Against sacrilege three sermons / preached by Maister Robert Pont ...

AGAINST SACRILEGE▪ The second Sermon. (Book 2)

Rom. 2. 22.

Thou that abhorrest Idols, doest thou com∣mit Sacrilege?

LOnger discourse vppon this texte, besides the thinges alreadie spoken of, being required at my handes, according to my promise, to meete the ob∣jectiones and shifting excuses of men of this age, who cloke their avaricious and gre•…•…die appetites, to appropriate to them selues the Kirk-rentes, I am nowe (as the Lord wil assist me) to enter in to answere to such thinges as they may alleage, and commonly alleages for themselues, to colour their corrupted sacrilege. I intend therefore without more processe, to ga∣ther the same in such order, as I thinke the beste advised amongst them, might propone the same, and to giue particular

aunswers thereto, with resolution accor∣ding to Gods word, & good reasons and laws of men. And so to take away al vaine excuses, whereby they would flatter thē∣selues in their sin, & fyle the eies of the ig∣norāt & simple soules, that perceiues not their driftes. Protesting alwaies, that if (carryed with the zeale of trueth) in pro∣gresse of this mater, I vse some vehemen∣cie of speeches, I do it not for offence of any particular person (the Lorde know∣eth) but against the vice it self, to labour so farre as in me lyeth to conuerte, at the least some of them that haue passed ouer∣farre, and ouer▪seene themselues in this matter, to amendement, by considering with themselues, better then they haue done of before their duty by such adver∣tisement, as I am heare to giue you that heare, and all others that will inquire of me, cōcerning my judgement in this ar∣gument, & things depending therupon.

To come then to the first generall ex∣cuse, and pretended reason that I thinke these men may alleage, who esteeme this kinde of alleaged sacrilege to be no sin at all (it being so vniuersall amongst a

greate multitude) or at leaste, not such a kinde of sinne nor so odious, as I would aggrege it to be: they will say therefore that giuing their intromission with such thinges, as sometimes perteined to the Kirk were vnlawfull (as they would not graunt it to be) yet the name of sacrilege in the proper signification cannot be ex∣tended thereto. For euen in the lawes which I would alleage to prooue it, and by the writers there-upon we finde, it is not properly called sacrilege, but quasi sa∣crilegium, or instar sacrilegij, that is like vn∣to Sacrilege, to take away any of that mo∣ney or other things giuen to that immor∣tall God, for vp-hold of his Religion and seruice. I aunswere, this is a poore shift, for the lawes giueth it as odious a name, calling it crimen peculatus, and crimen laesae religionis, that is to say, a crime and guilti∣nesse* 1.1 of stealing the publick money, and a criminall offense against religion. But (as I said before) we take sacrilege accor∣ding to the meaning of the Scriptures, & good laws of Christiā Princes aggreable thereunto. As indeede the very nature of thinges in themselues leade vs vnto this,

taking the argument from the lesse to the more, that we must needes confesse it to bee a greater sacrilege, to take from the Kirk a barrony of lande, or the teinde of a whole Parish Kirk, being of the valure of many chalders of victuall, nor a little thing, as a Silver cuppe or chalice out of a Sanctuarie or materiall Kirk. For the greater the thieft or spoyle of the ho∣ly thing bee, it is the greater Sacrilege. And as to the place out of the which the holy thing is taken, it makes not much to the matter in the law of conscience. But to put it out of doubt, that this kinde of spoyling the Kirk, and defrauding of her right; by the worde of God is properly to be called sacrilege: No man can deny but to spoyle God is sacrilege. Now the Prophet MALACHIE prooueth against the Iewes of his dayes, that they spoyled God, Because they defrauded him of his* 1.2 teindes and offrings, and therefore were al ac∣•…•…ursed with a curse. Which is the iust pu∣nishment of a Sacrilege. And very nature it selfe teacheth vs here-unto. For men vnderstande naturally, and will confesse that to spoyle or steale any thing from a

priuate man is a great offense: how can they then deny, that to spoyle or steale from God things dedicate to his seruice, is a more high and haynous transgressi∣on, and cannot be more properlie tear∣med by any name then Sacrilege.

But yet these men will alleage, that the authorities cited out of the Olde Testament, to prooue our purpose serue not sufficiently to that effect. For, albeit in the Leviticall or Ceremoniall law of MOYSES, not onely the teindes, but also the landes given to the sustentation of the Priestes and Levites, were separate from the common vse of men, and called Holy; yet that law being abrogate, or at the least ceasing and taking end, the sub∣stance thereof being accomplished in Christ, wee are no further bounde to the obseruation thereof. Therfore, the argu∣ment taken frō that law, concerning ho∣ly things, ought not now to haue place, neither concerning the teindes, which are not nowe add•…•…tted to be payed iure diuino (that is of Gods Law) as the Can∣nonistes speake, and much lesse con∣cerning Temporall landes, giuen to the

