ἸΕΡΟΣΥΛΙΆΣ ΜΆΣΤΙΞ. OR A SCOURGE OF SACRILEGE: In Answer to a Pamphleter calling himself ANTHONY PEARSON, Concerning The Great Case of Tithes.  
Wherein many gross Fallacies and Untruths of the Pamphleter are discovered and convinced.  
By JOH. READING, once a Student of Magdalen Hall in Oxford.  
It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy: and 〈◊〉 after vows to make enquiry. Prov. 20.25.  
〈◊〉 are cursed with a curse: for ye have rob me, even this ●●●le Nation, etc. Mal. 3.9.  
〈…〉 abhorrest Idol● dost thou commit Sacrilege? Rom. 〈◊〉  
London Printed by Da●●●●well, and are to be sold by George Sawbridg at the sign of the Bible on Ludgate-Hill. 1661.   

To the Right Honourable Sr EDWARD NICHOLAS Kt. Principal Secretary of State, and one of His Majesty's most honourable Privy Council. Grace, Mercy, and Eternal Happiness in Christ Jesus our Lord.  
Right Honourable,  
IT hath been the constant practice of the Adversary to oppose Truth, and to use his power to the discouragement of Faithful Ministers and Professors thereof: Sometimes like an envious Philistim, by casting dirt and earth into the Fountain of living Waters, opened by the hard labours of godly men: Sometimes by casting out of his mouth water as a flood after the Woman (the Church) that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood: Sometimes by supersemination of his pernicious Tares among the good Wheat in the Lord's Field Hence were, and now are those multitudes of Schisms and Errors, which in all ages of the Gospel, have infested the Church of Christ. In this last age, Satan knowing that his time is short, hath more furiously raged, moving all his engines, and using all his stratagems, for his siege against the holy City, and Tents of the Saints. Amongst other his artifices, knowing how much innate avarice inclineth vulgar minds to sacrilege; he hath lately tempted many to endeavour the utter taking away of Tithes, the Ordinance of God, as ancient as his Church on Earth; wellknowing, that by subtracting the Oil from the Tabernacle Lamps, the light will soon go out, and the people must be left to a darkness, worse than Egyptian. This fearful condition was coming on us so precipitately, as that the enemies of Truth were not ashamed openly to boast, That within one years' time, they would not leave either Church or Priest in England. But blessed be God who hath broken the jawbones of these ravenous Lions, and prevented their mischievous designs, by his gracious and marvellous providence, restoring his Sacred Majesty in peace unto his long afflicted people, and them by Him to their just Laws and Liberties; and therewith the free exercise of the true Religion maintained by our former Princes of ever-blessed Memory. In which respect, though divers able Champions of Christ and his Church, have encountered the adversaries of these Church Rites, with such full abilities, as that they have left little to be added hereto, Quod non fit dictum prius. Yet seeing this conflict hath not so been ended, but that new enemies still gird themselves to the battle, it is necessary that they be invested and answered: Therefore having brought to me from an adversary of all good, this piece which I endeavour to confute, as I conceive, by way of challenge; I could neither with credit to our Cause, nor good conscience toward God, be silent, or leave the truth without defence; my hope being, that I may hereby undeceive some who have misunderstood the case, which this adversary with his Jesuitical Arguments, so stingily and contumeliously, laboureth in.  
Why I presume to prefix your Honour's Name to this homely Tract, none need demand, who know the great favours which your Honour hath done for me; others I desire to understand, that in point of gratitude, I humbly acknowledge the debt which I am not otherways able to pay, then by acknowledgement, and my daily and hearty Prayers to Almighty God, abundantly to retribute for me, by his preserving your Honour, and all yours. Which he really professeth, who is  
Your Honour's most obliged and humble Servant John Reading.   

To the Christian Reader.  
STanders by see more than the Actors, especially in businesses Polemical, wherein sundry motions are not so much composed unto comeliness, 
Wisd. 16.20, 21  as present necessity of defence and offence. It is very rare therefore, that any piecce of writing, like the Manna, fitteth every palate, or is as strong meat to the strong, and as Milk to those who are of less exercised senses: Hence are such variety of Censurers; one profiteth by that he Readeth, another is embittered by Truth itself, because some Spirit of Error possesseth him, which like a Feavourish distemper, makes the most wholesome things seem unsavoury. It is an Insipid Discourse which falleth under no censure. If in this velitation some things are let fall, seeming more Sarcastical and sharp, than the gravity of the cause may seem to allow. I desire the prudent reader to consider, that I deal with an adversary who careth not whether, Dolus an virtus, right reason or absurd and fallacious Mediums, fair language, or railing scurrility, brings his deluded reader to an opinion of safe and impregnable conclusions on his side.  
If any ask why I meddle with this Argument, which some years past hath been discussed by so many learned writers? the business in hand speaks my defence. This bold Champion of Gath, upon the matter cryeth out, Give me a man, 
1 Sam. 17.10  in his opposing the Ministers of Christ, and reviling Gods Israel; and should we sleep? The Enemy endeavoureth to bring God's curse upon us, and should not we arm and stand up in the Gap? For my part, however less able than many, yet for Zions sake I cannot hold my peace, nor sleep, because the Ark, and Israel, 
2 Sam. 11.11  and Judah abide under tents, and the servants of my lord are encamped in the open fields. Here is an emergent danger of seducement cast in among the people, by which a dreadful curse must inevitably fall upon them, because the Lord hath spoken it, and should we be silent? Consider who it is that saith, Ye have rob me,— Ye are cursed with a curse: Remember who it is that saith to the Prophet concerning those sinners whom he warneth not, 
Ezek. 3.18  Their blood will I require at thy hands.— Truly my hope is, if my endeavours gain none of our adversaries, 
Matth. 8.  who are carried on with the foul spirits of Malice and Avarice, like that precipitate Hoard, to their own destruction, yet by God's mercful assistance we may stay and confirm our own, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Henod.  lest being deceived by others examples, they should likewise err in unjust gains, embracing their own mischief. How ever, I would not have this bragging enemy go away with his vain opinion:—  
Haec dici potuisse, & non potuisse r●felli.  
I have endeavoured to satisfy those who are not willing to be deceived, but to know the Truth and their Duties; hoping that others with their greater abilities, will stand up to defend the Church-rights, and so these blasts of Jesuits and other Sectaries designs and practices against the Ministers, shall prove but as wind shaking trees, and thereby causing them to take the stronger root. Sure I am that such pernicious pieces as this against Tithes, have in other cases, formerly awakened good Authors, and occasioned them to write many things for the necessary defence of the Truth, and Rites of the Church of Christ; so that the Adversaries thereof, in the issue, proved but as those Geese which gave the Alarm to the Court of Guard in the Capitol, whereby both that and the City were preserved. Of these things let the prudent Reader judge; and the good Lord God open all our understandings, that knowing the Truth, consenting and obeying, we may be happy in the God of Peace and Unity, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.   

ERRATA.  
Page 4. line 35. read, preached the Gospel. p. 6. l. 7. now ere. p. 8 l. 2 not certain. p. 9 l. 15. nay, but do you not know? p. 11 l. 10. Pharises and Scribes. p. 12. l. 14. as received. p. 13 l. 20. which could not. p. 16. l. 30. where they pleased. p. 17. l. 7. notoriously faulty. p. 18 l. 9 deserens. ibid. l. 5. Nicene. p. 19 l. 33 when you mind but. p. 21. l. 11. Mr. Selden. p. 29. l. 3. at nunc. p. 31. l. 27. hives of drones. p. 40. antepenult. would gladly. p. 51 l. 31. captions. p. 53. l. ult. to the faithful Moses. p. 55. l. 14. Minister. p. 56. l. 28. Josh. 2.1. p. 57 l. 15. levity of the Greeks. ibid. l. 23. arrangeth. p. 59 l. 11. proportion between. p. 63. l. 30. not unwillingly, grudgingly, or. p. 64. l. 27. as honesty. p. 66. l. 28. concerning whom we only say. p. 68 l. 3. alta pa●. p. 74. l. 7. laws. p. 78. l. 16. unhappy. p. 81. l. 11. faithful Ministers. ibid. l. 13. and all Ministe s.   

The Great Case of Tithes Stated.  
TO the Countrymen Farmers, etc.] The Author very considerably addresseth this Pamphlet to those who are as Marchant-men to men of War; where he may probably expect some purchase, and not many knocks.  
It is for your sakes, etc. 
Job. 1.7. & 2.2. 1 Pet. 5.8. ] Satan might have said as much to sinners, and Pharisees to their Proselytes, for whose sakes they traveled, not to save, but to destroy them; Are they not much beholden to you? There is but one God, one truth, which whether you or we follow, let the prudent Reader judge, when he hath seriously considered what is here objected and answered.  
You might be truly informed,] Be but sincere to make that one word (truly) good, and I will have no controversy with you.  
Of all that I could find written, etc.] I, on your side; I do not conceive that you would be so tenacious of your error, had you but so diligently read the truth, which many have clearly written on this subject.  
More than two years last passed] You see me to confess either much want of apprehension, or will to understand any, but those who were of your party and opinion.  
It shall be acceptable to me to receive it] on which promise, I offer you this following discourse.  
The state of the question in hand, understand thus; Whether Tithes for Gospel Ministers maintenance are due to them, by the unchangeable morality of God's Law? This we affirm; hence we claim; to this what ever you object, we shall endeavour to answer; against this law, no reason can conclude, no authority or decrees of man be of value. To your objections now; you say of Tithes.—  
— But they were for the Levites] That the Priests you say received no Tithes of the People, for these belonged to the Levites: whence if you would infer, that Tithes belong not unto Gospel Ministers, succeeding them, it were a mere caption to beguile your Reader; for we are to know, that first Priests were Ministers of the Lord, Joel 1.9, 13. & 2.17 and next, in that Tithes are confessed to have been due to the Levites, they must be confessed to have been due to the Priests; for all the Priests were Levites, though all the Levites were not Priests. The Priests were of an higher order and dignity, in the service of the Tabernacle, in which they were to Minister; the Levites were to bear the burdens of the Tabernacle, when it was to be removed; to prepare the wood, water, fire, vessels and instruments, for the Sacrifice and holy rites, etc. Now the Priests as they had a more excellent Office, so had they a more honourable Portion. For first, they had the Tithe of their brethren, the Levites part, the tenth part of the Tithe of all the Land; which because they were but few, (as I shall show anon) was a large allowance unto them: So that as the learned Mr. S. Nettles observeth it, 
Ans. to the Jewish part the history Tithes.  it appears by practice, that the Priests received Tithes, as well as the Levites; So much doth Chimki intimate on Mal. 3.10. He commanded the people to pay the tenth of their yearly increase unto the Levites, and the Priests; and this is plainly taught by the Apostle, Heb. 7.5. For verily they which are the children of Levi, which receive the office of the Priesthood, have a Commandment to take according to the Law, Tithes of the people, etc. which by Lyra is explained thus, Levitae generaliter recipiebant decimas à reliquo populo: inter Levitas autem illi qui erant majores illius tribus, videlicet Sacerdotes summi, filii Aaron, non solum accipiebant decimam cum Levitis à populo, sed etiam, de parte Levitarum recipiebant quae vocabatur decima decimae. Num. 18. And therefore by all this it is evident, that the Priests received Tithes of the people, and not only the inferior Levites. Hererto add, that in the general grant of the tenth to the Children of Levi, for an inheritance in respect of their service in the Tabernacle, Num. 18.21. The whole Tribe both Priests and Levites are included. Here it seems the Pamphleter followed Mr. Selden too close, and caught some knock, which made him forget his own words; pag. 12. when he comes there to speak of the Pope's working under colour of Jewish laws, he saith (By which Tithes were given to the Levitical Priesthood) dic sodes, How given to the Priesthood, if no Priest received them? Truly, Priests were by their vocation, more honourable than the rest of the Levites, as being to perform the holy ceremonies within the Sanctuary, therefore they received a more honourable portion than the rest of the Levits; for they had the tenth of their part of the Tithes of all the land. Now because they were but few in respect of the whole Tribe of Levi, of which were numbered above 22000, Therefore considering the first fruits, and their fees out of the Sacrifices, and other offerings, 
Num. 3.39, 43.  besides their part of the Tithes, they had a very large allowance appointed them, by the Lord. I had done with this point, but that I desire the Reader to consider how our adversary crosseth himself; sometimes denying, sometimes affirming the same thing. pag. 1. he saith, No Tithes did the Priests receive of the People; but pag. 3. he saith, The Priesthood which had a Command to take Tithes of their brethren. Thus his first foundation fails him.  
So was their maintenance distinct] That which you said impertinently before, you now make an introduction, 
Pag. 2.  to that which you would fetch in, scil. That the Levites maintenance was Tyths, but the Priests was distinct from that; ergo, What? the Priest's maintenance was not Tithes, neither aught the Ministers succeeding them to be Tithes; but you have marred this argument, by your own former concessions.  
Which were figures, etc.] Who, or what were figures, because you express not, I own no answer; only I conjecture what you reach at.  
Changing the Priesthood, which had a command to take Tithes of their brethren, 
Pag. 3.  there was made of necessty also a change of the Law] True there was made a change of all that was changeable therein; that is, the ceremonial part thereof; if you mean a change of all simply, you had need study the point woe years more; for here would be a begging the question and paralogism, a dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simplicitèr. There was a change of the Law, not simply, and in all the branches thereof (as the Antinomians would have it) but of the ceremonial and judicial part thereof. The morality is unchangeable in the whole and every part thereof; save only, that which was even therein ceremonial, and so alterable; as bringing titles to Jerusalem, etc. observation of the seventh-day-Sabbath from the Creation, etc. But the morality is unalterable and indispensable, in respect of all times, places and persons. In the rest which followeth, you seem a while to fight with your own shadow.  
Nor did the Apostles (you say) go about to establish the law by which Tithes were given] your foundation is here laid on a false ground, and such will your superstruction be; you suppose Tithes given by the ceremonial Law; in Abraham's example (as we shall hereafter see in its convenient place) it appears, that Tithes were due some hundreds of years before God gave the ceremonial Law by Moses; and God did not then give tithes to the Priesthood of Aaron, as a new donation for their maintenance, but only determined them according to that present age of his Church; as for the moral Law, on which Tithes are grounded, 
Rom 3.31.  the Apostle saith plainly— Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbidden: yea we establish the law. Yea, out of the ceremonial law, he takes out this morality, appliable for Ministers of the Gospel, Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? 
1 Cor. 9.7. etc.  Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? etc. for it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the corn— for our sakes no doubt this is written, etc. Do ye not know, that they which Minister about holy things, live 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 Gospel, should live of the Gospel.  
But freely preacheth the Gospel, etc.] What infer you from hence? The Apostles required no Tithes, ergo Gospel-Ministers ought to require none. First, I say, if the Apostles example (without respect to the difference of the several states of the Church newly planted, and peaceably constituted) must prescribe us in all things, then are we bound to suffer persecutions; to have no settled charge, but to travel up and down to preach to all Nations; which implies not a few impossibilities. Secondly, If your conclusion be, the Apostles took no Tithes, ergo the Gospel-Minister hath no right to them: The answer is apparent in the forecited place, where Paul saith, It was not because he had no power, but for the exigents of those times. For,  
1. Christianity was yet but a stranger on Earth, believers being very few, in respect of the numerous heathens bred up in Idolatry.  
2. Tithes, (whereof the heathens had some knowledge by the principles of nature, or otherwise) were generally paid to the Idol-Priests of the Pagans and Idol-service, as by Tithes paid to Hercules, and many other like may appear. See Sir H. Spelman larger work of Tithes, c. 26.  
3. Christian's being generally in Cities, they had few predial Tithes, and so they were incompetent to maintain Ministers  
4. For the first 300 years until the reign of Constantine, persecution almost every where raging, so that few Christians were masters of their own lives, liberties or possessions, but were almost every day counted as sheep for the slaughter; 
Rom. 8.36. 2 King. 5.26.  almost every place streaming Christian blood: Therefore as Elisha said to Gehazi, Was this a time to take? And that from new converted people, lately cleansed from the filthy Leprosy of sin? Was it not rather a time to give if they possibly could, to the relief of those they taught? Every thing hath its time; the time was not yet come, that a constituted Church should demand her own. In the Wilderness wherein the people were in frequent travels, the very seal of God's Covenant Circumcision was intermitted by the space of 40 years together, and in the Apostles times, their often journeying, and perils of waters, 
Josh. 5.7  perils of robbers, 
2 Cor. 11.26, 32 33.  etc. and frequent persecution enforcing them to fly for their lives, gave them no possible means of receiving Tithes, but as the Levites received them not in their travel, but when they were settled in Canaan; so the Apostles, after Christ's ascension being in continual travel through one part or another of the world, and one while in prison, another while in flight and persecution; what, convenience in such condition had either Christians to pay or Ministers to receive Tithes, which were to be taken in the seasons of their maturities, and only on those places where they grew to be due? nor ere that time came, they who in right aught to receive them, were by the guidance of the holy Ghost, in some other Country preaching the Gospel, many hundred miles from the place where their Tithes grew due. See it in S. Peter's example, walking through all quarters, Act. 9.32. etc. Sometimes at Lydda, or Joppa; sometime at Jerusalem, at Babylon, or Egypt sometimes; 1 Pet. 5.13. or the Apostles Paul and Barnabas, sometimes at Antioch, Seleucia in Syria, Salamis, Paphus in Cyprus, Perga in Pamphilia, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, 
Act. 13. Act. 14.6.  Lystra, Derbe in Lycaonia, Phrygia, Galatia, Mysiae, Samothracia, Philippi in Macedonia of Greece; S. Bartholomew in India; 
Jerom Catal. Script. Eccles.  S. Thomas in Persia, Hyrcania, Bactria; S. Matthew in Ethiopia, etc. What should these men have done with their Tithes? Where should they have had Barns for them, who were so little masters of their selves? What security could they have had, either to gather or keep such things from rapine and spoil? If in a Church and State so lately settled, so happily governed in peace, we have had so much experience of plundering and sequestration, What think you could have come to the Apostles and their primitive successors, if before the Church's peace, they had claimed their Tithes?  
5. Charity of Christians in those first ages of the Church was so abundant toward those that taught them, (Gal. 4.14, 15.) that they needed not any other supply by Tithes; but when that began to grow cold, it was but reason that their due to Tithes should be revived, and their proper right claimed and received. How long this charitable contribution continued, it is uncertain, but as it decayed, good Princes by God's providence in the overspreading increases of Christianity, did well to make laws for the maintenance of God's worship; and for the same, what so good a way could they take, as that by Tithes, which Gods wisdom had appointed? So Princes gave not Tithes to the Clergy, by their laws, but only as need required, restored them to the just Proprieters. God gave them, though in several ages he put it into the minds of Counsels to require them, and of religious Princes to make coercive laws, to bind their Subjects to pay them.  
6. Another cause of intermission of their claim, was that high opinion of the devouter Clergy of voluntary poverty; which dream of theirs, God's providence made use of, to make their persons venerable, and their doctrine of more esteem among the Gentiles, when they saw that their teachers aimed not at their own ease, safety, honour or enriching, but only saving of souls.  
7. Lastly, Fear of scandal caused, not only St. Paul to forbear his claim, and using his just power 1 Cor. 9.12. 2 Cor. 11.12. but others also. Hence probably it came to to pass, that so little mention is made of Tithes in the primitive age of the Church, or the exaction of them; yet we must remember that St. Paul saith; it was not that he had not power to have used his right, as he plainly shows; 1 Cor. 9.4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, etc. So that if it be granted that in those several obstructions, for some ages we neither read of any claim, or use of Tithes: What can our adversaries hence infer? No use or claim, ergo, no jus decimandi? Neither read we of any use of the Sabbath, in all the history of the Patriarches recorded by Moses, or of any Priestly or Prophetical function, neither taxing the neglect, or exhorting to the use or observation thereof; but can we reasonably conceive, that these ancient Saints either so long omitted the sanctification of the Sabbath, or Priestly exercises of Religion? no use, therefore no opinion of the right. What think you of the 40 years intermitting Circumcision (whereof we have before spoken) did that take away all opinion of the right?  
— Weekly Offerings for the Saints, etc.] for the poor Saints: What argument is this against Tithes? Good Christians now relieve the necessities of the Saints, where collections are made for them; Doth this impeach their duty of paying Tithes? Nay, but this ought ye to do, and not to leave the other undone. — This way of contribution continued in the Church, etc.] how long, it is not uncertain; but certainly the Pamphleter was not well advised, to say that it continued till the great persecution under Maximinian and Dioclesian about the year 304. before which time his vouchers, Tertullian, Origen and Cyprian were dead; which appears (saith he) by the writings of Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian. Tertullian flourisheth about the year 208. then wrote he against Martion: Origen flourished about the year 232. and died about the year 252. And Cyprian was crowned with Martyrdom (by Eusebius computation) in the year 259. in the eight persecution under Valerian, as other Chronologers reckon. Dioclesian caused that long and bloody Persecution, which was the tenth in order. Yourself confess in your next Paragraph save one, 
Pag. 4.  that Cyprian lived about the year 250. Now suppose that the specified contribution did continue till the year 304. how can that appear by the writings of Tertullian, Origen and Cyprian? Did dead men writ for your Assertion? But learn to bring your untruths closer together; and at least to hold the Poet's rule, to write ficta possibilia: possible, though not true things.  

