of
which
Scriptures
,
thus
we
reason
.
If
there
bee
a
portion
to
be
set
out
vnto
God
and
his
Ministers
,
out
of
all
and
every
the
temporall
goods
of
every
one
instructed
,
and
no
certaine
portion
to
bee
found
in
scriptures
but
tithes
:
then
are
tithes
the
portion
allotted
by
Gods
word
to
Ministers
for
their
service
.
But
there
is
a
portion
to
be
set
out
vnto
God
and
his
Ministers
out
of
the
temporall
goods
of
every
one
instructed
,
and
no
other
certaintie
mentioned
in
scripture
but
tithes
.
Ergo
tithes
are
the
portion
allotted
by
Gods
word
to
Ministers
for
their
service
.
The
consequence
of
the
proposition
depends
vpon
this
ground
,
that
some
certaintie
is
by
scripture
allotted
vnto
Ministers
for
their
service
.
Hereof
if
any
demand
proofe
let
him
consider
these
.
First
,
for
that
the
Lord
allotted
a
certaintie
vnto
first
borne
and
Levits
:
&
thinke
we
it
probable
hee
would
leaue
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
at
randome
to
a
competencie
indeterminate
?
2.
Jn
other
cases
this
argument
goes
current
.
The
Lord
prescribes
for
the
old
Tabernacle
all
things
necessarie
even
to
the
Besome
and
Ashpan
;
not
a
pin
in
the
Tabernacle
,
but
what
hath
his
prescript
from
God
.
Now
surely
of
this
we
may
say
it
s
not
a
pin
,
but
even
a
Clavus
Traba●is
,
one
of
the
master
nailes
in
our
Tabernacle
.
And
thinke
we
his
word
so
sufficient
and
absolutely
exact
for
all
necessary
prescripts
,
yea
circumstances
concerning
worship
,
government
,
any
thing
:
and
this
only
,
a
matter
of
so
great
consequence
,
left
vnprescribed
?
Lastly
,
if
no
certaintie
in
this
kind
can
bee
found
in
Scripture
,
how
wilt
thou
be
able
to
share
out
vnto
God
his
portion
in
faith
?
so
that
thou
maist
bee
able
to
say
,
I
haue
giuen
the
Lord
that
portion
of
my
goods
which
he
requireth
of
me
?
Forsooth
the
Magistrats
determination
shall
in
this
point
bee
the
levill
and
rule
of
faith
.
Resp.
1.
Then
must
thou
bee
able
to
shewe
that
the
Lord
hath
made
Magistrats
in
this
point
his
Carvers
,
which
is
vnlikely
vt
supra
:
2
,
Suppose
Magistrats
make
no
provision
,
where
is
then
the
direction
for
thy
faith
?
3.
Suppose
they
shall
assigne
Micah
his
allowance
:
wilt
thou
therewith
be
content
?
Then
sure
al
our
lay
persons
,
our
Micahs
,
haue
faith
well
guided
,
consciences
rectified
;
ten
shekels
of
silver
,
[
c
](A11600-e12620-b)
c
Iudg.
17.10
.
and
a
meales
meat
,
and
livery
,
they
afford
Sir
Iohn
.
In
faith
thinke
wee
?
surely
according
to
Magistrats
provision
.
And
why
blame
we
any
more
,
impropriat
persons
for
so
scant
allowance
?
perhaps
because
not
competent
.
Yea
but
the
Magistrate
thinks
it
competent
.
And
that
is
in
this
case
the
line
of
faith
▪
credam
?
non
si
mihi
&c.
Touching
the
minor
,
for
the
first
part
see
1.
Cor.
9.11
.
Prov
3.9
.
Gal.
6.6
.
in
which
place
yee
haue
it
in
so
many
termes
.
Let
him
that
is
instructed
,
make
his
instructer
partaker
of
all
his
goods
.
For
the
second
branch
of
it
;
that
no
other
portion
certaine
is
to
bee
founde
in
scripture
;
I
meane
which
hath
not
an
apparent
signification
of
something
peculiar
to
that
state
of
the
people
vnder
Levi
,
as
first
fruits
,
share
of
other
sacrifices
:
wil
appeare
to
any
man
,
that
wil
be
pleased
to
enter
induction
of
particulars
.
And
may
I
not
then
conclude
Tithes
are
the
portion
allotted
vs
by
the
word
of
God
?
Yea
what
if
I
shoulde
say
even
tithes
are
in
some
of
these
places
more
then
obliquely
pointed
at
?
What
meanes
the
Apostle
to
call
for
maintenance
vnto
Ministers
vnder
the
terme
of
double
honor
?
[
d
](A11600-e12700-b)
d
1.
Tim
5
17.18
.
for
that
by
honor
he
there
meanes
maintenance
,
the
reason
annexed
will
make
a
blinde
man
see
.
Surely
S.
Hierome
having
delivered
his
iudgement
of
that
place
,
Mal.
3.
Bring
all
my
tithes
into
the
storehouse
,
in
these
tearmes
Ecclesiae
populis
praeceptum
est
dare
decimas
,
alleageth
presently
this
place
for
proof
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
Elders
must
haue
double
honor
.
Againe
what
meanes
the
Apostle
by
that
Epithete
(
double
)
honour
?
say
some
,
double
.i.
large
and
liberall
;
but
why
double
rather
then
treble
,
if
he
meant
large
,
at
large
?
Doth
he
not
rather
in
that
Epithet
send
vs
to
consider
of
that
[
e
](A11600-e12770-b)
e
Numb.
8.16
.
double
portion
of
the
first
borne
in
whose
roome
Levi
was
assumed
?
And
that
which
made
their
portion
double
,
was
in
part
tithes
,
as
shall
hereafter
at
least
probably
appeare
vnto
vs
.
Proceede
we
to
a
third
reason
which
is
grounded
on
Levit.
27.28
.
Prov.
20.25
.
Rom.
2.22
.
Mal.
3.8
.
where
we
read
thus
,
Every
thing
separate
from
common
vse
,
is
most
holy
vnto
the
Lord
.
And
it
is
a
snare
to
devour
holy
things
,
&
after
the
vow
to
inquire
.
And
thou
which
abhorrest
Idols
,
committest
thou
sacrilege
?
And
yee
haue
robbed
me
.
Out
of
which
places
thus
we
reason
.
The
portion
which
hath
bin
separated
from
common
vse
,
to
mainetenance
of
Gods
worship
vnder
the
new
testament
,
is
the
portion
allotted
by
the
word
of
God
to
Ministers
for
their
service
.
But
tithes
are
the
portion
,
at
least
part
of
the
portion
separate
from
common
vse
to
mainetenance
of
Gods
worship
vnder
the
new
testament
.
Ergo
&c.
The
maior
is
thus
proved
;
because
the
detainement
or
alienating
of
things
so
consecrated
,
is
sacrilege
.
That
this
may
the
better
appeare
,
it
wil
bee
worth
the
while
to
consider
briefly
what
sacriledge
is
:
which
out
of
Mr
Zanchius
Vrsine
,
and
others
,
we
may
thus
briefly
describe
:
Sacrilege
is
the
taking
away
of
things
sacred
.i.
deputed
to
holie
vses
,
or
the
maintenance
of
the
worship
of
God
.
The
matter
about
which
this
theft
is
conversant
,
are
things
consecrated
to
God
;
of
which
there
are
two
sorts
:
some
which
God
himselfe
either
by
reservation
,
or
expresse
mandate
,
hath
hallowed
vnto
himselfe
;
some
which
man
hath
hallowed
and
separated
from
common
vse
.
of
both
read
Levit.
27.28.29.30
.
Now
that
which
makes
vp
the
nature
of
sacrilege
,
is
,
the
taking
away
or
detaining
of
things
thus
hallowed
,
and
returning
them
to
common
vse
.
Thus
then
I
reason
,
the
detainement
or
alienating
of
any
thing
separate
from
common
vse
,
is
sacrilege
.
But
detainement
or
alienating
of
tithes
,
is
the
detainement
and
alienating
of
thinges
thus
separate
.
Ergo
To
the
proposition
these
answers
I
haue
partly
read
,
partly
heard
in
conference
.
1.
Vnderstand
it
say
some
of
things
which
haue
beene
consecrate
by
law
.
Resp.
1.
no
word
of
God
forceth
to
such
limitation
.
For
even
of
voluntary
and
votary
consecrations
both
Moses
,
Levit.
27.
and
Salomon
,
Prov.
20.25
.
speake
.
And
was
it
not
free
to
Ananias
to
consecrate
or
not
,
more
then
generall
lawes
of
piety
or
charity
might
sway
him
,
Act.
5.4
.
whiles
it
remained
was
it
not
thine
owne
?
And
after
it
was
sold
was
it
not
in
thy
power
,
said
Peter
?
yet
was
Ananias
his
detainement
sacrilege
by
circumstances
of
the
text
and
consent
of
best
interpreters
.
He
is
taxed
by
Peter
not
only
for
lying
,
but
for
theevish
and
clancular
surreption
of
part
of
the
price
,
ver.
3.
and
,
saith
Beza
interpreting
the
word
,
Ad
sacrilegium
etiam
accessit
deffidentia
&
hypocrisis
.
see
also
Centuriat
.
Cent.
1.
lib.
2.
cap.
4.
Ambros
.
ser.
9.
Dum
ex
eo
quod
promiserat
,
partem
subtrahit
,
sacrilegij
simul
condemnatur
&
fraudis
.
