An historical vindication of the divine right of tithes from scripture, reason, and the opinion and practice of Jews, Gentiles, and Christians in all ages : designed to supply the omissions, answer the objections, and rectife the mistakes of Mr. Selden's History of tithes / by Tho. Comber ...

CHAP. I. Of Tithes before the Law.

§. I. ALmighty God, the Creator and the giver of all good things we enjoy, doth so com∣municate his Blessings to us, that though we have the use, he still retains his right to them all(a) 1.1, for the Earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof(b) 1.2. And in this sense when we dedicate any thing to him, we do but give him his own(c) 1.3. But though all that we have be his with respect to this general right, yet he doth not require we should actu∣ally give him all, provided we own his bounty and acknow∣ledge his right by offering some part to his honour, which being as a Quit-rent tendered to the Supreme Lord of the World, gives us right to enjoy the rest: A duty so evident in it self, that all Nations have learned from the Light of Na∣ture to make some such real oblation to their Gods, and some have thought Cain and Abel had no other guide to direct them in that first Offering we read of Gen. iv. 3.(d) 1.4 Though because there seems to have been a sacrifice of Beasts (which natural reason alone could not teach men to offer to God) and because Abel is said to offer by Faith(e) 1.5 (which must be grounded upon some declaration of Gods Will) therefore most Authors conclude that God himself first taught Adam this way of acknowledging him, and he from that Revelation taught it unto his Sons, who did an∣nually at a certain and solemn time make this oblation, as Aben Ezra gathers from that phrase In process of time, ver. 3.(f) 1.6 As for the Offering it self, the Ancients frequently call it First-Fruits(g) 1.7, and though the proportion is not re∣corded in Scripture, yet that dividing or separating Gods part from the rest of their Possessions (mentioned in the

LXX. Translation, where Cain is blamed for not rightly dividing(h) 1.8) seems to imply, there was some certain pro∣portion to be offered; and though Mr. Selden, pag. 7. calls this a mis-translation, and out of those Ancients that used it, would prove there is no quantity noted here. Yet the Tran∣slation was used generally by the Apostles and primitive Christians for nigh 400 years; and St. Paul plainly saith, Abel offered (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) a larger quantity in sacrifice than Cain, and some have expresly said the proportion was a Tenth(i) 1.9, and the general obtaining of that part after∣wards makes it probable enough: However at present we shall only take this for an instance of giving God some part of his Gifts back again as an acknowledgment that all comes from him, which is not only a principle of the Law of Nature, but a positive Command of Scripture also where we are enjoyned to honour the Lord with our substance, Prov. iii. 9. for, to Honour, signifies to give some gift, especially to our Superiours, or to those we would shew respect(k) 1.10; and though the proportion of this honorary gift be not named here, yet the next words —and with the First-fruits of all thy increase, as also the promise of filling our barns with plen∣ty, ver. 10. so usually made to paying of Tithes, Malach. iii. 10, &c. hath perswaded many, both Jewish and Christian Interpreters, to expound this place of Tithes(l) 1.11. Though we are content also to take this for a general precept of giving some part to God, and how Mankind came to fix upon the Tenth for that part, we shall proceed to enquire.

§. II. Though there were no written Law for a Tenth be∣fore the Levitical Precepts, yet 'tis most certain the fixing of that proportion for Gods part, had not its original from thence, because we have express Testimony that Holy Men had used to dedicate that part before, and that God had ap∣proved of that proportion, the Scripture instances in A∣braham and Jacob; and the Jewish Doctors out of their an∣cient Traditions affirm, that the rest of the Patriarchs also gave Tithes: Nachmunides speaks generally, The Patriarchs liberally gave their Tithes to the Lords Priests, viz. to Shem

