To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
PSAL. 110.4.The Lord sware, and will not repent, thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech.
Right Worshipfull, &c.
THere are three principall attributes of God,
These three attributes of God shine most clearely in the three offices of Christ,
〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉
Priestly function. For Christ by his Princely authority declareth especi∣ally the power, by his Propheticall he revealeth the wisedome, and by his Priesthood he manifesteth the goodnesse of God to all mankinde. Christ as a Prophet in wisedome teacheth us what in his goodnesse he hath merited for us as a Priest, and by his power he will bestow upon us as a King, free∣dome from all miserie in the Kingdome of glory. And on these three offi∣ces of Christ the three divine graces
In this Psalme David, as Christs Herauld, proclaimeth these his titles: First, his Kingly; Sit thou on my right hand, ver. 1. Be thou ruler in the midst of thine enemies, ver. 2. Secondly, his Propheticall; The people shall come willingly in the beautie of holinesse, ver. 3. Thirdly, his Priestly; The Lord sware, thou art a Priest, ver. 4. To obscure which most cleare and evi∣dent interpretation of this Propheticall Psalme, although some mists of doubts have beene cast in former times; yet now after the Sun of righte∣ousnesse is risen, and hath dispelled them by his owne beames, nothing without impietie can be opposed to it: forb 1.2 there he whom David mean∣eth, openeth Davids meaning; he whom this Prophesie discovereth, disco∣vereth this Prophesie; he to whom this Scripture pointeth, pointeth to this Scripture, and interpreting it of the Son of man, sheweth most evidently that he is the King who reigneth so victoriously, ver. 1. the Prophet that preacheth so effectually, ver. 3. and the Priest that abideth continually, ac∣cording to the words of my text; which offer to our religious thoughts three points of speciall observation:
First, the forme and manner of our Saviours investiture or consecration was most honourable and glorious, God the Father performing the rites; which were not imposition of hands, and breathing on him the holy Ghost, but a solemne deposition of his Father, with a protestation, Thou art a
Priest: ceremonies never used by any but God, nor in the investiture of a∣ny but Christ, nor his investiture into any office but his Priesthood.* 1.3 At his coronation we heare nothing, but the Lord said, Sit thou on my right hand. The rule of the whole world is imposed upon our Saviour by command; and even in this did Christ shew his obedience to his Father, that he tooke upon him the governement of his Church. But at the consecration of Christ we have a great deale more of ceremonie and solemnity, God his Father taketh an oath, and particularly expresseth the nature and condition of his office, a priesthood after the order of Melchizedek: and he confir∣meth it unto him for ever, saying, Thou art a Priest for ever. Of all which circumstances the Apostle in the Epistle to thed 1.4 Hebrewes taketh speciall no∣tice, and maketh singular use to advance the Priesthood of Christ above that of Aaron: Inasmuch as Christ was made a Priest, not without an oath, by so much he was made a surety of a better Testament. For those Priests were made without an oath, but he with an oath, by him that said unto him,
The Lord, &c. Jehovah is the proper and essentiall name of God, ne∣ver in the Scriptures attributed to any creature, as most of the learned Rabbins and Christian Interpreters observe: a name in such sort adored by the Jewes, that, in a superstitious reverence unto it, wheresoever they meet with it in the text, they either over-skip it, or in place thereof reade Adonai, or Lord: a name also so much admired by the Gentiles, that they called their chiefe God Jove, which is but a contraction of the Hebrew Jehovah. And as they glanced at the very name, so they had a glympse of the reason thereof, as may appeare by Plutarch his exposition of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or, Thou art, engraven in golden characters upon the gate of the Temple of Apollo, whereby (saith he) they who came to worship God, acknowledged that Beeing properly belonged to him. Him whom St. John calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Par∣menides and Melissus terme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I am (saith God toe 1.5 Moses) hath sent thee: and againe, I am that I am. Of all things else we may say truely that they are not that they are, because they are not of themselves, nor are their owne essence, nor continue what they are. God properly is that he is, because himselfe is his owne beeing, and because he is that he was, and was that he is, aad shall be what he was, and is, the same, yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Besides this reason of the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God himselfe intimateth another, taken from his faithfulnesse and truth in performing his promises: I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the name of God all-sufficient: but by my namef 1.6 Jehovah was I not knowne unto them; that is, I had not made good my promise unto them, I had not given beeing to my words; that is, I had not performed and accomplished them. According to which etymologie of the word Jehovah, the first straine of this verse soundeth to this tune; Jehovah sware, that is, he that giveth con∣tinuance to all things by his word, he giveth his word for the continuance of this thy sacred office: he who is alwayes as good as his word, nay, who is his word, hath said, nay, hath sworne, Thou art a Priest for ever. The Lord
Sware. As we honour God in swearing by him, so the Father honou∣reth the Sonne in swearing to him, or taking a solemn oath at his investiture.
An oath is a sacred forme of speech, in which, for the confirmation of a truth, or assurance of faith, supreme majestie is called upon as a witnesse or surety: this, if it be done by any creature whomsoever, implieth a kinde of adoration of him by whom they sweare; who by this manner of ap∣pealing to him, is tacitly acknowledged to be the Discerner of our thoughts, and supreme Judge of all our actions: and therefore Aquinas defineth ju∣ramentum, adorationis speciem, a kind of adoration. But if supreme Maje∣sty himselfe vouchsafe to use the like forme, he doth not thereby adore himselfe, but most surely bindes himselfe to the performance of that, for which he pawneth as it were his glory and life. Thus St. Austine briefely resolveth the point;g 1.7 What is Gods oath? (saith he) a solemne kinde of atte∣station to his promise for our greater assurance.