Pag. 5.  By whose writings it also appears, that there was not the least use or practise of the payment of Tithes in those former ages] Hence you would conclude that there ought to be none now, but that Ministers must live on the abundant charity and contributions of charitable people now. To which I first answer, Show us that charity of people towards their Ministers now adays, and then urge their example against Tithes; but while you take from us all that you can, their example is improperly pleaded against us, which you will not have to hold for us. Next I say, that by their writings it neither doth, nor can appear which you here say; and how prove you this your negative?— There was not the least use or practice of payment of Tithes in those former ages, besides those which we have to show for the contrary. Know you not, that many excellent writings are lost, and so never come to our sight? Like divers famous Cities mentioned by Strabo and other Geographers, whereof little else now remains, but the bare names: read the industrious Erasmus his complaint, in the end of Jerom's Catalogue of Ecclesiastical writers, where after other expressions of our loss of eminent Authors, he concludeth— Verum hic dolor extimulare debet onmes bonis addictos autoribus, ut id certè quod superest, tanto legant avidius, quanto minus est quod temporum ruina nobis fecit reliquum; moreover who knows not, that both sacred and Ecclesiastcal, and other Authors wrote many Treatises, pro re natâ, and as enemies of the truth gave them emergent occasions of necessary defence thereof, without which most probably they had therein been silent: For what need they have written, or armed themselves or others, when none opposed? But now dato, & non concesso; Suppose that we read not in the writings of ancient Counsels or Fathers any the least use or practise of the payment of Tithes; What? Therefore no Tithes were paid in those former ages? Nay, but you do not know, that all that which our Saviour Christ himself did, never came to our knowledge? Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples, which are not written in this book, John 20.30. & 21.25. There seems an impossibility of writing all: done, but not written concludes, à non scripto, ad non factum, non valere argumentum. Again, in the writing of the history of the Creation, Moses mentioneth not the Creation of Angels; What will you say that Angels were not created, because in Moses writings we read not of their Creation? Nay, but Moses saith Gen. 2.1. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished and all the host of them. You may say, and that truly, in that general word all, are comprehended the particulars, though not nominalitèr and expressly named; for indeed omne, or totum est, extra quod nihil est; and why, I demand, where the Apostle saith, Gal. 6.6. Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things; that is, in all his goods, for he would not teach any to offer è rapina holocaustum, to rob others to pay his teacher: and why may not the Apostles all comprehend the unspecified particulars, Tithes and Offerings, as well as Moses, all comprehendeth unspecified Angels? By this it appears how feeble your main argument is to prove, no use or practise of payment of Tithes, because we read them not commanded or paid in express words in the New Testament, and seldom in ancient counsels of the first age of the Church; yet ye will not deny Tithes expressly specified and paid; Heb. 7. Abraham paid Tithes, or gave a tenth of all to Melchisedech.  

pag. 5.  Of Ambrose you say, But his authority he produceth wholly from Moses writings] And would you desire better authority than Moses writings, which Christ the Lord of the Prophets citeth? See whither blind zeal precipitates men?  
But you say, They imposed their own opinion with so heavy Penalties] How were they their own opinions, if from the Law given to the Israelites, they take (as you confess) their whole Doctrine? 
2 Pet. 1.19.  St. Peter would teach you better, That no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation; But holy men of God spoke, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And what say these men of God as to this matter, more or less than God spoke by the Prophets Moses and Malachi, Ye are cursed with a Curse, 
Deut. 33.11. Mal. 3.  ye have rob me in Tithes and Offerings?  

pag. 6.  You say Tithes, Easter, Pentecost] Now for another sigary: Our question is concerning Tithes; What are Easter and Pentecost to that? Will he not bring the Poles Arctic, and an-Arcick together if he please?  
But you say, It was not a general received Doctrine that Tithes ought to be paid] Nor as it seems by you, is it now; it sufficeth us that the devouter sort (as yourself confess,) gave Tenths or greater parts of their annual increase; And who knows not that the better part of the people is very seldom the greater.  
You say,— Fathers, Popes, Bishops] Praesto: pretty Legerdemain: you shuffle in Popes, hoping as it seems in that company to render Fathers and Bishops odious to the vulgar; but if we consider the original of that name, Papa was once a name of honour and reverence, importing only Patrem Patriae, a father of the Country; and so was it long used in the better part, as Cypriano Papae, 
Cyprian l 2. ep. 7. 16. l. 3. ep. 11, 12.  so ad Cornelium Papam. This use of that name continued until after the time of Gregory, (the last of the good Roman Bishops and the first of the bad.) When Boniface 3. obtained of the Emperor Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be called Caput omnium Ecclesiarum, which his predecessor Gregory gave for the mark of Antichrist, or his forerunner, than was his Seat quickly exalted to Supremacy; not only above all Bishops of the Western Churches, but also to a claim of Superiority over Kings, Princes and People: hence the name Papa, Pope, began to fall into an odium with all those who received not the mark of the beast, Rev. 13. But if Popes did in any thing declare or determine Truth and Equity, would you eo nomine, reject it? Remember that the Pharisees, Scribes, sitting in Moses Chair (though bitter enemies to the Person and Doctrine of Christ) were to be heard: Yea, If the devil confess Christ to be the Son of the most high, would you reject it, as devilish? Nay, but consider that though the Devil spoke it, it is the truth of God, which when Satan uttereth, he speaks not his own. God hath so overruled some wicked men, as to make them instrumental to that eminent good, which he, who can do nothing but good, fore-ordained to do by them. See it in the example of Judas, the high Priests, Herod and Pontius Pilate, Act. 4.27, 28.  
You say, None of the first 8 general Councils of the Church, did so much as mention the name of Tithes] While none contradicted, there was no cause why they should speak of them; yet were the issue and determination of your controversy put upon antiquity, we could say enough thereof: We can prove that Tithes are more ancient than the law of Moses, who shows that Abraham paid them; and you cannot show them taken away by any law of God: why general Counsels did not make Canons for them, 
Agobardus cited by Mr. S●lden.  some give this reason, Nulla enim compulit necessitas, fervente ubique religiosa devotione, etc. indeed the actual payment of Tithes was not exacted in the infancy of the Church of Christ, but respited until the greater interests of Faith and Obedience to the Gospel were settled in a Church constituted: yet Paul showeth that there was much due unto him, in respect of his Ministry, 
1 Cor. 9  but concluded that he had not used that liberty, but as the time, and present condition of the Gospel required, suffered all things, that he might not hinder the propagation thereof; and that he might stop the mouths of backbiters. Add hereto, that there appeared more probability that men of the world and Pagans, would more readily entertain the truth which cost them nothing, and when the Ministers could not be suspected to preach for gain, honour or any selfishness, but only for their auditor's Salvation.  
That which you say, That Tithes were never so much as named in the first 8 general Counsels] makes nothing against their right; yet you may know, that though we avow not the Canons attributed to the Apostles, to be indeed the children of those fathers, yet that the first of them are very ancient, and near the Apostles times, it may appear in that Dionysius exiguus, who lived within 400 years of the Apostles, translated them out of the Greek, and received long before in the Eastern Church: 
Sr. Henry spelman's large work of Tithes, c. 20. of which City you may see Plin. lib. 3. c. 1. Stra. lib. 3. etc. Bin. To. 4.  See thereof the fifth Canon; likewise the Council Agrippinense is cited, Anno 356. Decreeing that Tithes should be called Dei census, God's rent. The Concilium Hispalense, or Spalense, as Garsias citeth it, held about the time of Gregory 1. about the year 603. in a fragment thereof saith, Omnes primitias & decimas, tam de pecoribus quam de frugibus, dives simul & pauper Ecclesiis suis rectè offerant: The same citeth Mal. 3. and thereon saith, Sicut enim Dominus omnia dedit, ita de omnibus decimam exigit, ut de fructibus agri, etc. siquis autem haec omnia non decimaverit, praedo Dei est, fur, & latro, & maledicta quae intulit Dominus Cain— congeruntur. That is, all the first fruits and Tithes, both of Cattle and Fruits, let both rich and poor, duly offer (or set out) to their Churches; for as the Lord gave all, so of all he requireth the tenth, as of the fruits of the field, etc. If any man will not pay Tithes of all these, he is a Thief, and robber of God, and the curses which the Lord brought on Cain— are heaped upon that man. The second Council of Matiscon, 
Carranz. Sum. Concil.  Anno 588. by some accounted a general Council, (because therein all the Metropolitan Bishops met) saith Canon 5. Leges namque divinae consulentes Sacerdotibus ac Ministris Ecclesiarum, pro haereditaria portione omni populo praeceperunt, decimas fructuum suorum locis sacris prestare— quas leges Christianorum congeries longis temporibus custodivit intemeratas: unde statuimus, ut decimas Ecclesiasticas omnis populus inferat. That is, Divine Laws providing for Priests and Ministers of Churches, have commanded all the people for an hereditary portion, to bring the Tithes of their fruits to the holy places, which laws, multitudes of Christians have kept inviolable a long time. Therefore we decree, that all the people shall bring in their Ecclesiastical tenths. Concil. Turonense held in the time of Charles the great, An. 813. saith, Nonas ac decimas, qui res Ecclesiasticas tenent, solvere rectoribus Ecclesiarum ordinati sunt. It were easy to add hereto many more Testimonies of ancient Counsels; but because others have sufficiently traveled herein, I shall refer the Reader who is desirous to be further satisfied, to the large work of the learned Sir H. Spelman, c. 20. Dr. Tilsley Animad. on hist. of Tithes, Preface and Catalogue; only let me have leave to inform them, who know not what is the difference between a general and a provincial Council. In a general Council omnes provinciarum Episcopi conveniebant: yet the forecited Council of Matiscon ordained, Ut quolibet triennio, universalis Synodus celebraretur; which would not be intended concerning a General Council in the first acceptation, except that Matiscon Council may be allowed for a general one, as some account it: for a Provincial could not prescribe a General one, though the General might prescribe the Provincial.  
The Provincial thus differed from the General, in numbers of voices and suffrages, as in that it was of inferior authority to the General. But concerning this matter, I shall content me to observe, That  
1. No humane Constitutions, can any more give credit to precepts divine, on which all must ground, than many Torches can give light to the Sun, which can be discerned by none but its own light, nor can all testimonies or decrees of men impair the truth of God.  
2. Testimonies of men, are not to be valued by number, but weight; nor weighed by any, but the standard of the Sanctuary, the word of God; and so far forth to be received, as they hold weight therewith; that is, divine truth.  
3. Christ promised his presence, where two or three should be gathered together in his name, whose truth is not limited unto, or by multitudes in Counsels: As the little Molehill may as truly have the Sunbeams shining upon it, as the vast Mountain; so may few gathered together in Christ's name, be as truly assisted by the Spirit of Jesus Christ, as where a multitude are met together. Yet here are two Cautions very necessary to be held: 1. That not every assembly which saith, lo here is Christ, is to be taken for such as are indeed gathered together in the name of Christ; but such are so to be esteemed, who sincerely hold the truth of Christ 2. Though holding the truth of Christ with a comfortable assistance of God's Spirit, as to their own particular Interest; yet may they not presume to make and give Laws for the Churches public discipline: But if Christ be with them, they must show it in their peaceable obedience to authority and order; either actively, (if with good conscience they may) or passively, if otherwise they cannot.  
4. We may note, that in the general Counsels venerable for truth and antiquity, some have dissented and departed.  

1 King. 18.19. 1 King. 22.6, 8  5. The major part have not always been the best, nor the lesser the worst: Ahabs Prophets were hundreds against one Elijah, and so against one Micaiah.  
6. General Counsels, though exceeding the Provincial in number and suffrages, yet may they not excel them in weight; there may be error of many (as may appear in the second Nicene Council, can 7. Decreeing for Images; and the Council of Trent, etc.) and there may be truth in few. The Apostles in the Council at Jerusalem were not many, but sufficient to determine for the world, because assisted by the Spirit of God.  
7. Provincial Counsels as occasion was offered them, Decreed that Tithes should be duly paid; which if the General did not meddle withal, it may be conceived, that it was because they had no occasion thereof presented to them by any complaint: and they being then in pursuit of the enemies of truth, would not divert to the care of things thereto subordinate, and much inferior.  
These things laid down, the prudent Reader may be satisfied concerning this argument of Counsels, and perceive the weakness thereof, and the falsehood of that assertion, that these Counsels did not so much as name or mention Tithes, until the Lateran Council, Ann. 1119. and after a little pause he saith, Ann. 1180. Oh for the whetstone!  
— For the use of the poor] This ointment (said Judas) might have been sold for much and given to the poor, but this he said, 
pag. 7.  not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, etc. 
Mat. 26 9  Joh. 12.6. Now whether the poor are here intended and mentioned for love and care of them, or malice to the Ministers, against whom you bring this argument, God knows, and all good men know, that a Sacrilegious person is a thief. I fear your Charity would be contented that any one (the devil not excepted) should have your Tithes, would he but send his Tything-Carts abroad for them, so that Ministers might be deprived of them, your work were done: If some Charles Martell would take the Church's estate to pay Soldiers, you would resolve upon the question it were Christian policy. But to your often repeated objection, we say that there were Tithes allotted for the poor, distinct from the Ministers Tithes, who have willingly relieved the poor, and would do still, but that you have so pillaged them, that you have scarce left themselves bread.  
You say farther— not any (Counsels) that expressly supposed them a duty of common right, before the Council of Lateran, held in the year 1215.] Were this so much as probable, it would condemn the Christian world, and the Prelates of much defect herein. We are too sure that many are faulty herein now, because Satan hath blinded the minds of many, and stirred up sundry impostors to write and speak against the ordinance of God for support of the Ministry, his design being to steal away the oil from the Tabernacle lamps, that their light failing, his Kingdom of darkness may be advanced: but if now, Governors should set out some more strict decrees for Ministers, more easy recovery of their Tithes then formerly have been, seeing the apostasy of so many sectaries; would those decrees be any proof in future ages, that Tithes were never supposed a duty of common right, before the year 1659. or some following time.  
Yet (you say) were they free to dispose them, were they pleased until the Popish Counsels restrained their liberty] Say now, bona fide, were Tithes, due to Priests and Levites under the Law, or Ministers of the Gospel, ever free to be disposed of by the people, in a settled state of any Church constituted, where the people pleased? If you mean tenths for the poor, they are out of the verge of this present controversy, and so you trifle: If you mean Tithes for Ministers, and maintenance of God's service, we justly require your proof; we know that under the law God never allowed any such liberty to his people; neither can it appear in the Gospel, that ever he left the Ministers thereof to a less certain and determinate maintenance, than he did the Priests and Levites; here now being the Ministry of a more excellent Testament established upon better promises; and how else did Paul avow his power therein, 1 Cor. 9 however in those times of the Church's troubles, he used it not?  
You say farther— The old Roman doctrine, that Tithes ought to be paid] And was the law for paying Tithes, old Roman doctrine? Was Moses a Roman? Or was Christ a Roman, who allowed the same in the Pharisees practise? But, to take your meaning, with favourable interpretation of unadvised words; I must put you in mind, that the old Roman doctrine was pure, 
Rom. 1.8.  when S. Paul commended their faith, and so it continued unto their latter apostasy. I so much reverence antiquity, as to avow, that, quod antiquissimum, verissimum. To your following Allegations, I say, what laws and canons for Tithes among the Saxons determined, doth not prove that Tithes are not due to Ministers by divine right? And as to the rest, I say, if they made laws to bind the people to obey Gods moral Law, they did well therein: and concerning the people so bound, it is pity that they (as we now) needed such coercive laws to restrain their Sacrilege.  
To that which you say, pag. 10. That notwithstanding the many Laws, Canons and Decrees of Kings, it was left to the owner to confer it where he pleased;] We answer to these tautologies, if they were true, that is no wonder, if there was no absolute reformation at once, specially there where the people's great Diana, secular interest, hath a part. But now consider, Of what strength is your argument, à facto ad jus faciendi? They did (say you) leave it to the owner, to confer it where he pleased; ergo, it was just and lawful so to do; that consequence will appear notoriously faulty in other instances. For example, The people of Judah built them High places and Images, and Groves on every high hill: yea, 
1 King. 14.23.  in Asa's good reign, The high places were not removed: 
1 King. 15.14.  In that miscellany of Religion, 2 King. 17.29.32. (to which may be added our modern confusion) Every Nation made Gods of their own, and put them in the houses of the high places which the Samaritans had made, etc. and made unto themselves of the lowest of them, Priests of the high places. So Jeroboam made Priests of the lowest of the people, 
2 Chro. 33.17.  which were not of the sons of Levi; whosoever would, he consecrated him, 
1 King. 12.31.  and he became one of the Priests of the high places. And this became a sin to the house of Jeroboam, even to cut it off: he made him Priests for the Devils, and for the Calves which he had made: 2 Chron. 11.15. Under him the people fell to Idolatry; their fact concluded it not just: and in the Prophet Malachies time, the people did not pay their Tithes and Offerings: Did that exempt them from the curse, 
Mal. 3.  because there were multitudes of offenders? No, no, it brought it upon the whole Nation; no examples of multitudes shall excuse Sacrilege.  
And Parishes (you say) are but of late erection] What would not he make his ignorant Reader swallow? 
Page 10.  Damasus speaking of Dionysius who lived about the year 260. saith, Presbyteris Ecclesias divisit, & caemiteria parochiasque & dioeceses constituit: he distributed unto Priests, Churches and Churchyards, and appointed Parishes and Dioceses. 
Vit. Pontif. Dionys. init.  So also Platina in the life of Dionysius testifieth, in the 2d. Council of Carthage, the argument of the 11 Canon is, 
Bin. Concil. To. 1.   nullus parochiam alienam praesumat invadere. That no man should presume to invade another's Parish: which Council though but Provincial, was confirmed by a general Council in Trullo: 
C●rranz. sum. council.  this was held in Cyprians time, that ancient Martyr. In the decrees of Urban in the year 230. it is said of lands dedicated and given to the Church— ipsae verores inditione singularum parochiarum, etc. In the Ancyran Council, 
Ib. Carran.  held about the year 308. approved by the Necene, it was decreed that Bishops and their Ministers, should endeavour utterly to root out that devilish invention and art of sortiledge— è parochiis suis. 
Ib. Carran. pag. 157.  In the 3 Canon of the Council of Antioch, we read thus, Si quis presbyter aut diaconus, aut omnino quilibet ex Clero parochiam propriam derens vel omnino demigrans in alia parochia, etc. This Council was approved in the sixth general Council of Constantinople. In the Council of Sardis, it was ordained, Canon 18.19. That no Bishop should ordain a Minister, ex aliâ parochiâ, without the consent of his Bishop. In the Laodicean Council, Canon 14. see the like. It were easy to weary the Reader with such proofs: And is not it a notorious falsehood to say that Parishes are but of late erection? One thing is here considerable, that when there were but few Christians, Parishes were of much greater circuit of land, then since the more abundant plantation of the Gospel, wherein for the ease and accommodation of Parishioners, many Chapels of ease erected, have since by Acts of Parliaments been made Parish Churches, subject to the Bishops and their Dioceses.  