and Heber(m) 1.12. R. Bechai saith, Our Doctors affirm, Isaac therefore measured the fruit of his Land that he might pay a just Tithe(n) 1.13. And that Job, (who lived before Moses Law) paid Tithes also, is attested by Authors of greatest credit a∣mong the Jews(o) 1.14. So that since the first is so certain, and probably was so frequent, it may be very fit to enquire, whence these Patriarchs learned, that this and no other was the part properly belonging to God: it seems most likely to have proceeded from Divine Revelation at first, for How could man know (saith a Judicious Writer) that he must give the Tenth, rather than the Ninth, the Eighth, or any other part of his goods, if he had not been taught it at first by God?(p) 1.15 If it be objected, That they pitched on this part by chance or fancy: I reply, Chance and fancy are uncertain and vari∣ous, and rarely the original of any constant and regular practice. If Abraham had thus chosen this part, others would have liked some other proportion, and there would have been variety; but since this and no other part is recorded to have been given, no doubt it came from a steadier and high∣er principle; besides it is certain, that God lid like and ap∣prove this Part, by his Care to record it for our imitation; by his not altering, but confirming this part in his written Law, and by his Blessing Jacob so liberally upon his vowing this part to him; all which may convince us, that he him∣self had directed the choice of this part at first, since he is not usually pleased with humane inventions in matters so nearly relating to his Worship, nor is he wont to take mens fancies for his pattern in Establishments of this kind, where∣fore he approved the Tenth part afterward, because he had directed it at first; which will be still more probable when we consider that these Patriarchs were very holy and reli∣gious Persons, inspired by the Spirit of God, and guided by the immediate direction thereof in all their solemn actions, and therefore 'tis likely in this also: they had then no writ∣ten Law to walk by, and the History of this period is so short, that very few of those immediate Commands which they received from God are left on record, or appear other∣wise than that the actions grounded on such commands are

set down as pleasing to God: from hence we may conclude, these Patriarchs had a command from Gods Spirit to give this proportion, though it be not written in Genesis. We read that Abraham obeyed Gods voice, and kept his Charge, his Commandements, his Statutes, and his Laws(q) 1.16; but there are not so many recorded Orders of so different kinds from God to him as will answer to each of those words; unless we grant there were many unwritten Revelations, among which might be this of Tithes: The Law of putting an A∣dulteress to death, upon which Judah proceeded(r) 1.17 is not on record before that practice, yet no doubt it was a Divine Revelation conveyed by Tradition since God confirmed it in the Law of Moses(s) 1.18: Yea, those famous Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah are generally believed to be such un∣written Traditions derived from Revelation at first: Yea, the most remarkable rite of Sacrificing was practiced be∣fore there was a written command for it, and yet that is generally believed to have been established by Divine Re∣velation; so that by parity of reason we may conclude, that God himself did choose this proportion of a Tenth, and teach it either to Adam, who conveyed it down by Tra∣dition, or else to Abraham, who is the first that is expresly recorded to have practised it; and this is sufficient to de∣duce it from a Divine original, and to prove that it was de∣rived from an unwritten Law of God at first, and that even in Abrahams time Tithes were due Jure Divino.

§. III. From the Institution we pass now to the Practice of Tithing, of which there are two famous instances in Scri∣pture during this period: The first is Genes. xiv. where A∣braham returning from his Victory over the four Kings, was met at Shaveh, or the Kings Dale, by Melchisedec King of Sa∣lem, who brought forth Bread and Wine, and he was the Priest of the most high God: And he blessed him and said, Blessed be Abraham of the most High God, possessor of Heaven and Earth, and blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine Ene∣mies into thine hand, And he gave him Tithes of all, ver. 18, 19, 20. and to shew this related to Gospel times, St. Paul largely

Paraphrases this History, and applies it to our Saviours Priesthood, Hebr. vii. Here therefore we will first enquire who this Melchisedec was, and secondly what these Tithes were which he received: First, the Scripture saith, He was King of Salem (not that which was near Scythopolis, but) that which was after called Jerusalem, very nigh unto which is that Shaveh, or the Kings Dale, where they are said to meet(t) 1.19, and indeed Jerusalem was Abrahams direct way to Hebron in his return from Hobah, and the fittest place for him to meet the King of Sodom, and though S. Hierom was told by a Jew, that he was King of the other Salem, yet he there confesses all Christians took it to be Jerusalem(u) 1.20, and so doth he himself elsewhere(w) 1.21; of this opinion also are all the famous Jewish Writers(x) 1.22, and Mr. Selden takes this to be the truer opinion(y) 1.23. Secondly, the Holy Ghost saith He was the Priest of the most High God: the great High Priest of the Greatest God (saith Philo:) we read also, that he did the office of a Priest in blessing Abraham, and blessing God for his Victory; and though this were an extraordinary oc∣casion, yet we may justly believe, that such a Priest (the type of Christ and of the Gospel Priesthood) was not negli∣gent at other times, but ordinarily and constantly did his office among those Canaanites and Phoenicians, as a just re∣ward whereof it is probable he did ordinarily receive Tithes from those under his charge, as the early payment of Tithes among those Phoenicians (of which more presently) may perswade us: And whereas we read not of any Ceremonial Worship that he performed, it is plain his Office consisted in those Eternal and Evangelical duties of Praying for his People and Praising God, to which we may add his bring∣ing out Bread and Wine, which the Fathers make the Type of the great Gospel Sacrament(z) 1.24, and therefore the An∣cients doubted not to affirm, that the Gospel Ministers were of the same Order with Melchisedec(a) 1.25. They have the same work to do, and deserve the same reward, viz.

