Against Sacrilege, Sermon 2
AGAINST SACRILEGE▪ The second Sermon.
Rom. 2. 22.
Thou that abhorrest Idols, doest thou commit Sacrilege?
LOnger discourse vppon this texte, besides the thinges alreadie spoken of, being required at my handes, according to my promise, to meete the objectiones and shifting excuses of men of this age, who cloke their avaricious and gre…die appetites, to appropriate to them selues the Kirk-rentes, I am nowe (as the Lord wil assist me) to enter in to answere to such thinges as they may alleage, and commonly alleages for themselues, to colour their corrupted sacrilege. I intend therefore without more processe, to gather the same in such order, as I thinke the beste advised amongst them, might propone the same, and to giuegive particular aunswers thereto, with resolution according to Gods word, & good reasons and laws of men. And so to take away al vaine excuses, whereby they would flatter thē selues in their sin, & fyle the eies of the ignorāt & simple soules, that perceiues not their driftes. Protesting alwaies, that if (carryed with the zeale of trueth) in progresse of this mater, I vse some vehemencie of speeches, I do it not for offence of any particular person (the Lorde knoweth) but against the vice it self, to labour so farre as in me lyeth to conuerte, at the least some of them that hauehave passed ouerfarre, and ouer▪seene themselues in this matter, to amendement, by considering with themselues, better then they hauehave done of before their duty by such advertisement, as I am heare to giuegive you that heare, and all others that will inquire of me, cōcerning my judgement in this argument, & things depending therupon.
To come then to the first generall excuse, and pretended reason that I thinke these men may alleage, who esteeme this kinde of alleaged sacrilege to be no sin at all (it being so vniuersall amongst a greate multitude) or at leaste, not such a kinde of sinne nor so odious, as I would aggrege it to be: they will say therefore that giuing their intromission with such thinges, as sometimes perteined to the Kirk were vnlawfull (as they would not graunt it to be) yet the name of sacrilege in the proper signification cannot be extended thereto. For euen in the lawes which I would alleage to prooue it, and by the writers there-upon we finde, it is not properly called sacrilege, but quasi sacrilegium, or instar sacrilegij, that is like vntounto Sacrilege, to take away any of that money or other things giuen to that immortall God, for vp-hold of his Religion and seruice. I aunswere, this is a poore shift, for the lawes giueth it as odious a name, calling it crimen peculatus, and crimen laesae religionis, that is to say, a crime and guiltinesse…d. ad …, peeulatus. l. 1. & l. 4. C. de Sepul. …. l. …. of stealing the publick money, and a criminall offense against religion. But (as I said before) we take sacrilege according to the meaning of the Scriptures, & good laws of Christiā Princes aggreable thereunto. As indeede the very nature of thinges in themselues leade vsus vntounto this, taking the argument from the lesse to the more, that we must needes confesse it to bee a greater sacrilege, to take from the Kirk a barrony of lande, or the teinde of a whole Parish Kirk, being of the valure of many chalders of victuall, nor a little thing, as a Silver cuppe or chalice out of a Sanctuarie or materiall Kirk. For the greater the thieft or spoyle of the holy thing bee, it is the greater Sacrilege. And as to the place out of the which the holy thing is taken, it makes not much to the matter in the law of conscience. But to put it out of doubt, that this kinde of spoyling the Kirk, and defrauding of her right; by the worde of God is properly to be called sacrilege: No man can deny but to spoyle God is sacrilege. Now the Prophet MALACHIE prooueth against the Iewes of his dayes, that they spoyled God, Because they defrauded him of his Mal. ….teindes and offrings, and therefore were al ac…ursed with a curse. Which is the iust punishment of a Sacrilege. And very nature it selfe teacheth vsus here-unto. For men vnderstande naturally, and will confesse that to spoyle or steale any thing from a priuate man is a great offense: how can they then deny, that to spoyle or steale from God things dedicate to his seruice, is a more high and haynous transgression, and cannot be more properlie tearmed by any name then Sacrilege.