Sacrilegij
quod
Deum
in
pollicitatione
fefellerit
:
fraudis
quod
,
&c:
2.
but
grant
it
with
that
limitation
;
wee
shall
anone
see
,
that
with
that
limit
we
may
assume
of
tithes
that
they
haue
bin
consecrated
.
A
second
restraint
some
haue
thus
given
to
the
proposition
;
vnderstand
it
say
they
,
of
alienating
things
consecrated
without
error
.i.
to
maintenance
of
true
worship
of
the
true
God
.
Well
,
agreed
;
let
it
be
so
limited
,
though
with
faire
probability
and
consent
of
no
small
clarks
,
we
might
contend
the
contrary
.
Keckerman
:
Thirdly
vnderstand
it
say
some
,
with
these
exceptions
.
1.
Except
in
case
of
the
churches
superfluity
;
&
this
exception
hath
this
ground
;
contentment
with
necessaries
is
required
of
Ministers
;
for
Moses
cries
sufficit
at
the
building
of
the
tabernacle
:
Resp.
What
word
of
God
or
sound
reason
giues
liberty
to
alien
seeming
superfluities
of
Ministers
rather
then
of
other
subiects
?
contentment
with
necessaries
being
equally
required
of
all
.
And
Moses
staies
addition
of
more
;
returnes
or
aliens
nothing
of
what
was
brought
by
the
people
,
no
not
though
there
were
an
overplus
.
But
secondly
grant
the
proposition
with
that
exception
;
in
what
case
,
in
what
times
may
we
not
with
that
limit
assume
of
tithes
?
Their
second
exception
is
when
alienation
is
necessary
for
preservation
of
the
Church
.
Resp.
An
vse
of
such
goods
for
the
time
,
may
perhaps
in
that
case
bee
allowed
:
perpetuall
alienation
,
besides
facts
of
some
men
,
nothing
makes
probable
.
The
shew
bread
was
made
common
to
David
&
his
company
in
extremitie
:
but
might
it
therefore
be
perpetually
aliened
,
such
necessitie
ceasing
?
Their
last
exception
,
when
Princes
haue
no
other
meanes
to
remunerate
subiects
,
faithfull
in
common
services
.
Resp.
What
,
I
wonder
,
in
such
case
laies
open
Church
goods
to
the
will
of
Princes
,
rather
then
the
goods
of
common
subiects
?
Thus
I
reason
and
leaue
them
:
privat
goods
of
subiects
,
Magistrats
may
not
alien
from
them
for
recompense
of
servants
,
much
lesse
may
the
Lords
portion
bee
transferred
to
such
vses
.
See
Gen.
47.22
.
Thus
then
the
proposition
is
cleere
as
it
was
propounded
:
let
vs
grant
it
with
these
limits
or
so
many
of
them
as
haue
any
shew
of
reason
to
support
them
.
And
thus
conclude
.
The
detainment
or
alienating
of
things
by
law
consecrated
to
pure
worship
of
the
true
God
,
without
superfluity
,
anie
longer
then
necessitie
requires
is
sacrilege
.
But
tithes
haue
been
by
law
consecrated
to
maintenance
of
pure
worship
of
the
true
God
,
are
not
superfluous
,
and
now
no
such
necessitie
of
their
alienation
.
Ergo
their
detainment
is
sacrilege
.
The
fourth
reason
followes
.
Whatsoever
duty
prescribed
in
the
word
of
God
not
either
ceremoniall
or
Iudiciall
,
that
is
vndoubtedly
of
perpetuall
observation
.
But
payment
of
tithes
is
a
duty
prescribed
in
the
worde
of
God
,
and
is
neither
ceremoniall
nor
iudiciall
.
Ergo
of
perpetuall
observation
.
The
proposition
I
thinke
none
will
doubt
of
,
sith
there
is
no
duty
prescribed
in
the
word
of
God
which
fals
not
vnder
some
member
of
this
distribution
,
and
only
Iudicials
&
ceremonies
were
temporary
.
See
we
therefore
whether
our
assumption
for
both
parts
of
the
predicate
may
bee
avowed
.
And
first
that
this
is
no
dutie
ceremonious
;
these
reasons
evince
.
1.
Ceremoniall
ordinances
were
all
shaddowes
of
things
to
come
,
the
body
whereof
is
Christ
.
This
no
shaddow
of
things
to
come
,
for
where
is
the
body
which
this
shadowed
?
some
,
who
yet
will
haue
it
no
ceremony
but
a
iudiciall
,
frame
this
ceremonious
resemblance
.
The
number
of
ten
is
a
number
of
perfection
,
and
by
paying
in
this
number
,
as
by
a
signe
,
the
offerer
makes
protestation
of
his
owne
imperfection
,
&
of
his
expecting
perfection
in
Christ
.
Prettie
too
too
.
Others
thus
,
they
were
paid
in
signe
of
thankfulnesse
;
others
,
in
signum
vniversalis
Dominij
.
Twentie
such
like
,
a
tolerable
wit
woulde
devise
:
but
can
they
shew
vs
these
significations
or
ends
of
payment
in
the
Scripture
,
even
but
obscurely
so
much
as
by
allusion
intimated
?
J
dare
say
no
,
nor
any
other
end
,
no
not
of
their
payment
to
Levits
,
but
maintenance
and
recompense
for
their
service
.
2
All
ceremonies
haue
an
analogicall
resemblance
of
the
things
they
signified
.
Therefore
called
[
f
](A11600-e13320-b)
f
Col
2.17
.
shaddows
of
things
to
come
,
because
that
as
the
shaddowe
carries
though
a
darke
,
yet
some
resemblance
of
the
body
whose
shadow
it
is
;
so
ceremonies
of
Christ
:
therefore
tearmed
also
[
g
](A11600-e13340-b)
g
Heb.
9.23
.
Gal.
4
9.
similitudes
of
heavenly
things
,
being
ordained
by
their
very
semblances
to
teach
the
rude
.
This
hath
no
Analogicall
resemblance
either
of
imperfection
,
or
thankfulnesse
,
or
Gods
vniversall
dominion
.
For
who
can
,
J
say
,
not
only
avow
his
frame
,
but
even
frame
it
except
absurdly
?
Giue
vs
such
an
analogy
of
this
as
we
are
able
to
shew
of
others
,
wee
will
then
beleeue
their
payment
,
to
haue
beene
levitically
ceremonious
.
Of
sprinklings
and
purifyings
,
of
Tabernacle
,
of
Arke
,
of
Propitiatory
,
of
high
Priest
(
and
indeed
of
what
not
,
that
was
truly
a
shaddow
of
heavenly
things
?
)
we
finde
their
analogie
in
the
word
of
God
.
For
instance
,
as
[
h
](A11600-e13360-b)
h
Heb.
9.7.2
.
high
Priest
amongst
the
Iewes
alone
entered
into
the
holy
of
holies
not
without
bloud
:
so
Christ
into
heaven
,
&c.
Can
those
that
so
confidently
avow
tithes
to
haue
been
ceremonies
,
thus
drawe
out
the
similitude
betwixt
them
and
heavenly
things
?
3
Whatsoever
ordinance
was
before
leviticall
lawe
,
not
foreshadowing
Christ
,
that
is
no
ceremonie
.
But
payment
of
tithes
such
.
[
i
](A11600-e13390-b)
i
Heb.
14
&
28
&
Col.
2
Heb.
●
.
7
.
&c.
Ergo.
No
leviticall
ceremony
may
be
vsed
after
publishing
of
the
Gospel
.
5
J
finde
not
that
the
Lord
in
propheticall
scriptures
taxeth
so
much
the
omission
of
ceremonies
,
or
exacteth
in
so
strict
tearmes
their
performance
,
as
hee
doth
this
of
tithes
[
k
](A11600-e13480-b)
k
Mal.
3
9.
.
Something
J
finde
of
their
faultie
performance
;
something
,
of
their
sticking
in
them
with
neglect
of
moralities
:
and
this
to
me
is
a
presumption
,
they
were
other
then
ceremonies
.
Lastly
J
never
read
Christ
speak
so
much
of
any
Jewish
ceremonie
,
as
he
did
of
tithes
;
[
l
](A11600-e13500-b)
l
Mat.
23.
these
things
ought
you
to
haue
done
.
Though
J
confesse
,
as
much
might
haue
beene
said
of
ceremonies
during
those
times
.
All
these
considered
,
may
J
not
conclude
of
tithing
,
it
was
no
ceremonie
?
See
wee
whether
perhaps
it
were
a
iudiciall
,
concerning
only
the
nation
of
the
Iewes
,
and
founded
on
equitie
particular
to
that
people
.
This
is
indeed
the
olde
tenent
of
Papists
.
But
1.
say
some
,
Judicials
were
all
of
duties
from
man
to
man
.
This
ordinance
of
holy
things
to
be
done
to
God
.
Therefore
not
iudiciall
.
But
what
,
trow
we
,
imagine
Papists
to
bee
the
civill
equitie
of
this
ordinance
,
particularly
concerning
the
nation
of
the
Jewes
?
Forsooth
saith
Bellarmine
out
of
Thomas
,
the
tribe
of
Leui
being
but
the
tenth
,
or
at
most
the
twelfth
or
thirteenth
part
of
the
Jews
:
tenths
must
be
theirs
that
equitie
may
be
kept
,
and
that
tribe
haue
no
greater
portion
then
the
rest
.