Tithes, which we see are not (as some ignorant persons fan∣cy) appropriate to a Ceremonial Priesthood, but were paid to Melchisedec, whom St. Paul makes to be of a quite diffe∣rent Order from that of the Levitical Priesthood, whose Pedigree was to be proved and their descent to be on record; but Melchisedec's genealogy is not written(b) 1.26, his Tribe is not recorded, nor his Family or Successor mentioned, yet he had Tithes whose Priesthood was no more tied to any one Tribe than ours is under the Gospel; and as we derive our Priesthood from this Order, so we may also prove our right to Tithes from the payment of them unto the first Priest of this Order: 'Tis true, he was also a type of Christ, and (though not Christ himself, as some fancy(c) 1.27 yet) so like him, that the Fathers expound Abraham's ha∣ving seen Christ's day, John viii. 56. of this his meeting with his type Melchisedec: but his being a type of Christ's Priest∣hood, (in all points but that of offering a bloody Sacrifice) doth not hinder him from being a type of the Evangelical Priesthood also, which is in all things (except his offering himself on the Cross) the same with Christ's Priesthood, as he declares in his Commission to those Apostles (whose Successors ordained us,) As my Father sent me, even so send I you(f) 1.28; wherefore we conclude, that the first receiver of Tithes upon record was a Priest, not of the same Order with Levi, but of the same Order with the Evangelical Priesthood, and since they do the same Duties they have a good Title to the same Reward.

§. IV. The next enquiry is, what Melchisedec did receive: The Scripture saith it was Tithes of all(g) 1.29, and a Tenth part of all(h) 1.30 But Mr. S. cannot conceive it is meant of any thing but Spoils(i) 1.31, though he tell us, that Rab. Salomon and both the Syriac and Arabic Paraphrase (on Hebr. vii.) explain it by Tithes of all that he had: and Eucherius, Of all his Substance; to whom I add Tostatus and Mercer, who have de omnibus rebus suis: The Chaldee Paraphrase also with Junius and Tremelius, the LXX. and Vulgar, all speak gene∣rally, He gave him Tithe of all things(k) 1.32; wherefore there is