Pag. 11.  The people (you say) then generally being Papists, did yield their obedience] Yet that God had ever some good corn among those tares I conceive you have so much faith to believe, (if you believe that he had in all ages a Catholic Church,) though possibly you have not so much Charity as to confess that he had such excellent Saints then, as are among you now in this last and worst of ages.  
You say, What before was owned for a gift, was now claimed as a debt] Shew, if you are a true man, who ever owned it as a gift or free benevolence of men, except those who knew not, or would not acknowledge the divine institution of Tithes: we own them as God's gift, and therefore as man's due to be paid unto us. God made us not your almes-men, but in things spiritual our people's rulers; 
Heb. 13.7, 17.  watchmen and guides set over them in the Lord. 1 Thes. 5.12. And so not to live of your benevolence, but duty, as spiritual Parents; and show if you can, why that duty should be less determinate and certain, than it was under the law to Priests and Levites: that he ever reserved out of the rest which he gave to Israel, to himself and to his service, never leaving it arbitrary to man's will or wisdom to appoint, no not to Moses himself; And how prove you that he leaves us to your will and charity now? All acknowledge a Law for paying Tithes to those who serve about holy things, show us in any one Text of the Old or New Testament where that law is repealed, or the whole of Minister's maintenance left to the people's pleasure?  
Seeing (you say) themselves in a snare] To you it seems that the ordinance of God is a snare; this discovereth your dangerous condi ion, and is an impious expression.  
Again you say, The Pope hath been imperious, or in a great height of pride] What is that to us? If so, it was his sin, for which he is responsible to God, who can make wicked men instrumental to some eminent good; as in the example of Judas (as to the passion of Christ for our Redemption and Salvation) appeareth; to whom we may add the rest, who did therein that which the hand and Council of God determined before to be done. And who can deny but that he might also work good by the Pope's commanding Tithes to be paid for the support of the preaching of the Gospel, to the then living elect, the powerful instrument of Salvation, however it proved a savour of death to many, possibly of those that preached it, but obeyed it not.  
Next you trouble your readers about Canon-laws, and Parochial payment of Tithes settled. What, suppose you that no good could be professed, done or settled in that time, wherein error and wickedness had miserably overspread a Church? I suppose you will not on second thoughts conclude so; when you mind not the propagation of the Gospel in Israel, when the Jews, Princes, Priests and people generally persecuted the faith of Christ,  
Next you talk of the poor; 
Pag. 11.  For whose sakes (you say) Tithes were chief given] If you mean that these specified Parliaments did settle Tithes chief for the relief of the poor, you do but trifle; knowing that Tithes were anciently appointed for several uses. 1. Ornament of Churches. 2. For the poor. 3. For love Feasts. 4. For Minister's maintenance. What ever Parliaments enacted, must be judged by God's laws: human law is to our duty à mensura mensura●● à lege divina, 
●ae. q. 19  whose end is the utility of men; therefore to that supreme power and justice must we look, and in that rest. So that this your argument is childish and impertinent, except you could show that we take human Laws and Statutes of Parliaments, to be the ground of our right to Tithes; we say after that ancient Council of Matiscon forecited; God hath appointed them for our inheritance, or hereditary portion.  
You say moreover, He that did not pay, no great punishment could they inflict on him, but excommunication] You mean I suppose that men could not, you cannot be ignorant of the power of God to punish the Sacrilegious, who hath denounced the curse on them: 
Mal. 3.  but was excommunication no great punishment, 
1. Cor. 5.  in the Apostles sense delivering to Satan? Possibly you account this punishment the less, because herein the sacrilegious were but delivered to their own Master. As for the exemptions you mention, we dislike them as well as you: as little to your purpose is that which you say in your following censure of Popish imitation of Jews, 
l. 1. c. 7. c. 8. etc. ib. c. 4. etc.  which as to those rites which your Durand citeth in his Rationale, we utterly dislike.  
But you say, Henry 8. being a Papist. etc.] One thing is remarkable, you use to call all Popery, which suits not with your fancy. If Henry 8. did any thing according to Gods Will and Word, that is no more Popish, than that was Devilish, which the Devil said, Mar. 5.7. Henry 8. was a Papist, and he made a Law, that every man should set out his Tithes; What is the conclusion yond drive to; ergo, paying of those duties is Popish; Poor Sophistry! You are not ignorant that this were a Sophism, Non causae pro causâ: His being a Papist, was not the cause of his making that law for Tithes, but (as yourself confess) because he believed that Tithes were due to God and his holy Church. In that you call that the Pope's doctrine, (which by your own party is confessed to be grounded on the Law of God,) you commend the Pope's Doctrine, though with an intent to calumniate ours.  
And you say, First of our Parliament laws for Tithes, 
Pag. 12.  and that upon which the rest are grounded.] Here is another notorious untruth: Was our Henry 8. before Athelston, who reigned in this land about the year of our Lord 924? Would you have your readers believe that Henry 8. made a Law, about 600 years before he was born, and crowned King? Was he King of this land before Edgar, living about the year 959? or before Canutus, who reigned here about An. 1016? or William the Conqueror, Henry 1 Henry 2. Henry 3. 
Hist of Tithes c. 8.  by William Selden cited as Lawmakers for the payment of Tithes to the Ministers? One thing out of the learned S. H. Spelman, I desire the Reader to consider; King Henry 3. 
Large work of Tithes.  (saith he) In the 9th. year of his reign, by that sacred Charter made in the name of himself and his heirs for ever, granted all this anew unto God. We have granted, saith he, unto God, and by this our present Charter have confirmed, for us and for our heirs, for evermore, that the Church of England shall be free, and shall have all her holy rites inviolable. Magna. c. 1. And that this Charter might be immortal, and like the sanctified things of the Temple forever inviolable; It was not only fortified by the King's Seal, (the sacred anchor of the Kingdom) but by his solemn Oath, and the Oath of his Son, and the Nobility of the Kingdom: yea, the whole Kingdom yielded themselves to stand accursed, if they should at any time after impeach this grant; and therefore in the 25 Edward 1. a special Statute was made for confirmation of this Charter; wherein, among other things it is ordained, that the Bishops shall excommunicate the breakers thereof; and the very form of the sentence is there prescribed, according to which, upon the 13 Mai. An. 1304. Edward 1. Boniface the Archbishop of Canterbury, and five other Bishops solemnly denounced this curse in Westminster-Hall, the King himself with a great part of the Nobility being present: First against all them that should willingly and maliciously deprive or spoil Churches of their rites. Secondly, Against those that by any art or device, infringed the liberties of the Church or Kingdom granted by magna Charta. Thirdly, Against those that should make new Statutes against the Articles of these Charters, etc.  
And now consider, you that have English hearts to love and pity your Country: what these Pamphleteers aim at, who lay stumbling blocks before the people, that they may bring the curse upon this Nation, which must inevitably come upon it, (if sacrilegious hands be permitted to take away the Church's rites) for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it, Mal. 3.  
If Tithes had no other ground, but only the laws of Princes, and that they were not before the enacting of those laws, and solemn dedications due; yet consider 1. What came to Ananias and Saphira; 
Act. 5.4. etc.  the Apostle told him, that whilst the land remained in his hands, it appertained unto him as a true proprietor, and when is was sold and in money, that was also his own; it was then arbitrary, and he might have otherwise disposed of it; but when he had given it to the advancement and service of the Gospel, he made it sacred, and all due to God and his assigns; and therefore keeping back any part thereof, he lied to God: and if it were sacrilege to take away any part of that which had been dedicated to holy uses, by a man's own donation and dedication of the whole; What is it to rob and take away from the Church that which God his self hath dedicated and consecrated to the same, (suppose in money, glebe, or other land given toward the maintenance of God's worship, or Tithes) on which came also a second bond, by the Vow, Oath, and freewill offering of the whole body of a republic in the representative thereof, consisting of King, Nobles, Clergy and Commons lawfully assembled in Parliament? But some say though our former Kings and Parliaments were bound by their vow and dedication of Tithes, or Lands given to the Church or Churches, because they lifted up their hands to God to give the same, what is that to us? very much: for lawful vows of fathers descend and are obligatory to their Children and posterity; and so in the blessing to the performers, as we may see in the example of the Rechaebites, Jer. 35.18, 19 and in the curse to the violaters of the same; therefore because Joshua and the Princes of Israel (though deceived by the Gibeonites, a people among the rest of the Canaanites, devoted by Gods own commandment, to destruction) had lifted up their hands to God, to spare them alive, they were bound by their Oath, so to do; and so were their Children to succeeding Generations. So that when Saul, after many Generations, out of a perverse zeal, slew them, 
2 Sam. 21 1, 2.  God punished that fact even in David's reign, Three years, year after year there came a famine upon Israel, until it was revenged on the family of Saul. Many instances of God's justice in this kind near us of eminent great and honourable families utterly ruined (the main cause, to men appearing, being sacrilege, impropriating Tithes and laying into their own hands those destructive morsels of gl●be and other lands formerly dedicated with a solemn curse in the Acts of Mortmain) might hereto be added, even from Henry 8. who (before his giving away Tithes, and things consecrated to God's worship unto impropriators hands) prosperous in an hopeful issue, yet, as to posterity, that doom was determined which was pronounced by the Prophet Jeremiah on Coniah, Writ this man Childless—. 
Jer 22.30.  The curse so many years before solemnly and publicly imprecated, came upon divers of our principal Nobility, and other illustrious Families, and still doth, whose names I spare; only I hint this, that all whom it concerns, may be warned to disgorge those sacred morsels, which they yet hold, lest they prove destructive to them and theirs; and that the Reader may at once perceive of what validity all the rest of the like arguments are, wherewith this Pamphleter and his associates endeavour to puzzle the minds of illiterate readers; and that all may consider what severe whips God yet holdeth over those who hunger for sacred morsels. You know the emblem, the Eagle snatching up a piece of flesh from the Altar, to carry up to her nest of young ones, with it carried a coal of fire cleaving to the flesh, which consumed the nest, and destroyed the whole air.  
But you say, Some of our famous Reformers, 
pag. 14.  did in their days, bear their Testimony against Tithes etc.] I answer, first I conceive that you call them famous reformers, ironically, and by way of irrision. Next I say, whatever they, or the Bohemians by you cited, speak against Tithes, is of no more value than man's testimony against God's Ordinance. Lastly, that one Bernard saw not all, it is no wonder, the most learned know but in part now, that the sun from the rising appears not in his full light at once, none can rationally wonder; and why should we that the reformation was not perfected all at once?  
You say, In your following heads of recapitulation, He will find the knowledge of those things which be needful] Yes, no doubt to confirm him in your error; but there can be no necessity of sinning.  
Tithes (you say) were paid to the Levites, that did the common services of the Tabernacle, etc. how the payment of Tithes to Ministers, succeeds the payment of Tithes to the Levites, (you say, we) had need to consider] We consider the Apostles rule, 1 Cor. 9.13, 14. which is, They which minister about holy things, live of the things of the Temp●●: and they which wait at the altar, are partakers with the altar. Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel. Secondly, we consider, that Melchisedech received Tithes, in the figure of Christ, the King of Righteousness and Peace: and that Tithes are due to Christ and his assigns, the Ministers of the Gospel, not as a Levitical, but as a moral duty, belonging to God▪ long before either Levites or ceremonial Law were in being; and therefore they continue under the Gospel, because moral duties are unchangeable. And it is observable, that Melchisedech met not Abraham the father of the faithful, with bloody Sacrifice, like a Priest of the Law, but with a supply of bread and wine, the elements of a Gospel-Sacrament, which the Ministers are to divide unto the people: That Tithes are not Levitical or Ceremonially due, it may appear, because  
1. They are much more ancient than the Levitical Law.  
2. Secondly, Tithes are positively declared to be the Lords, and so to belong to his Ministers about holy things for ever.  
3. Ceremonies of the Levitical-law were all significative, as of something to be performed by Christ, for the work of our redemption; but so are not Tithes.  
4. Tything now used, is not after the manner of the Levitical Law, but after the manner of Abraham's paying tithes to Melchisedec, who was not of the tribe of Levi: So our tithing, is now to Christ, who was of the tribe of Judah, 
Heb. 7.13.  of which no man gave attendance at the Altar.  
5. The end whereto tithe was ordained, is moral in point of Piety, Justice, and Gratitude.  
First, Piety, for that will maintain the worship of God.  
Secondly, Justice, for that is to give every man his due: Now the labourer is worthy of his reward; 
1 Tim. 5.18. 1 Cor. 9.14.  and God hath appointed tithes for a reward or maintenance of those who serve him in the Gospel, as well as under the Law.  
Thirdly, Gratitude, for benefits received of him, to whom we owe and offer such thanks; add hereto, that these are to be paid, to encourage and sustain the laborers in the work of the Lord; as Hezekiah commanded the people to give the portion of the Priests, and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the Law of the Lord, 2 Chron. 31.4.  
And we may here consider, that in the Levitical Law, the Lord had regard to provision for Gospel Ministers; for he saith in one of the branches thereof,— Thou shalt not muzzle the Ox that treadeth out the Corn; which the Apostle applieth to enforce payment of honourable maintenance of Gospel Ministers: Neither was that equity new, neither the Gospel itself: The first appearance whereof, which we read of, was from the beginning, when God said, It, that is, the seed of the Woman, 
Gen. 3. Gal. 4.4.  Christ— made of a Woman, shall bruise thy head; that is, the Serpent's head, (in which his life and venom principally lieth.) This Gospel promise lay hid for ages and generations, 
Ephes. 3.9. Col. 1.26. Exod. 4. Heb. 9.7. & 18.22. Gen. 3.19. & 4.4. Gal. 4. Joh. 1.  under dark and mysterious shadows and figures: So that though the Law, like Tamars' Zarah, as it were first put out the hand, which was before its birth, marked with a scarlet thread (blood and death;) yet in some sort the Gospel was first born, like Pharez, Gen. 38.28, 29, 30. and was, as the day light, by little and little, toward the fullness of time (wherein the Sun of Righteousness should arise to enlighten the World) manifested. See Gen. 49.10. Numb 24.17. Isai. 7.14. & 11.1, 10, 12. Dan. 9 Mich. 5, etc. and at the last clearly interpreted, 1 John 3.8. 
Rom. 6.22. & 8.2, 3. 1. Cor. 15.55, etc. Hos. 13.14.  For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil, ruin death, and hell. And because God would manifest this his mercy to the World, for the comfort and confirmation of his Elect in all ages, after man's fall, he still sent out some Interpreters and Preachers of his Sacred Mystery, furnished with such means as might every ways enable them thereto, and support them as to their humane necessities. And it is not probable, that an alwise God would slack his hand, and appoint a less certain, determinate, and comfortable maintenance to the Ministers of the most excellent Testament (the Eternal Gospel) than he did unto the Priests of the more imperfect, which was to cease and be done away: So that the Gospel-maintenance, as to the Moral equity thereof, was before the Law of Moses, given many hundred years after the Gospel-promises.  

2.  Your second Observation, is, That amongst the Jews, no outward Law was appointed for the recovery of Tithes; but he that did not pay them, rob God, etc.] And think you, that robbing God, against which the curse of the whole Nation was denounced, had no punishment following it? Think you not, that every sin separating between the sinner and God, the sole Fountain of Blessedness, was not a sufficient punishment to itself in the guilt thereof? And do you conceive, that we are now bound by Israel's Judicial Laws, any further than some Statute Law of this Nation makes them in force to bind us? It seems grievous to you, that any Law is made by good Princes and their great Councils for recovery of Tithes; but for which, you and others of your Sect, would venture on God's Justice, as if it were a light matter, by the contempt of Divine Laws, to fall into his hands, 
Heb. 12.29.  who is a consuming fire.  
But know you, that it is both lawful and necessary for those who have Legislative power in Republics, of authority to execute Justice, to bind their Subjects from running into sin, and pulling down curses upon their Souls; and therefore to enact Laws to compel them by respective punishments to obedience to God's Moral Laws: As in case of profanation and common swearing, for which the Land mourneth, adultery, murder, theft, oppression, etc. I suppose you will allow.  
You say again, That Tithes were not for the Levites only. 
3. ] It is easily granted. Jerom on Ezek. lib. 14. cap. 45. shows, That there were tithes of four sorts: First, For the Levites; Secondly, For the Priests; Thirdly, For Love-feasts; Fourthly, For the Poor. Which whether this Pamphleter dissembleth, that he may have something to say, though to no purpose, except to trouble the Reader, I know not.  
You say again, That when the Levitical Priesthood was changed by the coming of Christ Jesus, 
4.  the Law for tithing was also changed, as Paul writ to the Hebrews.] Now Samson will pull the House upon his own head: That very Text which you cite, is pointblank against yourself; the Law (that is, the Ceremonial Law) was changed, therefore something was appointed in its place: What, but the Gospel and the Ministry thereof? And as the Office, so of the necessity of humane condition, respect must be had for the supplies thereof, whereby it may continue. There was therefore a change of this Law, as to that which was Ceremonial, for example in the manner of paying Tithes to the Priests and Levites, the place where, at Jerusalem, or other public storehouses thereto appointed; but not in respect of the morality, or any branch thereof: So that the Priesthood after the order of Melchisedec, is not abolished, nor the Tithes to the same belonging; as the Apostle shows, Heb. 7.8. saying, And here men that die receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is written, that he liveth; that is, Christ. So then tithes still follow the Priesthood; and so the Apostle makes a Priest, and a receiver of tithes equivalents: Instead of saying, Men that die are Priests, he saith. That men that receive tithes: And instead of saying, He that lives is a Priest, he saith, He that lives takes tithes. As if in his judgement, Tithes and Priesthood were as inseparable in point of right, as Kingdom and Tribute; and so the portion due to Christ, is still due to his Assigns, the Ministers of the Gospel, who are his receivers, and in their Ministration in his stead, 2 Cor. 5.20. And so hath Christ appointed, 1 Cor. 9.14.  
But to your Objection, I suppose, your familiar, on which you rely, is known to you, except coming up Janus-like, double faced, you do not so well mark it: The one is a Parologism, à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter; the other is your old acquaintance, Petitio principii: We say, that changing the Priesthood, the Ceremonial part of the Law only was changed; but not the Law for tithing, which is Moral. You say that Paul wrote so (that the Law for tithing was also changed.) Paul's words to the Hebrews in the cited place, are these.— The Priesthood changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law You corrupt the Text, by adding thereto (of tithes) show us these words,— The Law for tithing was also changed, either in that place, or any other writing of St. Paul, or in all the New Testament, and we will rest satisfied therewith, and never more speak for tithes. But seeing you cannot, for shame, and danger of these plagues which are threatened, Revel. 22.18. leave that cause, which you cannot uphold without so many untruths, and falsification of the sacred Scripture.  
You say, For the first three hundred years, while the purisy and simplicity of the Gospel was retained, no tithes were paid among Christians.] If this were true, what could it make against our right to tithes? The causes which hindered their payment, are laid down in our answer to that which you objected in your third Page. Also for that you speak concerning the Apostles free Preaching of the Gospel, to which I here add, that Origen, who flourished about 226. or 230. in his 11. Hom. in Numb. after many other forcible persuasions to pay their tithes, by that which Christ said to the Pharisees, This aught you to have done, etc. he presently addeth,— How therefore shall your righteousness exceed the righteousness of Scribes and Pharisees, if they dare not taste the Fruits of their Land.— Priusquam primitias sacerdotibus offerant & Levitis decimae separentur? 
Lib. 1. ep. 9  Cyprian, whose Martyrdom fell not long after, speaking of the Levites tithes, saith, Quae nunc ratio & forma in clero tenetur, etc. And he blameth Victor, for appointing Geminius Actorem his Attorney, because he would not have him distracted from his Ministry, and citeth these things as a Decree of his Ancestors. The same Father in his third Tract, De simple. Praelat. speaking of the times before him, complaineth of Charity's growing cold,— Tunc domos, & fundos voenundabant,— Distribuenda in usus indigentium precia Apostolis offerebant: Ut nunc de patrimonio ne decimas damus.— Sic in nobis emarcuit vigor fidei: Sic credentium robur elanguit.— Then they sold Houses and Lands, and offered the price to the Apostles to be distributed, for the use of the poor; but now we scarce give tithes of our Patrimonies.— Thus hath the vigour of Faith languished in us, so hath the power of Believers grown faint. Much concerning this hath been noted by others, therefore I content me with these two ancient witnesses; but what now would you hence conclude? What, that craft and impurity brought in tithes among Christians? But that were a poor fallacy, Non causa pro causa: Such as the old man used, who said, That Tenterden Steeple was the cause of Goodwin Sands: For (said he) just as that was building, they began to appear: But if in the Primitive Church they had not the use of tithing, understanding Readers will consider that which hath been said therein, persecution everywhere raging, could not suffer the people to pay, or Ministers to receive their tithes. Yet no time can prevent God in his reserved right; no use or practice of paying tithes, while persecution hindered; therefore there was not jus in re, non sequitur. Tithes came into use in Christian Churches so soon as the owner's their selves retained use and dominion in their Possessions; except in case of Scandal at the first planting the Gospel. See 1 Cor. 9.4. 1 Cor. 12.15, etc. 1 Thes. 2.9.  
That as the mystery of iniquity began to work, etc.] Again, 
5.  here is a Fallacia non causae pro causá. Say soberly, Think you that the working of the mystery of iniquity was the cause of Ministers Preaching of that, which God had commanded to be done? Or was that men's imagination (as you say) the ground whereof, you confess, was fetched from the Law of Moses? It is to be hoped, that your second thoughts will be better. Your sixth Observation is nothing to the purpose, and therefore deserves no answer.  
You say, That in the first payment of tithes, 
Pag. 15.  they were not paid as tithes, but as Free-offerings, at the bounty of the giver, etc.] Say now, when, where, or by whom were tithes ever paid otherwise, than by God's Ordinance, from the first mention of them, unto this present; and show us, if you can, how identity admits of disparity. Payment of tithes, not paid as tithes? You say, As Free-offerings, not as answering any Law that required the tenth part, etc. This hath, and will appear most false; mean time circular Arguments are usque ad nauseam, tedious and absurd tautologies, odious to the prudent Readers. But, Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, and Jacob vowed a tenth to God, which no doubt, he also paid: Did these acts of theirs answer no command, or motion of God's Spirit equivalent thereto? 
Heb. 11.13.  How then is it testified, that these died in the faith? Can faith, as to please God, be without a divine precept? If you would suppose, That Abraham gave tithes to Melchisedec, as of mere benevolence to some distressed Prince, how think you came Jacob to vow a tenth, rather then some other part? how so great a part of the world, if not by imitation of God's people constantly and religiously paying tithes? Whatever you conclude of these, certainly they were not guilty of Will-worship, of whom God testifieth, that they died in the faith.  
It was not (say you) a received Doctrine, that tithes ought to be paid till about the year One thousand and two.] It is easy to answer, That with Unbelievers, the Gospel which Christ's Sacred Lips Preached, was a Doctrine not generally received. Was the Jews unbelief, which gave that holy Doctrine no better reception, any prejudice to the truth of Christ? He said of John Baptist, Matth. 11.14. If ye will receive it, this is Elias which was for to come: And again, Matth. 17.12. I say unto you, that Elias is come already—: What if the Jews than would not, or Papists now will not receive this Doctrine, as their learned Cardinal Bellarmine, 
Tom. 1. l. 3. c. 6. de Pontif. Rom. & Tom. 4 de gra. Prim. hom. c. 14.  who affis m, That Enoch and Elias shall come before the end of the world, to oppose Antichrist, and to convert the Jews. Doth man's unbelief any whit annul the truth of Christ? You see the feebleness of this your Argument, from the generality of men's not receiving a Doctrine, to conclude it not true. Your nineth and tenth Observations, are to no purpose against us.  
Moreover you say, 
11.  That tithes were brought in as a duty owing to God, and were so required and enforced, etc.] This may be an Argument against you, it is nothing against us. But we say more, What can any Law made by man, have for so sure a ground, as the Law and Commandment of God, upon which all Humane Laws and Decrees are, or aught to be grounded? And who gives Divine or Civil property (as to justice indefeaceable) but God, whose the Earth is, 
Psal. 24.1.  and all the fullness thereof? From him we claim our portion. As for the Coercive Laws of Princes, giving us a jus ad rem, we look upon God's good providence therein, and thankfully acknowledge their favours, for the preservation of God's worship, and our Minister's subsistence; without which, it is too evident, that many men's Atheistical confidence would embolden them securely to venture on the Justice of God, as they commonly do, when there are no witnesses of their sacrilege present: They have no Law of Conscience to hinder them, from taking away what they can from Ministers.  
You say again, That till the year Twelve hundred, 
12.  or thereabouts, it was the common practice, for every one to bestow his tithes where he pleased.] Supposing it a free-gift, the owner had fair colour so to do. But were this true, as it is far from it; what were the common practice of every one, against the Law of God, more or less than a general Rebellion against him? And yourself in your next Observation, show the mischief ensuing on such arbitrary dispositions; to wit, enriching those lives of Drones, Abbeys, and Monasteries: And you also confess, That all exemptions from payment of tithes, came from the Pope. You say here, To bestow his tithes; as if they were alms of free benevolence, and not duty by God enjoined: But we claim a right, not depending on your charity, knowing it too well. You are not so kind to the Prophet, 
1 Kings 17.6.  as the Ravens at the Brook of Cherich, they brought him Bread and Flesh in the morning, and likewise in the evening; but you would rather starve your Prophet, and pick out his eyes. Your fifteenth and sixteenth Observation, we conceive make nothing against us.  
Next you talk of tithes, That they are the same thing, whether claimed by an Abbey, or Impropriator, or a Priest, and stand upon the same ground and foundation, etc.] That they are the same in materiâ subjectâ; it is true, but to no purpose urged: Would you intimate, that there is in the Creatures tythed such an inherent mischief, as that quatenus ipsum, they must needs be evil, which are once tythed, whether taken by God's Law, or by man impropriated? If so, the madness of your Argument sufficiently appears. Sacrificing flesh to idols, did not in St. Paul's judgement, 
1 Cor. 10.25, 27, 28.  so pollute it, but that it might be eaten, ask no question for Conscience sake. That you mention an Impropriator, or a Priest, and tithes, standing on the same ground. If you mean by Priest, a Minister of the Gospel, and tithes impropriated, you cross your own Concessions, and the Dictates of Gods Law. Truly by your obscure grumbling, you seem to be very angry, and that you would fain by't, but that you know that your Toothless Argument cannot hurt us. And this, possibly so discomposed the Animal, that (as if he had forgotten on which side he is) in his seventeenth Observation, he doth ingenuously confess, A state of a Church declining to corruption, and error, clearly to be discerned and traced in that; as the power of truth was lost, so was the fruit thereof, which caused such earnest pressing to needful contributions; 
Pag. 15.  and when that would not serve, Laws and Decrees were made to force them: But in the beginning it was not so; for while the purity and simplicity of the Gospel was retained, there needed no pressing; for their charity then abounded, not only to the tenth part (that is, tithes) but for greater parts. Antonii gladios potuit contemnere, si sic omnia dixisset.  