Kirke in time of Papistrie, the which nowe cease to bee of that nature, to bee esteemed holy. First, before I aunswere, I am well contented there be a distincti∣on made betweene the •…•…andes and Teindes, leauing off to speake of the teindes till afterwardes. Then I aun∣swere concerning these Landes or an∣nuall rentes, out of Landes delated and giuen to the Kirke, that although the Leviticall Lawe, with the Ceremonies thereof, concerning the outwarde ob∣seruation hath taken an ende, and is fulfilled in Christ; yet the substance of the policie, concerning interteinement of the seruice of God, and vp-hold of re∣ligion still remaines. And it is no lesse necessarie, that the ministerie of God a∣mongst vs be mainteined; and that suffi∣cient prouision be made to serue other Godlie vses, where-unto the Kirke∣rentes ought to be applyed nor it was, that the Priestes and Leuites shoulde bene vp-holden in the time of the Olde law. And as to the holinesse or vnholi∣nes of these landes and reuenues: albe∣it in their owne nature (as I saide in the

former sermon) they be like other earth∣ly possessiones; yet in so far as they were applyed to an holy vse, they may wel be called holy possessions and rents, as the Kirk is holy, to whose vse they are ap∣poynted. Then I say, the end and firste cause wherefore these landes and rentes were giuen, being therewith to vp-hold the holy seruice of God, a like thing in substance, aswell in the Euangelical, as in the Leviticall Lawe; and the same being separate, dedicate, and mortified (as the Law speaketh) to that holy vse, it can no more be lawful to abstract the same from godly vses, then it was in time of the Olde law, the Ministers of the word not being otherwaies sufficiently provided, nor other godly vses for maintenance of religion, and of the poore members of Christ, being duely considered and ser∣ued.

But yet they may make instance and say, that the gift of thinges bestowed to to the Kirk of old, by our fore-fathers in superstition, was for a certaine cause, to wit, to pray for the Dead, say Messe, and do other superstitious & Idolatrous ser∣vice,

which nowe is not to be vsed. And therefore the cause ceasing, the effect should also cease: And consequently, things giuen for such abuses should re∣turne to the giuers or their aires, or at least to the Prince to be otherwaies em∣ployed. As to that theorike of the Law, the cause ceasing, the effect ceases (giuing it to be true) I aunswere with a distincti∣on, which the Lawiers themselues make, that thereby, two kind of causes ar to be considered in thinges, to wit, the impul∣siue cause (as they call it) and the finall cause. Now, albeit it be true, that the fi∣nal cause ceasing, the effect cōmonly cea∣ses also. Yet it is not so in the impulsiue cause, which al though it ceasis, it makes not the effect of the finall cause, which is the principall intention to cease. But so it is in this case. For albeit it may stand, that one of the causes that mooued zealous men in time of blindnes, to giue diuerse things to the Kirk, and to places then cal∣led religious, was to pray for the dead, and to do other superstitious seruie•…•…, be∣ing perswaded by Monkes, Friers, and others of their opinion, that such praiers

were valiable to deliuer soules out of Purgatorie, which may be called the im∣pulsiue or moouing cause: Yet the prin∣cipall & finall cause was (no doubt) that they minded to serue God thereby. For if they had not beleeued that these their gifts were to be applyed to the seruice of God, and godly vses, they would never haue bestowed any of their substance, rentes, or lan•…•…es, to any Kirk or religious place: That this is true; It is manifest by their euidents, fundations, and charters, made vpon such donations, in the words dispositiue, euer bearing this clause, Deo & Ecclesiae, to God and his Kirke, before they make mention of any Saint, place, or other vse, whereto the same was to be applyed. Nowe, seeing all these gifts are so giuen, it is reason that God being first named in the Charters, haue the firste place, as beste and worthiest, and as the principall receiuer of these donationes, which are nothing else but a small por∣tion of his owne, which hee before hath giuen vnto them. A•…•…d as a certaine zea∣lous man was wonted to saye, let God haue his life-rente, as the first person ex∣pressed

in the charters, & take thē the rest.

I adde to this answere, giuing, not gran∣ting, that the principal & final cause wher fore these giftes were bestowed should cease, yet it is no reasō that the same shuld returne to the giuers or their aires, being once simply disponed, & giuē to the kirks vse; yea, and mortifyed therto, as they vse to speake, which the laws call publick de∣dication to the Kirke. But in the same, in that case, if the cause wherfore they were giuen be not a good cause, these gifts are to be applyed to more godly vses, & not profane vses, according to that common rule of the law, quod semel Deo dicat est deo, &c. The things once dedicat to God may not therafter be applyed to profane vses, without great necessity, as for redemptiō of captiues, or other like cases. And for this purpose maketh that notable decisiō of Modestine an anciēt jurisconsult, wher of the sum is. That a certain leg•…•…cy being left to a citty, for a spectable to be done in* 1.3 memorial of the dead, which was not law full to be done in such a Citty. It were wrong (said he) that this legacie should returne backe to the aires of him that left it, but the same ought to bee be∣stowed

vppon an other lawfull vse. And as these lawes conteine great equi∣tie, so were they well practised in the dayes of AVGVTTINE. For when the Magistrates did take from the Donatistes their possessiones, which they had of the Kirke, and they complayned and dispu∣ted, that none should be depriued of their reuenues; for dissention of religi∣ones cause. That holy Father answered, that these goodes perteined to the Kirk, and therefore being rightly taken from them, who had made a separation from the Kirk, the same should be applyed to other Godly vses of the Kirk. As to the Princes part in these matters, wee shall speake (God willing hereafter) But yet to aunswere further to these men, who ob∣ject that their predecessoures (as they say) gaue such landes and rentes vnto the Kirke, in blinde zeale, and so they haue reason to take the same againe. The an∣tecedent or assumption of this argumēt, albeit it were admitted to them to proue, I suppose it should remaine vnprouen by a great many of them, who are most gree∣die to invade the Kirk-rentes nowe a∣dayes. For such as they be readier (as the