no reason why Mr. S. should restrain it to Tithe of Spoils on∣ly: Josephus indeed(l) 1.33 and divers other Authors cited in the Review(m) 1.34 do say, he paid Tithe of Spoils, but not any of them say it was only Tithe of Spoils, and Eucherius, who first speaks of Tithe of the Prey, and then of Tithe of his Sub∣stance, seems to intimate that Abraham paid Tithe of more than Spoils alone: And though Mr. S. would perswade us that St. Paul, Hebr. vii. 4. explains Tithes of all by (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) Tithe of Spoils; yet if we consult the place we shall find St. Paul adds, Tithes of Spoils, as a special in∣stance unto the general phrase used before Tithes of all: For the Apostle was to prove Melchisedec's Priesthood greater than Levi's, yea in this point of Tithing also, and therefore when he had said ver. 2. that Melchisedec had Tithes of all; lest it should be alleadged, that Levi also had Tithes of all, i. e. of all ordinary gain, he adds as a special prerogative of Melchisedec, ver. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. To whom also the Patriarch Abraham gave Tithe of the Spoils; that is, he gave this over and above the Tithe of his own estate, ver. 2. and herein Melchisedec's Tithing ex∣ceeded Levi's, who had not also Tithe of Spoils. And in∣deed Mr. S. feared to cite this Text aright, and left out the Particle [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] also, which shews that this was somewhat more than the Apostle had spoken of before. But further, there is no Scripture word used in this History except 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Heb. vii. 4. which can be interpreted Spoils, and (whatever Mr. S. doth pretend) this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth neither usually nor principally signifie, Spoils: The Etymology of it shews it originally signifies the Tops of heaps, which commonly be∣ing the best, made the Vulgar here translate it very pro∣perly De praecipuis; and because First-fruits were taken off from the Top of the heaps, and were of the first and best, thence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 comes to signifie First-fruits, as the Syriac Translator turns it here, and the Arabic to the same sense (not Tithe and Alms as Mr. Selden mistakes(a) 1.35, but) Tithe and choice Treasures: Nor did those Eastern Transla∣tions misread this Text so much as Mr. S. only they make the word [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] which Mr. S. wholly omits, to be very Empha∣tical,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉— to whom beside the Tithe the Patriarch gave of the First-fruits or choice Treasures, which confirms what we noted before: But to return to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all the Glossories assure us, that Tops of heaps and First-fruits, are the primary and usual signification thereof. Phavorinus gives no other sense of it, nor the Etymologicon Magnum, Hesy∣chius makes this to be the first sense, and only as a secondary sense saith it also signifies Prey or Spoils: And Suidas saith it properly signifies First-fruits of Fruits, or of Merchandize, and they say also (so he brings in the other sense) of things taken in war: which shews how little reason Mr. S. had to cite Hesychius and Suidas for Witnesses, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chiefly signified Spoils, but finally he produces only one Greek Proverb wherein it is used for Spoils, and then adds —in∣deed it elsewhere rarely occurs in this sense, pag. 3. whereas in the sense of First-fruits it occurs very often, and especially in the Christian Authors(b) 1.36. Wherefore St. Paul's saying, Abraham gave Tithe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, doth not certainly note he gave Tithe of Spoils, for it may properly be explain∣ed (that as he gave a Tenth part of all, v. 2. to note the quan∣tity, so) he gave Tithe also of the best parts, to note the quality of his gift: Or if we do expound it here to signifie Tithe of Spoils, yet nothing either in the Text or in any good Author can warrant us with Mr. S. to say it was only Spoils, which is a limiting that general word twice used by the Holy Ghost, Tithes of all. If it be objected, That Abraham had not his whole Estate there to give Tithes out of at that time? I Answer, The Scripture saith not he gave it then, but speaks indefinitely, He gave him Tithe of all, which may well enough be expounded, He then dedicated the Tithe of all his Estate by solemn Promise, and paid part of it then, and the rest afterward; nor is it unusual in Scripture or common Speech to say, We give, when we promise to give: so Abraham is said to have given Isaac all that he had(c) 1.37 not by actual dispossessing himself, but by promise, or as Rab. Salomon thinks, by a Deed in writing (declaring Isaac his heir, and) put into the Stewards hands to shew to the Friends of Rebecca, whom he was going to woe for his

Masters Son, so that he expounds ver. 10. All the goods of his Master were in his hand, to signifie a Deed containing his gift of all: So also our Ancestors are said to have given Tithes (not when they paid every years profits, but) when they made the solemn Promise: and thus Abraham might then give Melchisedec Tithes of all his Estate by Promise, for it was not only the present Spoils which were of Gods gift, but all the rest of his estate also, all that he had was be∣stowed freely on him by this most High God the Possessor of Heaven and Earth, as Melchisedec intimated to him. And therefore if Abraham did give no more but Tithe of Spoils, (or as Ben Ʋziel speaks, Of all that he brought back) now up∣on this extraordinary occasion, yet it is very probable he did ordinarily at other times give Melchisedec Tithes of all that came by Gods ordinary blessing. To prove which let it be considered, that Melchisedec is generally held to be Sem, as Mr. S. proves by the Testimonies of S. Hierom, Eucherius, the Samaritan Version, R. Salomon, Galatinus, &c.(d) 1.38 to whom we may add S. Ambrose(e) 1.39, and S. Augustine, who cites it as an old Tradition, that Canaan fell to the share of Sem, and that he lived there(f) 1.40. Supposing therefore (as the Jews and the generality of Christians affirm) that Melchisedec was Sem, who according to the Hebrew account lived till after Jacob was born. He was at this time the eldest per∣son living of Abrahams Family, and according to the custom of that Age (wherein the eldest Sons had the Priesthood)(g) 1.41, he was the Chief Priest at that time. Mr. S. indeed questions whether he were Noah's eldest Son or no; but the Rabbins (who he saith hold the contrary) do many of them expresly affirm he was the Eldest(h) 1.42, and R. Salomon is doubtful(i) 1.43; however Sem being always reckoned first, either he had the Primogeniture by nature, or it was trans∣ferred to him, and with it the Priesthood: And when the great High Priest and Ancestor of Abraham lived so nigh to him, we need not doubt but Abraham and he had corres∣pondence before this victory, which is also plain from his so readily coming out, not only to refresh him and his men, and to rejoyce with them in their return, but to offer up