Resp.
1.
But
it
is
wel
answered
that
this
end
of
their
assignement
to
Levi
,
hath
no
mention
in
Scripture
:
they
are
given
to
Levi
for
recompence
of
this
service
,
as
the
Lords
portion
primarily
,
other
end
or
reason
of
their
assignation
wee
finde
none
.
2.
If
this
were
the
ende
of
their
allotment
to
Leui
:
surely
the
Lord
much
forgat
himselfe
,
that
besides
the
tenthes
of
all
mens
goods
,
would
allot
them
share
in
sacrifices
and
vowes
,
and
48
Citties
with
Suburbes
of
so
large
circuit
as
we
read
,
Numb.
35.4.7
.
3
Be
it
granted
,
that
this
was
some
reason
of
their
assignement
to
Levi
:
how
concludes
this
the
ordinance
in
generall
?
For
the
iniunction
of
tithing
was
as
old
as
Abraham
[
l
](A11600-e13640-b)
l
Gen
14.20
.
,
when
was
no
place
for
partition
of
Gods
people
by
tribes
.
And
if
this
be
all
they
haue
to
proue
them
iudicials
.
J
shall
craue
pardon
for
subscribing
to
their
iudgement
.
Lastly
,
yeeld
them
Judicials
:
yet
if
of
common
equitie
,
if
confirmed
by
positiue
law
,
if
consenting
with
law
of
nature
,
if
serving
to
vphold
morall
duties
;
binds
not
the
ordinance
for
ever
?
J
conclude
therefore
,
sith
neither
ceremoniall
nor
iudiciall
,
or
if
iudiciall
,
yet
of
common
equitie
:
therefore
their
payment
is
perpetually
to
be
observed
.
The
last
reason
(
for
I
had
rather
giue
reasons
by
weight
then
number
)
is
taken
from
practise
of
the
church
in
all
times
from
beginning
of
the
world
downe
to
these
last
daies
of
reformation
:
ever
since
God
had
a
ministry
in
the
world
,
tithes
were
their
maintenance
.
Before
the
law
,
the
first
borne
;
then
,
the
ordinary
priests
,
received
tithes
.
[
m
](A11600-e13660-b)
m
Gen.
14.20
For
that
,
that
Melchisedec
was
Shem
Noahs
eldest
son
,
at
least
by
priviledge
,
if
not
by
birth
,
few
question
,
none
disproue
:
for
the
time
vnder
the
law
,
is
no
question
.
For
Apostles
times
or
much
of
them
,
the
vse
of
tithes
,
persecution
or
scandale
forced
to
be
intermitted
.
Yet
continued
that
Ius
ever
in
them
,
and
their
inferior
Presbyters
.
And
therefore
they
vrge
yeelding
of
maintenance
,
such
no
doubt
in
their
generall
aime
as
was
certaine
by
the
word
of
God
;
such
as
had
bin
in
vse
:
yea
plead
for
portion
[
n
](A11600-e13700-b)
n
Gal.
6
6.
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
of
al
goods
;
for
double
honour
.
After
when
God
was
pleased
to
graunt
even
but
a
little
rest
,
&
breathing
time
to
the
Churches
,
presently
came
tithes
againe
to
be
the
Ministers
portion
.
Cyprian
whose
martyrdome
fel
into
the
yeare
of
the
Lord
259.
according
to
Eusebius
his
computation
,
Geminius
Victor
for
appointing
Geminius
Faustinus
a
presbyter
,
overseer
of
his
will
,
and
thereby
occasioning
distraction
from
his
ministery
,
sets
down
by
way
of
aggravation
the
course
established
in
the
Church
of
God
for
preventing
such
distractions
in
the
ministry
.
As
by
Gods
owne
authority
and
disposition
,
the
tribe
of
Levi
received
tithes
from
the
other
tribes
,
&c.
that
they
might
by
no
meanes
be
called
away
,
or
constrained
to
thinke
or
deale
with
things
secular
:
the
same
course
and
order
is
now
holden
in
the
Church
,
Vt
qui
in
Ecclesia
Domini
ordinatione
clerica
promoventur
,
in
nullo
ab
administratione
divina
avocentur
,
nec
molestijs
&
negotijs
secularibus
alligentur
,
sed
in
honore
sportulantium
fratrum
tanquam
decimas
ex
fructibus
accipientes
,
ab
altari
&
sacrificijs
non
recedant
,
sed
die
ac
nocte
caelestibus
rebus
&
spiritualibus
serviant
▪
this
mentions
Cyprian
as
a
course
in
his
time
received
in
the
Church
.
In
the
same
age
a
few
yeares
after
was
Dionysius
bishop
of
Rome
about
the
yeare
266.
Gal.
6.6
.
1.
Cor.
9.
at
length
it
is
concluded
with
this
expostulation
;
Quis
plantat
vineam
,
&c.
who
plants
a
vineyard
,
&
eats
not
of
the
fruit
thereof
?
Nos
plantavimus
vineam
,
&
vos
vultis
edere
?
Item
praecepit
Dominus
per
Mosem
,
vt
nemo
mittat
falcem
in
alienam
messem
.
Haec
messis
nostra
est
,
&
vos
vultis
falcem
in
eam
mittere
?
Item
Apostolus
,
they
that
serue
at
the
altar
liue
of
the
altar
;
sed
numquid
de
eo
cui
non
serviunt
?
Qui
in
sacrario
operantur
,
cum
sacrario
participant
;
sed
numquid
cum
illo
in
quo
non
operantur
?
&c.
That
I
may
not
spend
time
&
paper
whiles
I
doe
but
actum
agere
:
for
the
next
age
,
read
what
Hierome
hath
touching
practise
of
the
Church
,
in
his
epistle
to
Nepotian
;
Ambrose
his
iudgement
in
ser.
quadrages
.
In
times
succeeding
,
Chrysost.
hom.
18.
in
Act.
August
.
in
Psal.
146.
&c
:
calling
for
tithes
,
and
sharply
reproving
their
detainment
or
spare
payment
.
For
Councils
,
that
one
Synode
called
Matisconensis
held
anno
580
;
Can.
5.
After
this
say
the
Century
writers
out
of
Aventine
,
To
leaue
forrenners
,
in
England
Anno
Dom.
786.
As
a
corollary
here
let
vs
obserue
that
tithes
of
England
haue
bin
by
law
separate
from
common
vse
:
the
inference
thence
is
out
of
former
grounds
,
that
they
could
never
be
lawfully
alienated
.
Yes
said
one
once
;
for
eius
est
tollere
,
cuius
ponere
.
Resp.
Peter
was
not
acquainted
with
any
such
mixime
in
the
case
of
Ananias
;
Levit.
27.
Things
once
separated
from
common
vse
,
are
forever
holy
vnto
the
Lord
.
And
heare
Keckerman
,
Princeps
iure
non
potest
&c.
Things
sacred
or
goods
designed
,
or
destined
to
diuine
worship
,
though
but
in
a
generality
,
yea
though
they
serue
to
superstitious
worship
,
Princes
haue
no
right
to
transfer
to
common
vse
.
Jf
his
sentence
swaie
nothing
,
heare
his
reason
:
Res
sacrae
pertinent
ad
statum
&
scopum
●eipub
.
eminentiorem
&
perfectiorem
,
ideo
ad
inferiorem
retrahi
non
debent
.
media
enim
perfectiorem
finem
respicientia
,
non
debent
abusive
ad
imperfectiorem
applicari
.
And
Polanus
,
J
might
ad
to
this
continual
practise
of
the
Church
,
the
vnanimous
consent
of
divines
in
iudgement
,
from
Apostles
daies
downeward
;
till
such
time
as
Popish
Demi-sacrilege
had
made
seisure
of
tithes
,
transferring
them
from
parochial
Pastors
to
the
Covents
of
Drones
:
then
began
their
Schoolemen
to
studie
shifts
,
whereby
to
iustifie
the
practise
of
their
Synagogue
,
and
after
many
disputs
,
resolved
of
this
as
best
plaster
for
that
sore
,
that
forsooth
they
were
Judicials
.
I
might
also
adioine
the
consenting
practise
of
heathen
by
light
of
nature
,
yea
suffrages
of
sundry
late
divines
;
but
that
this
taske
is
sufficiently
done
by
others
;
and
authorities
of
men
even
best
learned
and
devoutest
,
beare
little
sway
in
truthes
so
dangerous
.
This
only
I
desire
,
that
in
this
question
we
may
contend
with
reasons
,
rather
then
authorities
:
not
that
J
feare
to
bee
overlaid
either
with
waight
or
number
of
voices
;
for
the
ods
in
both
kindes
I
dare
avow
to
be
with
vs
.
But
1.
whereto
tends
committing
of
divines
in
fight
,
except
to
worke
distraction
in
people
?
And
,
2.
the
saying
of
Augustine
is
me
thinkes
iudicious
;
Scripturarum
autoritatibus
,
non
quorumque
proprijs
,
sed
vtrisque
communibus
testibus
,
res
cum
re
,
causa
cum
causa
,
ratio
cum
ratione
concertet
.
And
of
the
proving
part
hetherto
.
Let
vs
now
proceed
to
examine
such
arguments
as
are
brought
by
the
adverse
part
to
disproue
this
truth
;
such
J
meane
as
seeme
to
haue
any
footing
in
the
word
of
God
.