Proverbe saith) to eate the Kirk-loafe, then to giue it. Yet supposing it were ve∣rified, it is of no force to serue their turne, neither doth the consequent fol∣low thereupon. For although they, or their antecessors had giuen such thinges to the Kirk, by what reason should they take the same againe at their pleasure? For what is freer then gift? or what is more vnhonest and against humanitie, then to take the gift againe being once freely disponed? supposing it were giuen to a priuate man, whereof he had broo∣ked long possession. Howe much more shameles and vnhonest were it to the gi∣uer to take it againe by force. Then by stronger reason should this be thought vnlawfull, concerning things giuen to God and his Kirk, which (as the Scrip∣ture sheweth) cannot be redeemed again, but* 1.4 is to be restored whatsoeuer is defrauded there∣of (although it were by ignorance) or else the value, with a fift part more. To this pur∣pose perteineth that solemne protestati∣on, which the people made when they brought in their teindes and offrings to the Lord. And although these be coun∣ted

among the Mystical politick lawes, yet the substance thereof (as was proved before) remaines, to wit, the lawe ought not to defraude God & his Kirk of their duetie. To the which purpose, yet let vs heare what AMBROSE (a godly father) speaketh of such men, as would cal back againe that which they haue giuē to the vse of the Kirk. There be some (saith he) who after they haue giuē their goods to the kirk, rashly think to revoke the same, of whō, nether the former gift deserueth thanks, nor the latter doing is allowable. For the former lacketh judgment, & the other hath with it Sacrilege. There bee some whome it repenteth to haue distri∣buted their goods to the poore; but con∣cerning them that so repent, it is only to be feared, •…•…hat they shal not repent of this their rep•…•…ntance. See how this anciēt fa∣ther doubts not to cal them sacrilegious,* 1.5 who take againe from the kirk any thing, albeit they themselues haue giuen it. To this agrees very wel the law of Iustiniane, in this sentēc•…•…. Seeing it lieth in the hart of a man, to do or not do any thing that he intendeth, it becommeth him, either

not to proceede to the doinge there∣of, or else haste to performe it: Not de∣frauding his purpose by any craftie co∣lour of his irreligious minde: & so much the more this ought he to take heed to, if the gift be depute to godly vses or per∣sons of religiō, least he be found not on∣ly void of religion, but also vngodly. And so be subject not onely to the penalty of the law, but also to punishmente from heauen. And notwithstanding, not only he, but also his successors in this case shal be compelled to restore that which they haue taken & wit-holden, with the rest that followes. To the same purpose it is is said in another law, written in the same title of Donationes, speaking of things gi∣uen by mens predecessors, that it availeth nothing to say such things perteined to our progenitors, after that the right and donation thereof is deuolved to others.

Yet to beamfill their first argument, these men may alleage & say, that things dedicate to the kirk in Papistrie, were de∣dicat to Idolatry; which was not only vn∣holy, but also abominable before God, & consequētly the lands & rents so dedicat

can no waies be called holy, and so ap∣parantly would infer, they ought not to be applyed to the holy seruice of God, but rather to profane vses. This argumēt they see not how much it makes against themselues. For if these things offred to idole seruice be abhominable, why bring they abhomination into their houses? & so procure a curse against themselues. For the Scripture sayeth: Couet not the sil∣uer nor golde that is vppon their Idoles, nor* 1.6 take it vnto thy selfe, least thou be snard there∣with. Bring not therefore abomination into thine house, least thou be accursed like vnto it, but vtterly abhor it. Againe in an other place it is saide, There shall nothing of the* 1.7 damned things cleaue vnto thine hand: That the Lord may turne from thee, the fearcenesse of his wrath, and shew thee mercie, when thou shalt obey the voice of the Lord. Nowe al∣though this bee written in the Olde Te∣stament, it astricketh and bindeth aswell vs as the Iewes, Not to couet after euill and vnlawfull things as they did. For these things* 1.8 are written for ensamples to vs, as the Apo∣stle sheweth. So albeit the law of Deute∣ronomy is not to be vrged precisely in

al things, yet as lusting after euil thinges, is ay couetousnes, so thieft is euer thieft, and Sacrilege is euer Sacrilege.