But yet these men will alleage, that the authorities cited out of the Olde Testament, to prooue our purpose serue not sufficiently to that effect. For, albeit in the Leviticall or Ceremoniall law of MOYSES, not onelyonly the teindes, but also the landes given to the sustentation of the Priestes and Levites, were separate from the common vse of men, and called Holy; yet that law being abrogate, or at the least ceasing and taking end, the substance thereof being accomplished in Christ, wee are no further bounde to the obseruation thereof. Therfore, the argument taken frō that law, concerning holy things, ought not now to hauehave place, neither concerning the teindes, which are not nowe add…tted to be payed iure diuino (that is of Gods Law) as the Cannonistes speake, and much lesse concerning Temporall landes, giuen to the Kirke in time of Papistrie, the which nowe cease to bee of that nature, to bee esteemed holy. First, before I aunswere, I am well contented there be a distinction made betweene the …andes and Teindes, leauing off to speake of the teindes till afterwardes. Then I aunswere concerning these Landes or annuall rentes, out of Landes delated and giuen to the Kirke, that although the Leviticall Lawe, with the Ceremonies thereof, concerning the outwarde obseruation hath taken an ende, and is fulfilled in Christ; yet the substance of the policie, concerning interteinement of the seruice of God, and vp-hold of religion still remaines. And it is no lesse necessarie, that the ministerie of God amongst vsus be mainteined; and that sufficient prouision be made to serue other Godlie vses, where-unto the Kirkerentes ought to be applyed nor it was, that the Priestes and Leuites shoulde bene vp-holden in the time of the Olde law. And as to the holinesse or vnholines of these landes and reuenues: albeit in their owne nature (as I saide in the former sermon) they be like other earthly possessiones; yet in so far as they were applyed to an holy vse, they may wel be called holy possessions and rents, as the Kirk is holy, to whose vse they are appoynted. Then I say, the end and firste cause wherefore these landes and rentes were giuen, being therewith to vp-hold the holy seruice of God, a like thing in substance, aswell in the Euangelical, as in the Leviticall Lawe; and the same being separate, dedicate, and mortified (as the Law speaketh) to that holy vse, it can no more be lawful to abstract the same from godly vses, then it was in time of the Olde law, the Ministers of the word not being otherwaies sufficiently provided, nor other godly vses for maintenance of religion, and of the poore members of Christ, being duely considered and serued.
But yet they may make instance and say, that the gift of thinges bestowed to to the Kirk of old, by our fore-fathers in superstition, was for a certaine cause, to wit, to pray for the Dead, say Messe, and do other superstitious & Idolatrous service, which nowe is not to be vsed. And therefore the cause ceasing, the effect should also cease: And consequently, things giuen for such abuses should returne to the giuers or their aires, or at least to the Prince to be otherwaies employed. As to that theorike of the Law, the cause ceasing, the effect ceases (giuing it to be true) I aunswere with a distinction, which the Lawiers themselues make, that thereby, two kind of causes ar to be considered in thinges, to wit, the impulsiue cause (as they call it) and the finall cause. Now, albeit it be true, that the final cause ceasing, the effect cōmonly ceases also. Yet it is not so in the impulsiue cause, which al though it ceasis, it makes not the effect of the finall cause, which is the principall intention to cease. But so it is in this case. For albeit it may stand, that one of the causes that mooued zealous men in time of blindnes, to giuegive diuerse things to the Kirk, and to places then called religious, was to pray for the dead, and to do other superstitious seruie…, being perswaded by Monkes, Friers, and others of their opinion, that such praiers were valiable to deliuer soules out of Purgatorie, which may be called the impulsiue or moouing cause: Yet the principall & finall cause was (no doubt) that they minded to serue God thereby. For if they had not beleeued that these their gifts were to be applyed to the seruice of God, and godly vses, they would never hauehave bestowed any of their substance, rentes, or lan…es, to any Kirk or religious place: That this is true; It is manifest by their euidents, fundations, and charters, made vponupon such donations, in the words dispositiue, euer bearing this clause, Deo & Ecclesiae, to God and his Kirke, before they make mention of any Saint, place, or other vse, whereto the same was to be applyed. Nowe, seeing all these gifts are so giuen, it is reason that God being first named in the Charters, hauehave the firste place, as beste and worthiest, and as the principall receiuer of these donationes, which are nothing else but a small portion of his owne, which hee before hath giuen vntounto them. A…d as a certaine zealous man was wonted to saye, let God hauehave his life-rente, as the first person expressed in the charters, & take thē the rest.