As for the manner and forme of this oath, though it be not here set downe, yet it may be easily gathered out of other texts of Scripture. For God alwayes sweareth either by his essence, or by his attributes; by his essence,h 1.8 As I live, saith the Lord; or by his attributes, either of power, as Esay 62.8. He hath sworne by his strong arme; or by his holinesse,i 1.9 Psal. 89.35 or the like. Whence we may take up this observation by the way, That Gods attributes are his essence, and his essence himselfe. For sith God cannot acknowledge any greater unlesse he should deny himselfe, it followeth, that he cannot sweare by any thing that is not himselfe. If Princes have this priviledge, to confirme all their Proclamations and Pa∣tents with Teste meipso, Witnesse our selves, shall we require farther security from God? Not to beleeve him upon his word, which is all that heaven and earth have to shew for their continuance, were incredulous impietie: to expect or demand further an oath of him by whom we all sweare, were presumptuous insolencie. Yet see how the goodnesse of God overcom∣meth the distrustfulnesse of man; he giveth us more security than we could have had the face to aske, or hope to obtaine; he vouchsafeth not onely a bill of his hand, his written word, but also entereth into bands for the per∣formance of all covenants and grants made to us in the name of our elder brother Christ Jesus. As often as I endevour to stay my thoughts up∣on this point, they breake out into that exclamation ofk 1.10 Tertullian, O thrice happy we, for whose sake God taketh an oath; but most wretched we, if we be∣leeve not God, no not upon his oath. Or the like of Pliny upon occasion of the Emperours deposing before the Consul, O strange thing, and before this time unheard of, he sweareth by whom we all sweare, he confirmeth the Priest∣hood of his sonne by an oath, by whom all oathes are confirmed. In which consideration I marvaile not that Martin Luther was wont to say, he tasted more sweetnesse, and received greater comfort in his meditation upon this parcell of Scripture than any other. For what doctrine doth the whole Scripture affoord so comfortable to a drooping conscience, charged with many foule and grievous sinnes, as this, that God hath sworne his onely be∣gotten Sonne a Priest for ever, to sanctifie our persons, and purge our sins, and tender all our petitions to his Father? What sinne so hainous, what a∣bomination so grievous, for which such a Priest cannot satisfie by the obla∣tion of himselfe? What cause so desperate, in which such an Advocate, if he plead, will not prevaile? What suit so difficult, which such a Me∣diatour
will not carry? We may be sure God will not be hard to be intrea∣ted of us, who himselfe hath appointed us such an Intercessour, to whom he can deny nothing. Therefore surely if there be any Balme in Gilead, it may be found on, or gathered from the branches of this text, The Lord sware,
And will not repent. Is not this addition needlesse and superfluous? Doth God ever repent him of any thing? May wee be bold to use any such speech concerning God, that he repented or retracted any thing? We may, the Scripture will beare us out in it, which in many places warranteth the phrase; as,l 1.11 Then it repented the Lord that he had made man upon the earth, and he was sorrie in his heart: and,m 1.12 It repenteth me that I have made Saul King; for he is turned from me, and hath not performed my commandements: and,n 1.13 He remembred his covenant, and repented, according to the multitude of his mercies: and,o 1.14 If this Nation, against whom I have pronounced, turne from their wickednesse, I will repent of the plagues that I thought to bring up∣on them; but if they doe evill in my sight, I will repent of the good that I thought to doe unto them: therefore now amend your wayes and your works, and heare the word of the Lord God, that the Lord may repent him of the plagues that he hath pronounced against you: and,p 1.15 God saw their workes, that they turned from their evill wayes, and God repented of all the evill that he had said he would do unto them, and he did it not. All which passages I have entirely re∣lated, quia de Deo etiam vera dicere periculosum est, as the heathenq 1.16 Sage wise∣ly observeth, It is dangerous to speake even true things of God; for we may speake nothing safely of him which is not spoken by him in holy Scriptures. And above others the Ministers of the Gospel have a speciall charge gi∣ven them, not onely to looke to their matter, but to have a care also, retinere sanam formam verborum, to keepe unto a wholesome platforme of words and phrases, such as all those are which the holy Ghost hath sanctifi∣ed unto us, whereof this is one, God repented, &c. which may be safely uttered, if it be rightly understood. Certaine it is, and a most undoubted truth, that the nature of God is free from passion, his actions from excepti∣on, his will from controll, his purpose from casualty, his sentence from revocation; and therefore when God is said in holy Scripture to repent of any good by him promised, or actually conferred upon any, or any evill inflicted or menaced, we are not from thence to inferre, that there are any after-thoughts in God, but onely some alteration in the things themselves. As Parents and Nurses, that they may be the better understood of their In∣fants, clip their words, or speake in a like tone to them; so also our heaven∣ly Father, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that we may the better understand him, speaketh to us in our owne language,* 1.17 and expresseth himselfe in such termes as best sort with our conceits and apprehensions. When we condemne the courses which we have formerly taken, or undoe any thing which we have done, our after-thoughts checke our former, and we retract our errour; and this retraction of our opinions, and change in our minde, we call repentance: which, though it be farre from the nature of God, yet is it by a figure at∣tributed unto him, the more significantly to expresse his infinite hatred and detestation of sin, in regard whereof he cast man out of his favour, as if he had repented that he had made him: he cast Saul out of his throne, as if
he had repented that he had set him in it: as also to represent his compassi∣onate love towards penitent sinners, which prevaileth so farre with him, that upon the least relenting and humiliation on our parts, he reverseth the fearefull sentence he passed upon us, as if it repented him that he ever had pronounced it. We repeale some act or constitution of ours, or cancell some deed, because we repent of that which formerly we had done: but God is said to repent, not because his minde or affection is changed, but because his actions are such, as when the like are done by men they truely repent. Thus St.n 1.18 Austine resolveth the case, Some such effects, which in men proceed from repentance, descried in the Actions of God, have oc∣casioned these and the like phrases, God repented, and was sorrie in his heart.
Yea, but what effects are these? Hath he ever reversed any sentence, re∣pealed any act, nay, recalled so much as any word passed from him? Is the* 1.19 strength of Israel as man that he should lie, or as the sonne of man that hee should repent? Is not hee theo 1.20 same yesterday, and to day, and for ever? Are not all his menaces and promises, all his mercies and judgements, all his words and workesp 1.21 Yea and Amen? Doubtlesse it shall stand for an un∣moveable truth, when heaven and earth shall passe away, Mal. 3.6. Ego Deus, non mutor, I am the Lord, I change not: therefore we are yet in the suds, there appeareth no ground to fasten repentance upon God, either quoad affectum, or quoad effectum. But here theq 1.22 Schoolemen reach us a distinction to take hold on, whereby we may get out of the mire: It is one thing to change the will, and another thing to will a change. God willeth a change in some things at some times, but he never changeth his will. Some things God appointeth to continue for ever, as the dictates of the law of nature, and the Priesthood of Christ: some things for a time onely, as the Legall Ceremonies, and the Aaronicall Priesthood. Againe, some things he promiseth absolutely, as all spirituall graces necessary to the salvation of the Elect: some things conditionally, as the blessings of this life, so farre as they tend to the attaining of a better hereafter. In like manner, some judgements he denounceth absolutely, as the destruction of the king∣dome of Satan and Antichrist; others upon condition expressed or under∣stood, as the subversion of Niniveh, the present death of Hezekiah.
To apply these distinctions to our purpose, and close upon the very point in question: when any order, set downe by God for a time, altereth at the time, the date being expired, or any Prophesie depending upon a condition, falleth with it, God is said to repent, though he indeed doe nothing lesse; the change that appeares in the things themselves being nothing else but the execution of an unchangeable decree of God for their change. The meaning then of this phrase, will not repent, is, that the Priesthood of Christ is not like that of Aaron, which was after a time to expire, and is now actu∣ally with all the ceremoniall law abolished, but a Priesthood never to be al∣tered or changed. The Lord sware, and will not repent,
Thou art a Priest. There are three things that especially appertained to the office of Aaron and his Successours:
1 To keepe the originall and authenticall copie of the law, together with the golden pot of Manna, and the two tables written with the finger of God, and the Rod that budded.
