{Second Part 40}
Chap. VIII
Touching Tythes.
The payment of Tythes, as a maintenance to the Priesthood, which we were led to testifie against at our first Convincement of the Truth, was generally denied, as that which in Truth could not be owned, though the Claimers thereof have pretended thereto, sometimes by Divine Right, and sometimes by Humane Institution, and sometimes by both.
As to a claim by Divine Right, though they were so due under the first Covenant, yet that cannot be convincingly urged from the Scriptures of Truth under a Gospel-dispensation; for the Author to the Hebrews thus informs us, They that are of the Sons of Levi, who receive the Office of the Priesthood, have a Commandment to take Tythes of the People, according to the Law, Heb. 7. 5. But verse 12. he thus saith, The Priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a Change also of the Law. And verse the 18th of the same Chapter, he thus saith, There is verily a disannulling of the Commandment going before. Which clearly evidences, that since the Law is changed, and the Commandment disannulled (by which Tythes were paid) the payment thereof by vertue of that Law ceaseth, and so all claim thereto by Divine Right (since no Gospel-institution can be quoted) ceaseth also.
Moreover we find that Tertullian, who lived about two hundred years after Christ, doth thus write, ( 1 Apologetic. cap. 39.) “Neque pretio ulla res Dei constat: etiam {Second Part 41} siquod arcæ genus est, non de oneraria summâ quasi redemptæ religionis congregatur: modicum unusquisque stipem menstruâ die, vel cum velit, & si modo velit, & si modo possit, opponit; nam nemo compellitur, fed sponte consert, hæc quasi deposita pietatis sunt, That is, Neither is anything of God purchased with a Price; Also, if there be any kind of Treasury, it is not gathered by a collection that is chargeable (or that may be imposed,) as if it were the Price of a Ransomed Religion: every one laieth by a moderate stipend Monthly, or when he will, and if so be it please him, and if so be he can; for no body is compelled, but bestows of his own accord, these are as it were things committed in trust for Pious Uses.”
Selden, that great Antiquary of his time, also informs us in these words, “In the mean time, further to justifie what I affirm, take this of Epiphanius, Bishop of Constance in Cyprus, that about the year CCCLXXX wrote against the Heresies of the Primitive Times, when he tells us of the Teßiresdecatitæ or those which thought the holy Easter must be kept on the fourteenth Moon, according the the Law given to the Jews for their Passover, and that because they apprehended , that the keeping it otherwise was subject to the Curse of the Law, he says that παrζα εχδςιν ωa η Eχχληςια. That is, They do all things, or agree generally with the Church, saving that they were too much herein addicted to the Jewish Custom; and in his Argument against them, he shews, that the Curse hath not reference only to the Passover, but also to Circumcision, to Tythes (περί δεηατωσεωs) to Offerings, wherefore (as he goes on) if they escape one Curse by keeping their Easter according to their Law of the Passover, they thrust them into many other; for (saith he) they shall find them also cursed that are not Circumcised, and them cursed that pay not Tythes, and them cursed that offer not at Jerusalem.”
{Second Part 42} “Let any man now consider if this Bishop, that was least unacquainted with the Customs of the Christian Church, understood not clearly that no Necessity or known use of payment was amongst Christians in that time of Tythes, no more than of Circumcision or Offering at Jerusalem: Doth he not plainly reckon it as a thing not only not in Christian use, but even equals it with what was certainly abrogated? Is not his Objection shortly thus, Why do you not observe Circumcision, and Tything, and Offerings also at Jerusalem, which are all subject to the like curse? And because some kind of Offerings indeed were in use among Christians, therefore in the Objection he providently ties them to Jerusalem; but of Tything he speaks as general as of Circumcision, observe his own Context, which I here give, that the able Reader’s judgement may be free. Οζε θν ει μιαν χαταραν πεφευγαοιν ειs πολλαs εχυζθs ένεπειεαν. Ευρεζηοονζαι γδ επιηαταεατοι υη πεδιζευνομενοι επικαταεατοι, υη αποδηκαζθνζεs δω επικαπιεαζοι γινονζαs υη ειs Ιερθσαληυ προοφεεονζεs, that is, So that is they avoid one Curse, they shall fall under many other; for such shall be also found Accursed as are Uncircumcised; such accursed as Tythe not, and they are also Accursed (in the Old Law) that offer not at Jerusalem.”