18.  Next you say, That the right of tithes was never cleared, even among the greatest Papists.] What is that to us? Ipsi videant; were ever all Cases of Conscience cleared among them? advise with your own Casuists.  
Further you say, In all ages there were those that withstood the payment of them.] What then? we know it to our grief: Hereto you may cite this present age, with a— witness ourselves at—  
Conclude now (we challenge you thereto) but conclude categorically, Whatsoever hath been withstood by some in all ages, is not good or just. The payment of Tithes to Ministers, hath been withstood by some in all ages; ergo, the payment of Tithes to Ministers, is not good or just.  
To such a conclusion your medium looks, if you deal rationally; and if so, who sees not the falsehood of your major Proposition, which can neither by you, nor any Sophister in the World be proved? For if that were universally true, that whatsoever hath been withstood by some in all ages, is not good or just; What would become of the holy Gospel itself? You know what the Jews at Rome said to Paul, 
Act. 28.22.  As concerning this Sect, we know that every where it is spoken against. What truth was ever yet so evident to all men, that it found no contradiction? Blind Harpaste will contend, that the room hath no light. Antiquity wanted not an Anaxagoras so paradoxical, 
Fir. Lactant.  as to affirm that the snow is black; of all truths, Satan will be sure, that the Gospel shall never want Adversaries: some Jews or other, to gainsay the preaching thereof, and to withstand the Ministers, as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses; 
2 Tim. 3.8.  some tinkerly Alexander the Coppersmith. 
2 Tim. 4.4.  O but some of the Martyrs (saith our Antagonist) among other things, suffered in flames, you say, for that, sci. denying payment of Tithes. We answer, possibly a Martyr may not know all things, and therefore may err in some; but still we must remember, that it is the Cause, not the Punishment, which makes the Martyr. Few are persuaded, that either the Conclave which canonised Garnet, had power to make him a Saint; or that your Neoteric Saints have authority or warrant from God to unsaint the Evangelists, Apostles and Disciples of Christ, by the holy Ghost and Church, ever since their times, owned for Saints; 
Rom. 1.7. Rom. 16.15. 1 Cor. 1.2. 2 Cor. 1.1. Eph. 1.1. etc.  and so by calling, we fear lest their next attempt should be to divest St. Matthew, St. John, St. Thomas, etc. and to send them out among the vulgar, by the names of Mat, Jac and Tom: But now justify your assertion, and show us any one Martyr of Christ, who ever was of your opinion, in denying the payment Tithes, and suffering death for the same.  
Next you demand, 
Page 16.  Whether any person have a true and legal property in the tenth part of another man's increase] Concerning such legality, by the Laws of man, I conceive you make no question; concerning divine Law, if your quaere be; that upon the matter, is to doubt, whether God hath property in man's increases, or hath power and right, to assign the same to whom he will? For the first part of such a question, I take it to be indisputable, with all those who take God's Word to be their rule and guide; he saying expressly, all the Tithes of the Land; whether of the seed of the Land, or the fruit of the Tree, is the Lords; it is holy unto the Lord— so of the Tithe of the Herd, or of the Flock, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord, Levit. 27.30, 32. And concerning these he saith, Ye have rob me, though the Jews said (as many amongst us now, think it is no robbing of God, to take away, 
M l 3.  or detain Tithes from his Ministers) Wherein have we rob thee? God saith, Ye have rob me in Tithes and Offerings; and therefore were they cursed; even the whole Nation. As for the second part of the doubt, all know, that the right and absolute Proprietor, who holds not of any other, but is the Lord Paramount, hath right and free power to assign his propriety to any other, or others. Now God doth as expressly say, Numb. 18.24. etc. The Tithes— I have given to the Levites to inherit: Of which, he yet reserved to himself the Heave-offering, as it were a Quitrent for their acknowledgement of his Sovereign right over all. Now from his grant we claim a moral, and so an unalterable right due to those, whom he appointeth to serve about holy things, and not solely from the Laws of good Princes and States, though as yourself presently confess in the same Paragraph, Tithes are to be paid, because commanded by the State, and that Law and equity obliges the payment. That which you after say, That the person that claims them, may have no particular interest, is contradictory to the forecited Scriptures, and your own Concessions; as also by that which immediately you grant, it appeareth false; where you say, if a true legal Property be in another person to the tenth part of my increase, I ought in conscience to yield and set it forth, because it is not mine. To which we say, First, What can be a true or legal Property, if that be not such, which God himself gives, makes the conveyance, and in his holy Word testifieth, that he hath given and settled as Inheritance, and for such service, on those whom he hath appointed to minister about holy things? Next we say, that you can have no right in Tithes; that they should become yours either by purchase (for who hath right to sell God's part, and that invito Domino?) Nor by descent or prescription.  
The first (you say) claims these to be due, jure divino, and produce the Law of Moses for it, etc.] What other men's opinions are, or have been, cannot make our right and claim by God's divine donation by the moral Law, void; and therefore we trouble not ourselves about them.  
I have (you say again) diligently for two years and more, 
Page 17.  laboured to inform myself, etc.] Here you bring an argument from the time you have spent in studying this point, and implied unerring faculty of apprehension. For if this were not, no time can profit to good information. Concerning the validity of this reason, I leave to others to judge, who better know your abilities of Art and Nature than I yet do; but now give me leave to ask, what Authors studied you? Very likely, some, who were in the same error with you; others who could have informed you better, you condemn unknown; and because your aim is to uphold a party, for the carrying on a secret design, you did not receive the love of the truth, and therefore cannot want strong delusions: and so may you still be of their form, who are ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, if you study to deceive yourself and others: which if it be not so, I am confident that you may find enough in the writings of sound and Orthodox Divines, to undeceive you, if at least you will not shut your eyes; if the vail be laid over your eyes, none but God can make you see; whom we pray, in his good time to remove it.  
You speak again, of changing the Law by Christ, etc.] Concerning the change of the Ceremonial Law, you have been answered; that change is granted you, without advantage to you, or apparent damage to us. See what hath been said to your 14 pag. Further we say, that Christ changed not the moral Law, in any one jot, or title thereof, as to the morality of it; 
Matth. 5.  he protested against it, who is the faithful and true witness: So that the precepts thereof, having no repeal appearing in all God's Word, bind for ever unto the world's end. Show us if you can, where the Lawgiver ever repealed the Law for tithing. Bring us any one Text of holy Scripture, either expressly declaring it, or by necessary consequence concluding it: Which seeing you cannot do, abuse not the Scripture, making it to speak what you please, to hold up your party: In a right use of Scriptures, we must carry sense from them, not bring it to them. Your pretending to an absolute change of the Law, causeth your ignorant and credulous Readers presently to think, they are discharged from all duty to Moral precepts; not considering, that it must continually bind all men; and that the Ceremonial and Judicial Law were positive for a time, and appertaining to Israel only, 
12ae. q. 122. 1. 2m.  as determinationes moralium; which being changed, the Moral Law still continues. A discharge of obedience hereto granted, what an Harvest would the Devil reap from these pernicious Tares, which you scatter in the Lord's field? and what unspeakable confusion would follow? what (out of Hell) can be imagined more damnable? Consider therefore what designs of Satan your captious disputes carry on: You will say you intent no such thing; 
Parum interest quo animo feceris, quod fecisse malum est.  but it skills not with what intent you do that which is evil to be done.  
You say, Much more colour had the Choristers, etc.] Homo suavis; a merry man, I trow: But I am not at leisure to exchange words concerning odd Crotchets.  
But say you, How doth Gospel-Ministry succeed to the Levites, etc.] We have spoken hereof before, and say more; first, they succeed the Legal Priesthood, as they are Ministers of holy things; and therefore must live of Christ's portion, which is tithes, though their office in some things differ, as shall appear in its place. Next the Apostle will show you. Heb. 7.12. The Priesthood, saith he, being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law: Where note, that he saith not, that the Priesthood is abolished, but changed: So the Law in the Morality thereof, is not abolished, but the Ceremonies, and things thereto belonging, are changed. Now changing presupposeth a suffection or substitution of some other thing, in place of that which is removed: So the Ministers succeed in place of the Levitical Priesthood; and their honorary and maintenance accompanieth the same. Now the portion due to Melchisedec's Priesthood, which is a permanent order, is tithes; these being due to Christ's Priesthood, are due to Christ's Ministers. As for your buzzing about here and there, and no where se●ling, concerning the Priesthood, it is nothing to purpose. And what, say you, was the Primitive Church assured of for some hundred years? After you have done trifling, we shall have it; that the Church for some hundreds of years never called for tithes: Your own citations of Jerom, Ambrose, Augustine, etc. show this to be grossly false; except by some hundreds, you mean only the first three hundred, wherein the rage of persecution, neither permitted Christians to pay, nor Ministers to receive their tithes; concerning which, we have already spoken, in answer to the same objection.  
You say again, What is this to the payment of tithes?] 
Pag. 18.  What that Abraham paid tithes? very much. First, this imports a right in Melchisedec to take them, and therefore a debitum in Abraham to pay them; who having a special direction, by some inspiration, which had the force of an injunction, Abraham's act was of duty, not arbitrary benevolence; yea, by the Moral Law, which before the exact transcript thereof on the Tables of Stone, was the very same with the Law of Nature, which bond not only Abraham, but all persons respectively, to all times and places. For, to worship God is a Moral Precept, though for the time, the determination thereof, 
12 ae. q. 99  as to the manner how, appertained to the Ceremonial, which being antiquated and changed into another manner of worship under the Gospel; yet is still the same in point of Morality, which bound and unchangeably bindeth all. You possibly may say, Abraham paid tithes but once; but there needs no other proof, that he constantly paid them at other times, as well as that once specified to Melchisedec, because God testified concerning him, saying, Gen. 18.19. I know him, that he will command his children, and his household after him; and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgement; which is afterwards interpreted, Deut. 32 46. By doing all the words of this Law. Add hereto, that he only is good and just, who is constantly so, and accordingly Jacob also paid tithes; because the Morality of the Law, universally binding to this duty of Equity and Justice, bound all men and ever respectively to do the same; how else fell Abraham and Jacob upon a tenth, rather then on a fifth, seventh, or twelfth part? Without faith it is impossible to please God, as also to do any thing in faith, which God commandeth not.  
You say more, that— few are now left, who will only stand to it, and the generality are of a contrary mind.] Few are now left: We may thank your rage for that. But I demand, doth the appearing paucity of any Truths, Professors disparage their Cause? What then shall we think of Eliah crying,— I only am left? Were there not then many thousands on the Prophet's side, whom he knew not of? might it not even then, have been answered to him, as Elisha said to his servant, 2 Kings 6.6.— Fear not, for they that be with us, are more than they that be with them? But what you mean by, only stand to it, I know not, but doubt— hic ambiguo ludimur: Mean you only stand to it, that jus of receiving of tithes, and so wave and disclaim all right, which in confirmation of the same, good Princes and Parliaments, or Donations and Bequeathments, which well-affected men have given us, by several Laws and Acts, in divers ages passed? That were foolishly and ingratefully done, so to value these grants, to which, you confess, yourself bound to obey, Even for Conscience sake. That the generality are against Right and Truth, I do no more wonder, then that you are—  
And so (you say) the greatest part of the people of England deny tithes to be due by Gods Law.] To this, and that which immediately precedeth, I think no more answer than this necessary; if so, it is the more shame for them. Concerning the end of paying tithes, you have been answered: As for Impropriators, they are out of the verge of our present question, which concerns the Minister's portion; yet here we may use the saying of Boniface, Archbishop of Mentz, in his Epistle to Cuthbert, Archbishop of Canterbury. Our complaints (saith he) hereof, are not much unlike to a dogs barking at thiefs and robbers breaking open, digging through and rifting his Master's house.— Quia defensionis auxiliatores non habeat, 
Spelm. Concil. & decret. pag. 239  submurmurans ingemiscat, & lugeat: Because he cannot have helpers for defence, yet growling he will grumble and whimper.  
And this (you say) leaves every man free to give to him that teacheth) I am sure you are not very free to give to him that teacheth; and for all this preceding Miscellany, you leave us in doubt, what you mean by, this leaves? this what? your irresolute conclusion, and confused resolution? Do these make for your dream of the Castle in the air, Competent maintenance for Ministers, and that arbitrary, voluntary contribution? If you mean voluntary, to import willingly performed, as all good works must be, we accord. Paul Preached the Gospel willingly; that act of Preaching was a voluntary act of Paul, 
1 Cor 9.16, 17.  yet woe had been unto him, if he had not preached the Gospel, because a dispensation of the Gospel was committed unto him  
Concerning those you speak of, who you say, 
Pag 19  are transformed as Apostles and Ministers of Christ, who have the form, but want the power, who teach for filthy lucre, etc.] We may take up the Eunuch's quere— Of whom speaks he this? of himself, 
Acts 8.34.  or of some other man? Where is the power of godliness on your part, when you broach many falsehoods, setting up impious doctrines of men, instead of God's oracles? Non soles te respicere cum aliis maledicis? Is it filthy lucre in us to require the portion which God hath appointed us, or in you, who would take it from us? God's Word doth evidently enough show, to any whose eyes are not closed by prejudicated opinion, That, as there was a Legal service, to which belonged a legal maintenance, a Temple and an Altar service; to which, God allotted Temple and Altar portions or maintenance to them, who there served; so, by the same Moral equity, there is a Gospel service, preaching, administration of Holy Sacraments, etc. to which appertain the things, or temporal perquisites belonging to the maintenance thereof, which is laid down in sundry places of holy Scripture. See Gal. 6.6. Prov. 3.6. 1 Tim. 5.17. Now if there be a portion to be set out unto God, and his Ministers, out of all and every the temporal goods of every one instructed in the Gospel, according to the sum and purport of these places of holy Scripture, and no certain portion or maintenance for Ministers, be found in God's Word, but tithes; then are tithes, the portion and maintenance allotted by God's Word to Ministers for their service: But there is a portion to be set out to God and his Ministers, out of all the temporal goods of every one instructed in the Gospel, and no other determinate certainty for Minister's maintenance, mentioned in holy Scripture; Ergo, Tithes are the principal portion allotted by God's Word to Ministers for their service: And no reason can our adversaries allege, to make it probable, that God would have Gospel-Ministers means of subsistence, less certain and definite than the Priests and Levites means was under the Law. To conclude, a Law for payment of Tithes, for the maintenance of God's public worship, all confess; show us in all God's Word, where that Law was ever repealed.  

