་

8

• was without Father, without Mother, without Defcent, having neither Beginning of Days, nor • End of Life. ver. 3. That is, as Dr. Hammond paraphrafes, One of whofe Father, or Mother, or Pedigree, there is no Mention in the Story of • Genefis. as neither of his Birth or Death. In which Senfe, the Apoftle is to be understood, when he faith, But made like unto the Son of God, abideth a Prieft continually. ver. 3. that is, as the Doctor expounds the Words, He ftands in the Story as a kind of Immortal Pricft, without any Succeffor mentioned in his Priesthood, • who is in all this an Emblem of Chrift; concerning whom the Apoftle faith, This Man, namely Chrift, because be continueth ever, hath an unchangeable Priesthood, ver. 24. That is, faith the Doctor, Chrift being now no longer mortal, bath no Succeffor in his Priesthood, his Prieftbood paffes not from him to any other. And in his Annotations upon the Word Unchangeable, he faith, that drapácaros here fignifies that which • doth not pass from Father to Son, from one Succeffor to another, is from the Nature of the • Word Tapabáiew Tranfire, to pass, and fo they · are the Words of Athanafius concerning Christ, · ἀπαράβατον και ἀδιάδεκτον ἔχων τὴν ἀρχιερωσύνην, he bath a Pontificate or Priesthood, that paffes not away, or doth not go by Succeffion to others. Wherefore if the Doctrine of the Apoftle is to ⚫ be adhered to, no Tithes are claimable by any in our Day, upon the Account of Chrift's being a Priest after, or according to, the Order of Melchifedec, and that for this unanswerable Reafon, Chrift bath an unchangeable Priesthood, a Priesthood that is incommunicable to any other, • that

6

6

C

K 2

that hath (1) no Succeffors, nor Vicars, nor (m) Colleagues in it.'

He adds p. 106. That the paying of them, viz. Tithes, under the Levitical Law, was not a Type of any Thing that was to be fulfilled by the Coming of Christ. But in that he is mistaken, for Tithes were an Heave-Offering under the Law. See Numb. xviii. 24. But the Tithes of the Children of Ifrael, which they offer as an Heave-Offering unta the Lord, I have given to the Levites to inherit. They were therefore, as all other Heave Offerrings, typical of Christ, who is the great Heave Offering, and in whom they all had their final Determination, and Accomplishment. They were the Shadows, he the Subftance; they the Type, he the Antitype, or Thing figured.

He fays farther, that the paying or receiv ing them in the Days of the Gofpel, by Virtue of the free Gift of the Civil Government under which we live, cannot be called a Jewish Legal Ceremony, or any Ceremony at all.'.

SEEING Tithes were of old a Jewish Legal Ceremony, and abrogated by the Law of Chrift, it follows, both from the Nature of the Thing, and the Law of Chrift which abrogated them, that thofe human Laws, which would introduce and enforce them again under the Gofpel Difpenfation, are not agreeable to the Law of Chrift.

And now, that

BUT he goes on, p. 107. our Legislature has made fuch a legal fetled

Provifion

(1) Nec Succeffores, nec Vicarios. Gerbard in Synops. Crit. (m) Nullos Collegas. Whitaker in refpons, ad Camp. P. 213.

• Provifion for Minifters, and thought fit, in • Imitation of what was directed before the Law, as well as under the Law, to appropriate the Tithes to them for their Ufe; and that the Ministry have now as good a Right to their Tithes, as any other Men have to their Estates; and they are now become a referved Rent, or Charge on Land, which neither the Landlord purchases, nor the Tenant hires, but have always a proportionable Abatement made them, in the Price or Rent: They cannot therefore be ⚫ denied to the Minifters, or detained from them ⚫ without manifeft Injustice.

In all this he mistakes the Point, for,

1. Minifters have not now as good a Right to their Tithes, as any other Men have to their Eftates, becaufe there is a great Difference between a meer legal Poffeffion, and a rightful Property; Now the Priests are but the Poffefors of Tithes, not the Owners of them.

2. TITHES are not a referved Rent or Charge on Land, nor are they paid by Reafon of the Land; but of the Increase, Charge, Industry and Labour of the Hufbandman.

3. ALL Land is Tithe-free; the Charge of Tithe being on the Stock or perfonal Eftate : The different Price of Lands therefore arifes not from the Tithe, as a Rent-charge, which it is not, but as an Incumbrance and Oppreffion on the perfonal Estate of the Poffeffor, who on that Account gives an advanced Price, that he may but quietly enjoy what was his own before.

WHEN an Enemy has Poffeffion of a Man's Right, he must make the best Terms he can for

K 3

the

the prefent: But as foon as he can caft off the Yoke, he receives nothing but his own. So the Property of the Tenth of other Men's Increase and Labour is not the Priests, though they have Poffeffion thereof at prefent, and though the Law. may be on their Side, yet the Owner has a just Exception to the Equity of that Law, until he fhall have given his Confent to the transferring his own Property: And for that Reason is bound in Confcience and Juftice to himself and Family, to refufe an actual Compliance with the Law, left his own Act should be conftrued as a Recognition, or Acknowledgment, of his Adverfaries pretended Title.

He proceeds, And it can never be lawful for the People to make Ufe of that as their own, which is none of theirs ; and that they are not theirs, is owned by the Quakers themfelves, when they propofe, that seeing they were anciently given by the People, that they return again into the publick Treasure, and thereby the People may be greatly benefited by them, for that they may fupply for those publick Taxations that are put upon them, and may ease themfelves. For this he cites R. Barclay, and adds, which is really plainly a giving up of the Controverfy, as owning, they do not now belong of Right to the People; and therefore muft belong of Right to the • Minifters, till they are otherwife difpofed of by the Legiflature, as they propofe, which 'tis hoped they never will be.'

THIS is an empty Triumph, for R. Barclay makes no fuch Conceffion, nor does he ever acknowledge that the Tithes do not now belong of Right to the People: But, because the Law has

withheld from them their Right, he propofes an Expedient for repealing that Law, and applying the Tithes in fuch manner, as may be beneficial to the People whofe Right they are. Law and Equity are not fynonymous Terms; nor does our Opponent's ufing them promifcuously, when for his Intereft, oblige other Men from obferv ing a proper Diftinction. The Reader is defired to perufe Robert Barclay on this Subject, in his Apology, from pag. 336. to 340.

He yet goes on p. 108. And their not approving the Ufe for which the Tithes are now given, will no more juftify their not paying them, than their not approving the Ufe of Taxes, which are given for carrying on a vigorous War, would juftify their not paying therm, which yet they do not refufe to pay. And for the Quakers to condemn and annull, as to themfelves, the Laws that enacted Tithes to be paid to the Minifters, as Antichriftian, and a grievous Oppreffion, is a moft unreasonable and feditious Principle, and highly deftructive ⚫ of Government.

THE paying of our Taxes impos'd by Law, for the Service of the Government, is confiftent with the Precept of Chrift, Render, to Cæfar the Things that are Cæfars, to which we yield a ready Obedience; nor does it concern us, what Purpofes Cæfar fhall apply them to. But the Cafe of paying Tithes is quite different, where the Law, as we think, enjoyns us to do what Chrift hath prohibited. We therefore che therein, to obey God rather than Man. This is a Principle neither unreasonable nor feditious, unless the preferring Chrift's Precepts to Men's Injunctions can merit thofe Epithets.