2. To offer sacrifices both ordinary every day, and upon their set feasts and sabbaths, and extraordinary upon speciall occasions.
3. To present themselves before God for the people, to assure on their part obedience to God, by way of promise or stipulation, and procure Gods favour to them by way of mediation.
All which parts of their Priestly function they performed but typical∣ly and imperfectly: for neither did they keep the Law entirely, nor so much as the copy of it in later times, neither did their sacrifices purge thoroughly, neither did their prayers prevaile effectually: but our high Priest hath fulfilled all righteousnesse, and by one oblation of himselfe hath made a perfect satisfaction for the sins of the whole world: and he is in that grace and favour with God, that he putteth up no petition on our behalfe, but hee getteth it signed by his Father. The Leviticall Priests laid up the true originall of the Law, both written in the bookes of Moses, and engra∣ven in the two Tables, in the Arke, as a jewell in a sacred casket: but our high Priest both kept the Law it selfe, and perfectly fulfilled it, and wri∣teth it also in the tables of our hearts: they presented offerings for the sin of the soule, but he made his soule an offering for sinne:* 1.23 they appeared but once a yeere in the Holy of holies for the people, but hee being entred into the Sanctum sanctorum, the Heaven of heavens, sits at the right hand of his Father, and perpetually by the merits of his passion intercedeth for us.
Now the reasons which moved him to take upon him this office of a Priest, are conceived to be these:
1. Because the salvation and redemption of mankind, wrought by the sacrifice of his Priesthood, being a most noble worke, and not inferiour to the creation, it was not fit that any should have the honour of it but the Son of God.
2. Neither was it agreeable that any should offer him, who was the only sacrifice that could expiate the sinnes of the whole world, but him∣selfe: therefore by offering himselfe, he added infinite worth to the sacri∣fice, and great honour to the Priesthood of the Gospel. For, as the gold sanctified not the altar, but the altar the gold; so it may be truly said with∣out impeachment to the dignity of that calling, that Christ was rather an honour to the Priesthood, than the Priesthood an addition unto him. For what got he by the Priesthood, which cost him his life? what preferment could it be to him, to take upon him an office, whereby hee was to abase himselfe below himself, and be put to an ignominious and accursed death? What were we vile miscreants, conceived and borne in originall sinne, and soyled with the filth of numberlesse actuall transgressions, that to purge and cleanse our polluted soules and defiled consciences, the second person in
Trinity should be made a Priest? It was wonderfull humility in him to wash his Disciples feet, but in his divine person to wash our uncleane soules, is as farre above humane conceit, as it seemeth below divine maje∣sty. There is nothing so impure as a fowle conscience, no matter so filthy, no corruption so rotten and unsavoury as is found in the sores of an exulce∣rated mind; yet the Sonne of God vouchsafed to wash and bathe them in his owne bloud. O bottomlesse depth of humility and mercy! other Priests were appointed by men for the service of God, but hee was appoin∣ted by God for the service and salvation of men: other Priests spilt the bloud of beasts to save men, but he shed his owne bloud to save us, more like beasts than men: other Priests offered sacrifice for themselves, he of∣fered himselfe for a sacrifice: other Priests were fed by the sacrifices which the people brought, but he feeds us with the sacrifice of his owne body and bloud: Lastly, others were appointed Priests but for a time, hee was ordained a Priest
For ever. The rod of Aaron was a type of the Priesthood of Christ, which shooteth forth three buds or blossomes:
The two first buds seemed to wither at our Saviours death, though the fruit thereof be still preserved, but the third, though it put it selfe forth in his life time, yet it more flourished after his ascension. For although our blessed Redeemer now no more observe the ceremoniall Law, to which he gave a period at his consummatum est, nor offer any more sacrifice of his owne, yet he still offereth up our sacrifices of praises and thanksgiving, he still presenteth us unto God, and laboureth to reconcile God unto us; hee layes open before his Father his bloudy wounds and stripes, and by them beseecheth him to have mercy upon us; and in this respect, as well because the dignity of his Priesthood still remaines in himselfe, and the effect in us, as because continually he blesseth us, and mediateth for us, he is stiled a Priest for ever: not such a Priest as the Levites were, who held their office for their life, and after left it to their successors, who were in the end to re∣signe it into the hands of a Mediatour; but such a Priest as Melchizedek was, a singular Priest, an everlasting Priest, a royall Priest, a Priest who nei∣ther succeeded any, nor any him, a Priest for ever
After the order of Melchizedek. For the opening of this passage three points are to be cleared:
1. Touching the name, though it bee one word in the Greeke and La∣tine,
and carry the forme of a proper name, yet in the originall it is two; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and seemeth rather to be an appellative, signifying my righte∣ous Lord, or the righteous Lord of my appointment: as Psal. 2.6. I have set my King, &c. Howbeit, as the name of Augustus was the common stile of all the Romane Emperours, yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the sirname of Octavius, from whom the rest received it; so it is not unlikely, that the stile of Melchize∣dek was at the first attributed to this famous King of Salem, who met A∣braham with a present as he returned from the slaughter of the Kings; yet afterwards, either by adulation, or for other reasons, it might be given to his successors.
Of the interpretation of this name we can make no doubt, sith the Apo∣stle hath construed it unto us (viz.)s 1.24 King of righteousnesse, and after that, King of Salem, which is King of peace; whence some gather consequent∣ly, that the most righteous Kings are most peaceable, and that hee can bee no King of peace, who is not a King of righteousnesse. Where righteous∣nesse doth flourish, there shall be abundance of peace. As in the name of Melchizedek King of Salem, so in the heart of every good King righte∣ousnesse and peace ought to kisse each other. Now Christ is a King of righ∣teousnesse in three respects:
He administreth righteousnesse, because hee ruleth his Church with at 1.25 scepter of righteousnesse: he wrought righteousnesse in fulfilling the Law, which is calledu 1.26 righteousnesse, and by his grace also he enableth us to work righteousnesse, and in some good measure to fulfill his commandements: he imputeth righteousnesse, when he justifieth the ungodly, and accoun∣teth faith for* 1.27 righteousnesse to him that worketh not, but beleeveth: for God made him that knew no sinne, to bex 1.28 sinne for us, that wee might be made the righteousness of God in him, that no flesh should glory in his presence: for of him arey 1.29 we in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisedome, and righteousnes, and sanctification, and redemption.
2. Tovching the person of Melchizedek, there are sixe opinions: the first,
1. Of certaine Heretickes, called the Melchizedekians, who taught, that Melchizedek was az 1.30 power of God greater than Christ, and that hee was the Mediatour and Advocate of Angels, as Christ is of men.