Pag. 19  But you say, He always took care for such as he sent forth, and they never wanted, etc.] And what reason can you show, why they now should? I presume not to ask, why so many of Christ's faithful Ministers have of late been driven into great wants, and so are still? Your device of competent maintenance, doth here but corvis hiantibus illudere. They who were sent out by Christ (you say) reaped the fruit of their labour: What proves this, but that they ought to do so still?  
Concerning Churches, which you say were gathered; we say you ought to consider, a great difference between a settled or constituted Church, and that which in the Primitive Age of the Gospel, was settling, and there to be constituted: Therefore that which was then done, cannot reasonably prescribe a maintenance for Ministers of a Church constituted. There was, besides persecution, unadvised zeal of voluntary poverty; a Bird as rare to be found in this age, as a Phoenix or black Swan: There was danger of scandal given; we know none now, except taken, not given, in requiring our Tithes, of such as you.  
Herewith (say you) let our now called Churches be proved, etc.] God be blessed, we have a more just and certain proof then your Lesbian rule to try our Calling by; Christ saying, By this shall all men know, that ye are my Disciples, if you love one another; and for the rest, The labourer is worthy of his hire: This is appointed us by the Lord of the Vineyard by God, out of his own reserved part; not contracted for, or arbitrarily determined by man. This we understand, that which God knew to be a proportionable honorary; not that which fickle man fancieth to be so. This is no mercenary wages, such (as your own party confess) are upon Covenant, Compact, Agreement or Promise. Now it cannot appear that ever the Apostles maintenance was grounded on Covenant, Compact, agreement, Promise, etc. but on God's Providence and Ordinance.  
Mercenary wages is definite, particular as to the sum agreed on between party and party; so was not the Apostles maintenance in any of the Churches, to which they preached: Yea, say you, for their preaching was free. Why they took not Tithes: you have heard formerly, that they had maintenance from the Churches, is above all dispute; but you would have us preach freely; that is, taking no Tithes: because in the Primitive Church, Charity abounding, you say, it appeareth not that Tithes were paid: To which, we say, be you such first, as those Christians were to their Teachers, and then talk of gathering Churches, and our ceasing to take Tithes. In the mean time, you cannot reasonably require us to leave our good way, seeing you will not leave your evil one, of sharking Ministers.  
Wages is or aught to be proportionable to the merit of those, that serve by Covenant; but the maintenance of the Apostles and Ministers could not, can not be such: for they Minister Spiritual things, and reap Carnal. And now, Why quarrel you our receiving these supplies of the World, to which we Preach? And from what part thereof should we reasonably expect to reap, but from that, on which we sow? 
1 Cor. 9  God hath determined that we shall live of the Gospel, which we preach according to the equity of the moral Law; for this one and the same justice is to be observed in the Law and Gospel. 
12ae. q. 108. 2. o. 19  The Schoolmen well note, that the Gospel commands no other Moralities, than the same which the Law commanded.  
And here (you say) rulers should have wisdom, etc.] 
Rom. 13.4.  We take you for a pretty Counsellor of State; and the Apostle saith of the Magistrate He beareth not the Sword in vain; for he is the Minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him that doth evil. But in vain carrieth he the Sword, who hath not wisdom to direct it: And is that wisdom which you here offer our Magistrates, for Counsel of State, to leave Christ's Kingdom to his own rule? What to punish no offenders? To cry to Christ as those rebellious Tribes, 1 King. 14.16. See to thine own house David? What would become of such inactive Magistrates, and such a Laish? For defect of Justice in the due execution thereof, 
Judge 18.7. Gen. 18.25. Ezek. 5.8.  the Lord the Judge of all the Earth will do right; as he saith, because they had not kept his judgements— Therefore thus saith the Lord God, behold, I, even I am against thee, and will execute judgement in the midst of thee, 
See also Ezek. 11.9. 2 Chron 24.23, 24.  in the sight of the nations. So when Joash harkened to wicked Counsel, and did not justice upon delinquents, the Lord brought upon Princes and people the Assyrian Army, so they executed judgement upon Joash. Thus will it still come to pass, that for want of Magistrates due execution of justice, God will come, and punish both people offending, and Magistrates conniving, or not punishing. And do you not mark what a parcel of singular wisdom here is presented to Magistrates?  
Neither (say you) is his spirit diminished, that it cannot, or will not send forth, and fit Ministers for his service, or that he needs Universities, etc.] That God can fit teachers, even by infused habits of knowledge, none doubt; but from his Power to conclude his Will, were but a wide inference. His Spirit is not diminished, he can make many Worlds; Doth this conclude that he will? He can do whatsoever he will do; Will you thence infer, that he will do what ever he can? He needs no Universities; neither did he in the days of Prophets, yet had he then his Naioth in Ramah, 1 Sam. 19.22, 23. a School of Prophets. So had he in the Apostles times; yet when the learned St. Paul, brought up at Gamaliels' feet, wrote directions to Timothy, 
1 Tim. 5.13, 16. 3 Tim. 2.15,  he saith, give attendance to Reading, Exhortation and Doctrine; the fruit whereof, he presently subjoins, for in doing this, thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee: so study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. All this your party believe they can do, without any Analytical order; but if the Orator should hear you, he would say, This is not dividere, but frangere.  
But, to our purpose again: I demand, Doth God's power to give other means of enlarging men's hearts to his service, annul his Ordinance in the use of accustomed means? What then would the brainsick Super-ordinarian not conclude against Preaching of the Gospel, and use of holy Sacraments?  
Against use of Universities, you bring an Argument, à fine: You say, Students go thither to learn Greek and Hebrew, the original; that they may understand what Christ spoke, and the Apostles preached.] And do you not think that were worth their time and charge? What were all knowledge in the world without this? But sure you are not ignorant, that our Grammar-Schools send few Students to the Universities without a competent knowledge of the Greek; neither that there are many other excellent things, besides Tongues, to be learned at the Universities. As for the Mother-tongue of Christ and his Apostles, I suppose you are not to learn that it was Syriac, much differing from the Greek and Hebrew, both in character and form of words. I here remember you, that the Apostles, 
Acts 2.  after they had received the Holy Ghost, as occasion served, and need required, spoke all tongues; but writ the Canon and Rule of Faith, the New Testament, in Greek; as the Prophets wrote the Old in Hebrew. If they that heard them speak in their own Language, could not understand their Doctrine, but that it seemed foolishness to them; If they had heard them speak in unknown Tongues, would they not say that ye are mad? 
1 Cor. 14.23.  But the cause of their not understanding their Doctrine in their own native tongue, was, because the judgement denounced, Isai. 6.9, 10. was upon them; and because the God of this world had blinded their eyes, which believed not: So that the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ could not shine unto them. Knowledge of Tongues, none but the stupidly-ignorant will deny to be a shining light: Possibly a blind man, or he that winks, is not benefitted by it; but would you conclude, that therefore they who are of entire sensories, and willing to see, are, as you say, Nothing the nearer for it? What think you, that the wisdom of God thought good to furnish his Apostles and Disciples with the gift of Tongues, and interpretation thereof; was that a vain and fruitless Donation? Were they, who thereby had the mysteries of salvation written in Scriptures, brought home to them in their mother-tongue, no nearer to the knowledge of the Gospel? The Apostle saith the same, which Reason and Experience confirm, 
1. Cor. 14.11. — If I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaks, a Barbarian; and he that speaks, shall be a Barbarian to me: And are they not nearer to the knowledge of the Gospel, who understand the Greek, in which it was originally written, than they who are ignorant of that Tongue? Egyptian darkness, quintessence of dunsery! Who ever heard of so professed a Purple John, as you here personate? What, was the Scripture written in English? or were the Interpreters thereof assisted with such infallibility of spirit, even in things less than fundamental, that they could not err in any thing? which if you hold not, you must confess, that they who understand the original must be nearer the knowledge of the Scriptures, than they who do, and needs must take up that which they do know, upon trust. Qui benè didicit, benè docet: And on the contrary, he that never well learned, can never teach well. I may boldly affirm, that the want of learning, knowledge of tongues, and good arts have bred all these Schisms and divisions amongst us, which render us odious and contemptible among the Nations at this day; and that it was Satan's masterpiece against unhappy England, to beget a contempt of learning, by emboldening a rude vulgar, to contemn the persons of the Ministers.  
To your Objection again, we say, That God's Spirit needed no Universities to instruct men; but all sober men know, that they have need of Universities, wherein they may be instructed. What then? God can make an Ass speak; but surely it were not wisely concluded, God's Spirit is not diminished, etc. therefore we will have no more Universities, but such Teachers, as that dull Beast, shall serve our turns to make us Saints of the new Edition. And seriously, were all men of your mind (at least, of which you would seem to be) to take away our University bred Ministers, by taking away their settled livelihood, necessity would so enforce, that ere long you must be served by such animals, as could only bray pure nonsense by the glass—. Hoc Ithaci cupiunt—. Consider whether this be not a Jesuitical plot, whereof I heard one of them say, at the very beginning of our troubles,— There is a design set upon you, which when you hear, will make your ears tingle.  
But you say, Our Consciences must be judge, who those Ministers are, etc.] Auditum admissi risum teneatis amici! 
Pag. 10.  What? Professed blindmen challenging Prerogative to judge of colours? Ambitious Absolom did but wish, 
2 Sam. 15.4.  O that I were made a Judge in the Land— But you plead privilege, Our Conscience (you say) must be judge: And do you not see what a Church and Ministry we were like to have, if these men might be judges? Think you that they would allow any, but such as they knew were surely involved in their Heresy? But now speak clearly, and mistake not Opinion for Conscience: Opinion is grounded on probability, or that which but seems so unto deluded minds; but Conscience, on the infallible Word of God, in which can be no falsehood. Show us now (if you be true men) that this is indeed your Conscience, and we will go along with you: But excuse us, if we subscribe not unto such dull and stupid opinions, for which you cannot show, that Christ's Ministers were ever, in your sense, made manifest. But you would have Magistrates punish, and restrain the evil: We wish it so, but doubt that you would wince, when you were under the lash for Sacrilege; and your Opinion could not save your—  
You say, Would not this ease the Magistrate, and be more acceptable to God?] To so impious and vain a question, it is enough to answer, No.  
Who (say you) made him a Judge, & c?] He or they who made him a Magistrate and a restrainer of the evil. 
Pag. 20.   
A third sort (you say) plead for Decrees, etc.] I am loath to be expensive of precious time, in examination of that which others plead; and I content me to say, concerning the rubbish, which you here scrape together, That those things have been sufficiently answered, by the learned and most industrious Dr. Tilsley, Animad. on Hist. of Tithes; to whom I refer the Reader, who desireth further to be satisfied concerning those things.  
And then (you say) about that time, it came to be received and believed, that tithes ought to be paid, etc.] I cannot but think you dissemble your knowledge, who say, That it was about a thousand years after Christ, before it came to be received and believed, that tithes ought to be paid. Origen, Cyprian, Jerom, Ambrose, Augustine, etc. believed them to be due, and payable, or else they would not have pleaded so earnestly for them; and you know, that these lived some hundred of years before the time which you mention: Consider what yourself have confessed, and for shame contradict not that.  
You say, That in England, as well as other Nations, every man might have given his tithes where he pleased, till about the year One thousand two hundred.] If that were true I could not but think it great pity, that they were so long ignorant. But must we still be troubled with your Crambe, and often repetitions of one and the same falsehood? surely it is already nauseous to the understanding Reader.  

Page 21. — Pleaded for Humane right] To this, and many things else gathered out of Mr. Seldens History of Tithes, I answer again, That it skills not much what others plead: God gave Ministers the jus and right of Tithes, from that time that he had a Church: I say, Jus in re, a right in Tithes, though Humane Laws may be said to give them Jus ad rem; that is, a Law and Custom of Court, to claim and recover them as their right. To this, if Kings and Parliaments have contributed their power and authority, by Laws and Decrees; they did justly and religiously therein: For therefore God put the power into their hands, well knowing, how malicious Satan is against Ministers of the Gospel; and how (in his ambition to bring men to his Kingdom of Darkness and Atheism) the subtle Impostor works (as you do) on the worldly minder of Neuters in Religion; who wouldly gladly be of the cheapest one, that they might spare their purses, and the newest, that they might be in the fashion.  
Now for Statutes of Kings and Parliaments, suppose they have power concerning mutual Humane rights, i. e. Meum and tuum; God only hath right in his reserves: Suum cuique, is the Rule of Justice; and Christ said, Give to Caesar, that which is Caesar's; to every one that which is his; only let God's Portion be sacred and inviolable. We look therefore on Statutes, as effects of God's mercy towards his Church, making Kings and high Powers her Nursing-fathers'; and yet we say, that we ground not our Claim and Interest therein. God hereby used a Coercive power to restrain the Sacriledgious, because of the hardness of their hearts, who regard not Gods Laws, but fear Mans.  
The Law (you say) doth not give any man a property.] But sure the Law of God doth; of, and by which we hold, from whence we claim our portion. And we further say, That if no Humane Law, Act, or Decree, had been made for us on this behalf, yet had we a firm right to that, which God assigned us by his Will, revealed in his Word: Yet we thankfully acknowledge, that we owe very much to the Laws and Grants of good Princes, Magistrates, Councils, and Judges, for our actual recovery of our deuce, without which, it may too easily appear by you, and your party; how little comfort and support, men's consciences would afford Ministers, notwithstanding your pretended sufficient maintenance for them, whose Judges you would appoint yourselves: Was not Ticonius your Tutor, 
August. Ep. Vincent. Cic. Acad. q l. 4.  or one of that Sect, who said, Quod volumus, sanctum est? or some Protagoras, affirming, Id cuique verum esse, quod cuique videatur?  
You say, He that saith, they are only due by Humane Right, 
Pag. 22.  etc.] We know not any of ours, who say so: We say they are due by the Law of God and Man, and recoverable by Humane Laws to God subordinate: As, Stante Repub. Israeliticâ, peculiar Rights and Interests by the Moral Law due and claimable, were justly recovered by the Judicial, which God appointed as a subsidium thereto, and Band of Obedience; the execution whereof, was by men appointed to judge: so now, For Magistrates are still to execute justice according to those Laws, which by Statute or Statutes, are made Judicial to us: And if our Magistrates may justly judge for me, I may as justly claim and recover my right by the same Law and Equity: Add hereto, That Councils may and aught to make Laws, to bind the people to obey Gods Moral Law, and by just punishments, appoint restraints of transgressors thereof, that it may be well with them and their children: For, Salus populi suprema Lex. This may appear, if we consider either first or second Table; As in case of profanation and common swearing, or profanation of the Sabbath, or against Murder, Adultery, Theft, we have wholesome and necessary Laws. Now if for the obedience to God, Humane Laws be good and necessary in respect of one Moral duty; why not in others? As, if for the maintenance of God's worship in the quotâ parte of time by God reserved, and thereto still necessary: Why is it not as just and necessary in the quotâ parte of our substance, by the same Law of God reserved to, and necessary for the same? To the matters in your following Cavils, concerning Civil Rights, Ministers Proprieties, and Courts wherein they have been, or aught to be recovered, you vainly trouble your Reader; our claim being from Divine Law, whereto all Laws and Courts ought to be subordinate.  

Pag. 22.  You say further, That the Act (for Tithes) gives nothing, but commands what was before.] Herein you say true; For God gave them from the beginning, and man confirmed them in sundry times following.  
Next, you demand how Laws of Kings and Parliaments, etc. bind the Conscience?] Yourself have formerly answered; but the Apostle more definitively, saith Rom. 13.1, 5. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.— Ye must be subject (needs be subject) not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake: 
1 Pet. 2.13.  And St. Peter, Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of Man, for the Lords sake. And— will this double band hold Samson if it doth, sin not against Conscience, Satan-like endeavouring to seduce others, and draw them in society of sin.  

Pag. 23.  Tithes (you say) be not due by the Law of God.] This is a shameless begging of the question, which will never be approved by us, or proved by you.  
But you say, Who hath set them up, the Law of man at best?] Here is another begging of the question at another door, as also in the following words, where you say, in the place where God disannulled his own command. We offer here again to join issue with you, and challenge you to show us any one Text of God's Word, whereby it appears, that God ever disannulled or repealed his Law of Tything. For the rest, if you could cite and urge as many Decrees of Princes, or Acts of Parliaments against us, as you have cited for Tithes; yet no Decrees of men can Impeach our Right therein; seeing God by the Magna Charta of his holy Word, hath settled it, for an Inheritance upon the Ministry.  
You demand, Who put this power into the hand of man, 
Pag. 23.  to raise a compulsory maintenance for Ministers:] The Apostle will tell you, Rom. 13.4. The Magistrate is the Minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him that doth evil; Is not execution of wrath a compulsory means, think you? Or is not Sacrilege evil in your Theology? That you further say, that the Ministers of Christ never looked for, or durst own such a way of provision. We say, First, That the maintenance of Ministers ought to be willingly aforded them, not grudgingly or sparingly, as also their ministration; this is, as to the first intention of the Law; but if men will be obstinate, Compulsion is a second intention hereof. Secondly, Suppose that Ministers did not own such a way of provision for recovery of Tithes, before such Acts of Parliament were made for them; What hindereth but that they may justly use such Laws, now Enacted and in Force?  
You proceed— What Nation in Europe, will not say they have a Christian Magistracy?] Do you not forget how great a part of Europe is under the Turk? Your many following impertinences should have had no answer, but that you say, heavy punishments are inflicted upon such as cannot for conscience sake conform unto them: To which I say, it was never well since men's Consciences were tied to their Purse-strings, and that opinions not so much as probable, must go for Conscience. Show us Gods Word for your Conscience, and we will submit to the same bond; but we think it an abominable Idolatry, to set up opinions of beguiled Men, instead of God's sacred Oracles.  
Concerning— This day of clear and Sunshine light] We say, 
Isai. 8.20.  to the Law and to the Testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. To this Law we appeal, and willingly submit; Doth this savour, in you tender sensory, of the old Popish Spirit? Who sees not your endeavour to re-establish Popery, though you so much seem to speak against it? And now let me bonâ cum veniâ, tell you, that either your hypocrisy, or ignorance is something gross. And is this as you say, a shame to our reformation? Or is the practice of you deformers a shame to Christian Religion? It is probable that you carry on the Jesuits design of reducing England to darkness of Popery again, by decrying Ministers right, to a settled maintenance; that by taking them away, you may remove the Candlestick out of his place, the light of the Gospel from us, and then you may possibly bring many to Popery and Atheism. I must needs say, that this personated Zealot speaks much against Popery, but works what he can for it; on whom I look as on Thames-water-men, with their faces one way, but labouring might and main, to carry their Passengers and Vessel another.  
You add— Were the Law just commanding Tithes, etc.] What will he not question, 
Pag. 24.  who doubteth of the equity of the Law? I hope you mean humane Law, which yet is founded on God's Law; and have you not learned of Socrates, to doubt of all things? Concerning triple damages, or other punishments which the Law hath appointed obstinate transgressors; I suppose you know, that the plaintiffs charges of the Suit, commonly exceed the damage justly awarded him, towards his reparation therein; so that even under the tender hands of just Judges, the remedy is more burdensome, than the disease; these punishments therefore are but just. What injustice is it, think you, to force a Thief or Possessor malae fidei to restore the goods of another man, which he hath injuriously possessed himself of, and still detaineth? What injustice can be in a legal reinvesting the true owner? And in case that the injurious refuse to submit to the Law, to compel him by some severe punishment by Law provided in such case? And if this be justice in one case, Why shall it not be so in another kind of wrong or robberry? Why not in case of Sacrilege, the worst of robberies, if in inferior thieveries? O, but you say our consciences tell us, that detention of Tithes from Miinisters, is no sin. What if a Thiefs Conscience (as you account Conscience) should tell him, that had rob you, that stealing is no sin; Would you not pursue him, and prosecute law against him? I doubt in your next scruple, your weak and tender Consciences will tell you, that 'tis a sin, to pay your Landlords any Rent, or at least their sin, to Distrain or Sue for any, though you can, but will not, for your Conscience sake forsooth pay him any: And will not the next question in your Schools, be whether it be lawful In foro Conscientiae, to pay any Debt?  
— To set out Tithes, etc.] You say, this is against his Conscience; once again we require you to show us any one Text of Scripture, prohibiting setting out of Tithes; that we may know, that it is Conscience, and not Opinion, grounded on humane fancy, malice, greedy desire of enriching yourselves by pillaging the Ministers, which moveth you to think so.  
You say,— This age so much pretends to reformation]— and every one cries woe, woe, and he complain's, that help's to make it so.  
Are you not a chief pretender to Reformation? Why then trouble you the sacred peace of the Church? And truly, I fear, that it will come to pass which you next say, that Papists (your honoured Patroness) shall rise in judgement against you, and condemn you; they own some Order, Unity, Government and Law; they have some show of Devotion and religious Charity; but in our new Sectaries, I see very little of these, if any at all. Your following objections in this Page, are but quarrelsome, captious, as to the present, not deserving answer.  
You say— By conscientious men, 
Pag. 25.  far more heavy than the loins of the Law] Conscientious men, and Opinatours, are with you, convertible terms; as concerning abuses in offices, we are ignorant; But what if there were such things? What were this to our Cause? You say nothing against those wealthy Kerns, who by detaining Tithes, beggar poor Ministers and their Families, which we know to be true: In this, 'tis marvel, but you think they do God service. 
John 16.2.   
You say, The Pope himself hath no such penalties.] No? what think you of his holy House, forsooth, his Inquisition Preaching with fire and faggot? You say, You writ what you can prove by manifold instances. It may be so in some things impertinent; and possibly you are acquainted with the Pope's Ecclesiastical Courts, and (what ever you seem under your present disguise) are a right trusty Advocate for them.  
You say, Priests are not able to pay tenths unto the Protector, etc.] What Priests you talk of, we inquire: We own not that title in any, but Christ, a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec, that faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, Heb. 2.17. And as we conceive, ancient Councils, Fathers, and the Rubric of our Church Liturgy, attribute that name to Ministers of the Gospel, 
Cyprian. ep. Caecilio. l. 2. ep. 3.  by way of analogy and allusion to that, which was under the now-antiquated Ceremonies of the Law. So Irenaeus, l. 4. c. 20. saith,— Sacerdotes autem sunt omnes Domini Apostoli— semper Altari & ●eo serviunt: That is in respect of their succeeding the Levitical Priesthood, and allusion to their service. So Cap. 3.32. Sacrificium Deo cor contribulatum; and Cap. 33.— Incensa Johannis in Apocalypsi, orationes ait esse sanctorum: For, as Cyprian saith, Adu. Jud. l. 17. the old Priesthood was to cease, ut novus sacerdos veniret, qui in aeternum futurus esset; that is only Christ. See Heb. 7.23. an elegant figure whereof immediately preceded Christ's coming, when Zachary, the Levitical Priest, was to come out and bless the people, he was dumb: For then God would bless his people by his Son Christ, the Eternal Priest, after the order of Melchisedec; who not only auspicated his preaching with sundry blessings, but ascending into Heaven, lifting up his hands, 
Matth. 5.2, etc. Luk. 24.50, 51.  blessed his Disciples. When he was to come into the World, the Priest, the son of Aaron, could not speak; that by that sign, God might teach his people to expect another Priesthood, and Priest, in whom not only Jews, but all the Nations of the World should be blessed: 
Gal. 3.8.  And this was also intimated, in that the Levitical Priests were after the morning Sacrifice only, to lift up their hands, and bless the people; but not after the Mincha or evening Sacrifice; 
Maimon. tract. de Orat. c. 14. Heb. 1.1, 2. & 13.10, 15.  for in the evening of time, God spoke unto his people by his own Son Christ. To our purpose again, the Lords Table may be called an Altar; and praises of God, a Sacrifice, as it is written, By him therefore, let us offer the Sacrifice of praise to God continually: So will we render the calves of our lips, Hos. 4. ●. So are all the Servants of Christ Priests; not by propriety of speaking, 
Rev. 1.6. & 5.10. & 20.6. 1 Pet. 2.5.  but as they are also called Kings, by analogy and representation. Nor do I remember where Ministers are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Priests in the Gospel. Here it is necessary to consider, 1. How Ministers may be called Priests. 2. How not, or wherein there appears a real difference between them, and Levitical Priests, properly so called.  
1. In that the Apostle saith, The Priesthood being changed; 
Heb. 7.12.  he implieth, that the Office of Ministration in the public worship of God is not abolished, or taken quite away; so that there is nothing substituted in the place thereof, but that the Office, as to the morality thereof, so continues as that Analogically, Ministers of the Gospel may in some sense be called Priests. The Prophet Joel makes them convertible terms, 
Joel ●. 17.  saying, Let the Priests, the Ministers of the Lord, weep—: And the Prophet Isaiah speaking of the calling of the Gentiles, 
Isai. 66.21, etc.  saith, I will also take of them for Priests, and for Levites, saith the Lord.  
2. The Levitical Priest served at the Altar, that is, Did there that service, which by God's Law he was there to perform: And so the Minister is to do that service in the Church, which God hath, under the Gospel, appointed and settled on him in his Calling thereto, and separation from the people, in preaching the Gospel, Praying, Administration of the Holy Sacraments, and those other Ministerial Functions, which are peculiar to his Calling.  
3. That Priests had their certain and determinate allowance and maintenance assigned them out of the increases of the Earth (by God's donation) for his service; 
Hebr. 7.5.  never being left to the courtesy, or charity of men, no not the faith Moses to dispose of; and so have the Ministers of the Gospel: In both which, it was and is sacrilege, to alienate, take away, detain, or change the whole or any part thereof, otherwise reserved by God to his own service, and assigned to the Ministers thereof, or to reduce the same to common uses.  
4. The Ministers of the Gospel succeeding the Legal Priests in the public service of God, as persons in their Office sacred, to which they are set apart, or separated, Rom. 1.1. Gal. 1.15. may not desert, or be distracted from their Calling, nor impropriated to any other. Thus, and in such like respects, they may analogically be styled Priests; as hath been said, thanksgiving may be called a Sacrifice, Psal. 116.17. Spiritual, not bodily or proper; 
Psal. 141.2.  as Prayers are Spiritual incense. Let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight, and the lifting up my hands, as the evening sacrifice; and as I said, the Lords Table, may be called an Altar; not properly, but by way of allusion to that, to which it succeeded: So may Gospel Ministers be styled Priests.  
2. Herein observe, That the Legal Priests, and the Ministers of the Gospel differ.  
1. The Legal Priests were to be only of that tribe of Levi, and family of Aaron, Exod. 40.13, 14. But the Ministers of the Gospel (if lawfully called) are limited to no one stock or family, but may be of any: So that the Legal Priests were in some sort, born to the Priesthood; but Ministers are separated thereto: Therefore the Lord taking to himself, a people under the Gospel out of all Nations, 
Isai. 66.20, 21.  saith, And I will also take of them for Priests, and for Levites.  