(as Abrahams Priest) a Sacrifice of Praise to the most High that gave them this Victory: And when we consider that Mamre, where Abraham dwelt, is (according to S. Hierom) but 22 Roman miles from Jerusalem, or about seven German miles by the Scale in Adricomius's Mapps(k) 1.44, so that a late Traveller saith, He went out in the Morning, viewed Hebron and all places of note thereabouts, and came back to Jeru∣salem at night(l) 1.45. We have good reason to judge, that A∣braham did frequently partake of Melchisedec's Ministry, and ordinarily received his Prayers and his Blessing, and 'tis likely did annually pay him Tithes, though none but this extraordinary payment be mentioned in the short history of Genesis. 'Tis certain the Rabbins had a Tradition, that Sem (who with them is Melchisedec) was the Priest in ordinary of Abraham's Family; for when Rebecca was with Child of Twins, and went to enquire of the Lord, they say, She went to enquire of the Lord by Sem(m) 1.46, or (as Lyra out of them relates it) by Melchisedec(n) 1.47; they say also, that Jacob was educated in the Tents of Sem and Heber(o) 1.48, and, that he taught Joseph what he had learned of Sem and Heber(p) 1.49. All which makes it highly probable, that so Pious a man as A∣braham was, did ordinarily and regularly pay his Tithes to Melchisedec, and though it be recorded but once, yet we can no more infer from thence, that he only paid Tithes once, than we can that Melchisedec never blessed God but once, because it is mentioned but once in Scripture: Nor is it likely that Jacob should learn to dedicate the Tenth of all that he had, from Abrahams once only giving Tithe of Spoils, much less can we think the same of one single Act could have spread it self so generally over all the Gentile World (as shall be shewed in the Third Chapter,) where∣fore we conclude, that Abraham did frequently pay Tithes to Melchisedec: and because some do enquire, whether A∣braham did offer these Tithes as a free gift, or paid them as a Due, I shall observe, that Melchisedec was the Priest and the Representative of the Most high God, to whom the Tenth was peculiarly due, and therefore it may properly be said, he paid Tithes to Melchisedec as Gods due: and

S. Paul doubts not to call this Act a paying of Tithes, Heb. vii. 9. Levi paid Tithes in Abraham, and ver. 6. he saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Melchisedec Tithed Abraham, or took Tithes of him (which implies a due,) again ver. 2. where we read, He gave him the Tenth of all, the Greek is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, signifying, he divided, separated and set forth a Tenth part (the very way of paying Tithes now:) And though in Genesis it be said, He gave him Tithes of all, yet the phrase of Giving is often used in the holy Books, for the discharging a just due, so Psal. xxix. 2. Give the Lord honour due to his Name; and the People are to Give Tithes(q) 1.50 when they were due by a writ∣ten Law; so to Give Tribute(r) 1.51 is, to Pay Tribute, and to give a Servant his Hire(s) 1.52 is, to pay him his Wages; therefore we cannot infer that Tithes were not paid as a due, because Moses saith He gave them, only if we critically enquire into the difference of these Phrases, we may note, S. Paul uses the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but once, viz. ver. 4. concerning Spoils, which intimates that Abraham paid Tithes in ordi∣nary of all his usual increase, but freely gave out of extra∣ordinary Devotion the Tithe of Spoils upon this Victory: This I thought fit to remark upon this memorable Exam∣ple (which Mr. S. so slightly passes over) and I infer from hence, That when an inspired Patriarch was blessed by a Priest, who was the Type of Christ, and of the same Or∣der that Gospel Ministers are now: He gave him a Tenth part of all that he had, having learned from Tradition or divine Revelation, that the Tenth was that part which God had appointed should be given to him in acknowledgment of his bounty, and this Institution and the practice which followed it, do thus far prove Tithes to be due Jure Di∣vine.