But yet they whome we accuse as sa∣crilegious, may make instance, and saye, how can ye call alwaies things dedicate to Idolatrie holy things? And againe, if these things cannot be handled or intro∣metted with in any sorte; how can ye ap∣plye the same to the vse of the reformed Kirke, and true seruice of God? seeing ye abhorre Idolatrie, and hold such thinges abhominable. For aunswere, first I denie that these thinges were dedicate only to Idolatrie, for I haue prouen the contrary of before. And as to that allegeance, that thinges dedicate to Idolatrous seruice, if they be abhominable, how can they bee applyed to the seruice of God, in his re∣formed Kirke, being abhominable in themselues? I say, Sirres, wee lack not ex∣amples of the Scripture, that such things may and should be employed to the true seruice of God. In the spoyle of Iericho,* 1.9 The Lord commanded, that all the siluer and Gold, and other mettle that was found in the Citty, should be put in the treasure of the house

of the Lord. In the which (no doubt) ma∣ny thinges were, that had bene dedicate to Idoles service. And yet in the meane time expresse inhibition was made, that no particular man shoulde meddle with any thereof, least he make himselfe exe∣crable thereby. And the punishmente that was executed against ACHAN, de∣clared how far God was offended with that transgression of that his commande∣ment. The like may be spoken of things taken in warre by the Isralites of their enemies, as of Madianites and others.* 1.10 And of Gedeon, who made sacrifice to the Lord of his fathers bullocke, and trees of the gr•…•…ue dedicate vnto Baal. And vnder the Law of the Gospell, the Prophet shew∣eth, that the Gentiles shall bring al their riches to serue the Lord, and to beautifie the house of his glorie.

Now, because in this there is no great question, wee come to more pithy appa∣rante argumentes, that our Kirk-robbers alleage for th•…•…mselues. The Kirk-rentes, (say they) namely, the first kirk-lands, for the most parte were giuen by Kinges, his majesties predecessors, mooved of blind

zeale to the Kirk, in time of Papistrie (for such abuses ar now abolished) to abbaies principally, & other places called religi∣ous, to pray for the dead, sing & say Mes∣ses, & to vse other their superstitious ser∣vice. The which landes & rents so giuen, haue greatly hurte & diminished the pa∣trimony of the crown. Therfore the king with advise of his estates in Parliament, hes called in & revoked these donations, namely, of lands, & taken them againe to his Hienes own patrimonie & dispositi∣on. And we againe, haue obteined some of these lands, erected to vs & our aires by liberality of the Prince in temporal li∣vings or lordships. And so we possesse the same justly by our lawful titles, therfore we ought not to be rayled on, nor called Sacrilegious possessors. I answere simply (not for offence of any, but to vtter the trueth) that I judge these kinde of erecti∣ones, or whatsoeuer new required titles by such meanes that the possessours can pretende, to bee altogether vnlawfull. But this question requires greater con∣sideration: which standeth in two heads. The one is, what entereste the Prince

hes, or may justly pretend in Ecclesiasti∣cal liuings. The other, what right or title thereof, he may dispone vnto others. As to the former of these two heads (with∣out offence of the Prince I speake) who is prejudged by this kinde of dealing, as∣well as the Kirke: I say, that Kinges in so farre as they be called, nurishing Fathers of the Kirke, they ought to see sufficient prouision bee made for vp-holding the seruice thereof. And the Kirk againe, to bestow al dutie for furthering the Prince in the publick affaires of the common wealth. But the Prince to suffer the Kirke to be spoyled, not hauing first prouided sufficient meanes, how they that serue in the Kirk may be honestly interteined ac∣cording to their estate, with the other af∣faires thereof. And the schooles and the poore (who ought not to bee neglected) well seene to, it cannot stande with good conscience, law, divine nor humane.

Therefore I saye (albeit these men alleage the Kirke-rents to be ouer-great) to begin at the spoyle of the Kirke, the o∣ther not being done, is a very preposte∣rous* 1.11 order. When AHAB, being but a ve∣ry

wicked king, would haue taken NABOTHS vine-yarde, he offred first to giue him a better vine-yard then it was, or the worth thereof, if it pleased him (he being a priuate man) in money. And so he would haue done in∣deed if NABOTH had accepted the con∣dition. Now, to take from the Kirk of God, which is more then to take from a∣ny particular person, a greate parte of the rente thereof, and giue nothing in the place of it, nether to make sufficient pro∣uision for the necessarie affaires thereof, I thinke the like example hes not bene practised in any Christian Countrie, or common weill heretofore. If they will giue instance of our neighbour cuntrie, there is no comparison; for they that serue in the Kirks there, at least are all wel provided of liuings: But they will reply; The Parliament & estates agreed to take these Kirk-landes: Therefore it ought to stande as a law, and it is not now time to dispute nor reason thereupon. But howe many acts of Parliament (I pray you) are oftentimes againe called & annulled by contrarie actes. And how can they bee annalyed or bought, vake (vnles they be

first reasoned vpon: Yea, this were a very hard & rigorous dealing in a Princes mi∣noritie, to make a lawe, not onely preju∣diciall to God and his Kirke, but also to the Prince himselfe (if it be rightly con∣sidered) and yet no man to haue place to speake against it, or to sute any refor∣mation. The Civill law sayes, that things done in prejudice of the Kirk, albeit con∣firmed by laws, are to be rescinded. And al such statuts (sayth the Emperour FRE∣DERICK) should be raysed out of the act bookes. Moreouer, the lawes made after* 1.12 this maner, in prejudice of the Kirk, may well be declared null in themselues. Be∣cause the most part of them were made in the Princes minoritie, as also, because that represented the third estate for the kirk, had no commission nor power from the reformed Kirk, being Bishoppes and Abbottes, the most parte of them, of the papistical promotion; protestation being made also publicklie for nullitie of their proceedings.