2. Of Hierax the Egyptian and his followers, who taught, that Melchi∣zedek wasa 1.31 Christ himselfe, who before his incarnation appeared in a hu∣mane shape to Abraham.
3. Of the author of the booke, q. Vet. & N. Test. who writeth, that Melchizedek is the Holy Ghost.
4. Of Origen and Didymus, who thought Melchizedek to be anb 1.32 Angel.
5. Of Aben Ezra, Bagud Haturim, Levi Benyerson, David Chimki, and of thec 1.33 Samaritans and Hebrewes generally, who confidently affirme, that Melchizedek was Shem the son of Noah.
6. Ofd 1.34 Dionysius Areopagita, Epiphanius, Theodoret, Hippolytus, Pro∣copius, Eusebius, Eustathius, Calvin, Junius, Musculus, Mercerus, Pereri∣us, Pareus, and divers others, who hold it most probable that this Mel∣chizedek was one of the Kings of Canaan.
In this variety of opinions, backed with manifold authorities, as Tully spake of the soule, that it was lesse difficult to resolve what she is not, than what she is; so we may say of Melchizedek, that it is a far easier matter to determine who he was not, than who he was.
[Refut. 1] 1. He was not any power of God greater than our Saviour, or the Angels Advocate: for neither is there any inequality between the divine persons, neither have the evill Angels any Advocate to plead for them, who are condemned already, and reserved in chaines of darkness till the great day. The text of Scripture which they wrested to their fancy, no way advan∣tageth them. For Christ is said, a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, not because he was inferiour to him in person or office, but because he succee∣ded him in time, and bare an office framed after a sort according to the pat∣terne of his.
[Refut. 2] 2. He was not the Sonne of God, the second person in Trinity: for the type must needs be distinguished from the truth; but Melchizedek was a glorious type of Christ, and is saide 1.35 assimilari, to be likened to the Son of God: he was not therefore the Son of God, but his fore-runner in the of∣fice of Priesthood.
[Refut. 3] 3. He was not the Holy Ghost; for Moses describeth him to bee a man that ruled in Salem, and executed also the office of a Priest to God: which cannot be affirmed of the Holy Ghost, who never tooke our nature upon him, nor is any where in holy Scripture termed a Priest of the most high God. The onely footing which this opinion hath, is upon that ground, that Melchizedek is said to bef 1.36 without father; which ground no way sup∣porteth this opinion. For wee cannot argue from one attribute of Melchi∣zedek affirmatively, though we may negatively. This argument is good, He that hath a father reckoned among men, is not Melchizedek; but this is not so, The Holy Ghost is without father, therefore he is Melchizedek. For God the Father, the first person in Trinity is, as also Adam the first man was, without father or mother, yet neither of them Melchizedek.
[Refut. 4] 4. He was not an Angel: for it is a thing unheard of in the Church of God, that the angels of heaven should sway earthly scepters, or discharge the fun∣ction of Priests. What have Angels of heaven to do with feasting armies, or receiving tythes of spoyles, as Melchizedek did from the hands of A∣braham? These foure opinions have been long agoe exploded, the two re∣maining stand still in competition for the truth.
5. The advocates for Sem plead hard: Sem (say they) as appeareth in the story of Genesis, lived to the time of Abrahams victory, & to him it was promised, that the Canaanites should be his servants, and consequently that Salem their Metropolis should be his seat, where Melchizedek was King. Neither was there any greater man than Abraham, to whom that great Patriarch should doe homage, and pay tythes, save Sem. Lastly, those pre∣rogatives of Melchizedek (without father, without mother, without beginning of dayes, or end of life) agree best to Sem, who might be said to be without
these, either in the notice of the text, or in the speech of men: because he was now so aged, and had lived so long after the Floud, that no man then living remembred his Parents. He might likewise be said to be without beginning of dayes in respect of the new world after the Floud, and without end of life in respect of the old world before the Floud.
[Refut. 5] Notwithstanding all these allegations in the behalfe of Sem, the truth goeth not so cleare for him, but that it is encountred with many and great difficulties. For there is no ground to beleeve that Sem left the East, and set up his rest ing 1.37 Judea: neither is it likely that the Spirit would have de∣scribed a man worth eternall memorie in such an obscure manner, and under such a new name, that he remaines yet unknowne. Were he Sem, why should Moses conceale his name? Moreover, the Apostle in the seventh of theh 1.38 Hebrewes saith in expresse words, that the pedegree of Melchizedek is not accounted among men; but Sems is, as we reade ini 1.39 Genesis: neither is it a solid answer, which yet is given by many learned men, to say that Sems genealogie is not accounted by the name of Melchizedek. For no more is Jacobs accounted by the name of Israel, yet none thereupon would say that Jacobs genealogie is not set downe by Moses. The Apostles com∣parison standeth not in the bare name, but in the person of Melchizedek: whether by the name of Melchizedek, or by the name of Sem his pede∣gree be set downe, it is certaine hee cannot be that man whom St. Paul in this resembleth to Christ, that he was without father or mother accounted among men, for his Parents are upon record.
6 What then shall we conclude? Either that he was a Ruler of Canaan,* 1.40 whose genealogie is no where set downe, nor the day of his birth nor death; or that he was a man immediately sent from God, and shewed one∣ly to the earth, and afterwards taken away after the maner of Enoch, or E∣lias, that he might be likened in all things to the Sonne of God; or that the Apostle hath an eye onely to Moses his relation, in that place where Mel∣chizedek is brought in by him, blessing Abraham, and receiving tithes from him, without any mention there of his Parents in the flesh, or succes∣sour in his office, or day of his birth or death. So are wee to conceive of our high Priest, who was without father according to his manhood, with∣out mother touching his Godhead, and in his person, which was meerely di∣vine, without beginning of dayes, or end of yeeres.
3 Touching his order or offices, it is certaine that he was both King and Priest. For he was King of Salem, and Priest of the most high God: the conjunction of which two offices was not unusuall in those elder times a∣mong the heathen: for by the light of nature they saw such majestie in the person of a King, and eminencie in the office of a Priest, that they judged none so worthy of the Priesthood as their Kings, nor any so capable of the Kingdome as their Priests: and therefore in most places they either crowned their Priests and gave them power; or sacred their Kings, and gave them orders. Right so doth Virgil describe Anius, as Moses doth Melchizedek, invested with both dignities:
k 1.41Rex idem Anius, Phoebi{que} Sacerdos.