§. V. It hugely confirms our former Assertion, that A∣braham paid Tithes of all frequently, because we find Ja∣cob, who had been brought up according to the religious Rites of Abrahams Family, solemnly Vowing to give God the Tenth of all, which intimates that he had seen frequent dedications in that Proportion. God had appeared to

him just now, and fixed all the Promises made to Abraham upon him and his Posterity, Gen. xxviii. 13, 14, &c. where∣upon as he was now the heir of Abrahams blessings, he thought himself obliged to exercise Abrahams Piety, the sum of which is contained in the three branches of this Vow of Jacobs, viz. First, his Faith, ver. 21. Then shall the Lord be my God: Secondly, his Devotion, ver. 22. And this Stone which I have set for a Pillar shall be Gods House: Third∣ly, his Gratitude, And of all that thou shalt give me, I will surely give the Tenth to thee. As the owning of the true God, and the dedicating a solemn place to his Worship, were derived from the known practice of Abraham, so was the consecrating the Tenth of all; and it is evidently grounded on the same reason, Abraham gave his Tenth to acknowledge, that God was the possessor of Heaven and Earth, and Jacob gives his, because God is the giver of all that he hath; and this reason is not at all ceremonial or proper to the Jewish people, but moral and equally obliging to all that know God, if they have any estate by his bounty: And if the proportion had been arbitrary, 'tis likely Jacob would have varied and either given more or less; but his fixing on the same part, shews the Tenth part was determined before to belong to God. And since his present circumstances made him need and desire above all things to choose such a part as would be most pleasing and acceptable to God, no doubt he well knew that this was the proportion which was agreeable to Gods will, either by the special direction of the Spirit then, as Mr. Calvin thinks(t) 1.53, or rather by the practice and Tradition of his pious Ancestors, grounded upon a divine Revelation at first; but however he learned it, 'tis sure he knew this Part would please God, because he consecrates it on purpose to engage him to perform his Pro∣mises; and the Almighty abundantly proved Jacob was not mistaken, since he fully and liberally performed all that the good Man desired, and by giving him great plenty God did demonstrate to him and to all Mankind, that he liked and approved of the dedicating a Tenth part to his honour. And when God had thus enabled Jocob, upon his return

we need not question but he performed this Vow, and though the Scripture be silent, yet his Piety and the testi∣mony of good Authors may assure us it was done. He paid it at his return by offering the Tithe of all his goods, saith Jo∣sephus(u) 1.54. He performed it in Bethel, and gave the Tithe of his substance for the honour of God, unto him that was in that Age to receive it, as Aben Ezra(w) 1.55. Who was the Chief Priest then is not certain, but Mr. S. thinks it very probable it was Isaac, who (as he truly affirms) was the Chiefest Priest at that time(x) 1.56; and for any thing appears in the Text, Jacob paid Tithes yearly after his return: for since God gave him not the increase of one year only, but of e∣very year, and he had vowed to give God the Tenth of all that he should give him, therefore he who had every year new gifts, was obliged to acknowledge it by a new Tithing; and the Phrase in the Hebrew, ver. 22. Tithing, I will Tithe it to thee (which we translate, I will surely give the Tenth to thee) doth import frequency and exactness too in making of this Payment. Thus therefore we have a second Instance of another inspired Patriarch fixing on the Tenth part as fit to be offered and certainly pleasing God, and Gods own ap∣probation of this Part, together with the payment of it to a Priest as God's Receiver, and great probabilities of constant and regular Tithing long before the Law of Moses. But here the Jesuites, and Jesuited Sectaries object, That Jacobs Vow of Tithes was conditional, if God preserved him in his Journey, and gave him food and rayment, and brought him back in peace; which shews, that offering Tithes was no ne∣cessary duty, nor would he have been obliged to it, if he had not bound himself thereto by Vow(a) 1.57. To which I answer, that the conditions are absolutely necessary to the performance of the duty that he vowed, for unless his life were pre∣served, and unless God gave him some Estate, how was it possible he should pay Tithes; so that these conditions im∣ply no more, then that if he lived and had any thing, though never so small, though it were but Necessaries, out of that, whatever it were, more or less, he would give the Tenth to God: and the adding of such a condition, with∣out