But leauing nowe the Princes parte, who is indeede nothing helped nor in∣riched by these annexations & assumpti∣ons

(as they cal them) of the kirk-lands & rentes, for if they were, it should be more tolerable. I come to the second head cō∣cerning them to whom the Prince hath disponed in heritable titles, the lands and rents of the kirk, by new erectiōs (as they tearme thē) in temporal liuings or lord∣ships. These kinde of dispositiōs, I affirme to be more vnlawfull a great deale, nor if the Prince should haue holden the same in his own hands: yea, moreouer I say, sik gifts & dispositions may not stand lawful ly, neither by the law of God, ciuil laws, nor municipal laws of the cuntry. For as to Gods law, I think they wil acclaime to no warrante of it, because it maketh di∣rectly against them, & involving them in the estate of Achan, Ananias, & Sapphira, procureth rather a curse againste them, without they repente & amende. Which the Prophete MALACHIE pronounceth against such persons, as defraud the Lord of his teinds & offrings. And as to the ci∣vill Lawes & Ecclesiasticall cannons, we may easely finde an infinite number a∣gainst them, forbidding all alienation and distraction of Kirke-goodes to the

vse of any particular person. Reade the first booke of Iustinian his lawes, in the volume called Codex, in the title, de Sacro∣sanctis* 1.13 Ecclesiis, and others titles follow∣ing, wherein all alienation of Kirk goods is decerned null and of no force; and the things alienated are commanded to bee restored. To the same purpose agree the lawes of the newe constitutiones, called Authentickes, in so far, that it is not per∣mitted to the Prince himselfe, to permit or change, with any of the goodes of the Kirk, called vnmoveable, vnlesse he giue the better in steede thereof. And LEO the Emperour sayet•…•…, that they who dispone these goodes, haue Sacrilegious mindes. Therefore they who haue perswaded our Prince (whom God preserue) to an∣naly or dispone to themselues, or to o∣thers, these Kirk-landes, haue done that they might to haue him counted Sacri∣legious as they are. The lawe also ordei∣neth the byers of these goods, to lose the price, and to restore the goods againe▪ The Notars of such contractes, to be ba∣nished; the Iudges that ratifie the actes of such alienationes, to bee deposed from

their dignities. Howe much more are they to be judged gyltie and punished, that take and vsurpe those goods, with∣out alienation to their owne commodi∣tie.

I omit here to cite many ancient Cā∣nons of Councels to this effect, which would occupy long time. For, who list to reade the volumes of Councels & Can∣non-law, may finde them very frequent in many places. Comming then to the lawes of the Countrie, and naturall rea∣son, the foundation of all good lawes, I saye, the corrupted dealing of our time concerning Kirk-robberie, is such as can not stand, neither with the one, nor with the other. For, as to our municipal laws, which are either the lawes of the Maje∣stie, or actes of Parliament. The lawes of the Majesty altogether disallow, alienati∣on of Kirk-goodes, in so far, as if the Pre∣late himselfe, Abbote, or Bishoppe, make any alienation or disposition thereof,* 1.14 from the Kirke vse: The byer thereof, should lose the price, and the landes may be taken againe by the King (but not di∣sponed to others) if they were giuen by

him or his Predecessors. And in the acts of Parliament, both ancient and recent, commonly the first acte is, that the li∣berties and freedomes of the Kirke be keiped. And how can these liberties be but hurte, when the Patrimonie of the kirk is taken awaie, and giuen to profane men & profane vses? Now, to come in particular, to these new erectiones, and new found infeftmentes of Kirk-Lands, they are (as I vnderstande) of two sortes. For some are giuen before the annexa∣tion of them to the Crowne, and some thereafter. As to the former, I woulde know by what law or reason they could be giuen by a simple gifte of the Prince, they being not yet come in his handes, and the consent of the true Kirke, neuer had thereto? For, as to the consent of Abbots and Bishoppes, being the moste parte of the Papisticall promotion, and chiefe wrackers of the Kirke, no•…•… hauing any commission from the true reformed Kirke, it cannot bee of any force in this case, to defraude the Kirke of her Patri∣monie. And albeit, the whole Kirke had consented, their consente could not bee