At this day the Kings of the East Indians are stiled Brameres, that is,
Priests, and by the law are to die in a holy place, as persons sacred to God.l 1.42 Aristotle remembreth such an ancient custome among the Grecians, Res divinae committebantur Regibus; andm 1.43 Tullie among the Romans: and Stobeus setteth a faire colour upon it, The best of all, that is, God, ought to be honoured and served by the best, that is, the Prince; and the service of God, which is or should be, in all well ordered States, the chiefest of all cares, ought to be the care of the chiefest, that is, the King: which made Lycurgus, the Law-giver of the Lacedaemonians, ambitious of the title of the Priest of Apollo, and Solon of Priest of Minerva, and induced Mercurius Trismegistus, Au∣gustus, Titus, and Trajan, to assume this sacred title into their stile, and an∣nexe the Priesthood to the Crowne.
n 1.44Accessit titulis Pontificalis honos.
Wherein they may all seeme to have taken Melchizedek for their patterne, who the first of all that ever we reade, mingled both oyles, and compassed the Mitre with a Crowne; bearing a Scepter in one hand, and a Crozure in the other, more fully to represent the Sonne of God, who remaineth a Priest, and reigneth a King for ever.
This resemblance betweene them satisfieth not our Adversaries, they straine this text hard to draw bloud from it, even the bloud of Christ sacri∣ficed in the Masse. If (say they) Christ be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek, then he must daily offer a sacrifice unto God under the formes of bread and wine, as also did Melchizedek. And this is the fairest evidence they bring out of Scripture for the sacrifice of the Masse. Against which we object,
1 That neither the Hebrew letter, nor the vulgar Latine, the authority whereof no Papist dare impeach, importeth that Melchizedek offered bread and wine, buto 1.45 brought forth; protulit, non obtulit.
2 Admit of the word offered; what say they to Rabbi Solomon, Tertulli∣an, Ambrose, yea, Andradius also, and other Papists of note, who referre this offering to Abraham, not to God? the bread and wine he offered was a present to Abraham, not a sacrifice to God. Obtulit (say they) Abraha∣mo panem & vinum; and will they make no difference betweene an office of civility and a sacrifice of religion?
3 Admit Melchizedek offered this bread and wine, or some part of it, to God, yet doth not the Spirit of God recommend his Priesthood, as being any way remarkable for the sacrifice he offered, but for the blessing where∣with he blessed Abraham. For so it followeth in the text, ver. 19, 20. And he was the Priest of the most high God, and he blessed him, and said, &c. And from this act of his office the Apostle inferreth, thatq 1.46 Melchizedek was a Priest of a higher order and ranke than Levi, who blessed him in the loynes of Abraham, and received tithes from him: Without contradiction, saith the Apostle, the lesse is blessed of the greater.
4 Admit that his Priesthood were as remarkeable for his offering, as for his blessing, yet all this comes short of the point in question, to prove that Christ is said to be a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, in regard of his sacrifice of bread and wine. For Christ never offered a sacrifice of bread
and wine, as we are all upon an accord, the sacrifice which he offered was his body and bloud.
5. Had he offered at his last Supper a sacrifice of bread and wine, and not instituted a Sacrament in bread and wine, yet that offering would not intitle him to the Priesthood of Melchizedek, more than to the Priesthood of Levi. For the Priests of the Law also offered bread and wine. Doubtlesse there must be something eminent and extraordinarie in the Priesthood of Melchizedek, in regard whereof Christ is said to be a Priest after his order: and we need not seek far for singular resemblances between them, the Apo∣stle hath excellently paralleled them in the seventh of the Hebrewes.
To contract all in briefe: Melchizedek was a Priest,
And in these respects chiefly Christ is stiled a Priest after the order of Mel∣chizedek, that is to say, a
Had there beene yet a more speciall and remarkeable agreement between Christ and Melchizedek in regard of the sacrifice of bread and wine, how commeth it to passe that the Apostle omitteth it, where professedly hee compareth them, and maketh use even of nominall conveniences betweene them? He who presseth verball congruities, would he have pretermitted any reall, especially such an one, as, if it were true, were more remarke∣able than all the rest? viz. that as Melchizedek offered no flesh of beasts to God, or bloudy sacrifice, but bread and wine; so Christ at his last Sup∣per offered himselfe, and hath commanded the Priests of the Gospell to the end of the world to offer a daily unbloudie sacrifice, under the formes of bread and wine.
They will peradventure replie, that though the Apostle for some speciall reason pretermitted this resemblance betweene them, yet the ancient Fa∣thers have not baulked it. For St.r 1.47 Cyprian saith in expresse termes, that Christ offered a sacrifice to God his Father, and he offered the same which Melchizedek had done, to wit, bread and wine. And St.s 1.48 Jeromes words are as direct, Melchizedek in a figure offered bread and wine, and dedicated the mysterie of Christians in the body and bloud of our Saviour. And Eusebiust 1.49 Emissenus speaketh as fully as either St. Cyprian or St. Jerome; Melchize∣dek in offering bread and wine prefigured Christs sacrifice. This I confesse is the language of some of the Ancients, whose words notwithstanding, though put upon the tentors of a Jesuiticall interpretation, and stretched to the utmost, will not reach home to their purpose. For they passe not be∣yond one of these points, either that Christ resembleth Melchizedek in this, that as Melchizedek brought forth bread and wine to refresh Abra∣ham and his armie; so he at his last Supper brought forth bread and wine before his Disciples, and instituted a Sacrament by them to refresh their soules: or that Christ offered that in substance and veritie which Mel∣chizedek offered in type and figure, to wit, his bodie and bloud. Thus St. Cyprian expresseth himselfe in the same sentence, saying, He offered the same which Merchizedek did, bread and wine, suum scilicet corpus & sangui∣nem, to wit, his body and bloud. And the Author of the Treatise De coena Domini, who carrieth the name of St.u 1.50 Cyprian, very well cleareth the mat∣ter, saying, Christ at his last Supper delivered with his owne hands bread and wine to his Disciples, but on the Crosse rendred his body into the hands of the Souldiers, to be wounded and crucified, to verifie the type, and accomplish the figure, and fully resemble the patterne of Melchizedek. And this may serve for the sense and construction of this text of Scripture: let us now see how it may serve for our use and instruction.
First, it instructeth us in the lawfull use of an oath, which is here warran∣ted by the practice of God himselfe, Juravit Jehova, The Lord sware.
Secondly, in the certaintie of our salvation, grounded upon the immuta∣bility of Gods purpose, He will not repent.
Thirdly, in the dignity of the Priesthood of the Gospell, which was the calling of our blessed Lord and Saviour, Thou art a Priest.
Fourthly, in the abrogation of all legall rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices, by the perpetuall Priesthood of Christ. But because these are pathes trod by every one, I will proceed to the three last observations.