I now come to examine, Whether a Claim by Humane Institution be Warrantble as a reward to a Gospel-Minister.
To run through the many Institutions, and varieties of Charters, by which a pretended Claim hath been made thereto, would fill a large Volumn, and is not much to the purpose on this Occasion; that therefore is passed over, and the inquisitive Reader referred to Selden’s History on that Subject, and the statutes made on behalf of Tythes in the Reigns of Henry 8, Edward 6, Queen Elizabeth, &c. and so proceed to manifest, whether there be any just {Second Part 43} Pretence from the Scriptures of Truth to claim Tythes under a Gospel-Dispensation, as a proper Maintenance for a Gospel-Ministry, by vertue of any humane institution.
The most pertinent part of Scripture that at present we remember to prove a maintenance for a Gospel-Ministry, is what Paul writes 1 Cor. 9. from verse 3. to verse 16. on which this observation may be made.
That Paul pretended not to have any Power to claim carnal things by any Humane Institution, neither is here any one word intimating that he had either Power or Liberty to make use of Carnal things, unless from those unto whom he had sown Spiritual; moreover, tis evident that Paul was so far from using that Gospel-Power, which he had, that he accounted it a Reward unto him that when he preached the Gospel, he might make the Gospel of Christ without Charge.
Obj. But what if it please the supreme Powers to bestow on the National Ministry Tythes? how prove you from the Scriptures, that those who freely pay it, do ill, or that ‘tis not lawful for them to receive it from such, and sue for it by the law from others, who are not free to pay it?
Ans. We are so far from condemning all those who freely pay them, and not as by constraint, that we look upon it to be the duty of all professing Christianity to contribute toward the outward maintainance of such whom they usually hear, and account to be the true Ministers of Christ, (though not obliged thereto by Law) in case they have need; and if the Charity of any should be such, as to bestow upon them one fifth part instead of a tenth, far be it from us to condemn it; but the Testimony of Truth is against all those, who under pretence of being Gospel-Ministers, {Second Part 44} have received carnal things, from any who give them not freely, but by vertue of humane insititution.
And as to the other part of the Objection, viz. to prove it lawful to sue for Tythes, when given by Law to a Gospel-Ministry; it is time enough so to do, when any one shall undertake to prove that ‘tis agreeable to the Law of God to make outward Laws to enforce a Contribution in any form or method whatsoever for Maintainance of a Gospel-Ministry.
Hitherto we have not understood, that any Pen hath undertaken such a Proof, and therefore no necessity to enlarge for disproof of that, which is neither proved or pretended to be proveable, as we know.
However, lest any should think this premise a kind of a Shift, we shall add thus much, that as the work of the Ministry of the Gospel of Christ is a Spiritual Work, so a temporal Constitution is unsuitable for the Maintainance thereof. Paul testified, The Lord ordained that they which preached the Gospel, should live of the Gospel.
We now desire the impartial Reader seriously to weigh and consider, whether since God hath ordained, that those who preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel, it can be justifiable in a Minister of the Gospel, instead of cleaving to what God hath ordained, to cleave to a humane Law, thereby to sue for Tythes from those, who are so far from being Partakers of the Gospel, pretended to be ministred, as that they disown the same.
To every enlightened eye it cannot but be plain, that a Maintainance so obtained, is not a living of the Gospel, because as the ministry of the Gospel is freely received, so ‘tis freely given, and he that is exercised therein reapeth no man’s carnal things, unless they be freely offered.
No comments:
Post a Comment