I adde to this answere, giuing, not granting, that the principal & final cause wher fore these giftes were bestowed should cease, yet it is no reasō that the same shuld returne to the giuers or their aires, being once simply disponed, & giuē to the kirks vse; yea, and mortifyed therto, as they vse to speake, which the laws call publick dedication to the Kirke. But in the same, in that case, if the cause wherfore they were giuen be not a good cause, these gifts are to be applyed to more godly vses, & not profane vses, according to that common rule of the law, quod semel Deo dicat est deo, &c. The things once dedicat to God may not therafter be applyed to profane vses, without great necessity, as for redemptiō of captiues, or other like cases. And for this purpose maketh that notable decisiō of Modestine an anciēt jurisconsult, wher of the sum is. That a certain leg…cy being left to a citty, for a spectable to be done in…d. de vsus… et … … …. L. le▪ gatu…. memorial of the dead, which was not law full to be done in such a Citty. It were wrong (said he) that this legacie should returne backe to the aires of him that left it, but the same ought to bee bestowed vppon an other lawfull vse. And as these lawes conteine great equitie, so were they well practised in the dayes of AVGVTTINE. For when the Magistrates did take from the Donatistes their possessiones, which they had of the Kirke, and they complayned and disputed, that none should be depriued of their reuenues; for dissention of religiones cause. That holy Father answered, that these goodes perteined to the Kirk, and therefore being rightly taken from them, who had made a separation from the Kirk, the same should be applyed to other Godly vses of the Kirk. As to the Princes part in these matters, wee shall speake (God willing hereafter) But yet to aunswere further to these men, who object that their predecessoures (as they say) gaue such landes and rentes vntounto the Kirke, in blinde zeale, and so they hauehave reason to take the same againe. The antecedent or assumption of this argumēt, albeit it were admitted to them to proue, I suppose it should remaine vnprouen by a great many of them, who are most greedie to invade the Kirk-rentes nowe adayes. For such as they be readier (as the Proverbe saith) to eate the Kirk-loafe, then to giuegive it. Yet supposing it were verified, it is of no force to serue their turne, neither doth the consequent follow thereupon. For although they, or their antecessors had giuen such thinges to the Kirk, by what reason should they take the same againe at their pleasure? For what is freer then gift? or what is more vnhonest and against humanitie, then to take the gift againe being once freely disponed? supposing it were giuen to a priuate man, whereof he had brooked long possession. Howe much more shameles and vnhonest were it to the giuer to take it againe by force. Then by stronger reason should this be thought vnlawfull, concerning things giuen to God and his Kirk, which (as the Scripture sheweth) cannot be redeemed again, but Levit. ….is to be restored whatsoeuer is defrauded thereof (although it were by ignorance) or else the value, with a fift part more. To this purpose perteineth that solemne protestation, which the people made when they brought in their teindes and offrings to the Lord. And although these be counted among the Mystical politick lawes, yet the substance thereof (as was proved before) remaines, to wit, the lawe ought not to defraude God & his Kirk of their duetie. To the which purpose, yet let vsus heare what AMBROSE (a godly father) speaketh of such men, as would cal back againe that which they hauehave giuē to the vse of the Kirk. There be some (saith he) who after they hauehave giuē their goods to the kirk, rashly think to revoke the same, of whō, nether the former gift deserueth thanks, nor the latter doing is allowable. For the former lacketh judgment, & the other hath with it Sacrilege. There bee some whome it repenteth to hauehave distributed their goods to the poore; but concerning them that so repent, it is only to be feared, …hat they shal not repent of this their rep…ntance. See how this anciēt father doubts not to cal them sacrilegious,C. de donationibus▪ l▪ si quis argentum § Sin autem. who take againe from the kirk any thing, albeit they themselues hauehave giuen it. To this agrees very wel the law of Iustiniane, in this sentēc…. Seeing it lieth in the hart of a man, to do or not do any thing that he intendeth, it becommeth him, either not to proceede to the doinge thereof, or else haste to performe it: Not defrauding his purpose by any craftie colour of his irreligious minde: & so much the more this ought he to take heed to, if the gift be depute to godly vses or persons of religiō, least he be found not only void of religion, but also vngodly. And so be subject not onelyonly to the penalty of the law, but also to punishmente from heauen. And notwithstanding, not only he, but also his successors in this case shal be compelled to restore that which they hauehave taken & wit-holden, with the rest that followes. To the same purpose it is is said in another law, written in the same title of Donationes, speaking of things giuen by mens predecessors, that it availeth nothing to say such things perteined to our progenitors, after that the right and donation thereof is deuolved to others.