Fifthly, in the necessitie of order in the Church, Sacerdos secundum ordi∣nem. Though Christ were a singular and extraordinarie Priest, yet he had a president, and was made after an order: he who ordaineth all, would be or∣dained himselfe, to establish order in the Ministerie. As Christ himselfe, so all Ministers of holy things, must be secundum ordinem, after some order. I demand then after what order our Popist Priests are made? whether after the order of Aaron or Melchizedek? If after the order of Aaron, then are they to offer bloudie sacrifices, and performe other carnall rites, long agoe abrogated: if after the order of Melchizedek, then they are very happie. For then they are to be Kings and Priests, then they are not to succeed any other, nor any other them: then, as hath beene shewed, they are singular,
everlasting, and royall Priests. We may put a like interrogatorie to many of our Brownists or Anabaptisticall Teachers, who run before they are sent, and answer before they are called; being like wandering starres, fixed in no certaine course; or wilde corne, growing where they were not sowne; or like unserviceable pieces of Ordnance, which flie off before they are discharged. If men, though endowed with gifts, might discharge a Pasto∣rall function, or doe the worke of an Evangelist, without a lawfull mission, St. Pauls question had beene to little purpose,u 1.51 How shall they preach un∣lesse they be sent? What calling have these men? ordinarie or extraordi∣narie? If ordinarie, where are their orders? if extraordinarie, where are their miracles? If Christ himselfe would not take upon him the Priest∣hood till he was called thereunto, as Aaron, what intolerable presumption is it in these, not to take, but to make their owne commission, and to call men by the Gospell without a calling according to the Gospell. It is not more unnaturall for a man to beget himselfe, than to ordaine himselfe a Priest. But because these men will not be ordered by reason, I leave them to au∣thority, and come to the
Sixth observation, which is the Prerogative of Christ,* 1.52 who was ordai∣ned a Priest of Melchizedeks order, whereby he was qualified to beare both offices, Kingly and Priestly. For that Christ alone may execute both charges, besides the faire evidence of this Scripture, Uzziahs judgement maketh it a ruled case, who presuming to burne incense to the Lord, incen∣sed the wrath of God against himselfe. A rare and singular judgement, and worthy perpetuall memorie; he who, not content to sway the royall Scep∣ter, would lay hold on the Censer, and discharge both offices, was for ever discharged of both: and even then when he tooke upon him to cleanse the people, was smitten with a foule and uncleanx 1.53 disease. So dangerous a thing is it, even for Soveraigne Princes, the Lords Annointed, to encroach upon the Church, and assume unto themselves and usurpe Christs prerogative. Whereof the Bishops of Roane and Rhemes were bold to bid their Sove∣reigne Lewis, the then French King, beware, informing him, Quod solus Christus fieri potuit Rex & Sacerdos, that it was the prerogative of Christ alone to beare both offices. And Popey 1.54 Nicolas himselfe concurreth with them in judgement; When the truth, that was Christ, saith he, was once come, after that neither did the Emperour take upon him the Bishops right, nor the Bishop usurp the Emperours, because the same Mediatour of God and man, the man Christ Jesus, distinguisheth the offices of each power, assigning unto them proper actions, to the end that the Bishop, which is a souldier of Christ, should not wholly intangle himselfe in worldly affaires: and againe, the Prince, which is occupied in earthly matters, should not be ruler of divine things, viz. the preaching of the Word, and administration of the Sacraments. To make a medley (saithz 1.55 Synesius) of spirituall and temporall power, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. There is great difference between the Scepter and the Censer; the Chaire of Moses, and the Throne of David; the tongue of the Minister, and the hand of the Magistrate; the materiall sword that killeth, and the spirituall that quickeneth. To the King (saith St.a 1.56 Chrysostome) are the bodies of men committed, to the Priest their soules: the King pardoneth civill offen∣ces and crimes, the Priest remitteth the guilt of sinne in the conscience: the
King compelleth, the Priest exhorteth: the Kings weapons are outward and materiall, the Priests inward and spirituall. A like distinction St.b 1.57 Jerome maketh betweene them; The King ruleth men, though unwilling, the Bishop can doe good upon none but those that are willing: the King holdeth his sub∣jects in awe with feare and terrour, the Priest is appointed for the service of his flocke: the King mastereth their bodies with death, the Priest preserveth their soules to life. But the farthest of any St.c 1.58 Bernard presseth this point, and toucheth Pope Eugenius to the quicke: It is the voice of the Lord, Kings of the Nations rule over them, &c. But it shall not be so with you; goe to then, usurp if thou dare, either an Apostleship, if thou art a Lord; or Lordlike dominion, if thou art an Apostle: thou art expressely forbid both: if thou wilt have both, thou shalt lose both.
But why doe I prosecute this point? Doth it concerne any now adayes? Doth any one man beare both these offices? I answer affirmatively, the High-priest at Rome doth. For he compasseth his Mitre with a triple Crown: and, as if he bare this name written upon his thigh, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, challengeth to himselfe a power to depose Kings, and dispose of their Kingdomes. Doth any one desire to know who is that man of sinne, spoken of by thed 1.59 Apostle, who opposeth and exalteth himselfe above all that is called God? Let him learne of the Prophet who are called gods, (Dixi dii estis,e 1.60 I have said ye are gods) and it will be no matter of great diffi∣cultie to point at him who accounteth that hee doth Kings a great honour when he admitteth them to kisse his feet, hold his stirrop, serve him at table, and performe other baser offices, prescribed in their booke of ceremonies. I can tell you who it was that made the Emperour Henrie the fourth, with his Queene and young Prince, in extreme frost and snow, to waite his leisure three dayes, barefooted and in woollen apparell, at the gates of Canusium: it was Gregory the seventh, otherwise called Hildebrand. I can shew you who set the Imperiall Crowne upon the head of Henrie the sixt, not with his hand, but with his foot, and with the same foot kicked it off againe, saying, I have power to make Emperours, and unmake them at my plea∣sure: it was Pope Coelestine. I can bring good proofe who it was that would not make peace with Frederick the first, till in the presence of all the peo∣ple, at the doore of St. Markes Church in Venice, the Prince had cast his body fl••t on the ground, and the Pope setting his foot on his neck, advanced himselfe, blasphemously wresting the Scripture, and applying those words of the Psalmist to himselfe,* 1.61 Thou shalt tread upon the Lion and the Basilisk: it was Pope Adrian, who was afterwards choaked with a flie. I could re∣late unto you in what Councell divine majestie is ascribed to the Pope, and a power above all powers: in the Councell of Lateran, under Leo the tenth. But I tremble at such horrible blasphemies, and leave the Authors and maintainers of them to the censure of the true Melchizedek; who, as he is a Prince of peace, so he is also Rex justitiae, King of righteousnesse, and will one day right himselfe, and all his servants, and destroy the man of sin with the breath of his mouth, and brightnesse of his presence.