sufficient to dilapidat or annaly the Kirk Lands in propertie to any person, they being themseues onely vsufructuares, and not proprietares thereof. And as to the Princes parte, can he take any priuate mans heritage from him, and giue it to whome hee pleaseth, without consent of partie, or fore faltrie? I think all men will say no. Much lesse then, may he dispone these lands from God and his Kirk, by sik simple donationes. As to the other sorte of infeftmentes or erectiones giuen af∣ter the annexation, they can be no better in effect, for giuing only for arguments cause, that these lands were lawfullie an∣nexed to the Crown; whereuppon I wil not now farther dispute. I say, the King cannot by the Lawes of his Realme, di∣spone the same againe from the crowne, they being once annexed therto. Reade the 43. acte of King IAMES the seconde, the 86. of King IAMES the Thirde, the 24. of King IAMES the Fourth, and like∣wise his Revocation, acte 83. As also the 4. and 54. of King IAMES the Fifth: with others, tending to the like purpose. Yea, they would make our Kinges Majestie

that now is, bee involved in periurie by these dispositiones, it being expresse a∣gainst his oath, made at his Hienes coro∣nation, and inacted amongst the acts of Parliamente. The time straites me, that I cannot insist longer vpon this head.

Before I speake of the teindes, I come to the finall reason, or rather excuse that robbers of the Kirk pretend for them to colour their Sacrilege. The landes, with the other rents of the kirk (say they) giuē to it in time of Papistrie, ar ouer-large, & more then sufficient, for the necessary vses of the Kirk that now is. For, as to the Ministers, what should they haue but their necessary sustentation, with an gray gowne, to go vpon their feete Preaching from place to place, as the Apostles did? They are as •…•…eedie as the Papistes; with many other like tearms of their reproch∣full Rethoricke. And why may not the King (say they) giue these landes to No∣ble-men, Gentle-men, and others, able to serue his Majestie; the teindes being more then sufficiente to susteine all the charges of the Kirke. As to the estate of the Ministers, it is no marvell that they

who care for no Religion, but so far as it serues their turne, would wel vouch safe to see them poore, that they might goe the lighter to heauē, following the foot∣steps of IVLIAN the Apostate, or rather IVDAS the traytour, who envyed for the oyntmente that was bestowed vppon Christ, because hee was a Sacrilegious thiefe, and would haue had the price thereof to his owne vse. Would these men commend vnto vs such poverty, as Christ did to the poore in Spirite, or if necessitie required, to loose all thinges for his names sake, they should doe well. But seeing they labour so farre as they may, to bring Ministers in contempt, & consequently, to depriue the people of the doctrine of Saluation, we cannot ad∣mit their vngodly devises: For wee haue sufficiente warrant in the word of God, that the labourers in this function, are worthye of their wages; not onely for the honeste intertenemente of them∣selues, but also of their wiues, chil∣dren and families, and for hospitalitie. Which things being ministred vnto vs, for our owne partes, wee would be well

contented, so that none of vs did lacke, as it was in the Primitiue Kirke, providing not the lesse, that the reste of godly vses belonging to the Kirk, were not neglec∣ted: And speciallie, the schooles and the poore: whose large portion ought to be comprehended therein, seeing the Kirk∣rentes were justly called, •…•…he Patrimo∣nie of the poore. As to the reste (this be∣ing done) we might well agree, it should supplie the necessarye affaires of the Prince, and the Realme, and such other Godly vses as the worlde allowes. And the ensample of former ages agreeable thereto haue practized. But the abuses we cannot allow, as that of the Papistes, of defrauding the poore of that parte of the Kirkes Patrimonie, which should be bestowed vpon them.

Wee knowe that the Kirk-rentes of olde were divided in foure partes. The one parte thereof was bestowed vppon the Pastour or Bishoppe for his owne vse, and for vp-holding of hospitalitie. An other, vppon the reste of the office∣bearers, in the Kirke (called the Cler∣gie.) The thirde, vppon the Poore.

And the fourth and laste parte, vppon the interteinemente of Kirkes, Hospi∣talles, Brigges, and other publicke and Godlie affaires: Whereinto, the neces∣sities of the Prince, and publicke affaires of the Countrie are to be also conside∣red. But the degenerate posteritie of the Antichristiane Kingdome, applyed all these goodes, to the interteinement of idle bellies, diuiding all the Kirkes Pa∣trimonie, into Prelacies, and benefices, & in erection of Abbaies & Cloisteres, such as are not to be found in the booke of God, nor in any ensample of the Pri∣mitiue Kirke, and such as ought to haue no place in any reformed Kirke or com∣mon wealth. And yet this corruption re∣maineth amongst vs, by distributing of newe titles, not onely to the Bishoppes, but also to Abbottes, and newe Pre∣lates (as they call them) after the man∣ner of the olde Papisticall promotion. The affaires of the true Kirke, in the meane time, not being duelie seene to nor provided. And as concerning benefices vnder Prelacies, there is a newe craftie and fradulente inuention

founde out, that these greedie gorman∣des haue procured at the Princes hands, gifts of the Patronages therof: therby to defraude best qualifyed Ministers of the same, to giue them, or rather sel them to whom they can finde out, who wil be cō∣tent to make vnlawful paction with them, to take a little portion of the fruits there∣of (serue as they please) and let the moste parte remaine with themselues, either by setting of vnlawfull tacks, or by some o∣ther fraudulent way.