For
other
,
others
haue
fully
and
often
answered
them
.
Thus
then
some
reason
.
Tithes
are
not
in
all
the
new
Testament
specified
to
bee
the
ministers
maintenance
;
so
indeed
reasons
Bellarmine
;
so
Thomas
,
so
Canisius
and
many
others
of
that
rancke
of
honest
men
.
In
nova
lege
,
in
the
new
law
.i.
in
scriptures
of
the
newe
Testament
we
finde
no
such
precept
,
Ergo
not
due
to
Ministers
by
the
word
of
God
.
Resp.
Now
sure
J
had
thought
it
had
beene
sufficient
to
haue
found
them
grounded
on
any
part
of
Scripture
not
particularly
concerning
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
,
because
[
o
](A11600-e14510-b)
o
1.
Tim
3.16
.
the
whole
Scripture
is
given
by
inspiration
from
God
;
and
[
p
](A11600-e14530-b)
p
2.
Pet.
1.19
.
that
word
of
Prophets
(
saith
Peter
)
is
a
most
sure
word
,
we
shall
doe
well
to
attend
thereto
.
And
therefore
hetherto
it
hath
been
a
maxime
amongst
divines
;
A
parte
scripturae
non
valet
argumentum
negativè
.
Jts
a
morall
statute
given
to
Magistrats
to
punish
with
death
,
[
q
](A11600-e14570-b)
q
Gen.
9.6
.
the
shedder
of
mans
blood
;
yet
J
finde
it
not
specified
in
all
the
new
Testament
:
An
ordinance
irrevocable
that
the
Sabboth
bee
kept
with
cessation
from
labours
;
yet
specification
of
the
dutie
J
finde
not
in
the
new
Testament
.
Sundry
the
like
might
be
instanced
,
as
by
view
of
that
place
Ezek.
22
7.
ad
12.
to
every
man
may
appeare
.
Only
let
mee
intreat
men
fearing
God
,
not
so
farre
to
forget
their
reverence
to
the
old
scriptures
,
and
the
spirit
that
inspired
them
,
as
to
deny
them
their
share
with
the
new
Testament
in
this
honour
;
of
being
rule
in
part
of
their
faith
and
practise
.
This
age
is
strangely
in
loue
with
Epitomees
,
if
faith
it selfe
shall
be
drawne
to
her
compendium
;
[
r
](A11600-e14640-b)
r
Ioh.
5.45
.
He
should
iudge
the
Iewes
,
so
shall
hee
and
Prophets
iudge
Christians
also
,
as
well
as
Evangelists
and
Apostles
.
2
Who
can
question
this
truth
so
cleare
to
all
men
?
so
necessary
for
all
that
will
with
Tertullian
maintaine
the
fulnesse
of
the
Scriptures
?
That
scripture
teacheth
as
well
what
it
implies
,
as
what
it
expresseth
.
Teacheth
it
not
particulars
in
generals
?
Effects
or
consequents
in
principles
?
equals
by
equivalence
?
The
conclusion
is
not
expressed
in
scriptures
of
the
new
Testament
;
that
precept
of
Sabboth
is
not
abrogated
:
yet
taught
in
the
new
Testament
.
Sith
[
s
](A11600-e14690-b)
s
Mat.
5.17
.
no
precept
of
the
Decalogue
abrogated
;
Ergo
not
that
of
Sabboth
.
The
conclusion
not
expressed
in
the
new
Testament
;
Infants
are
to
bee
baptised
,
yet
taught
in
the
new
Testament
:
[
t
](A11600-e14730-b)
t
Act.
2.38.39
Mar.
10.14
.
1.
Cor.
7.14
.
Act
10.47
.
sith
to
whome
promises
,
kingdome
,
covenant
,
spirit
belong
,
to
them
baptisme
.
Ergo
to
infants
.
These
doctrines
are
all
taught
in
the
newe
Testament
,
because
generals
,
principles
,
or
equivalents
are
there
taught
.
And
so
haue
wee
tithes
prescribed
in
the
new
Testament
,
vt
supra
.
Yea
more
than
so
implicite
;
as
in
former
reasons
hath
already
appeared
.
It
s
by
this
occasion
nowe
in
my
minde
that
Tertullian
hath
in
his
treatie
de
spectaculis
;
where
bending
himselfe
to
disswade
Christians
from
presence
at
such
prophane
and
barbarous
spectacles
as
were
then
in
vse
,
hee
thus
shapes
answer
to
a
reason
of
this
mould
:
Quorundam
fides
(
saith
he
)
aut
simplicior
,
aut
scrupulosior
,
ab
hac
abdicatione
spectaculorum
de
scripturis
autoritatem
exposcit
,
&
se
in
incertum
constituit
,
quod
non
significanter
neque
nominatim
denuncietur
servis
Dei
abstinentia
eiusmodi
:
Some
mens
faith
(
saith
Tertullian
)
whether
over
simple
,
or
over
scrupulous
,
demaundes
our
authoritie
from
scriptures
for
this
abandoning
such
sights
;
and
makes
it selfe
doubtful
because
such
abstinence
is
not
there
expresly
and
by
name
inioined
to
the
servants
of
God
.
Whereto
he
answers
;
planè
nusquam
inuenimus
,
&c.
It
s
true
,
saith
that
autor
,
we
finde
not
in
any
place
,
that
as
it
is
apertly
said
,
thou
shalt
not
kill
,
&c.
so
it
s
expresly
defined
,
thou
shalt
not
goe
to
the
circle
or
Theater
&c.
but
wee
finde
that
general
of
David
to
touch
this
particular
;
Blessed
is
hee
that
hath
not
walked
in
the
counsell
of
the
vngodly
,
nor
stand
in
the
way
of
sinners
;
if
in
no
way
of
sinners
,
then
not
in
this
:
Nam
apud
spectacula
&
in
via
statur
,
&c.
There
needs
no
application
.
Now
this
argument
the
same
for
substance
some
haue
vrged
with
this
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
In
scriptures
of
the
newe
Testament
,
where
Ministers
maintenance
is
purposely
treated
of
,
no
mention
is
to
be
found
of
tithes
:
And
that
is
at
least
a
presumption
,
their
payment
is
no
perpetual
ordinance
of
God
.
For
is
it
likely
the
particular
would
haue
beene
concealed
?
Resp.
Perhaps
,
and
but
perhaps
not
;
1
If
either
state
of
the
times
had
borne
it
,
or
2.
necessitie
required
,
or
3.
Apostles
had
beene
willing
to
vrge
the
vttermost
of
right
.
But
considering
first
the
distresse
of
the
times
,
was
such
,
as
scarce
any
could
call
any
thing
his
owne
;
2.
weighing
againe
how
fully
the
particular
was
in
the
old
Testament
determined
;
lastly
pondering
how
loth
the
Apostles
were
,
to
exact
right
,
least
any
occasion
should
be
given
,
to
suspect
of
mercenary
or
covetous
affection
in
preaching
:
it
was
as
convenient
to
omit
particularizing
the
quantitie
,
as
to
remit
the
vse
of
all
right
,
as
to
some
Churches
some
practised
.
2
But
yet
this
J
finde
;
they
call
for
[
u
](A11600-e14910-b)
u
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
double
honour
.
For
[
x
](A11600-e14920-b)
x
1.
Cor.
9.5
.
ad
14.
maintenance
due
by
law
of
nature
,
and
nations
,
and
by
ordinance
of
Christ
,
and
that
is
either
tithes
,
or
else
no
certaine
particular
.
3
Who
will
vndertake
to
evidence
the
particulars
of
all
duties
of
iustice
,
charity
,
temperance
,
even
there
where
hee
shall
finde
such
duties
purposely
prescribed
?
Or
be
so
bold
(
ne
quid
dicam
gravius
)
as
to
exclude
particularities
of
these
duties
from
intention
of
Gods
spirit
because
the
generals
are
only
handled
,
vpon
supposed
likelyhoods
,
or
presumptions
truly
presumptuous
?
Leaue
we
therefore
this
argument
,
and
see
whither
the
rest
haue
better
colour
.
Bellarmine
endevouring
to
disproue
the
morality
of
this
duty
,
thus
reasons
;
Moral
duties
haue
ever
bound
conscience
,
even
before
the
law
of
Moses
.
But
the
lawe
of
tithes
was
not
till
the
times
of
Moses
.
Ergo.
Resp
.
the
proposition
we
acknowledge
.
The
minor
how
will
he
proue
?
If
hee
shall
reason
from
the
scriptures
silence
;
the
same
may
be
said
of
adultery
,
Idolatry
,
periury
,
almost
of
what
not
?
2.
We
haue
that
which
is
equivalent
to
a
precept
;
the
approved
practise
of
the
Saints
of
God
;
yea
if
Lyra
may
be
credited
,
an
implied
precept
given
to
Iacob
,
Gen.
35.1
.
when
he
is
commanded
to
build
an
altar
at
Bethel
according
to
his
vow
made
,
Gen.
28.
Looke
backe
to
what
is
said
in
clearing
the
first
Argument
,
and
thereby
iudge
whither
the
precept
of
tithing
were
in
those
daies
given
,
or
not
.
His
next
reason
is
this
,
Reason
naturall
teacheth
not
the
payment
of
tenthes
to
Priests
,
but
only
of
what
is
sufficient
to
their
sustentation
.
Ergo
not
morall
.