Yet to beamfill their first argument, these men may alleage & say, that things dedicate to the kirk in Papistrie, were dedicat to Idolatry; which was not only vnholy, but also abominable before God, & consequētly the lands & rents so dedicat can no waies be called holy, and so apparantly would infer, they ought not to be applyed to the holy seruice of God, but rather to profane vses. This argumēt they see not how much it makes against themselues. For if these things offred to idole seruice be abhominable, why bring they abhomination into their houses? & so procure a curse against themselues. For the Scripture sayeth: Couet not the siluer nor golde that is vppon their Idoles, nor Deut. 7.take it vntounto thy selfe, least thou be snard therewith. Bring not therefore abomination into thine house, least thou be accursed like vntounto it, but vtterly abhor it. Againe in an other place it is saide, There shall nothing of the Deut. 13.damned things cleaue vntounto thine hand: That the Lord may turne from thee, the fearcenesse of his wrath, and shew thee merciemercy, when thou shalt obey the voice of the Lord. Nowe although this bee written in the Olde Testament, it astricketh and bindeth aswell vsus as the Iewes, Not to couet after euill and vnlawfull things as they did. For these things …. Cor. 10.are written for ensamples to vsus, as the Apostle sheweth. So albeit the law of Deuteronomy is not to be vrged precisely in al things, yet as lusting after euil thinges, is ay couetousnes, so thieft is euer thieft, and Sacrilege is euer Sacrilege.
But yet they whome we accuse as sacrilegious, may make instance, and saye, how can ye call alwaies things dedicate to Idolatrie holy things? And againe, if these things cannot be handled or intrometted with in any sorte; how can ye applye the same to the vse of the reformed Kirke, and true seruice of God? seeing ye abhorre Idolatrie, and hold such thinges abhominable. For aunswere, first I denie that these thinges were dedicate only to Idolatrie, for I hauehave prouen the contrary of before. And as to that allegeance, that thinges dedicate to Idolatrous seruice, if they be abhominable, how can they bee applyed to the seruice of God, in his reformed Kirke, being abhominable in themselues? I say, Sirres, wee lack not examples of the Scripture, that such things may and should be employed to the true seruice of God. In the spoyle of Iericho, …osua. 6. 7.The Lord commanded, that all the siluer and Gold, and other mettle that was found in the Citty, should be put in the treasure of the house of the Lord. In the which (no doubt) many thinges were, that had bene dedicate to Idoles service. And yet in the meane time expresse inhibition was made, that no particular man shoulde meddle with any thereof, least he make himselfe execrable thereby. And the punishmente that was executed against ACHAN, declared how far God was offended with that transgression of that his commandement. The like may be spoken of things taken in warre by the Isralites of their enemies, as of Madianites and others.I…g. 6. And of Gedeon, who made sacrifice to the Lord of his fathers bullocke, and trees of the gr…ue dedicate vntounto Baal. And vnderunder the Law of the Gospell, the Prophet sheweth, that the Gentiles shall bring al their riches to serue the Lord, and to beautifie the house of his glorie.
Now, because in this there is no great question, wee come to more pithy apparante argumentes, that our Kirk-robbers alleage for th…mselues. The Kirk-rentes, (say they) namely, the first kirk-lands, for the most parte were giuen by Kinges, his majesties predecessors, mooved of blind zeale to the Kirk, in time of Papistrie (for such abuses ar now abolished) to abbaies principally, & other places called religious, to pray for the dead, sing & say Messes, & to vse other their superstitious service. The which landes & rents so giuen, hauehave greatly hurte & diminished the patrimony of the crown. Therfore the king with advise of his estates in Parliament, hes called in & revoked these donations, namely, of lands, & taken them againe to his Hienes own patrimonie & disposition. And we againe, hauehave obteined some of these lands, erected to vsus & our aires by liberality of the Prince in temporal livings or lordships. And so we possesse the same justly by our lawful titles, therfore we ought not to be rayled on, nor called Sacrilegious possessors. I answere simply (not for offence of any, but to vtter the trueth) that I judge these kinde of erectiones, or whatsoeuer new required titles by such meanes that the possessours can pretende, to bee altogether vnlawfull. But this question requires greater consideration: which standeth in two heads. The one is, what entereste the Prince hes, or may justly pretend in Ecclesiastical liuings. The other, what right or title thereof, he may dispone vntounto others. As to the former of these two heads (without offence of the Prince I speake) who is prejudged by this kinde of dealing, aswell as the Kirke: I say, that Kinges in so farre as they be called, nurishing Fathers of the Kirke, they ought to see sufficient prouision bee made for vp-holding the seruice thereof. And the Kirk againe, to bestow al dutie for furthering the Prince in the publick affaires of the common wealth. But the Prince to suffer the Kirke to be spoyled, not hauing first prouided sufficient meanes, how they that serue in the Kirk may be honestly interteined according to their estate, with the other affaires thereof. And the schooles and the poore (who ought not to bee neglected) well seene to, it cannot stande with good conscience, law, divine nor humane.