Judge 6.37, etc. Deut. 32.2, etc.  2. The Levitical Priest was to execute his Function among the people of Israel only: Then Judea like gideon's Fleece had the dew of Heaven, the Doctrine and Mysteries of Salvation, and the floor of the world beside was dry; as it is written, Psal. 147, 19, 20. He showeth his Word unto Jacob, his Statutes and his Judgements unto Israel; he hath not dealt so with any Nation. And as for his Judgements, they have not known them. And so Christ's injunction bound his Disciples for a time, Go not into the way of the Gentiles; 
Matth. 10.5. & 28.19.  but after his Ascension, the Ministers are to go into all, or any part of the world, to Preach the Gospel to every creature: Now the floor hath the dew, 
Mark 16.15. Rom. 11.25. Eph. 2. Col. 3.11. Gal. 3.28.  and the fleece is dry, since that blindness is come upon Israel. Now the stop of the partition wall is taken down; and in Christ, there is no difference between Jew and Gentile, bond and free.  
3. Levitical Priests offered real, external, visible, material, proper, and bloody Sacrifices; but the Ministers of the Gospel offer only spiritual Sacrifices, Prayers, Praises, Thanksgiving, as they are an holy Priesthood, 
1 Pet. 2.5. Revel. 1.6.  to offer up spiritual Sacrifice, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ: For he hath made us Kings and Priests unto his Father.  
4. The Levitical Priest was to officiate in outward Ordinances of a worldly Sanctuary, which were shadows of good things to come, which Rites are now antiquated: 
Heb. 9.1. & 10.1. Col. 2.20. 1 Cor. 9.11. 1 Pet. 2.5.  But the Ministers of the Gospel officiates in things spiritual and permanent; therefore the Levitical Priesthood is utterly ceased. These things which then prefigured Christ to come in the flesh, and to die for our Redemption, after his coming and fulfilling all things fore-ordained, prefigured under the Law, and foretold by the Prophets, are done away and abolished; as not only dead, but a kill letter, a ministration of Condemnation: Before which, the Law killed non effectiuè, or per se, 
Gal. 5.2. 2 Cor. 3.7, 9 12ae. q. 97. 2, 3m.  but occasione arreptâ, non datâ; by reason of man's infirmity. But now after the Passion of Christ, the Ceremonial Law is not only Lex mortua, but in the profession and observation thereof, Mortifera; because thereby Christ shall nothing profit men; because such Ceremonies hold out an expectation of Christ the Saviour of the elect to come: Which whoever now professeth, 
Gal. 5.2, 4.  is Antichristian, renouncing the true and only Redeemer already come in the fullness of time, and so cutting himself off from all hope of Salvation; there being no other name given under Heaven among men, whereby we must be saved; 
Acts 4.11,  neither is there salvation in any other. Now the present Ministry is of the Everlasting Gospel of Christ; and the Ministers thereof, 
Revel. 14.6.  are Ambassadors of Christ, and his Deputies for the Gospel on Earth, who is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec; who changeth not by Death and Succession, as the Levitical Priest, but liveth ever; and is a faithful High Priest over the House of God: Other Priesthood, in propriety of speaking, we own none.  
To conclude, we must consider, that some names which once were venerable and honourable, have in process of time, become opprobrious and disgraceful terms, as  
1. The word Tyrant. Servius in Aenei. l. 7. tells us that with the Grecians, Tyranni & Regis nulla discretio est. And Suidas showeth also that it was once, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Nomen melioris ominis, ac levius, until Dyonysius, and others like, by their cruelty dishonoured it: Since, it signifieth the worst of men, because of bad, the greatest; such as Jerom describeth, Tom. 1. ad Demetriad. de virg. servand.  
1. The name Papa, (as hath been said) was once of great reverence, until the eminent impiety of some so called, embased the same.  
3. The name Magus, was once among the Persians, an honourable title, as also among others. Suidas gives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lovers of God: And Jerom saith, Magi differunt à maleficis; aliqui honesti, etc. such for continence he specifieth, Lib. 2. adv. Jovin. 
Seru. in lib. 4. Aenei.  Yet the Romans condemned Magic, probrosa enim ars habita est. And Jerom in Eph. Proem. notes, that the Ephesian Idolaters were given to magic, Which ever (saith he) follows idolatry. This might be instanced in many great examples.  
4. Possibly, the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was once also of honest signification, which some learned men give by Caupona, a victualler: So Vatablus, Pagnin and Val. Shindler, after the Chaldee, John 2.1. 1 Kings 3.27. he gives this reason, speaking of the Spies. Si fuisset meretrix, high viri ad illam non divertissent, ob suspiciones, & scortatorum advenientium metum. The seventy whom the New Testament Writers, 
Josh. 2.1.  generally follow, because it was then their Vulgar Greek, render it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, meretricis, and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, meretrices, 1 King. 3. deriving it from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 scortatus fuit, but the Rabbins derive the word which we speak of, from, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, among other things signifying cibatus est in the Chalde: It may seem, that the ill behaviour of such Women, had caused the word so much to decline to infamy.  
5. Certainly, that sacred name of Priest, in proper signification among the Jews, and in Analogical among Christians, by the rebellion of some of them against God and his Christ, and their impurity of example in the declining condition of the Church, in the mouths of the Vulgar, from an honourable signification became disgraceful; though those of better understanding, knew and know how to use it to the reverence of Gospel Ministers.  
I have thus much digressed for their sakes, who do not, 
Pag. 25.  but would understand these things, and now again to our adversary and his course eloquence.  
You say, Oh shameful Reformation! what compel a man himself to set out the tithes of his own goods, to maintain a hireling Priest, etc.] The Orator would here say, Let this perverseness be in the equity of Greeks, Qui maledictis insectantur eos, à quibus de veritate dissentiunt: Shameful Reformation! Hireling Priest! O shameful scurrility! I say not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or bona verba quaeso; possibly your canine eloquence would break you, if it had no vent. For my part, I have no list to bark again at so angry a Cur; had I any such custom or mind, I could say with Jerom, Possum remordere sivelim, 
Ad Dominon. ep. l. 2.  possum genuinum dentem laesus infigere. But I say only consider with whom the Apostle araigneth revilers, 1 Cor. 6.10. and what is the root of railing— Perverse dispute of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth; and mark well, if in that glass, you do not discern your own countenance.  
That you wish for, Old Priests, and old Ecclesiastical Courts (that is, Popish) I easily believe, that herein you do not dissemble: But if there be any such abuses, as you pretend; what is that to the cause of tything? doth an abuse by man, in your logic conclude, a just cause to take away the holy use of that which hath been abused? if that were so, how little good would be left us of all the Creatures of God? and what cruelty is it, 
Pag. 26.  think you, severely and according to Law, to punish obstinate offenders, who can, but will not let go that, which they have rob just owners of?  
Next you stomach it, that some say Ministers have as good right to the tenth part, as the owner hath to the other nine.] which is most true: Consider for the better understanding hereof. 1. The common or civil right of men, which the Laws of Nations give, and confirm to every possessor bonae fidei, by purchase, descent, etc. this right to the creatures, a Turk or Pagan may have, in that determinate portion which he possesseth. 2. The divine right which man had in his Creation, but lost in his fall, and utterly forfeited in the first Adam's attaindor; this was restored again to believers in the second Adam, Christ; of which he saith, 1 Cor. 3.22, 23. All are yours, and ye are Christ's: This belongs only to the Elect. In both these kinds, we are to observe. 1. a Right common to any, so all or any may have a civil right to any kind of Creature. 2. A Right peculiar to some as being separated from the common Condition, by some special Act of God's Providence, of which sort are Tithes given by him, to those, who serve about holy things, in his public Worship: which being laid down, it may appear that Ministers of the Gospel have as good right to the Tenth or Tithe, as the owner hath to the other nine parts; if at least you will grant that God giveth as good right, by his divine donation, as any sale or assignment of man can make.  
But you say— Yet am I not bound to pay them, etc.] True, if neither Laws of God, 
Pag. 26. Mark. 5.3.  nor man can bind you; but that like the Masterless Gadaren, possessed of the Devil, you break Chains and Fetters, and no man can bind you; but if divine or humane Law can hold, you are bound to pay, and that by such a Bond, as no Laws, Decrees, Statutes or Dispensations of Man, can discharge you from; but to speak to them, whose Consciences tell them, that the Law of God is, and aught to be their rule. How posterity stands bound in public Grants, Donations, Vows or Covenants, consider in the example of Israel and the Gibeonites, before mentioned; how in private legacies and bequeathments, the Apostle will inform you Gal. 3.15. Though it be but a man's Testament, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth it. That is, no man ought to make it void by any violation thereof; but this belongeth to another question; our claim being grounded not on the assignment or grant of man, but on the revealed. Will of God, who commanded To give Tithes of all the increase of their Land, etc. Numb. 18.21, 26, 30. And to make their Teacher's partakers of all their good things, Gal. 6.6. Doth this bind men (think you) to pay the settled maintenance of Ministers Tithes Predial, Personal, and Mixed? Or are you resolved, to suspend your obedience to God herein, until you be delivered into the everholding Chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgement? Be well advised in time, for there will be no change in eternity.  
And doth your next Supposition conclude it arbitrary, 
2 Thes. 3.  to work or live inordinately? Or were there not the like propositions, between Tithes and yearly values of the Lands, on which they grew under the Law, to any that can be pretended to? What sober man amongst you, ever grumbled at the nimietie of wealth? Who quarrelleth at the largeness of a Lords Estate, who is a Peer of the Land, or a Gentleman's, or yeoman's, as too much for him and his Family, except some lawless, impious Leveller? Though perhaps one of these Estates be forty times more than the Ministers incom; and possibly the Laics revenue is spent in Luxury, Debauchery, or Idleness at least, while the poor Minister is envied, and grudged his portion of God's blessing, the Earth's increase, which he gives you with him, (that I may not say, for him) the Minister I say, spending many careful hours Night and Day for your Soul's Edification, Comfort and Salvation— Sudat & alget— like Jacob over Laban's Flock at Padan-Aram, in the day consumed with drought, and by the frost in the night, and his sleep departeth from his eyes, Gen. 31.40.  
You say, A tenth part of the increase is generally more worth, than the Land on which it grows] What have you dwelled at Gerar, where Isaac reaped an hundred-fold in a Year? Or is it because you have little skill in the Georgics? I am confident, that this one untruth would yield you a Million by the year, if you could make it true; but were it as you say, did ever much increase of fruits make an exception in Gods grant of them, as that the Tithes should be holy to him and his service, and paid to the Priests of the Sanctuary, or Ministers of the Gospel; provided that they did not exceed such, or such a value? Methinks in reason, the more bountifully God giveth increase of the Earth, the more willing men should be to render him that part thereof, which he hath reserved (as it were a Lords-rent) unto himself, and his own service; and here excuse me, that I tell you your objections seem not much unlike the declamation of some ill-contrived Orator, so undistinctly huddled out, that neither doth the Speaker well consider, nor the hearer easily understand what he saith, more than that, quod vult, valdè vult.  
Your following Cavils and Cases, Pasturing and Stocking Land, 
Mal. 1.14.  may show, that you have craft enough to beguile the Minister of due maintenance; but cursed be the deceiver: and it were but lost labour, to teach others this skill, seeing that too many without your Magistery have enough of the knave already.  

Pag. 28.  Next you talk, Of new payment of Tithes, etc.] To which we answer, That payment of Tithes, is evidently as old as Abraham; and for ought you know, as Adam. To the rest of your Objections present, we say, Abusus non tollit usum; that which hath been abused by some, may yet be returned to the true service of God again. So the censers of the rebellious Israelites, made covers for the Altar of God; and truly the annexed reason is remarkable— For they were offered before the Lord, therefore they are hallowed, Numb. 16.38. And is not the same reason good for reducing Tithes (abused to superstitious uses in former times) unto the present true worship of God, seeing they were hallowed, not by the dedication of a rebellious Corah, but by God himself; and that to his own holy service? And what else means our Saviour by the Parable of the strong man's Fort, 
Luk. 11.22.  and reprisal of all his impropriated Vessels, but Christ's overcoming Satan, and recovering the bodies and souls of his Elect, from his Power and Captivity? Body and Soul must perish eternally, if that alteration which is wrought in the sinner, by the Spirit of Sanctification, make him not acceptable and beloved of God, as a son, who was before his reconciliation by Christ, an enemy. How else saith the Apostle (speaking of many sorts of pollution by sin,— Such were some of you: 
Rom. 5. ● Cor. 6.10.  but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God: Upon the account of reducing that to a good use, acceptable to God, which hath been abused unto evil, we retain our Churches, and Oratories, and worship God in Spirit and in Truth therein, though they have been in times of Popery, houses of Idols, and Idolatry.  
To your many following impertinencies, if I should follow you in your Wilde-Goose-Chase, I should tyre the patiented Reader; therefore I only add, That there is much difference between tithes of Mines, Quarries of Iron, Brass, Tin, Led, Coles, and that which the Earth's superficies brings forth, as Corn, Grass, Fruits, Wood, etc. though by your leave, all these are increases of the Earth; and therefore tythable. Sir Edward Coke, by you cited, limits his sentence, with a Till they be severed from the Land: So that though no tithe be paid of the Land, yet are they to be paid from the Land.  
Your frequent talking of Popery, is but to make your incautious Reader believe, that you are no Papist; and that you may insinuate into the people's minds an odium against Ministers, whereas indeed in such seeming-opposition, you do your uttermost endeavour to bring in Popery.  
You further say, When I bought my Land, I bought not the tithes, etc.] This you say, some object; to which you frame your answer: But we require our liberty to answer for ourselves. Neither could you, nor any man buy out God's part; for that no man had power to sell you: So that in your conveyance, there needed no specification of Covenant for, or exemption from a tenth part of the increase of the Land, that being presupposed payable by God's reservation thereof unto his own service. What ever man buyeth or selleth, in point of commutative justice, God's part cometh not within the compass thereof; neither can it be sold or alienated; neither can any sale or purchase of man lessen or impeach his right, or any part thereof, which he never granted to any but those whom he appointeth to serve about holy things.  
Next, you bravely say, I answer, 
Pag. 29.  that I have already proved all Land is tythe-free, etc.] Indeed I think he meant it— Magnis tamen excidit ausis: Tell me now in sadness, who can free the earth from the charge of tithes, but that supreme power of God, who gave them for an inheritance, unto those whom he designed to his public service? Here we require your explication of this term, Tythe-free; mean you this in respect of any Humane Law, Ordinance, Provision, or Prescription of Men thereto pretended? If so, it is to no purpose, seeing, as hath been said, None but God hath power of giving or alienating tithes. Now, once again, we challenge you to show us, where God in holy Scripture, ever repealed his Law of tithing. Further we say, that all the habitable parts of the Christian world, which yield increase, are tythable, and none exempted therefrom, by God's Law; in which, if you beat our ears, with a thousand beggings of the question, you shall never obtain it of us.  
That you say, Tithes are a burden which the Pope laid on us,] Is a fallacious assertion; the Heathen could here teach you, that quoth in divinis rebus sums, 
Plaut. Mil. glor.  sapienti lucro est: But God laid this duty on us, which you call a burden; and this grant of his, no Ordinance or Law of Man (though enjoining the same duty) can more drown, than a Lease can a Fee-simple. Man's Laws are alterable, but the morality of God's Law is not.  
Next you talk of Thiefs and Robbers] Whom you mean, I only guess at, and say, Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione querentes? Clodius accusat maechos— What? great Thiefs, make hue and cry after true men? you Church-Robbers, stealers of tithes (of whom you are at best, an a better) are the Thiefs and Robbers, 
Mal. 3.  in God's judgement, if there be any such on these borders.  
You say next, That you may by as good reason, be eased of your tithes, as of the Pope's yoke.] Which is in effect to say, that you may as justly cast off God's Law, as the Popes; is this Popery, ho? The reason offered as to the question, if form, would appear to be a fallacia non causae pro causa. Your Land, you say, was purchased when the Pope's authority lay heavy on this Land. That being cast off, you would infer, that we may with as good reason cast off tithes which he commanded to be paid: Yea, but consider a superior command and cause, I mean, a Divine enforcing that duty of paying tithes (although the Pope had not at all commanded such payment) and your fallacy is dissolved.  
You say, First to preach that tithes are due, 
Pag. 29.  and then to limit them to Parishes, etc.] And why not? God's Word warranting the one, and man's just accommodation requiring the other? Once again I say, as concerning Parishes, there is a parochial or particular dueness of tithes, or that of Parishes, to the Minister there officiating in God's public service: And there is a general dueness of tithes, that is to say, of tithes to be paid to the body of the Ministry; which is by God's providence distributed into several parochial Cures, where they are by the increases of the Earth, thence arising, to be maintained, that they may there preach the Gospel, and administer the holy Sacraments, etc. unto the people there inhabiting.  
You say again, That tithes were at first, as charity at most, as a freewil-offering of the owner.] This is an absurd falsehood, and a shameless begging of the question; and you seem to dispute non ad idem; but circularly. Speak plainly; Do you mean, that Man's charity giving, and not God's Law commanding, brought tithes to be the Minister's maintenance? If so, it is apparently false, by God's several commands to pay them to the Levitical Priesthood; wherein I suppose, you will not affirm, that men's charity was the first, or principal moving cause; or do you mean, that the freewill of man, in this business of tithes, preceded that command of God, as a cause the effect? or that posito Dei mandato, man did yield a free and cheerful obedience, in paying tithes, as God had commanded? Which voluntary act, was as Paul's preaching of the Gospel, such as that woe had been to him, if he had not done it? Express your terms and sense, and let us have no after-reckoning: We know that God's Children yield a cheerful and a voluntary obedience; they do their duty commanded, not moillingly, grudgingly, or of necessity; and, 
2 Cor. 9 7. 1 Pet. 5.2. 1 Cor 9.17.  that God loves and rewards cheerful obedience, and such are all acts of true Religion, voluntary, not compulsory; the Spirit of God making us willing of unwilling; so carrying about our wills, and affections, as Astronomers say, the primum mobile doth the inferior orbs of Heaven in their Diurnal motion from East to West, contrary to their Natural motion, yet by an admirable influence, Citra violentiam: So we can admit tithes paid by God's servants, to be a freewill offering, respectu offerentis, but not ex parte praecipientis; as if man instituted, and paid them without God's Command for the same; and as if they were works of Supererogation. We know, that in every good which we do, God worketh both velle & perficere: 
Phil. 2.  we acknowledge, that they are not rightly performed by any pure Naturals of man, but of God's free Grace, both Jubentis quod vult, & praestantis quod jubet. So Israel brought a willing Offering unto the Lord, every man and woman, whose heart made them willing, to bring for all manner of work, 
Exod, 35.29.  which the Lord had commanded to be made by the hands of Moses. But our Adversaries would fain have it, that Tithes were but as some votive Obligation of the Owners, which they needed not to have dedicated or paid, except themselves pleased. This is the Witchess Herodias which they so ambitiously pursue, that they might once conclude an Arbitrary maintenance for Ministers: and do but mark the Circle, to which this mole is Conjured. Fain would they have God's Ordinance undermined, and dissolved into such Imaginary Principles, as might bear this castle in the Air, that Tithes should henceforth, be only what men in Charity and  would give their Ministers. Thank you for you kindness, gentle Sir. but get you Alms-men where you will, we are none of them. The Papist hath too much advantage already, in their large maintenance, open Presses for their Students Works, liberal Contributions for any advancement of his Cause; while our Presses are too much shut to good Studies, Contributions; rare is Honesty, and if the Jesuit could but yet more discourage us, by taking away the remainder of Ministers necessary maintenance by Tithes, his work were done, and England undone. To the reverend Ministers, I entreat leave to say— If they be Prophets, and if the Word of the Lord be with them, let them now make Intercession to the Lord of Hosts, 
Isai. 27.18.  that the Vessels which are left in the house of the Lord— go not to Babylon.  
And now limit them (that is Tithes) to Parishes, etc.] That which you speak, 
Page 30.  may pass muster among your Impertinences, as to the present question; concerning Parishes, I have already spoken; 
Gen. 14.18.  here I only add, 1. That the first place of Scripture mentioning a Priest, mentioneth Tithes paid unto him. 2. The first place also wherein, House of God, 
Gen. 28. ●8. ●2  or Church is spoken of, there also are Tithes, the maintenance of the Priesthood vowed to God; as some note by that name, whereby Parish-Churches were anciently called; that is, tituli— lapis iste quem posui in titulum erit Domus Dei: So Damasus in the life of Evaristus Bishop of Rome. Anno 112. saith— hic titulos in Urbe Roma divisit Presbyteris: 
Platins. vit. Eva●ist. Onuthrius compu●eth Anno 96. Concil. To. 1. Pag. 106. e●i. 1606.  And the Nicen Council, c. 21, mentionth Parishes, as Carraza reciteth the Canons thereof, out of the second Epistle of Julius: So that by those divisions, the Congregations were assigned to such and such Churches, and the Tithes thence arising, belonged to the Ministers there serving, as hath been noted, from Gal. 6.6. what the Popes you speak of got of first-fruits, impropriate Tithes, etc. is a loss to our Clergy, and therefore not advisedly urged by you against them.  
That which you further say, that— No man can prescribe to have Tithes, etc.] Were something against those who make prescription the ground of their claim, which concerns us not, who claim from divine donation.  
Again you say— many may prescribe to be free from Tyithes, or part thereof] Consider of what value prescription can be against God's unchangeable moral Law, and your second thoughts will tell you, that antiquity of error can never make any good Prescription. Christ yielded the Pharisaical glosses antiquity on their side, Math. 5.21. etc. ye have heard of old time, that it was said by (or to) them, etc. which he presently corrected with his— but I say unto you, etc. The rest of your following discourse savoureth strongly of your siding with the Popish party: as your stomaching the Title of the head of the Church, which we understand to be the supreme Governor, under God, of inchurched men: neither is this, as you say here, The King's new Authority, as the head of the Church. For what say we more therein, than Tertullian many hundred years since said— We honour (saith he) the Emperor as we ought—  hominem a Deo secundum— & solo Deo minorem— Sic enim omnibus major est, dum solo vero Deo minor est. 
In Scap. c. 2.  I conceive that you are not to learn that Caput importeth a Chief, First, or Principal.  
But you say, That all Arch-Bishops, Bishops, etc. were no longer to hold of the Pope, 
Page 30.  but of the King; and not to claim their benefices by Title from the Pope, but of the King, by virtue of that Act of Parliament: and here the succession from the Pope was cut off and discontinued, etc.] A grief to all good hearts, think the Papists; But why should this trouble you, if you be none of them? What is this to us, who acknowledge neither dependence on, nor Succession from the Pope?  
You say more— And so all their Right, Title and Claim, was and is at an end] What because the Pope's donation is at an end, must Gods also be involved in the same ruin? How will that conclusion follow? The abuse and usurpation is taken away, ergo, the right use and just possession must down? Are God's Laws, grounded on the Pope's Decrees and Grants? I never yet heard that claimed by any of you: And what wild Logic stands your discourse upon? Countrymen, open your eyes, and let not these Wolves in Sheepsclothing any longer beguile you; the Fox under a stupid Animal's skin, enough discovers his appetite to catch Geese, and to bring you and your Children into the miserable darkness of Popery and the Tyranny thereof. Consider before it be too late, how easily they will do it, if by taking away the Ministers of Christ from you, depriving them of livelihood, they bring into their places, Popish Priests and Jesuits; if they get footing here again, their little finger will prove heavier than your Ministers loins were to you; Tithes would not long suffice them.  