Resp.
neither
doth
reason
direct
to
keeping
a
seaventh
daie
,
but
only
a
separation
of
some
solemne
times
to
Gods
worship
.
But
who
would
consult
with
reason
corrupted
,
&
blinde
since
the
fall
,
to
determine
of
moralities
?
Since
al
it
reacheth
vnto
,
even
where
it
hath
some
helpe
from
generall
grace
,
are
generalities
only
of
morall
duties
?
His
last
reason
,
Matters
of
vow
are
no
moralities
:
tithes
were
[
y
](A11600-e15060-b)
y
Gen.
28.22
.
vowed
by
Iacob
:
Ergo
not
commaunded
.
Resp.
And
are
all
matters
of
vow
things
arbitrary
,
none
moralities
?
What
thinke
yee
of
that
ver.
21.
vttered
in
some
vow
,
and
as
it
were
with
the
same
breath
of
Iacob
;
If
the
Lord
will
go
with
me
,
and
keepe
mee
in
the
way
that
I
shall
goe
,
&c.
then
shall
the
Lord
be
my
God
?
Was
it
a
matter
Arbitrary
to
Iacob
to
haue
the
Lord
,
and
him
only
to
be
his
God
?
being
the
substance
of
the
first
morall
precept
?
Yet
was
it
vowed
by
Iacob
,
as
we
see
,
on
like
condition
with
tithes
.
More
instances
might
be
alleaged
:
but
quorsum
:
Proceede
wee
to
argumentes
of
our
owne
divines
.
Tithes
say
some
are
originally
in
kings
and
civill
Magistrates
,
and
it
s
their
Mishpat
.
i.
ius
to
dispose
of
them
to
civill
or
religious
vse
.
For
saith
the
Lord
;
of
Israels
king
,
Hoc
erit
ius
regis
vestri
,
&c:
hee
shall
take
tithes
,
1.
Sam.
8.15
.
Resp.
Is
it
possible
men
shoulde
advisedly
thus
reason
out
of
this
scripture
?
[
z
](A11600-e15180-b)
z
Levit.
27.30
The
Lorde
had
long
ere
this
declared
tithes
to
be
his
,
[
a
](A11600-e15190-b)
a
Num.
18.24
.
assigned
them
to
Levi
for
his
service
in
the
tabernacle
:
and
that
vnder
Magistrats
civill
though
not
kings
.
When
in
his
wrath
he
giues
a
king
to
Israel
,
revoked
he
his
ordinance
of
tithing
to
Levi
?
Who
can
think
it
?
I
stand
not
to
dispute
the
question
,
whether
the
words
describe
a
king
,
or
rather
a
tyrant
.
But
this
I
am
sure
is
evident
:
the
Lorde
there
shewes
the
many
mischiefes
shoulde
befall
them
as
a
plague
for
their
reiecting
the
government
by
himselfe
established
,
such
as
should
make
them
cry
vnder
the
burthen
of
his
exaction
.
A
course
beseeming
an
exorbitant
tyrant
,
rather
then
a
regular
king
.
Iust
:
yea
but
this
shal
be
his
Mishpat
.
i.
his
ius
ver.
11.
Resp.
And
why
his
ius
rather
then
his
guise
?
His
right
rather
then
his
fashion
?
As
most
render
,
and
the
word
oft
signifie
.
See
1.
Sam.
27.11
.
was
it
his
ius
to
take
from
the
people
their
fields
and
vineyards
,
and
best
oliue
yards
to
giue
to
his
servants
?
As
is
said
,
ver.
14.
How
then
sinned
Achab
[
b
](A11600-e15290-b)
b
1.
Reg
21.1
,
2
,
3.
in
coveting
the
vineyard
of
Naboth
?
And
desiring
to
purchase
it
with
mony
?
Yea
,
why
offers
he
mony
or
deales
by
way
of
contract
?
It
was
his
ius
being
a
king
,
to
take
vineyards
&
fields
from
subiects
to
giue
to
his
servants
:
much
more
to
keepe
for
his
owne
benefit
and
conveniency
.
3.
Alienation
of
possessions
from
tribes
and
families
was
flatly
forbidden
to
the
Iewish
people
,
that
Christs
linage
and
descent
might
bee
kept
vnconfounded
.
2
But
what
when
it
is
yeelded
hee
had
a
tus
to
exact
tithes
of
subiects
?
Must
it
needs
be
vnderstood
of
tithes
of
Levits
assigned
them
of
God
?
and
not
rather
of
other
tithes
which
he
might
craue
in
subsidium
?
as
[
c
](A11600-e15350-b)
c
Gen.
47.24
.
fifts
were
once
imposed
vpon
Egyptians
.
Certainely
Ezechias
,
it
seemes
,
thought
tithes
the
Levits
due
,
and
therfore
amongst
other
precepts
of
reformation
,
Apostles
received
not
tithes
in
their
daies
.
Ergo.
Resp
.
That
is
hard
,
that
I
say
not
,
(
impossible
to
proue
)
2.
not
tithes
,
no
nor
ought
els
of
some
churches
,
but
made
their
owne
hands
minister
to
their
necessities
,
that
they
might
not
be
scandalous
to
weake
brethren
,
nor
chargable
to
afflicted
churches
;
3.
yea
suffered
bonds
,
reproches
,
cruell
deaths
,
&c.
must
therefore
the
Churches
of
all
ages
receiue
like
measure
from
her
children
?
4
The
question
is
de
iure
non
de
facto
:
&
that
ius
was
remitted
,
because
burthensome
to
those
times
,
as
circumcision
was
in
the
wildernes
,
Ioshua
.
5.5.6
.
If
tithes
be
thus
due
to
Ministers
,
why
not
also
first
fruits
for
these
also
were
commanded
to
be
paid
to
Levits
?
Resp.
To
these
and
all
arguments
following
,
this
generall
answere
may
serue
;
that
wee
claime
not
tithes
by
vertue
of
the
precept
given
for
Levites
.
Who
ever
heard
vs
thus
reason
?
God
commanded
tithes
to
be
paide
to
Levites
:
Ergo
tithes
are
due
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
.
But
thus
we
claime
them
;
as
due
to
God
by
reservation
from
the
beginning
,
as
following
Christs
priesthood
,
as
the
only
certainety
mentioned
in
scripture
,
as
consecrated
to
God
by
consent
of
Churches
&
Edicts
of
princes
,
as
agreeing
with
the
vse
and
practise
of
the
Church
in
al
times
For
the
mandate
of
God
concerning
Levi
,
we
make
it
not
the
ground
of
our
title
to
tithes
.
So
that
of
these
reasons
we
may
say
as
he
,
they
are
Nihil
ad
Rhombum
.
Yet
that
nothing
be
wanting
to
anie
mans
satisfaction
,
I
answer
,
1.
that
first
fruits
were
paid
to
Aaron
,
[
d
](A11600-e15510-b)
d
Heb.
7
11
as
to
high
priest
,
whose
priesthood
is
now
passed
to
another
;
2.
vpon
a
reason
particular
to
that
people
;
3.
for
sacrifice
,
as
appeares
at
large
,
De●
.
26.
2.
ad
11.
appeares
there
any
such
thing
of
Tithes
?
Lastly
they
were
figures
as
should
seeme
,
of
Christ
,
[
e
](A11600-e15530-b)
e
1
Cor
15.20
.
The
first
fruits
of
them
that
sleepe
;
of
beginnings
of
sanctification
,
called
by
the
Apostle
[
f
](A11600-e15550-b)
f
Rom.
8.23
.
the
first
fruits
of
the
spirit
.
Can
any
of
these
be
avouched
of
tithes
?
Who
then
sees
not
manifest
disparity
betweene
the
two
?
If
this
be
a
duty
of
people
to
pay
tithes
to
Ministers
:
than
that
also
of
Ministers
to
[
g
](A11600-e15580-b)
g
Num.
18.28
.
pay
tithes
to
the
high
Priest
.
Resp.
The
argument
proceedes
from
a
false
Hypothesis
,
supposing
vs
to
claime
tithes
by
mandate
Leviticall
.
Which
we
vtterly
disclaime
,
vt
supra
.
2.
But
yet
farther
I
answere
;
It
followes
not
if
one
,
then
the
other
due
.
1.
For
[
h
](A11600-e15620-b)
h
Ps
50
12.13
that
our
high
Priest
needs
them
not
:
but
only
hath
ordained
for
them
that
[
i
](A11600-e15640-b)
i
1.
Cor
9.14
.
preach
the
gospel
.
2.
Sacrifices
are
now
ceased
,
to
which
these
Decimae
secūdaneae
chiefly
served
[
k
](A11600-e15660-b)
k
Num.
18.28
29.30
.
;
so
that
their
reason
is
no
more
but
this
,
If
tithes
for
stipend
,
then
tithes
for
sacrifice
:
he
is
meerely
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
discernes
not
the
inconsequence
.
If
precept
of
tithing
be
moral
,
than
that
also
of
[
l
](A11600-e15690-b)
l
Mal.
3
10.
bringing
them
to
one
common
storehouse
.
Resp
.
This
argument
also
proceedeth
from
like
fained
Hypothesis
.
see
supra
.
&
yet
hath
no
good
consequence
:
for
must
the
substance
of
a
duty
needs
be
Levitical
,
because
some
circumstances
thereof
concern
only
Iewish
nation
?