which the duty vowed cannot possibly be performed, doth not prove the thing Vowed was no necessary duty be∣fore: Especially since it is very usual to Vow necessary du∣ties, as when Holy Men vow to watch over their words, and to keep Gods Laws(b) 1.58. Thus Hannah vowed her first-born Son to the Lord (due to him before by Express Law, Exod. xiii.) and upon such a condition as is mentioned in Jacobs vowing Tithes, viz. if the Lord would give her a Son(c) 1.59. S. Augustine doth highly commend our tying our selves to necessary duties by special Vow(d) 1.60, and so do all practical Divines, and why then should it be strange that Jacob did so? But that which utterly baffles this Cavil is, that Jacob vows the Lord shall be his God, upon the same Conditions upon which he vows to give Tithes; and dare any say, It was no necessary duty before this Vow was made for Jacob to have the Lord for his God? If it were a necessary duty before this conditional Vow, then so might Tithes be also: And S. Chrysostom explains these conditions to be rather manifesta∣tions of his Faith, than any limitations of his Vow, for God had just now promised to be with him, &c. and though he had not yet actually performed them, yet Jacob was so assured of Gods truth, that out of a Heroic Trust in the Divine promises he presently engages himself to those Du∣ties which were the just acknowledgments of such Mer∣cies, and dedicates his Tithes before-hand, declaring thereby how much he loved and relied on God(e) 1.61. We conclude therefore, that the Patriarchs thought it a necessary duty to pay Tithes, and that their practice with the principles on which they proceeded are evident proof, that they be∣lieved the Tenth part was due to God, by sufficient mani∣festations of his Will, and therefore they paid it as due Ju∣re Divino.

Notes

• (a) 1.1

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Philo lib. de Cherub.
• (b) 1.2

  Psal. xxiv. 1.
• (c) 1.3

  1 Chron. xxix. 14.
• (d) 1.4

  Rab. Levi. Chrysost. & Grot. in loc.
• (e) 1.5

  Hebr. xi. 4.
• (f) 1.6

  Hebr. in fine dierum: hoc est, revoluto anno. Ab. Ezra & Fagius in loc.
• (g) 1.7

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Philo de Sacrif. Cain & Abel. Chrysost. hom. in loc. & D. Ambros.
• (h) 1.8

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 LXX. Gen. iv. 7.
• (i) 1.9

  Hugo de S. Victor. annot. elucid. in loc. Peter. Comestor histor. Schol. Gen. 26.
• (k) 1.10

  Honor do∣num intelligi∣tur, Hieron. in Math. xv. & ita ipse Chri∣stus explicat Honora patrem, &c. Math. xv. 4, 5, 6. Vide Numb. xxii. 17, 18. Acts xxviii. 10, &c.
• (l) 1.11

  Rab. Salom. Rab. Levi ben Gershom. An∣tioch. homil. 120. Cornel. à Lapide, Mercer, &c.
• (m) 1.12

  R. Nachman in Gen. xxvi. 5.
• (n) 1.13

  R. Bechai. in Gen. xxvi. 12.
• (o) 1.14

  R. Salom. in Job. xxxi. 8. Chald. par. in Job. xxiv. 19. Talm. tract. Mas. Shabad. c. 2. fol. 32.
• (p) 1.15

  Hugo de S. Victor. erud. Theol. de Sa∣cram, l. 1. par. 11. c. 4.
• (q) 1.16

  Gen. 26.25.
• (r) 1.17

  Gen. 38.24.
• (s) 1.18

  Lev. 20.10.
• (t) 1.19

  2 Sam. xviii. 18. Vallis regia duobu•• tantum stadiis distat à Jerusalem. Jo∣seph. Antiq. l 7. c 9. & A∣dricom. de∣scrip. Terrae S. pag. 174.
• (u) 1.20

  Salem om∣nes nostri Jeru∣salem arbitran∣tur. ad Evag. Tom. 3. pag. 62.
• (w) 1.21