John 9.21.  Next your talk of Impropriators Claim by purchase. Concerning one of them we only say, as the Parents of the once blind man answered the Jews, he is of age, ask him, he shall speak for himself. Here we thank you for your ingenuous Confession— those (you say) that sold him (Impropriations) had no good Title, neither can theirs be made good, which is derived from them.  

Page 31.  By which (you say) it doth plainly appear, that no man at this day, can claim Tithe of another, either by divine or humane Right, etc.] If you speak of Impropriate Tithes, we have nothing here to do with them; If of Appropriate, we say, if begging the question would serve your turn, we would at once confess— actum est de decimis: but you are here come to the same point of your Circle, in evident begging the question, saying— no man at this day can claim Tithes of another, either by Divine or Humane Right: prae clara verba, sed verba; What? Caesar's, Veni, Vidi, Vici? A singular faculty you seem to yourself to have; no sooner do you think a thing, but it must plainly appear to be so; but that we sufficiently know your quality of begging the question, we might think that some miles gloriosus were entered into the Scene, telling how many thousand flying Enemies he fetched down with his limed Barbolts, and slew in one day. To the next we say, that we are not called to meddle with State-Interests; and concerning the Pope and his, we have here nothing to do; only we mark how the declining of the Pope's Supreamacy sticks in your Stomach.  
Now (say you) to plead for such wages of unrighteousness] You dare call God's Donation, wages of unrighteousness; 
Page 3●.  speaking as they who care not what, (though blaspemy) but how much they speak. To that which you say, concerning Priests receiving Augmentations; I say, I know no Priest so much favoured here, I know some reverend Ministers who are.  
Which (you say) they may as well take away (meaning Gleb-land) as their predecessors did the revenues of Abbeys and Monasteries] Yet yourselves confess, 
Page 33.  that they were the Hives of lazy Drones. We wish that in their just dissolution, they had been better employed; but affirm that none can justify the taking away things consecrated to God's service; but you constantly grumble at the decay of Popery; we wish that your vizard were pulled off, that speaking bare-faced your incautious reader might discern, on which side you are.  
Whose Tithes (you say again) are often as much worth as the Land] I once heard one, 
Page 34.  who being censured for reporting a gross untruth, replied, that he had told it so often, that his self began to think that it was true. But I hope you here speak Philosopher-like— ex aliorum sententia, not your own, but others opinion.  
— Forthwith throw away Tithes, etc.] We thank you, as much as though we did, and shall think of your Motion.  
You say— So long as they continue, there can never be any possibility of raising maintenance in such places] If you mean so long as impropriations continue, etc. per nos, alia pax esto; if otherwise, your argument hence derived, as to the taking away Tithes, is very feeble, being a fallacia non causae, pro causâ. For what hindrance can paying and receiving of scythes be to those places, where none are payable as praedial, as in Towns and Cities, wherein are no fields? But consider you that fear God, what Azariah acknowledged. 2 Chron. 31.10. Since the people began to bring the Offerings (with their Tithes, as appears there, v. 5, 6.) We have had enough, for the Lord hath blessed his people: which was according to that which God speaks, Mal. 3.10. Bring ye all the Tithes into the Storehouse— and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.  
Next you ask concerning Towns and Cities, or Lands Impropriate, where there is no competency of maintenance by Tithes— Must they never have an able Minister? Have they no share in our Gospel, because they have no maintenance? I answer, the cause why such as you specify have no greater share of our Ministers pains, is not so much because they have no maintenance, as because they will have none; while Gadaren-like they value their swine, or temporal interests, more than the Gospel. And now think you that they do not put the Word of God from them, and judge themselves unworthy of everlasting life; not only who contradict the Word when it is preached, but they also who take a course, that it may never be preached unto them? I speak of them, who dwelling in populous Towns and Cities, will not agree together to levy some such means for the support of an able Minister, as may keep him alive, and enable him to the service of God. But to pass by this fault of Townsmen and Citizens, etc. we can justify by thousands of witnesses, that the Gospel hath been powerfully and diligently preached in sundry Towns, by able Ministers, where no maintenance was either raised by any Impropriator, or otherwise could be by any appropriated Tithes, there growing, I will add without any reward of their pains, either retributed by the auditors, or expected by those preachers.  
You demand again— Have you not a more righteous Rule?] What than that, which Gods Word prescribed? This and your following farrago libelli, may be satisfied with this answer, that it is a dangerous thing to account a man's self more wise than God, and a foolish presumption to endeavour any amendment of his Ordinances; needs must he find his human wisdom foolishness, who opposeth it to divine. Your objection from the inequality of paying, is vain; for who can be ignorant that there were inequalities of Estates under the Law, or that every man was bound to pay according to that which he had, not according to that which he had not? Your following cavils are more suitable to the gallfull pen of some apostate Julian, or jeering Lucian than the writing of any professed Christian.  
To that which you say, of Throwing away Tithes as an old relic of Popery] We answer, that when you have proved them to be such, you may have some ground for such a motion; till than we require your patience, if we hold fast God's Ordinance, and the Ministers just maintenance.  
Further you say, Halt no longer between two, etc.] 
Aeschylus Jasonem ebrium (n scena quâdam) induxi●, quo vitio laboraba● ipse poeta tragicus, comentitus Heroas. Athenae. l. 10. c. 7.  We must tell you Sir, here you entitle us to your own faults, as that drunken Poet Aeschylus did the noble hero Jason, and other Grecians to his own vices; 'tis you who halt between Papist and a Schismatical pretender to Reformation. So Ahab would have put the crime of troubling Israel, on the Prophet of the Lord: as for us, God knows that our souls desire is to cleave steadfastly unto him and his sacred Ordinances; and we have not yet temporised (as too many have done) God preserving us in our suffering of hard things; Is this halting with Sir Gregory Nonsense?  
Next you talk of A more Gospellike way of maintenance, etc.] To which 'tis easily answered, that not only you, but no Creature, Men or Angels of Heaven, can prescribe a more Gospellike way, than that which God hath appointed, and Christ approved.  
The light which you talk of, we own not for such, who have a more sure word of Prophecy, unto which as unto light, that shineth in a dark place, we attend until the day dawn— As for those ignes fatui of men's inventions, we neither value them, nor find any cause to follow them.  
Next you speak of a way to establish the Nation upon a sure foundation of true freedom, as to the conscience] We say, 1. Use not your Liberty for a cloak of malitiousness. 2. Beware that you be not of their number, of whom the Apostle speaks, 
1 Pet. 2.16. 2 Pet. 2.18.19.  who when they speak great swelling words of vanity— while they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption. 3. If you dissemble not, but bear good will to your Country's freedom, and good conscience; we cannot but pity the seeming disproportion between your zeal and knowledge, as we would pity to see mettle in a blind jade.  

Jer. 15.19.  As for giving content to separate Congragations, our rule is the same which, God of old gave the Prophet— Let them return unto thee, but return not thou unto them. And as for satisfying such as are self-excommunicate, and divided from the womb of the Church, we pity them, but must leave them to God's tribunal: for ourselves we have learned of the Apostle, Gal. 1.10. If I yet please men, I should not be the servant of Christ. That on which you spend your Rhetoric about contention for Tithes, as if that were a sufficient cause why they should be taken away, is very childish. Tell me, have there not been, and still are many bloody contentions about the preaching of the Gospel of Christ? What, would it be a sure foundation of true freedom, as to the conscience, to obey the command of those Rulers, Elders and Scribes, Annas, Caiphas, etc. Not to speak at all, 
Act. 4.18.  nor teach in the name of Jesus? Is it your best prescript for the cure of the head-ache, to cut off the head? medice cura teipsum. But seriously, your argument is a fallacia accidentis, a wholesome way were for the people duly to pay and set out their Tithes according to Laws divine and humane. I conceive that no man would be so ill-advised, as to sue for his right, if he might have it without trouble and charge of Law.  
That you say, Paying unreasonable, etc.] You speak like yourself. But doth paying Tithes hinder Tillage, and the staff of bread as you pretend? Here is again another fallacia accidentis, if that be true which you say; or a fallacia non causae, pro causa, if false. It is not paying of Tithes, which is the obstruction to plenty, but men's unbelief; God himself saying, Prove me now if I will not— pour you out a blessing, etc. 
Mal. 3.10.  Of what kind? Of the increases of the Earth? And what is the condition to which that promise relateth? Is it not paying Tithes, and leaving their Sacrilege?  
Let no man (say you) henceforth think it strange, etc.] We shall not think it strange, that some men refuse to pay Tithes, while there is a Devil to tempt them to Sacrilege; nor wonder that some will pay Tithes, because we have a good God, who though he justly permit many to strong delusions, that they may perish, yet will he preserve his elect, and incline their hearts to obey his Laws and Ordinances, that it may be well with them, and theirs.  