Then
must
Sabbath
also
even
for
substance
be
ceremoniall
,
because
some
circumstances
&
ends
belong
only
to
Iews
Deut.
5.15
.
If
precept
of
tithes
be
moral
,
then
that
also
of
Ministers
not
[
m
](A11600-e15750-b)
m
Num.
18.24
having
portion
amongst
their
brethren
.
Resp.
The
same
fallacy
that
before
;
for
we
claime
not
by
precept
given
to
Levi.
And
yet
the
argument
follows
not
.
1.
for
saith
Polanus
(
though
I
avow
not
his
answere
)
that
ordinance
was
figuratiue
;
[
n
](A11600-e15820-b)
n
Numb
.
35.
Levit.
25.34
.
Had
citties
with
their
suburbs
which
were
their
perpetuall
possession
,
and
passed
from
father
to
sonne
;
subiect
to
same
lawes
of
Redemption
as
others
.
Wherefore
Ieremie
a
Priestes
sonne
[
o
](A11600-e15860-b)
o
Ier.
32.7.9
.
buies
the
fielde
of
his
vnckle
as
next
of
kin
.
See
also
1.
King
.
2.26
.
Thus
therfore
vnderstand
that
ordinance
of
Levits
having
no
portion
amongst
their
brethren
.
No
portion
,
that
is
,
no
such
portion
,
separate
from
their
brethren
,
as
had
other
tribes
,
not
simply
none
:
the
Reason
thereof
was
Iacobs
prophecy
[
p
](A11600-e15890-b)
p
Gen.
49.7
.
touching
their
scattering
amongst
their
brethren
.
Disposed
of
also
by
Gods
providence
for
greater
conveniency
of
the
peoples
instruction
,
as
also
by
situation
of
their
citties
in
[
q
](A11600-e15910-b)
q
Iosh.
21.
every
tribe
is
me
thinks
probable
.
Lastly
a
manifest
disparity
there
is
between
the
two
.
For
the
children
of
Levits
succeeded
their
parents
,
&
were
for
ever
to
be
maintained
by
Levits
portion
.
Not
so
the
children
of
Ministers
,
except
they
be
[
r
](A11600-e15920-b)
r
1.
Tim.
3.
Titus
.
1.
approved
,
&
found
meet
for
the
ministery
.
Lastly
they
obiect
the
place
,
Numb.
18.24
.
vnanswerable
,
as
they
thinke
,
and
such
as
if
a
man
but
turne
to
with
a
wet
finger
,
he
shall
presently
see
tithing
a
ceremonious
ordinance
.
Now
for
my
part
I
haue
viewed
the
place
,
and
with
my
best
attention
considered
what
may
thence
be
deduced
to
proue
it
ceremoniall
.
Yet
finde
not
that
it
concludes
either
the
ordinance
in
generall
,
or
yet
that
Leviticall
constitution
to
haue
beene
ceremonious
,
for
thus
wee
must
frame
the
Argument
.
If
tithes
were
assigned
to
Levi
for
his
service
in
the
tabernacle
:
then
is
the
ordinance
of
tithing
meerely
ceremonious
;
for
that
service
was
ceremoniall
.
But
tithes
were
assigned
to
Levi
for
his
service
in
the
tabernacle
.
Ergo.
Resp
.
1.
To
say
nothing
that
that
particular
assignement
concludes
not
the
ordinance
at
large
,
but
the
ordinance
for
Levi
only
:
I
answere
2.
that
by
as
good
inference
they
may
proue
reverence
,
obedience
,
defence
of
Ministers
,
ceremonious
duties
,
inasmuch
as
even
these
also
belonged
to
Levites
for
their
service
in
the
tabernacle
.
For
why
must
Israelits
giue
Levites
honour
,
obedience
,
singular
loue
,
&c:
but
for
their
worke
sake
?
And
what
was
their
worke
?
But
their
service
in
the
tabernacle
.
So
that
now
our
people
owe
vs
no
more
honour
,
obedience
,
loue
,
&c.
[
s
](A11600-e16000-b)
s
1
Thes.
5
12
13.
Heb.
13.17
.
for
our
worke
sake
,
as
it
is
prescribed
.
For
these
all
belonged
to
Levites
for
their
service
in
the
tabernacle
,
which
was
ceremonious
.
Briefly
;
they
were
given
to
Levites
for
their
service
in
the
tabernacle
,
non
quâ
tabernaculi
;
but
quâ
service
.
And
therefore
before
tabernacle
erected
,
they
were
paide
to
Priests
,
Gen.
14.
3.
Was
the
whole
service
of
the
tabernacle
ceremonious
?
Nay
were
not
some
maine
parts
of
it
,
apparently
morall
?
What
thinke
we
of
teaching
the
people
?
[
t
](A11600-e16050-b)
t
2.
Chr.
17.9
.
Act
15.21
.
Nehe.
8.3.6.7
8.
of
Reading
the
scriptures
,
and
giving
sense
?
of
praising
God
?
Were
not
these
parts
of
tabernacle
service
?
And
had
not
the
Levites
maintenaunce
for
these
,
as
well
as
for
slaying
sacrifices
?
Surely
if
this
be
the
best
and
clearest
reasons
against
tithing
,
I
must
needes
professe
,
they
are
so
farre
from
making
me
doubt
of
my
conclusion
,
that
they
rather
stablish
my
iudgment
therin
.
And
these
are
all
the
arguments
I
haue
yet
heard
vrged
by
men
of
any
iudgement
,
against
the
necessitie
of
paying
tithes
.
One
other
only
which
seculars
vse
,
I
will
annexe
;
&
that
is
drawne
from
a
perilous
inconvenience
ensuing
vpon
this
doctrine
.
What
is
it
?
Forsooth
if
tithes
belong
to
Ministers
&
are
payable
to
them
only
,
according
to
the
word
of
God
:
it
wil
come
to
passe
,
that
a
Ministers
portion
shall
exceed
the
allowance
of
two
or
three
of
his
wealthiest
parishioners
.
But
that
,
I
tell
you
,
is
a
shrewd
inconvenience
.
Resp.
A
mischiefe
which
I
wonder
the
Lord
in
his
endlesse
wisdome
never
bethought
himselfe
to
prevent
amongst
the
Israelits
.
The
Levites
,
though
according
to
the
generall
division
of
Israell
by
tribes
,
they
were
but
a
twelfth
or
thirteenth
part
:
yet
according
to
exact
number
of
persons
reckoned
by
polles
,
were
scarce
the
sixtith
part
of
the
people
.
The
number
of
the
people
without
the
Levites
,
amounted
to
[
u
](A11600-e16090-b)
u
Num.
1.46
.
sixe
hundred
and
three
thousands
,
fiue
hundred
&
fifty
;
to
which
if
we
adde
their
old
men
,
and
al
from
vnder
twenty
yeares
amongst
them
which
came
not
into
the
first
number
,
[
x
](A11600-e16100-b)
x
Numb.
1.3
.
allowing
but
double
so
many
for
them
,
they
arise
to
about
a
thousand
thousands
and
three
hundred
thousands
.
Now
the
Levites
numbred
from
the
infant
to
the
old
man
,
were
found
but
two
and
twenty
thousands
only
,
[
y
](A11600-e16110-b)
y
Num.
3
39.
and
that
is
not
aboue
the
sixtith
part
of
the
people
.
Yet
see
,
the
Lord
allots
them
the
tenth
of
all
the
increase
of
the
land
:
besides
share
in
oblations
,
[
z
](A11600-e16120-b)
z
Num.
35
4.7
things
consecrate
by
vow
,
and
48.
citties
with
suburbs
of
so
large
circuit
,
that
according
to
Hieromes
measure
of
the
land
,
exceeded
the
portion
of
any
other
tribe
in
Israell
.
It
s
marvell
none
woulde
vndertake
to
be
the
Lords
Counsellour
,
and
to
tel
him
such
large
allowance
might
make
Levites
prowde
and
lazy
.
But
this
large
portion
to
the
Lord
seemed
no
inconvenience
:
howe
seemes
it
so
to
vs
,
in
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
?
Againe
,
how
fals
it
,
that
to
other
orders
&
rankes
of
men
,
as
lawyers
,
gentles
,
&c.
their
portions
exceeding
by
more
then
fourths
the
portions
of
others
,
are
not
maligned
;
the
Ministers
of
all
other
should
bee
subiect
to
envie
?
Lastly
,
how
is
it
,
that
men
in
their
own
,
though
far
larger
portion
,
know
no
measure
,
but
adde
continually
thousands
to
hundreds
;
and
(
as
Agars
horsleach
)
crie
,
giue
,
giue
;
and
as
the
graue
,
knowe
no
measure
of
desiring
:
yet
of
a
ministers
stipend
,
of
fiftie
,
or
an
hundred
pounds
,
cry
Sufficit
;
It
s
enough
,
and
too
much
?
What
,
I
wonder
,
is
that
great
service
these
men
performe
,
so
over
acceptable
to
God
,
or
profitable
vnto
men
,
aboue
the
worke
of
a
minister
?
that
they
should
thinke
themselues
worthy
of
all
,
whatsoever
by
a
vijs
&
modis
they
can
scrape
togither
;
and
yet
to
ministers
,
for
their
work
sake
,
hardly
beteeme
double
honour
in
proportion
to
the
meane
wealthy
amongst
their
people
.
Tempora
,
Tempora
,
how
are
yee
turned
?
But
I
conclude
.