7. The next point in which this Text instructeth us, is the strength and validity of an oath. God, when he would shew unto us the immutability of his decree concerning Christs Priesthood, confirmeth it unto him by an
oath, thereby declaring, that the greatest evidence of truth, and strongest assurance of faith between man and man, nay between God and man, is an oath. It is the soveraigne instrument of justice, the indissoluble bond of amity, the safest refuge of innocency, the surest warrant of fidelity, the strongest sinew of all humane society. Detestable therefore and ••amna∣ble is their doctrine and practice, who straine and weaken the sinew which holdeth the members of all politike bodies together: who cancell that bond, which being made on earth, is registred in the high Court of hea∣ven, and the three persons in the blessed Trinity are witnesses thereunto: who either untye this everlasting knot by cunning equivocation; or cut it asunder by Papall dispensation. O my deare brethren, hold not with them who breake with God, sweare not to their doctrine, who maintaine for∣swearing, take not part with that religion which taketh away all religious obligation. Is that (thinke you) the Orthodoxe faith, which alloweth, and in some case commendethg 1.62 perfidiousnesse and treachery? Is their doctrine truth, Qui dogmatizant mendacium? who doctrinally teach the lawfulnesse of an equivocating lye; an•• that they may verifie their doctrine of lyes, be∣lye the Truth himself, and endeavour to make that which I tremble to utter, Jesum ipsumh 1.63 Jesuitam, Jesus himselfe in this point a Jesuit? O ubi estis fon∣tes lachrymarum! Of all beasts, we have those in greatest detestation which devoure their owne young. What are our words and promises, our vowes and oathes, but the issue of our owne mouth? which they, who resume and recall, what doe they other than eate and devoure their owne off-spring? The first that brake his allegiance in heaven was the Divell, and thereby became a Divell: and the first that brake promise on the earth was likewise the Divell to Adam and Eve, whose scholars they shew themselves, who teach that the Pope can dispense with the oath of allegiance, that oathes are better broken than kept with Heretickes. Such was Julius the second, who (if we may beleevei 1.64 Bodin) was not ashamed openly to professe, Fidem dan∣dam omnibus, servandam nemini. Such was Alexander the sixth, who when his son Borgias had drawne in the ring-leaders of the contrary faction by faire promises, and deepest protestations and oathes of pardon and reconci∣liation, and as soon as he had them all in his power, put them to the sword; his father applauded this his perfidious and barbarous act, and cryed out, O factum benè, O well done, and according to my hearts desire. Such wask 1.65 Mar∣tin the fifth, who when Alexander Duke of Licuania had sworne to protect the Hussites, wrote to him in these words, Know that thou couldest not, nor mightest not give faith to Heretickes; and that thou sinnest mortally, if thou keepest thy word and oath with them. Such was Hambertus the Embassadour ofl 1.66 Charles the fifth, who when the Lady Katherine, the youngest sister of that Emperour, was espoused to John Frederick. Duke of Saxony, & the in∣struments were drawne and sealed, as soone as ever there was a change of Religion in Saxony, he perswaded the young Lady to break off the match, affirming openly, that faith was not to be kept with Heretickes. Such were the Popish Divines of Paris, who both in their Sermons and printed bookes taught openly, that them 1.67 Prince was not bound to keep faith with Sectaries: and to that purpose alledged a decree of the Councell of Constance. Such was Clemens the seventh, who when Charles the fifth had resolved upon an
expedition against the Moores, to which hee had formerly bound himselfe by oath, sendeth unto him a Bull, whereby hee releaseth him of all oathes that hee had taken for the expulsing those Infidels, notwithstanding any constitution Apostolicall, statute, ordinance, or oath to the contrary; yea, though ratified by the See of Rome with an expresse clause of excluding any dispensation or relaxation whatsoever. Such was Julian the Popes Le∣gate, who perswaded Uladislaus King of Hungarie & Bohemia, to undertake a wicked warre against Amurath the Turke, contrary to oath, assuring him that the Pope allowed of it; and there is no doubt he did so: but (asn 1.68 Bodin observeth religiously) Pontifex probavit, Deus immortalis non probavit, Almighty God allowed not of it: for Uladislaus the King was slaine in the battell, his whole army put to flight, & Julian the Popes Legate mortally wounded; to whom, as he was now breathing out his last perjured breath, Gregory Sarmosa exprobated his wicked counsell and pestilent doctrine, say∣ing,o 1.69 Goe to, Julian, and tell the King now in the other world (or in hell) that faith is not to be kept with Heretickes and Infidels.
You have heard how this Text thundereth against the Fathers of the Ro∣mane Church, & all who embrace or practice their perfidious tenets: mark, I beseech you, now a while how it lighteneth upon the children of our Church, and all who defend the certainty as well of morall as theologicall faith. As when there came ap 1.70 voice from heaven, Jesus said, This voice came not because of mee,* 1.71 but for your sakes; so we may truly say of the oath in my Text, God tooke not it so much because of Christ, to secure him in his of∣fice, as for our sakes, to assure us of the remission of our sinnes, purchased by the bloud which Christ as a Priest offered upon the Crosse▪ How are we assured hereof? what security doth he give us? The greatest that ever was taken or given, the oath of Almighty God. If the bare word of God is a∣ble to sustaine this whole frame of nature, shall not his oath be able to sup∣port a weake Christian in the hottest skirmish with Satan, and most dread∣full conflict with despaire? What though our consciences be so polluted, that we abhorre our selves? yet let us not languish in despaire; for we have a Priest that can cleanse them: there is no staine so fowle, which the bloud of Christ will not fetch out. If we have but so much faith as a graine of mustard seed, we may say withq 1.72 Bernard in his divine rapture: The death of Christ is the death of my death, because he dyed that I might live: for how should he not live, for whom life dyed? O then in a spirituall dereliction, when our heart is as cold as a stone, and we are at the very brinke of despaire, apprehending the full wrath of God against us for all our sinnes, let us not say to the mountaines, Cover us, and to the hills, Fall upon us; but flie to the rocke in Horeb, Christ Jesus, and hide our selves in the holes thereof: Foramina petrae sunt vulnera Christi, The holes of this rocke are the wounds of our Savi∣our: let us by faith run into the holes of this rocke, and feare nothing. Yea, but even there wee heare the cry of our sins like the cry of Sodome; and therefore how can we be safe? Listen wee but a while, and wee shall heare another cry farre lowder, the cry of Christs bloud, which speaketh bet∣ter things for us than the bloud of Abel. Yea, but how may wee be assured that his bloud speaketh for us, and maketh continuall intercession to his Fa∣ther to be reconciled unto us? By his owne promise and his Fathers oath.