  Quest. in Genes. Tom. 3. p. 328.
• (x) 1.22

  Joseph. Ant. lib. 1. cap. 11. Targum in Gen. xiv. Midras Tehil. Psal. 56.2. Ab. Ezra & R. D. Kimki in Gen. xiv. & R. Levi Ben. Gersh. in Jos. x. 1. confer Jesai. l. 21.
• (y) 1.23

  Selden Re∣view, p. 452.
• (z) 1.24

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isid. Peleus. li. 1. Epist. 431. ita Hieron. qu. in Gen. Tom. 3. p. 328. & Chron. Alexandrin.
• (a) 1.25

  Hieron. ut supra Epiphan. contr. Haeres. 55. l. 2. Tom. 1. p. 209. Steph. Tornacens. Ep. 171. Isidor. Hispal. Glos. in Genes.
• (b) 1.26

  Hebr vii. 3. Paraph. Syriac. Cujus nec pater nec mater scri∣pti sunt in ge∣nealogiis. ita Epiphan. contr. haer. 55. lib. 1. Tom. ••.
• (c) 1.27

  Pet. Cunaeus de Repub. Heb. l. 3. c. 3.
• (f) 1.28

  Joh. xx. 21.
• (g) 1.29

  Gen. xiv. 20.
• (h) 1.30

  Heb. vli. 2.
• (i) 1.31

  Selden. hist. pag. 2.
• (k) 1.32

  De omnibus rebus, C. P. Onk. & Jun. Trem. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, LXX. ex omnibus Vulg.
• (l) 1.33

  Antiq. l. 1. cap 11.
• (m) 1.34

  Selden's Review. p. 450.
• (a) 1.35

  See Mr. Nettle against Selden, pag. 24.
• (b) 1.36

  S. Chrysost. hom. 22. in Math xv. Tom. 5.189. Clem. Alexand. Protrep. p. 32.
• (c) 1.37

  Gen. xxiv. 36.
• (d) 1.38

  Selden's Review, p. 450.
• (e) 1.39

  Ambros. Com. in Hebr. vii. ita Lyra, Tostatus, &c.
• (f) 1.40

  Aug. de temp ser. 105.
• (g) 1.41

  Selden, hist. pag. 5. & Re∣view, pag. 452.
• (h) 1.42

  Talm. tract. Sanhedrin, c. 8. fol. 69. R. D. Kim. in 1 Chron. I.
• (i) 1.43

  R. Salom. Jarchi, in Gen. X. ver. 20.
• (k) 1.44

  Descrip. terrae S p. 341.
• (l) 1.45

  Bellonii ob∣serv. l. 2. c. 87.
• (m) 1.46

  Cald. Par. Jonath. in Gen. 25.22. & Rab. Salom. in loc.
• (n) 1.47

  Lyra in Gen. xxv. 22.
• (o) 1.48

  R. Salom. & R. Bechai in Gen. xxv. 27.
• (p) 1.49

  R. Salom. in Gen. xxxvii. 3.
• (q) 1.50

  2 Chron. xxxi. 4.
• (r) 1.51

  Math. xxii. 17. & xvii. 27.
• (s) 1.52

  Deut. xxiv. 15.
• (t) 1.53

  Non quod suo arbitrio Deum coluerit (scil. Dando decimas) nam directio Spi∣pitûs vice legis fuit. Calvin. in loc.
• (u) 1.54

  Joseph. Ant. l. 1. c. 18.
• (w) 1.55

  Ab. Ezra in Gen. 35. & Lyra, Tostatus, &c. ibid.
• (x) 1.56

  Histor. p. 5.
• (a) 1.57

  Bellarm. Tom. 1. con∣trov. 5. l. 1. c. 25.
• (b) 1.58

  Psal. xxxix. 1. & cxix. 106. Nehem. x. 29. Jer. xxxiv. 8.
• (c) 1.59

  1 Sam. I. 11.
• (d) 1.60

  Quid debe∣mus vovere, cre∣dere in illum, sperare ab illo vitam aeternam, bene vivere, &c. August. Enar. Psal. 75. Tom. 8.
• (e) 1.61

  Chrysost. in Gen. hom. 54. Tom. 1. edit. Savil, p. 425.