HAving thus answered these cavils, I propose the ensuing conclusions to the good reader's consideration.  
1. All are bound to do the most high Lord God homage and service, of whom it is written, Him only shalt thou serve. 
Mat. 4.  This is a rule so evidently just, that the very heathens in their twelve Tables of their Law acknowledged it, on this ground, 
Az or. l. 6. c. 63. Cic. de leg. l. 2. 12ae. q. 44. 6. Lex natura is non potest deleri, quoad prima principia.  that God is the Lord, and disposer of all things. For as Schoolmen say, the Law of Nature cannot be extinguished, as to its first Principles. Now there is no Nation of the World so immane and barbarous, but that it believes there is a God, who created, and still governeth this Universe: So that the brutish Poticius for his ignorance of God, was esteemed a kind of Paradox in Nature, a Prodigy and Monster of Mankind. 
Cic. Plaut.  God's Word teacheth us, that he must be worshipped, but, as his self commandeth in it, which is his revealed will; as 'tis written, 
Mic. 6.8.  He hath showed thee O man what is good, and what doth the Lord require of thee.  
2. We must be faithful and true to him, whom we adore as our God, the searcher of hearts: not encroaching upon any part of that, which the holy Word declareth (as a reserved right) to belong unto the Lord our God.  
3. What ever carnal reason, or wisdom of the flesh pretend, or suggest to the contrary; we must duly and willingly render and pay unto him all his Rights, and Duties belonging unto him as a supreme Lord of all: As it is written, Give unto God the things that are Gods; 
Mat, 12.21. 1 Chro. 29 14. Psal. 115.16.  which when we have truly done, we must acknowledge with David, Of thy own hand have we given thee; all is thine: The earth hath he given unto the children of men; only reserving to himself, as it were a small Lords-rent, as an acknowledgement of his Sovereign Dominion.  
4. The things which God hath reserved, as a Tribute or Rent to himself, are, 1. Either of the time measured unto man for this present life; out of which he hath reserved a Seventh part, or a Sabbath and holy rest, that we may be enabled to subsist and serve him; without which we cannot be happy.  
2. Or of the blessing and increases of the Earth; out of which, God in his bounty, feeds, clothes, every way necessary accommodates us in our humane necessities; only reserving unto his own service, little more than a tenth part, and that for man's good also; that by such means a Ministry, able to edify, comfort and inform him, concerning the Will of God for his salvation, may be maintained; to which Ministry, he hath appointed that his reserved part, the tenths; to those I say, whom he calleth to labour in his service.  
3. A part of the Earth, or land which he hath given man to Till, Sow, Plant, and yield Increase: as he reserved a part of our time of life, for our serving him, so hath he also a part and portion of our place, or the earth on which he will be served; (for without time when, and place where, there can be no humane Action) That is, Church, and Churches, Houses set a part from all common use, to his service and public worship accommodate. So was there a Temple and Synagogues for Israel, and Churches among Christians, even from the Primitive age, 1 Cor. 11.22. Also, to the Levites there were Cities appointed, out of every Tribe; Num. 25. 23. etc. even 48 walled Cities with their Suburbs; their other revenue being generally provided for them, by Tithes, Oblations, etc. out of the whole Land beside. Now, our Saviour released none of these Rights, as to the morality thereof; that is, the equity of his servants maintenance, and necessary accommodation, in his worship: Therefore he avowed the Temple to be his Father's House; and the Prophet saith, 
John. 2.16. Mal. 1.11. R v. 8. Mat. 21.13.  From the rising of the Sun, even to the going down of the same— in every place, incense (that is Prayers of the Saints) shall be offered unto my name, saith the Lord of Hosts. So Christ declared himself to be Lord of the Sabbath; and so also, is he Lord of that portion of the Earhts increases, reserved to the public Worship of God: and in case of detention thereof, 
Mal. 3.  he saith expressly— Ye have rob me— in Tithes and Offerings.  
5. The Law had three branches: The Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial. The first whereof, was and is the rule by which all persons, at all times, and in all places, are to compose their lives, as to God, which is the substance of the first Table. The second Table prescribeth the mutual duty of man to man. The Ceremonial Law, prescribed several religious Rights, according to which, God would have his Israel to worship him, until the fullness of time wherein Christ was to come in the flesh, and fulfil all those things for man's redemption, which those rights prefigured, and under which God's people were to be exercised and trained up all the time of their minority, as a Child under a Schoolmaster, in expectation of a Saviour and Redeemer to come. The judicial Law appertained to Israel, for the well government of them, by administration of civil Laws, for the peace, welfare and tranquillity of that people: therefore these are often joined together in holy Scripture, Precepts, Ceremonies and Judgements. The first whereof, appertaineth to the right forming of holy manners. The second to Rights and sacred Ceremonies, determining the manner of God's worship for that time. The third, to the civil government of the people. And these three are as it were the nerves of every well governed State; holy Manners, religious Worship, and due execution of Justice.  
6. Divine positive Laws or Institutions, bound, as did moral Precepts, though with some considerable differences. Some positive Laws were binding only to some particular persons; as that, Gen. 2.16. Of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: this bound (as to the precept) only Adam and Eve, who were but one flesh. Some positive Law, 
Gen. 2.24.  as they were temporal, having their beginning and ending in time, thoug they were binding to a multitude, or nation, yet were they not so to all men, as Circumcision, raising up seed to the diseased brother, etc. which bond Israel respectively, until Christ came in the flesh, that the truth of the promise concerning his being of the Tribe of Judah, and family of David might appear in that distinction of Tribes. So the many Sanctions appertinent to Priests and Levites, 
Heb. 10.1.  the Service and Rights which having a shadow of good things then to come, were to cease when the truth was come, and had accomplished all those things, which were thereby prefigured. So the judicial Precepts were positive for the time, while Israel's republic continued, and so were binding, and still are as they have their ground in moral equity. To these are reducible those precepts prohibiting Marriages in certain degrees of consanguinity, which positive Law maketh incestuous, then commencing when mankind was increased unto multitudes and societies of men, which could not bind in the family of Adam, supposing God's Ordinance for the progagation of all mankind by one man and one woman.  
For the Ceremonial Laws, they bond not before their institution signified to Israel by the divine Lawgiver; neither do they, because they are not positive unto this time. Therefore that opinion is erroneous and dangerous, which saith— Naturae lex & ratio deposcit & precipit, 
Azor. instit. l. 6. 25.  ut Deo Sacrificia offeramus, quibus peccata nostra expiemus. For sacrificing was no Law of Nature, but a Positive Law; the Law of Nature was as the Original to the Moral, which was a transcript or duplicate thereof; and there was a positive precept for Abel's sacrificing, without which it could not have been acceptable to God, as done in faith; but now in propriety of terms, offering Sacrifice for expiation, is no more justifiable, than Circumcision. Christ hath by his own oblation of himself once offered, 
Heb. 10.10, 14, 18. vid. ib. c. 9 12.  perfected for ever them that are sanctified— now where remission of these (that is sins) is, there is no more offering for sin. These Laws are now not only mortuae, but mortiferae; not only dead, but a kill Letter. Whereas the moral Law (in all negative precepts thereof) binds Semper & ad semper. And the Affirmative (as may be seen in the fourth and fift precept) bind semper, though not ad semper. So we are all our life time bound to sanctify the Sabbath, but we are not bound at all times of our life so to do, because it is not always the Sabbath or Seventh day, and we are not bound to any impossibility in Nature.  
7. The Ceremonial and Judicial Laws, as positive, had some mixtures with morality; and the moral had something Ceremonial or Positive for a time; 
Erat partim morale & partim ceremoniale. 12ae. q. 100 3. 2m. Alens. parc. 4.2.  which was the reason why the fourth precept was alterable, from the seventh day reckoned from the Creation, to the Seventh day from Christ's Resurrection. The moral precepts, as simply, such, are unalterable, and indispensable, as to all times, places and persons. Neither did God ever dispense with the morality of his own Laws: 
Mat. 5.  Neither did Christ, in any one jot or tittle dissolve them; whatsoever seems contrary, is but expository in the result; as Christ doing most of his great works on the Sabbath, was no dispensation with the fourth precept, but only an interpretation thereof; showing that works of necessity and mercy, 
Luk. 13.15. & 14.5.  are works of the Sabbath. So God commanding Israel to borrow of the Egyptians, and take away the things so borrowed; 
Exod. 11.2. Gen. 18.  by that Act of his justice doing Israel right (he being the great Judge of all the World) in giving them their just wages, for their unjust servitude (which wages the Egyptians detained from them) doth but interpret the vl Commandment— Thou shall not steal; That is, not by any means take away another man's goods invito domino i. e. bonae fidei possessore. Now first we must consider, That due wages belonging to Israel, in point of morality, which saith the labourer is worthy of his hire, 
Luk. 10.7.  was in the Egyptians hands, who therefore were thereof but malae fidei possessores, from whom, as from a thief or usurper it was legally to be recovered; that might not be done without warrant from a competent Judge; therefore God's warrant empowered them so to do; 
2 Chron. 19.6.  as the sentence of those who now judge for God, may warrant a labourer, or servant to recover his due hire, or wages unjustly detained from him. Secondly it is considerable, That we may not take from him, who though of some other Nation, is yet united, in the same bonds of community and amity with the republic, 
Exod. 13.18. Numb. 14.3, 11. etc. Deut. 17.16. Gen. 44.14.  of which we are a part (which the Egyptians from that time were no longer to be) except in case of legal proceeding, or lawful hostility; wherein as thou mayst take away the life of an enemy, so mayst thou his goods; but in an unjust War, the murder, or latrociny is double injury.  
8. In man's fall, some moral Laws were to his understanding more unextinct than others: So were the precepts of the first Table which concerned our duty to, and worship of God, more obliterated than the precepts of the second Table, which concern the maintenance of humane society; as, Honour thy father and thy mother: Thou shalt not kill, Commit adultery, steal, etc. The very Heathens knew, that such things were unjust, impious, and destructive to humane society; therefore they prohibited them in their 12 tables, or abridgement of their Laws; and accordingly, severely punished the offenders. Towards the divine precepts of the first table, which enjoined the due worship of one true God, their unerstandings were more darkened, though even thereof they had some very slender remains by natural principles not utterly extinct, as may appear in their worshipping of those whom they took to be Gods.  
9 The Scripture affirms not only that which is therein expressed totidem verbis, but that also, which by necessary consequence followeth the true sense thereof; as appears in that which Christ said to the Saducees, 
Mat. 22.29.  Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures; Wherein? 
Exod. 3.6.  In that which God said unto Moses, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Why, here's not a word or syllable concerning the resurrection of the dead, concerning which Christ there spoke; true, if we consider express words; but from necessary consequence it followeth, If God be the God of the living, and not of the dead; then Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are not so dead, but that they still live with God in their Spirits, and therefore their bodies shall rise again to be with God, the God of the living, which they not understanding, knew not the Scriptures and Power of God to raise the dead, in the Scriptures declared. This may also appear in that which the Catholic Church believeth concerning the sacred Trinity, which is not where named in holy Scripture totidem Syllabis, 
1 John 5.  but by certain consequence from thence proved. The same also we must understand concerning Baptising Infants, and the observation of the Christian Sabbath, and so of paying Tithes to Gospel Ministers, &c,  
10. God's precepts be they never so ancient, having no repeal appearing in holy Scripture, are ever binding, unto the end of the World, and no man can with any security of conscience attempt to free himself from the bond of any duty imposed by God's moral law at all, or from his positive precepts, without clear evidence of the lawgivers will for the cessation thereof.  
11. No moral Law of God is temporary, as concerning the future; but as it bindeth every man without exception, respectively, so doth it ever bind. Such is the Law of tithing, which is enjoined in the first, fourth, fifth, and eighth precepts of the moral Law; as will appear in its place.  
12. No man, counsels, or authority of men, may dispense with any one precept of God's Law: Christ disavoweth any dissolution of it by himself, in the least jot, as to the morality thereof. Therefore it is a sin, and such as shall exclude a man from the Kingdom of Heaven, to attempt it, though with consent of many, or most suffrages of men, under any pretence whatsoever. So when God saith, Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven Image, What will it avail the Idolater to plead before his Tribunal, that a great part of the people say, that Idols are Laymens' books? Shall their distinction of dulias and latria excuse them? What that some think the Sabbath peculiar to the Jews, and therefore that it ought to vanish away with the ceremonial Law? What that some think that Christian liberty freeth them from Obedience, to their civil Magistrates; and that it was proper to the Jewish policy only; that some impious Nicolaitans thought fornication no sin; or that Christian Liberty freeth them from God's Law, forbidding all uncleanness and filthy lust? If all Nations and people should, or possibly could dispense with these, or any one precept of God's Moral Law, such consent could not amount to more or less, than a general apostasy from God, and his sacred Law. What if people and Nations should cry down tithes; as when the Huns, Goths, and Vandals, invading the Western parts of the Christian World, Tithes and Churches were pulled down, Universities, Colleges, and Schools of good learning were overthrown, as our adversaries would fain have it now: Can all this do any more, than make their outrages more infamous, hateful to God and Man, and more odious to all posterities, to whom their detestable and unhappy memory should come; and for present, themselves instrumental to pull down God's curses and plagues upon themselves and their Country, unappy in the birth and breeding up of such prodigious miscreants?  
13. No combination or consent of multitudes, may change or alter Gods sacred Ordinances, under any pretence of Reformation, or of more convenience or bettering them by any means. The vain and impious dream of some competency for Minister's maintenance, instead of tithes, is mere rebellion against God and his Laws, no better than an high and mad presumption to correct his wisdom, rectify his providence, and attempting to control and amend his Decreed and Sacred Ordinances, oblikely censuring them as defective or erroneous; which is an acme and height of more than Luciferian resolution, he said, Similis ero altissimo. I will be like the most high; but, 
Isa. 14.14.  upon the matter, these would be supra altissimum, above the most high, to control and alter his Decrees. Had the Jews attempted to have changed the maintenance of Priests and Levites, in the whole or any part thereof, by God appointed and declared; though they had given them more than the value of their tithes and offerings, in money or some other kind of commodity: Would God have connived any more at such sacrilege, than at the rebellion of Corah and his Confederates? they would have changed God's Ordinance in the authority of Moses, and Aaron and his son's Ministry: And can we reasonably conceive, that for such as now attempt to take away the Ministers, and Gods public worship, branch and root; the Earth hath not yet more back-doors to open for such Conspirators, that they may go down, body and soul, alive to Hell? Be advised, it is the same God still, and therefore it is a dangerous undertaking to meddle with that, 
Heb. 13 8.  which he hath appointed, reserved for his own part, and assigned as an honorary for their service; whom he calleth and designeth thereto, not whom the assembly of Corah would substitute and ordain to serve in the Sanctuary. And now if you will rest on the Apostles sentence, Gospel Ministers, in the change of the Law, succeeding the Priests and Levites, must likewise be maintained; not by an arbitrary allowance, by the will of man, but by that which God appointed for them. So the Apostle applieth the same moral equity for the Ministers of Christ: The Priests and Levites portion was tithes and offerings, etc. even so hath God appointed or ordained, That they which preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel, 1 Cor. 9.13, 14. To what relateth that (even so,) but unto that which he before spoke of? even as Legal Priests lived, or were maintained by tithes and offerings; so must Ministers of the Gospel be maintained by tithes and offerings.  
I demand of our Competency-men, how, even so, if tithes be taken away, and Ministers left to the people's benevolence? even so, must signify nothing so: but even so, by your wills, they who preach the Gospel, shall have nothing except a meals meat, when they will flatter you.  
14. Without all controversy, there was a certain determinate allowance for Priests and Levites under the Law; and what reason can be showed, why we should conceive, that God hath not appointed as competent and comfortable means for Ministers subsistence? What Scripture can be produced to demonstrate, or solid reason urged to make it so much as probable; that God who so disposed of Legal Priests and Levites, that they were, as I may say, fed out of Gods own hand and reserved part, should remit the Ministers of a better testament, and a better hope, to the unkind hands of unconstant men to be maintained in a dubious and uncertain condition of subsistence? Would he have them under the Law of Moses depend on his own holy Providence; and Ministers of his dear Son Jesus, on men? For you must observe, that though the quota pars for Priests and Levites, was determinate in Tithes and Offerings, yet in the whole, or dividends thereof, it must needs arise more or less, as God blessed their Land with increases, much or little. 
Heb. 3.2.  Add heerto, if God would not trust the Magistrates of his Israel, no nor Moses, so faithful a servant in his house, so dear, so familiar as he was with God, to leave the determination of the Priests and Levites portion unto him, but limited him in every particular thereof; How much less would he leave the Gospel-Ministers livelihood, to the fidelity and discretion of any modern trusties, specially in the declining age of the world, which he foresaw would be more unconstant to all good, in the coldness of charity towards the end? The face of the Sky, and great deeps, is variable, burr men's minds are incomparably more fluctuant. Had the prodigious changes which we have seen in this giddy age, been foretold us; Who could have believed such a report? The Changes, I say not in matters of small moment, or examples of obscure condition, or men of vulgar quality, but of the most eminent in their kinds. There were changes in the primitive Church, when the most evident gifts of the holy Ghost flourished among Christ's Disciples: one while the Lystrians were hardly restrained from sacrificing to Paul and Barnabas as Gods; 
Act. 14.28.  presently they stone them, as the worst of men. Now the Pharisees emissaries report— Never man spoke as this man speaks; 
John 7.  ere long the people would stone him as if he had been a blasphemer: now they make the streets and Temple of Jerusalem ring of their Hosannas; presently they roar out their Crucify, 
John. 18.  Crucify. Truth begets enemies, where pride begets impatience of reproof. Ahab discovered the true cause, why he conceived that Michaiah prophesied no good to him, 
1 King. 22.8.  in saying, I hate him. They that have some appearance of Religion in them, know not all, and therefore may have some erroneous Opinions; and though possibly they will hear, like, and love you, while you comply with their judgements; yet if you descent, they presently bid defiance. So the Galatians who received Paul as an Angel of God, even as Christ Jesus; 
Gal. 4.14, 15.  presently took him for an enemy, because he told them the truth which crossed their opinion. So the Jews hearing Paul say, that he must be sent far off to the Gentiles, 
Act. 22.21, 22.  gave him audience unto this word, and then lift up their voices, and said, away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. Herod heard John Baptist gladly, and did many things, but when John reproved Herod's incest, John must to Prison and die. And are not men as wicked now, as in those days? What hath been the cause of so much cruelty towards fruitful Ministers and Preachers of the truth of Christ, but Auditor's impatience of reproof? And had you but the pernicious liberty, which you so much affect to have, all Ministers your Almsmen, Who should with safety to his life and liberty roprove you, who have been so impatient of hearing truth, though you have not yet such a bond on Ministers tongues, as you would have? What Prophets could you hope to have, but such as would Act with you, and in your progress toward hell, have ready their— go up and prosper? But you say, we are Godly people; yea, and your Actions have prettily well declared you such unto the World. 'Twas godliness with you to spoil our goods, to sequester, and imprison us: though we are silent, these injuries cry at the gates of Heaven, and posterity will freely speak of this your pretended godliness. Oh Sir! but we ever held out the profession of reformation: truly, as those crested pictures, which coming on show Saint, but going off, devil. And what competent maintenance faithful Ministers were like to have of such Professors, but that of Ahabs' allowance? 1 King. 22.27. Put this fellow in Prison and feed him with the bread of affliction, and with the water of affliction— here would be your competency for the Ministers of Christ.  
15. Tithes and Offerings (as grounded on the Moral Law) are due to those who serve about holy things of the Gospel: for all, except Atheists and Semiatheistical Antinomians, confess that the moral Law doth now as strictly bind (quoad vinculum) as before Christ came into the World to take away the curse of the Law; he took not away our duty therein commanded; he did not in respect of our obedience, dissolve one jot or tittle of the morality thereof. If therefore the moral Law still binds men to pay Tithes, it binds to pay them to Ministers, whom God hath called and assigned to receive that his part reserved and appointed by him for their service in his public worship, and to none other. Christ repeating the first Commandment of the moral Law, enjoining our serving God, saith, 
Mat. 4.10.  him only shalt thou serve: which another Scripture expresseth, honour the Lord with thy substance, 
Prov. 8 9  and with the first fruits of all thy increase: The quotam partem whereof he determineth by Tithes; which are therefore enjoined in the first precept in the moral Law.  
Likewise in the fourth precept for sanctification of the Sabbath by Prayer, hearing the Word, etc. And how shall they hear, without a Preacher? And how shall Ministers Preach without necessary means to keep them alive, and to furnish them with accommodations necessary to the performance of their Ministerial charge, which is to give attendance to reading, etc. that they may both save themselves and their hearers; when they have not so much as means to preserve their lives, and to supply them with food and raiment, much less to buy books?  
Likewise, Tithes are commanded in the fifth precept, for honouring of our Spiritual parents, 
1 Cor. 4.15. 1 Tim. 5.17. Mal. 3.  who are to be counted worthy of double honour; that is, relief and maintenance. This is the first Commandment with promise, which the Prophet toucheth when he speaks of Tithes and Offerings duly paid; this cannot be in an imaginary competency, but in that which God hath appointed a definite settled maintenance, for those that serve him in his public Worship, which he never left in Law or Gospel, to the will or courtesy of man. Now other definite or settled means for Ministers maintenance, he never appointed any, 
Decimà certam partem desi, nat. Alens. part. 4. q. 2. m 2.  but by Tithes, Offerings, and other like perquisites appertinent to those who served in the Tabernacle, Temple, or Church constituted; therefore these must be their maintenance, if any.  
Lastly, As Tithes are God's part, reserved to himself and his assigns, so are they commanded in the eighth Commandment; which in the negative part saith, Thou shalt not steal: and God's Prophet showeth, that taking away or detention of Tithes, is stealing: and the Apostle, 
Mal. 3. Rom. 2.  that Sacrilege (the worst thievery) is found under the Gospel, as it was also under the Law: why saith he else, Thou that abhorrest an Idol, committest thou Sacrilege? If there be nothing now sacred in the time of the Gospel, as some profane men affirm; How unadvisedly did Paul ask that question concerning a thing which is not in being, neither can be? And if there be any thing amongst us sacred, Are not those things such, as God hath consecrated and hallowed? And did he not Consecrate, and set apart from common use Tithes, for their maintenance, whom he appointed to serve in his public Worship? Now the eighth precept in the negative part, forbiddeth all taking away and detention of others right; in the affirmative therefore it commands to yield, give and preserve what thou canst, every ones right; so Tithes belong to the eighth precept: and indeed, the end of ordaining Tithes, is evidently moral, as in point of piety, equity and gratitude, as hath been noted; and that to which all men of all ages in the World, places and conditions, are respectively bound; as well under the Gospel, as the Law. And Abraham and Jacob paying Tithes, had the word of promise, To Abraham and his seed, in the faith whereof, he was justified, 
Rom. 4.9, 10, 11.  before he had received Circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised. So that the Gospel was preached before (the giving of the Law by Moses) to Abraham, Gal. 3.8. Whence it appears that paying Tithes is a Gospel duty, performed, before their payment under the Law given on Sina; and Abraham paid them, before the Levitical Law determined them. In which determination, God did not infer any new thing, or right of Tything into his Church, but according to the necessity of the present state thereof, so regulated, and ordered Tithes for the Priests and Levites, to govern the people by the Law, which was their Schoolmaster to Christ; who being come, altered nothing of the morality of his Law, although the changeable rites, like outworn garments and beggarly rudiments, 
Zeck. 3.4.  were then to be cast off (as Joshuas filthy garments) and other habits of sanctity, and religious Gospel-worship to be put on with Christ the new Man, the same body his Church, 
Eph. 4.  en ire in every part, under the same sacred head Christ Jesus, 
John 1.  remaining the same: the Law then was given by Moses Ministry, but grace and truth by Christ, who perfectly fulfiled all that, which was prefigured in those Ceremonies. And we read, that Abel offered firistlings of his flock, 
Qui credidit, obtulit decimas. Alens. Part. 4. Ib. Alens. Heb. 1.6. A naturae rationalis lege est, ut D●us colatur & honoretur. Alens. quo. s.  and the fat thereof; he of Adam's posterity was primus verè fidelis, before the deluge; after which, and the growth of Idolatry, the first we read of paying Tithes, was Abraham, the father of the faithful. Now God was to be Worshipped, before, and after the giving of the Law, at all times, and by all persons; which the very Law of Nature dictated to reasonable men; and God's Worship (supposing his Ordinance by the Ministry of man) could not be without Ministers to officiate; neither could they subsist without maintenance, being frail flesh and blood, subject to all humane necessities; to which when Christ the Lord of all, in the form of a servant, vouchsafed to subject himself, he was once necessitated to send to Sea for Tribute-money. Now the maintenance of his Ministers, is the maintenance of his worship; and therefore Tithes are now as due to Gospel-Ministers, as they were to Priests and Levites under the Law; for God is now to be Worshipped, as he was in the Tabernacle and Temple at Jerusalem; 
John. 4.  even: From the rising of the Sun, unto the going down of the same; for he is not the God of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles; even of all the Spiritual seed of Abraham.  
Lastly, Tithes are God's own part, reserved to the Ministers his Assigns: Therefore he complaineth, Mal. 3.8. That the Jews rob him, though they made such a crime strange to them. And wherein was his spoil? What Thief can obrepe, or come on him at unawares, who neither slumbers nor sleeps? Besides, Infinito nihil potest decedere; Wherein could the robbery be, but in the hindrance of his Worship, and that by taking from him the service of his Ministers, the Priests and Levites, who being deprived of Tithes and Offerings, could neither perform their charge, nor give attendance therein, for want of maintenance thereto allotted them by God?  
16. Sacrilege is robbing of God by taking away, 
Mal. 3.10.  or inverting to common uses those things, which are dedicated to God's service, holy uses, or the necessary maintenance thereof; whether they were consecrated by God himself, 
Levit. 19.8. Numb. 5 9, 10, & 16.37.  as tithes and offerings, etc. or by man, God's Spirit consenting and moving thereto. Of the first sort, all those things are, which are subordinate to his worship, commanded in the Moral Law; of the second sort, are all those votive things consecrated by man, to the same end and purpose: As moneys, for the present relief of the poor Christians (with such Sacrifices God is pleased.) Also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or ornaments, and necessary utensiils of the public worship of God in the Church, dedicated to the commodation thereof; also Lands, on which Churches now are, 
2 Sam. 24.18, etc. 2 Chron. 3.1  or the Temple or Synagogue were erected (as Auraunahs' floor which David bought, on which he built an Altar, and on which afterwards, Solomon built the Temple of the Lord at Jerusalem;) as also those parcels of Land on which Synagogues were built, or Churches now are: Understand those sacred, durante usu. Also Gleabland given by Act of Mortmain, and consecrated for additional supplies of Gospel Ministers accommodations and maintenance; concerning which, that ancient Decree of Pius the First, in the year of our Lord, One hundred forty and seven, is very considerable, which thus saith, Praedia divinis usibus tradita, etc. 
Carranza.  Farms or Country Houses and Lands given to holy uses, some men apply to humane, that they may serve themselves, taking them away from the Lord God, to whom they were dedicated. Quod siquis praesumpserit, 
— Quasi sacrilaedium, eo quod laedit sac●um. Alens. ● part. 2. 22ae. q. 99 & 151. Zanch. Ursin. Danaeus. Eth. Christian. l. 2. c. 15. Polan. Synt. Theol. l. 10. c. 63.  sacrilegus habeatur, & sicut sacrilegus judicetur: Let him be esteemed sacriledgious, and proceeded against, as such. The Schools define Sacrilege thus, Est sacrae rei violatio, vel ejusdem usurpatio; it is committed— Cum res consecrata, vel sacro usui deputata usurpatur. And they say, All that is Sacrilege, which is done ad irreverentiam rei sacrae. Suidas thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Qui sacra diripit, sacrilegus est. Ours thus, Sacrilege is taking away of things sacred, or deputed to holy uses, or the maintenance or furtherance of God's worship. Whether those things were consecrated by God himself, by reservation to his service, and by express mandate have been hallowed to the same; or those things which man (as above noted) hath consecrated; whereof see Levit. 27.14, etc. So that alienating or detaining things so hallowed, or returning them to common use, is the sin of sacrilege; such therefore, is stealing, detention, or alienation of tithes appointed for the necessary support of God's service and public worship.  
17. The horridness of this sin, further appears by the express curse of God inevitably following it, as you may see it denounced by his Prophet, 
Mal. 3.10.  even on a whole Nation, where such a sin is committed, and connived at by men; and commonly this curse is a flying Book of the largest Folio ever mentioned. The length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof, ten cubits. This is the curse which entereth into the House of the thief, and it shall consume it, with the timber thereof, and the stones thereof. And shall this punishment, so swift, so great, like a Spider's Web catch only little Flies, and let the great break thorough? Shall the little Thief come under the lash, and shall the sacrilegious escape the whip?  
Some have observed in particular examples cited, how severely it hath been revenged on some in all ages; 
Josephus de Bel. Jud. l. 1. 2 Maccab. c. 3.  as on Pompey, Crassus, Heliodorus, etc. read but our own Annals, and they may sufficiently inform you herein; read what hath befallen Improrpiators; see what yet visible Monuments of God's justice in the consumptions of goodly Monasteries, Princes Palaces, Houses of Bishops, Nobles, Gentry, to this day appear. I say no more, though I could say much herein: Seldom doth the house of the sacrilegious flourish to many generations; for as Augustine said, 
In Joh Tract. 50.  comparing private robbery and stealing of things public. Quanto vehementius judicandus est fur sacrilegus, qui ausus fuerit, non undecunque tollere, sed de ecclesia tollere? Qui aliquid de ecclesia furatur, Judae perdito comparatur.  
Now herein, three things commonly beguile men.  
1. The multitude of offenders, who think, via trita, via tuta.  
2. Because they vainly conceive, that if in their possession there be a sin, their Ancestors from whom descended the impropriation, must bear it; not considering, that except they restore all that which they wrongfully possess, they are guilty of the same sin.  
3. Because they think that alienation of Tithes or Gleab-land, is at worst, but a trespass against a poor Minister of a despicable condition in respect of this world, and possibly subject to some just exceptions in point of abilities, or manners. But we must know,  
First, That multitude can give no patronage to sin, it rather hasteneth God's judgements on offenders.  
Secondly, It cannot excuse thee, that a sin lieth heavy on another's soul, if thou becomest guilty of the same.  
Thirdly, What ever the Minister be; first, he stands or falls to his own Master; secondly, in his Charge, he is the Steward of God's House: And in this matter of paying Tithes, the Parishioner is not to respect, of what quality and condition he is; for the debt is due to the Ministers Lord and Master; So that he receiveth it not in his own, but God's right; so that whether he be faithful in his service, or not, he is not responsible to his fellow servant, committed unto his charge, but unto his Master, with whom no doubt the account of an evil servant will be severe enough.  
To conclude, it were happy if these who have swallowed down sacred morsels, would be persuaded to disgorge those poisoned bits, before it be too late; and that they would cast out that, which they sacriledgiously possess, whether by power, purchase, or prescription, 
Acts 27.6. & 19.38.  as those Mariners of Alexandria did their lading; wisely resolving, that it was better that those things should perish for them, than with them.  
The conclusion of the last Prophecy of the Old Testament, 
Mal. 4.4, 6.  is, Remember ye the Law of Moses; lest I come and smite the Earth with a curse: The same Moses, in blessing the several Tribes of Israel, said of Levi: Let thy Thummim and thy Vrim, be upon thy holy One. 
Deut. 33.8.  They shall teach Jacob thy judgwents, and Israel thy Law. Bless Lord his substance, and accept the work of his hands: Smite thorough the Loins of them that rise against him, and of them that hate him, that they rise not again. Now it is to be noted, that Prophet's Prayers are also Prophecies.  
And now my dear Brethren, concerning whom my hearts desire and prayer to God is, That ye may be saved: Consider what these Pamphletiers intent you, when they would teach and persuade you to commit Sacrilege, laying a stumbling-block before the blind, to make them fall upon God's curse, and to cause the same to come upon this whole Nation: Which I much fear, already groaneth, as under many other iniquities; so also under this sin of Sacrilege. The holy Lord God open their eyes, whom it concerneth, that they may not sleep in death. Amen.   
FINIS.