If he should neglect to solicite for them, who truly repenting of their sins by faith relye upon him, he should breake his owne word; and neglect the office, to the discharge whereof his Father hath sworne him, saying, Thou art a Priest for ever. How can we ever thinke, that hee will refuse us, who gave us himselfe? Will he spare breath for us, who breathed out his soule for us? Yea, but we sinne continually; and he intercedeth perpetually: he is a Priest for ever. Yea, but we are weake, and our enemies strong, what can a Priest stead us? he may purge our sinnes, but can he save our persons? he may appease the wrath of God, but can he rescue us from the violence of man? he may stand in the gap between God and us, but can he stand in the field for our defence against our enemies? That hee can: for hee is a Priest after the order of Melchizedek, a Kingly Priest; a Priest to instruct us, and a King to protect us: a Priest to reconcile us to God, and a King to subdue our enemies unto us: a Priest to cloth us with his righteousnesse, and a King to arme us with his power: a Priest to consecrate us Priests, and a King to crowne us Kings. To whom King and Priest, and to the Father who or∣dained him, not by imposition of hands, but by deposition of oath, and to the holy Spirit who made the instrument and sealed it, three persons, and one everliving and everloving God, let us as Kings command the ut∣most service of our bodies and soules, and as Priests offer them both intirely for living sacrifices, most agreeable and acceptable to him. Amen.
Apoc. 1.5, 6.
Mat. 22.42, 43, 44.
Plin. panegyr. Trasan. Impe∣rium super Im∣peratorem Im∣peratoris voce delatum est, & nihil magis subjecti animo factum est, quam quod cae∣pit imperare.
c. 7.20, 21.
Exod. 3.14.
Exod. 6.3.
Quid est Dei juramentum? promissionis firmamentum: si tu jurando te∣staris Deum, cur non Deus jurando testetur semetiplum? L. 16. de Civit. Dei c 32. Quid est Dei ve••i veracis{que} juratio, nisi pro∣missi confirma∣tio, & infideli∣um quaedam in∣crepatio?
Ezek. 18.3.
Psal. 22.16.
Tertul. l. de peniten c. 4. O beatos nos quorum causâ Deus jurat; O miserrimos, si nec juranti Do¦mino credimus.
Gen. 6.6.
1 Sam. 15.35
Psal. 106.15.
Jer. 18.10.
Jon. 3.9.
Hil. de Trin. l. 5. Non po∣test Deus nisi per Deum in∣telligi, à Deo discendum est quid de Deo in∣telligendum est
Num. 23.19. God is not a man that hee should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent: hath he said, and shall be not doe it? hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
L. 9. de Civ. Dei. Poeniten∣tiae nomen u∣surpavit effe∣ctus, non illius turbulentus af∣fectus.
1 Sam. 15.29.
H••b. 13.8.
2 Cor. 1.20. For all the pro∣mises of God in him are Yea, and in him A∣men, unto the glory of God by us.
Aquin. par. 1. q. 16. art. 7. Ali∣ud est mutare voluntatem, ali∣ud velle muta∣tionem.
Esay 53.10.
Hebr 7.2.
Psal. 45 6. The scepter of thy Kingdome is a right scep∣ter.
Mat. 3.15. Thus it becom∣meth us to ful∣fill all righte∣ousnesse.
Rom. 4.5.
2 Cor. 5.21.
1 Cor. 1.30.
Epiph. hae∣res. 55.
Ystella in Gen. 14.
Hieron. ep. ad Evag.
Jer. & E∣piph. loc sup. cit.
Coel. hierarc. c. 9. Haeres. 55. in Gen. 14.
Hebr. 7.3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
Hebr. 7.3.
Calvin. in Gen. 14. Ne{que} enim virum ae∣ternâ memoriâ dignum, Do∣minus novo tantum & ob∣scuro nomine indicasset, ut maneret igno∣tus; ne{que} proba∣bile est Semum ex Oriente mi∣grasse in Judae∣am.
Ver. 6.
Gen. 10.22.
Confirm. 6.
Virg. Aen. 3.
Arist. pol. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
Cic. pro dom. ad Pontif. Cum multa divinitus a majoribus nostris inventa atque instituta sunt, tum nihil prae••larius quam quod e∣osdem religio∣nibus deorum immortalium & summae reip. prae esse volue∣runt. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vid. Lips. polit. l. 4 c. 1.
Ovid. Fast. l. 1. & l. 3. Et fiunt ipso sacra colente Deo.
Gen. 4.18.
H••b. 7.7.
Ep. l. 2. ep. 3. ad Cecil. Sacri∣ficium Deo pa∣tri obtulit, & obtulit hoc i∣dem quod Mel∣chizedek.
Hieron. ep. ad M••rc. Melchi∣zedek in typo Christi panem & vinum obtu∣lit, & mysteri∣u•• Christia∣norum in Sal∣v••toris corpore & sanguine de∣dicavit.
Euseb. Emis∣sen. Serm. 5. de Pasch. Melchi∣zedek oblatio∣ne panis & vini Christi sacrifi∣cium figuravit.
Cypr. de unct. Chris. Dedit i∣ta{que} Dominus noster in mensâ in quà ultimum cum Discipulis participavit convivium pro∣priis manibus panem & vi∣num, in Cruce verò manibus militum corpus tradidit vulne∣randum, ut•• A∣postolis secreti∣us impressa sin∣cera veritas, & vera sinceritas exponeret gen∣tibus, quomodo panis & vinum caro esset & sanguis, & qui∣bus rationibus causae effectibus convenirent, & diversa nomina vel species ad u∣nam reduceren∣tur essentiam, & significantia & significata ••isdem vocabu∣lis censerentur.
Rom. 10.15.
Obs. 6.
2 Chr. 26.20.
Causab. l. de libert. Eccles. Gratian. dist. 96. cum ad ve∣rum.
Syn. ••p.
De verb. Esa.
Hieron. ad Heliod Rex nolentibus praeest, Episco∣pus volentibus, &c.
Bern. de con∣sid. ad Eugen. Reges gentium dominantur••••s, vos non sic; au∣de ergo usur∣pare, aut Do∣minus Aposto∣latum, aut Apo∣stolicus Domi∣natum.
2 Thes. 2.3.
Psal. 82.6.
Psal. 91.13.
Aug. de men∣dac. ad consent.
See Parsons sober reckoning with Thomas Morton, and the same L. Bi∣shop of Du∣resme Tract. de aequivocat.
Bodin. de rep. l. 5. c. 6.
Cocleus hist. Hussit. l. 5. an∣no 1423 Noris te dare fidem haereti∣cis non potu∣isse, & peccare mort••liter •••• servaris.
Sleia l. 6. Anno 1527. Anno 1577.
Aug. Thual. hist. l. 63. Aper∣to capitein concionibus & evulgatis scrip∣tis ad fidem sectariis ser∣vandam non obligari prin∣cipem cont••n∣debant, allato in cam rem Concilii Con∣stantiensis de∣oreto.
Loc. ant. cit.
I nunc, Juli∣ane, & dic ••egi tuo apud infe∣ros, Haereticis fidem non esse servandam.
John 12.28.
Ver. 30.
Mors Chri∣sti mors meae mortis, quia il∣le mortuus est ut ego viv••m: quopacto enim non vivat, pro quo moritur vita?