Sith
Tithes
belong
to
Christs
priesthood
,
sith
no
other
certainety
allotted
to
Ministers
in
scriptures
,
sith
detainement
is
sacrilege
,
sith
tithing
no
ceremony
nor
particularly
Iudiciall
,
sith
confirmed
by
consent
and
practise
of
the
Church
in
all
times
,
lastly
(
which
is
not
the
least
)
sith
reasons
against
it
are
of
so
no
force
,
as
wee
haue
seene
:
therefore
tithes
are
the
portion
due
to
Ministers
for
their
service
in
the
Gospell
.
[
a
](A11600-e16230-b)
a
Prov.
6.30
.
to
satisfie
their
owne
soules
;
and
liue
your selues
in
open
[
b
](A11600-e16250-b)
b
Mal.
3.8
.
robbery
of
God
himselfe
?
Far
be
it
from
mee
to
multiply
sins
or
to
cast
vnnecessary
scruples
into
the
consciences
of
Gods
people
.
But
faine
J
would
knowe
for
my
learning
,
of
such
as
are
so
loth
in
this
point
to
wound
consciences
(
alas
,
how
senselesse
,
and
fleshed
in
sacrilege
!
)
where
God
hath
ever
legitimated
sacrilege
;
or
made
it
lawfull
vnder
the
new
Testament
,
to
alienate
from
him
things
consecrated
to
his
worship
:
when
turned
the
truth
of
that
sentence
into
a
lie
;
[
c
](A11600-e16270-b)
c
Prov.
20.25
Rom.
2.
Act.
5.1.3
.
It
is
a
sinne
to
devoure
holy
things
,
and
after
the
vow
to
enquire
.
Nay
the
Lord
it
seemes
,
hath
written
it
in
the
hearts
of
Naturalists
with
the
point
of
a
Diamond
:
howsoever
some
mens
simple
or
wilful
ignorance
,
or
impious
profanenes
,
or
insatiable
covetousnes
seemes
to
detain
this
point
of
truth
,
[
d
](A11600-e16300-b)
d
Rom.
1.58
.
as
many
other
,
in
vnrighteousnes
.
When
Nabuchadnezzar
had
surprised
the
temple
,
&
seized
the
sacred
vessels
appointed
to
Gods
worship
:
in
the
middest
of
sacriledge
,
he
feares
to
be
sacrilegious
;
and
therfore
[
e
](A11600-e16330-b)
e
Dan.
1.2
.
brings
them
to
the
house
of
his
Gods
,
supposed
by
him
to
bee
the
only
true
Gods
.
Infinite
I
might
be
in
propounding
the
sentences
,
and
censures
,
that
heathen
passed
vpon
this
point
of
impietie
.
And
is
there
any
man
can
doubt
whither
detainement
of
tithes
be
sacriledge
,
or
not
?
Shape
to
they
selfe
a
description
of
sacriledge
with
any
sound
limits
determining
its
nature
,
and
see
whither
vnder
it
fals
not
the
detainement
of
tithes
.
I
beseech
you
therefore
suffer
the
words
of
exhortation
:
Giue
Caesar
,
Caesars
;
and
God
,
that
which
is
Gods
.
Neede
I
,
I
thinke
,
to
presse
it
by
reasons
?
Not
sure
if
the
belly
had
eares
.
But
sweete
sinnes
,
are
the
dangerous
sinnes
,
because
for
the
most
part
incorrigible
;
begetting
in
most
,
either
a
loathnesse
to
bee
informed
,
or
obfirmation
against
all
perswasions
.
Yet
let
vs
attempt
;
who
knows
whither
the
Lord
may
be
pleased
[
f
](A11600-e16360-b)
f
Act
16
14.
to
open
the
heart
,
if
but
of
one
Lydia
,
to
attend
to
the
things
which
are
spoken
?
Consider
therefore
,
I
beseech
you
,
even
in
the
bowels
of
Christ
Iesus
;
first
the
hainousnesse
of
this
sinne
of
sacriledge
.
They
erre
in
[
g
](A11600-e16390-b)
g
Zanch.
de
vitiis
exter
.
Cult.
opposit
.
Thesi
3●
Zanchies
iudgement
,
that
make
sacriledge
only
a
branch
of
theft
,
and
breach
of
the
eighth
precept
;
yea
rather
it
is
a
species
of
irreligion
.
Heare
his
reasons
.
For
whence
proceedes
it
;
but
from
contempt
of
holy
things
,
&
manifest
vnreverence
towards
God
himselfe
?
wherefore
steales
any
man
things
separate
to
preserue
the
ministerie
,
but
because
he
contemnes
the
whole
Ministery
,
yea
God
himselfe
to
whose
worshippe
they
are
consecrated
?
And
wherevnto
tendes
such
fraudulent
,
or
violent
praying
vpon
holy
things
:
but
to
the
vtter
overthrow
of
all
religion
?
Sathan
knowes
well
,
Gods
outwarde
worship
cannot
be
continued
without
the
Ministerie
,
nor
the
Ministery
without
Ministers
,
nor
Ministers
without
Church
goods
:
and
therefore
provokes
hee
Tyrants
and
profane
men
,
to
invade
the
Churches
possessions
,
that
by
that
meanes
he
may
hinder
,
if
not
wholly
overthrowe
,
the
state
of
religion
.
To
this
purpose
Zanchius
.
Shall
I
adde
one
other
reason
?
The
rather
because
I
see
men
thinke
of
this
theft
,
even
those
that
thinke
worst
,
but
as
of
thefts
from
men
;
they
rob
not
God
,
but
Ministers
(
if
any
)
while
they
detaine
tithes
,
or
other
things
hallowed
.
Now
let
them
consider
,
that
the
dominion
,
and
propertie
of
all
things
hallowed
,
is
Gods
,
and
such
consecration
giues
him
seizure
of
them
in
see
;
the
vse
only
is
the
Ministers
.
[
h
](A11600-e16460-b)
h
Polan
.
in
Ezech.
48.14
.
Quae
sanctificata
sunt
Domino
,
non
sunt
eorum
,
quibus
data
sunt
,
sed
eius
,
cuius
nomine
possidentur
.
Things
hallowed
to
God
,
are
not
so
much
theirs
,
to
whom
they
are
given
,
as
Gods
in
whose
title
they
are
possessed
.
Therefore
(
saith
the
Lord
to
the
Israelites
detaining
tithes
from
the
Levits
)
Yee
[
i
](A11600-e16500-b)
i
Mal.
3.
haue
robbed
not
Levi
,
whose
they
are
in
vse
,
but
ME
,
in
whom
is
the
property
and
dominion
.
Need
any
more
reasons
,
then
the
enormity
of
the
sinne
?
Heare
then
2
the
detestation
wherein
in
al
times
amongst
all
men
,
christians
,
or
heathen
,
this
sin
was
holden
.
To
omit
the
bitter
invectiues
every
where
obvious
,
consider
the
punishments
appointed
for
the
sacrilegious
.
[
k
](A11600-e16530-b)
k
Cent.
9.
cap.
1.
Charles
the
great
in
his
time
made
this
decree
;
that
whosoever
should
invade
,
or
waste
,
or
by
any
cunning
meanes
presume
to
alienate
the
goods
of
the
church
,
he
should
legally
be
punished
by
the
Iudges
,
as
an
homicide
,
or
sacrilegious
theefe
,
excommunicated
by
the
Bishops
,
deprived
of
burial
;
yea
,
as
if
his
almes
were
infectious
,
or
accursed
,
none
must
receiue
it
.
Amongst
the
heathen
no
tortures
were
thought
sufficient
for
this
sin
,
[
l
](A11600-e16570-b)
l
Lactant.
de
orig.
Error
.
c.
3
scourgings
,
burnings
,
rackings
,
hangings
,
any
thing
whatsoever
their
furie
could
devise
to
inflict
.
[
m
](A11600-e16590-b)
m
Plutarch
.
de
his
qui
serò
a
numine
puniuntur
.
At
Delphos
they
vsed
to
cast
them
headlong
from
a
rocke
,
which
they
called
Hyampeia
.
The
Aethiopians
had
an
herb
they
called
Ophiusa
,
as
of
vnpleasing
aspect
,
so
of
farre
more
dangerous
effect
taken
into
the
body
.
It
so
affrighted
with
phantasmes
of
dreadfull
serpents
,
that
such
as
drank
it
made
away
themselues
.
[
n
](A11600-e16630-b)
n
Plin.
hist.
nat.
lib.
26.
cap.
17.
Obid
(
saith
Pliny
)
cogebantur
sacrilegi
illam
bibere
;
for
that
cause
were
church
robbers
forced
to
drinke
it
.
Amongst
our selues
,
breaking
vp
of
churches
,
&
stealing
the
least
trifle
,
aggravates
the
theft
,
&
makes
the
offender
culpable
of
death
.
If
the
Philosopher
were
now
aliue
,
would
he
not
laugh
at
the
spectacle
?
To
see
the
great
theeues
lead
the
smaller
to
the
gallows
?
How
is
it
a
sin
more
hainous
,
to
violate
a
temple
,
then
to
alienate
Church
maintenance
from
the
worship
of
God
?
3.
If
none
of
these
moue
,
oh
yet
let
the
blood
of
so
manie
soules
perishing
by
this
,
if
not
as
a
cause
,
yet
as
a
greate
occasion
,
waken
vs
.