Now, concerning the teinds (where∣of I promised laste to speake) I graunt in∣deede, if they were rightly gathered and bestowed to the right vse, they would both helpe the poore labourers of the grounde, and serue to many good vses in the Kirkes affaires. But as things nowe go amongst vs, they are little more profita∣ble to these vses, then the Kirk lands. For they who wrongfully haue invaded the landes, marke as greedely for the teinds: and are entred already in possession of the greatest part thereof. And now begin to make question, what title or right the Kirke hath thereto: So insatiable is the

greede of them who haue once made shippe-wrack of conscience, that they would Crucifie Christ againe for his coate. Herefore it is expedient, as short∣nesse of time will now serue vs, to de∣duce from the originall, the payment of teindes. First, before any written law, we finde, that ABRAHAM gaue to MELCHI∣ZEDECK,* 1.15 as Priest of the moste high God, teindes of all the spoyle that he had obteined of the discomfiture of the enemies, as pledge of his thankfulnesse towarde God. IACOB also passing to Mesopotamia, after that notable* 1.16 vision of the ladder, reaching from earth to heauen, made a solemne vow, that if the Lord should be with him, preseruing him in his way, and giue him foo•…•…e and rayments, of all that the Lorde should giue him, he should render a∣gaine the teind vnto the Lord. Whereby, it may well appeare, that by the very in∣stinction of nature, this custome was receiued amongst the Godly Patriarcks, to giue teindes vnto God, of that what∣soeuer he bestowed vpon them, aswel by offring sacrifices, as applying the same to the vtilitie of the Priestes of the Lorde, the poore, and other godly vses. As to the

offringe and paying of teindes vnder the Law, we neede to make no question, for the same is so set foorth at length, in the bookes of the Law of MOYSES, that the adversaries can make no argu∣ment against it. Wherein▪ among many other thinges it is written, That all the* 1.17 teind of the increase of the Lande, aswell of cornes, as of bestiall, perteined to the Lord as holy. And that he distributed the same againe to the Priestes and Leuites, and their fami∣lies, for their seruice. And concerning the* 1.18 teindes of euerie thirde yeare likewise, that the strangers, widdowes, fatherlesse, and poore of the Land, should be partici∣pant thereof, so that I neede not insiste further thereupon at this present: only, calling to your remembrance, that so∣lemne protestation (of the which I made mention before) that the people were or∣dained to make, that they had brought in all the teindes of the Lord, & defrauded nothing therof. Read the place. Deu. 26.

It restes to declare then, what hath bin the vse concerning teinds, vnder the Go∣spel amongst Christians. Certainely the vse of payment thereof hath bin so anci∣ent,

that it is difficil to finde out the firste original thereof. Alwaies it appeareth e∣uidently, that godly Princes & common wealths, being willing to provide the Pa∣stours, & other godly affaires of the Kirk, of competent living & revenues, did ra∣ther choose the teindes, then any other meanes to that effect; following the ex∣ample of the godly before the lawe, and imitating the cōmand of God, vnder the Lawe. Which loueable vse and custome, hath remayned through many ages (I thinke) inuiolably obserued in all Chri∣stiane kingdomes & common-wealthes. For it is more then a thousand yeares by. paste, since the payment of teinds vnder the Gospell, was called an auncient cu∣stome, which the Christians had obser∣ued by common consente, by ayplying* 1.19 the same to the vse of the holy Ministery, the poore, redeeming of captiues, and o∣ther godly vses, as we may finde in some ancient cānons of councels. So that I can not marvaile ynough of a certaine man, who held himself very wel beseen in the laws & customs of the cuntry, who was not ashamed to affirm, that the paimēt of

teindes to the Kirke, was not olde, but of late brought vp. If this man had red di∣ligently the Scottes Chronicles only, he* 1.20 might haue found how CONVAL King of Scottes, who reigned about the yeare of our Lorde, fiue hundreth, three score and eight yeares. Did statute by lawe, that the teindes of all that grew vpon the grounde, should be brought in vnto the Priests, and service of God, vsed in these daies, which from that time by long pre∣scription hath bene obserued amongst this our Scottish Nation. So that the question cannot nowe haue place, whe∣ther the teindes perteine to the Kirke or not; I will not deny but the teinds might be possibly changed, in other meanes of sufficient provision for the Kirke, if such godly zeale were nowe amongst men, as was of olde time. But in so farre as we see the plain cōtrarie, that men are now rea∣dier to take away, thē euer our predeces∣sors were to giue; it were a foolish thing to loose the certaine for the vncertaine, and that which is neuer likely to come to passe. And the wisedome of the fathers, hes done better in this behalfe, then any

thing that wee can nowe deuise or per∣forme. Therefore, whosoeuer now doe abstracte the teindes from that vse; for the which they haue bene of so auncient time appoynted amongst Christians, they are to be repute as violaters of that godly and publick order, and good e∣state of Christian common-wealths and cannot be excused from Sacrilege.