Many
motions
I
haue
heard
of
,
made
for
a
learned
ministery
,
that
every
congregation
might
haue
[
o
](A11600-e16690-b)
o
Ier.
3.15
.
a
past
or
to
feed
them
with
knowledge
and
understanding
.
For
my
part
I
say
as
[
p
](A11600-e16710-b)
p
Gal.
5.12
.
Paule
in
another
case
;
vtinam
excindantur
;
I
would
they
were
cut
off
that
hinder
it
.
But
amongst
all
,
how
is
it
that
the
point
of
maintenance
comes
not
to
be
consulted
?
It
were
to
be
wished
that
the
Apostolique
zeale
burnt
now
in
Ministers
,
that
rather
then
soules
should
starue
,
they
would
freely
giue
what
they
haue
freely
receaved
.
But
hee
was
[
q
](A11600-e16740-b)
q
Perkins
in
Iob.
33.
23.
an
holie
man
that
said
,
men
are
men
,
and
must
be
allured
by
such
arguments
as
may
prevaile
even
with
flesh
and
blood
.
It
was
Gods
great
wisdome
in
the
creation
,
first
to
provide
food
,
before
he
made
the
Animal
creatures
.
And
it
's
ashame
to
the
Church
in
the
daies
of
peace
,
to
see
men
of
best
gifts
therefore
divert
their
studies
to
other
arts
,
because
the
ministery
affords
not
maintenance
;
for
our
Church
most
,
where
Gods
allowance
is
so
liberall
,
were
it
not
that
sacrilege
did
intercept
it
.
4
May
J
not
adde
the
mischiefe
temporall
it
hath
brought
vpon
the
land
?
Complaints
are
frequent
amongst
our
people
against
inclosures
the
decayers
(
they
say
)
of
husbandry
,
by
which
,
saith
Salomon
,
even
kings
are
maintained
.
I
dare
say
,
that
peculatus
,
if
J
may
so
tearme
it
,
hath
not
beene
more
hurtfull
this
way
,
then
hath
this
sacrilege
.
Cornefields
were
wont
to
laugh
in
our
Gentlemens
now
pastures
;
but
tithes
seeme
more
compendious
to
the
ground
of
housekeeping
then
the
toilesome
tediousnesse
of
tilling
the
earth
.
And
scarfe
a
great
man
now
adaies
,
though
but
niggardly
hospitall
,
that
can
keep
open
dores
without
a
Parsonage
.
It
were
wel
me
thinkes
amongst
so
many
delicates
,
they
would
once
in
their
liues
eate
one
morcel
of
their
own
bread
.
Lastly
,
if
these
perswade
not
,
yet
let
that
terrour
of
the
Lord
prevaile
with
vs
;
[
r
](A11600-e16810-b)
r
Prov.
20.25
.
It
s
a
curse
(
saith
Salomon
)
to
devoure
holy
things
,
a
cursed
practise
,
that
brings
downe
Gods
vengeance
vpon
the
sacrilegious
.
Examples
we
haue
seene
many
,
and
read
of
more
:
even
kings
themselues
haue
not
gone
vnpunished
.
The
[
s
](A11600-e16850-b)
s
Zech.
5.4
.
flying
booke
of
Gods
vengance
,
Enter
(
saith
Zecherie
)
into
the
house
of
the
theefe
,
and
consumes
it
with
the
timber
,
and
the
stones
thereof
;
leaues
scarse
a
monument
where
hee
hath
beene
.
Is
God
thus
sharpe
against
petite
thefts
,
and
will
he
leaue
sacrilege
vnavenged
?
Search
records
divine
,
humane
:
where
findest
thou
a
rob-God
without
his
vengance
?
obserue
these
sacrilegious
amongst
our selues
:
it
s
much
if
they
prosper
to
the
fourth
generation
;
much
,
(
though
God
be
much
in
sparing
)
if
hee
either
leaue
not
them
childlesse
,
or
their
children
gracelesse
,
by
one
meanes
or
other
makes
them
not
vomit
those
morsels
of
holy
things
,
that
they
haue
devoured
.
Tithes
with
lay
men
,
are
as
the
[
t
](A11600-e16890-b)
t
1.
Sam.
5
6.9.11
.
Arke
with
the
Philistims
,
plaguing
the
vniust
possessors
,
til
they
returne
to
the
right
owners
.
Enough
I
hope
of
this
first
sinne
.
And
too
much
perhaps
some
wil
say
,
too
ful
of
tartnes
.
Let
them
remember
the
Callum
is
thicke
,
and
needs
a
hot
Cauterie
.
Yea
but
it
may
wound
the
conscience
;
Vtinam
.
The
remedy
is
at
hand
.
Restituatur
ablatum
,
vt
dimittatur
peccatum
.
Howsoever
,
for
my
soule
,
I
dare
not
[
u
](A11600-e16950-b)
u
Isai.
5.20
.
speake
good
of
evill
,
Read
Ezech.
13.22
.
2
As
to
our
people
,
wittie
,
alas
,
to
their
own
harme
,
in
shifting
to
detaine
that
little
of
the
Lords
portion
still
left
him
,
I
say
as
[
*
](A11600-e16990-b)
*
2
Par.
31.4
.
Hezechias
(
J
would
,
I
could
hope
with
like
successe
)
Giue
the
portion
to
Priests
,
and
Levits
,
to
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
,
that
they
may
bee
encouraged
in
the
law
of
the
Lord
.
Needes
any
more
reasons
then
the
encouragement
of
your
Ministers
.
Heare
Malachy
;
Detainment
is
robbery
in
the
highest
degree
;
sacrilege
;
[
x
](A11600-e17020-b)
x
Mal.
3
10.
yee
haue
robbed
mee
,
saith
the
Lord
to
with-holders
.
2.
Robberie
detested
by
Jdolaters
;
will
a
man
,
will
an
Idolater
spoile
his
Gods
?
For
shame
let
not
Christians
spoile
their
God
.
3
[
y
](A11600-e17050-b)
y
Levit.
27
30
Tithes
are
Gods
by
reservation
from
the
beginning
,
Ministers
are
but
his
receavers
.
4.
Payment
sets
open
the
wondowes
of
heaven
,
and
brings
downe
a
blessing
in
abundance
;
5.
Detainement
,
a
curse
,
yea
vpon
whole
kingdomes
.
That
saying
of
Salomon
,
let
never
bee
forgotten
;
[
z
](A11600-e17090-b)
z
Prov.
3.9.10
Honour
God
with
thy
substance
and
with
the
chiefe
of
all
thine
increase
:
so
shall
thy
barnes
be
filled
with
abundance
;
is
a
blessing
annexed
to
this
dutie
.
Will
any
say
it
s
spoken
only
for
that
state
of
the
Church
in
Israel
?
Let
him
pervse
the
whole
booke
,
and
instance
but
in
one
precept
there
given
of
Leviticall
performances
,
except
he
will
too
absurdly
instare
in
proposito
.
More
perswasions
I
wil
not
adde
:
how
feare
I
,
that
J
shall
not
perswade
,
no
not
though
J
doe
perswade
?
Shal
J
presume
to
speake
of
the
figleaues
,
men
haue
sowne
to
themselues
to
hide
their
shame
?
Some
thus
:
To
honest
able
Ministers
they
thinke
them
due
;
but
dishonestie
&c.
makes
vncapable
.
Resp.
With
what
conscience
then
detaine
yee
from
such
whose
honesty
and
abilitie
your selues
will
testifie
?
2
The
Levites
in
Malachie
his
daies
[
a
](A11600-e17150-b)
a
Mal.
2.7
,
8
,
9
had
broken
the
covenant
,
were
become
ignorant
,
partiall
,
contemptible
:
yet
even
in
those
times
called
the
Lord
for
tithes
.
3.
What
law
of
God
,
or
man
,
permits
to
private
men
detainment
of
dues
even
from
the
dishonest
.
[
b
](A11600-e17170-b)
b
Mat.
22.
To
wicked
Magistrats
tribute
must
be
paid
.
4.
Tithes
are
due
to
Ministers
,
not
quâ
probi
;
but
quâ
ministri
:
not
for
their
honesty
;
but
for
their
Ministerie
.
As
to
those
other
obiections
,
of
customes
,
[
c
](A11600-e17230-b)
c
Gal.
6.7
.
God
is
not
mocked
.
A
pretty
mocke-God
answere
it
will
bee
,
at
that
great
day
when
thou
shalt
stand
before
the
great
Proprietarie
to
bee
examined
,
how
faithfully
thou
hast
given
Tithes
according
to
his
assignement
;
to
tell
him
:
for
matter
of
tithing
,
thou
hadst
a
custome
to
the
contrary
.
Dally
not
with
conscience
,
deceaue
not
thy selfe
,
God
sure
wil
not
thus
be
deluded
.
Thus
far
of
this
question
at
your
request
;
to
whome
vndeserved
kindnesse
hath
engaged
mee
so
farre
,
as
my
weake
abilities
can
extend
themselus
.
Of
this
tract
thus
thinke
;
The
Author
thinketh
himselfe
a
man
,
&
therefore
subiect
to
errour
.
Yet
would
faine
so
carry
himself
,
as
to
deserue
of
Gods
Church
the
esteeme
of
an
honest
man
,
and
therefore
no
lover
of
errors
;
much
lesse
a
Patrone
of
them
against
his
knowledge
and
conscience
.
FINIS
.