Because time hasteth me to an ende, I am compelled for the present to cut ma∣ny thinges. Therefore I come shortly to the laste refuge of these Kirk-robbers, whereas they alleage for themselues, their titles, tacks, and assedations, with o∣other evidentes & rights, whereby they possesse and brooke the teindes. And many wil say also, that their predecessors haue had kindnesse thereto of long time by-past. And others, moreouer will al∣leage and say, wee haue payed great gres∣somes, and sums of entresse silver there∣fore, besides our yearely dutie, hauing these teindes disponed to vs, by them who had power to set the same. To aun∣swere shortly to all this, first I say, to the takes-men, that all their tackes and titles,

for the moste parte are set contrarie to the common Lawe, and so are null in themselues. And if wee shall examine them by the Lawe of Conscience, which is the chiefe Lawe that Christi∣stians ought to liue by; it will be harde to purge the taker and also the setter of Sacrilege. The first cause that mooued* 1.21 them of the Kirke to let teindes in tackes, was to defende them from the invasion and violence of such mightie robbers, as spoyled them of their possessions. For o∣therwise, it was not lawfull in any case by their Cannones, that any of them, (whome they called the Laick sorte) should haue any medling therewith. But now it falles out plain contrariwise, that none doe greater hurte to the Kirk, then those tackesmen, to make their own gree∣die gaine of the Kirk-goods. And they may wel be compared to manchpresents (as we speake) taking to themselues the best parte, & leauing the least portion to the Kirks vse. So I say, that none of them that take the teindes in assedation, with euident diminution of the olde rentals can pretende, but they greatly hurte the

Kirke, contrary to good lawes & consci∣ence. Yea, many of their tacks are not on∣ly within the halfe of the just availe; but oftentimes within the tent part, as victu∣als now are solde.

For colouring of the which, there is a new fraud of the law devised, by conver∣ting victuall into money, vnknowne to our Fore-bearers▪ because (say they) v•…•…c∣tuall was sometime sold for such prices: But where finde they that argumente, à* 1.22 posse ad esse, valiable in the Law? or why preferre they not at least, the option to the receiuer, rather to choose, then to the giuer? or els, why will they not paye Sterling money, or the auaile thereof, as good as it was, when victualles were so solde? Who will go to the market now with our money, to buy victuall of such prices, and not be mocked? Whereto should I insiste longer vppon the newe mainteined corruptiones of this age, to defraude the Kirke of her due right? It shoulde weary both mee to rehearse, and you to heare it. When as tackes was not set in times by-paste, but for the space of ninetene years the farthest. Now

three nintene years, with three life-rents, all in one tacke, is thought nothing. Yea, many make heritage of the teindes, as they haue done of the landes. I omitte to speake of the oppression of the poore la∣borers of the grounde, whereof I made mention before. As to the kindnesse, which these men alleage, because it is of no force in the Lawe, I cease likewise to speake thereof. And as to the power of them that set these tackes, being for the most parte titulars of Prelacies, I counte them no lesse Sacrilegious, then the ta∣kers, as if I had time and space, I might easely prooue. With them also I joyne a sort of false brethren, called, beneficed Ministers, who make as little conscience to dilapidate the kirk-rents, as others do. So that there is no estate free of Sacri∣lege in the•…•…e vnhappie daies. Lorde arise and caste out all byers and sellers, with thieues and robbers, and corrupted Sa∣crilegious dealers out of the Kirke, and stirre vppe some zealous reformers of these manifolde deformities, that the Kingdome of Christ maye continue a∣mongst vs, and his Gospell not be remo∣ved

and taken from vs, for our great ingratitude and sinnes, in abusing the name and profession of the same. To whome with thee, O Father and holie Ghost, be all honour and glorie. A•…•…en.

Notes

• * 1.1

  •…•…d. ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉, peeu∣latus. l. 1. & l. 4. C. de Sepul. 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. l. •…•….
• * 1.2

  Mal. •…•….
• * 1.3

  •…•…d. de v∣s•…•… et 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•… 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉. L. le▪ gatu•…•….
• * 1.4

  Levit. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.5

  C. de dona∣tionibus▪ l▪ si quis ar∣gentum § Sin autem.
• * 1.6

  Deut. 7.
• * 1.7

  Deut. 13.
• * 1.8

  •…•…. Cor. 10.
• * 1.9

  •…•…osua. 6. 7.
• * 1.10

  I•…•…g. 6.
• * 1.11

  1. King. 21
• * 1.12

  •…•…. Cassa∣mus & L. deceruimu•…•… C. de Sacro. s. Eccleijs
• * 1.13

  Authent. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 non ali∣•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ecclesiasti •…•…oll. 2.
• * 1.14

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 1.15

  Gen. 14.
• * 1.16

  Gen. 28.
• * 1.17

  •…•…erit. 27.
• * 1.18

  Num. 18
• * 1.19

  Concil. Matisc. 2, Can. 5.
• * 1.20

  〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉. li. 9. f. 192.
• * 1.21

  Concil. Carthag, 5 cap. 6.
• * 1.22

  Contrad•…•…. •…•…d leg. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. l, p•…•…ecia.