Therefore I saye (albeit these men alleage the Kirke-rents to be ouer-great) to begin at the spoyle of the Kirke, the other not being done, is a very preposterous1. King. 21 order. When AHAB, being but a very wicked king, would hauehave taken NABOTHS vine-yarde, he offred first to giuegive him a better vine-yard then it was, or the worth thereof, if it pleased him (he being a priuate man) in money. And so he would hauehave done indeed if NABOTH had accepted the condition. Now, to take from the Kirk of God, which is more then to take from any particular person, a greate parte of the rente thereof, and giuegive nothing in the place of it, nether to make sufficient prouision for the necessarie affaires thereof, I thinke the like example hes not bene practised in any Christian Countrie, or common weill heretofore. If they will giuegive instance of our neighbour cuntrie, there is no comparison; for they that serue in the Kirks there, at least are all wel provided of liuings: But they will reply; The Parliament & estates agreed to take these Kirk-landes: Therefore it ought to stande as a law, and it is not now time to dispute nor reason thereupon. But howe many acts of Parliament (I pray you) are oftentimes againe called & annulled by contrarie actes. And how can they bee annalyed or bought, vake (vnles they be first reasoned vponupon: Yea, this were a very hard & rigorous dealing in a Princes minoritie, to make a lawe, not onelyonly prejudiciall to God and his Kirke, but also to the Prince himselfe (if it be rightly considered) and yet no man to hauehave place to speake against it, or to sute any reformation. The Civill law sayes, that things done in prejudice of the Kirk, albeit confirmed by laws, are to be rescinded. And al such statuts (sayth the Emperour FREDERICK) should be raysed out of the act bookes. Moreouer, the lawes made after…. Cassamus & L. deceruimu… C. de Sacro. s. Eccleijs this maner, in prejudice of the Kirk, may well be declared null in themselues. Because the most part of them were made in the Princes minoritie, as also, because that represented the third estate for the kirk, had no commission nor power from the reformed Kirk, being Bishoppes and Abbottes, the most parte of them, of the papistical promotion; protestation being made also publicklie for nullitie of their proceedings.
But leauing nowe the Princes parte, who is indeede nothing helped nor inriched by these annexations & assumptions (as they cal them) of the kirk-lands & rentes, for if they were, it should be more tolerable. I come to the second head cō cerning them to whom the Prince hath disponed in heritable titles, the lands and rents of the kirk, by new erectiōs (as they tearme thē) in temporal liuings or lordships. These kinde of dispositiōs, I affirme to be more vnlawfull a great deale, nor if the Prince should hauehave holden the same in his own hands: yea, moreouer I say, sik gifts & dispositions may not stand lawful ly, neither by the law of God, ciuil laws, nor municipal laws of the cuntry. For as to Gods law, I think they wil acclaime to no warrante of it, because it maketh directly against them, & involving them in the estate of Achan, Ananias, & Sapphira, procureth rather a curse againste them, without they repente & amende. Which the Prophete MALACHIE pronounceth against such persons, as defraud the Lord of his teinds & offrings. And as to the civill Lawes & Ecclesiasticall cannons, we may easely finde an infinite number against them, forbidding all alienation and distraction of Kirke-goodes to the vse of any particular person. Reade the first booke of Iustinian his lawes, in the volume called Codex, in the title, de Sacrosanctis Authent. … non ali… … Ecclesiasti …oll. 2.Ecclesiis, and others titles following, wherein all alienation of Kirk goods is decerned null and of no force; and the things alienated are commanded to bee restored. To the same purpose agree the lawes of the newe constitutiones, called Authentickes, in so far, that it is not permitted to the Prince himselfe, to permit or change, with any of the goodes of the Kirk, called vnmoveable, vnlesse he giuegive the better in steede thereof. And LEO the Emperour sayet…, that they who dispone these goodes, hauehave Sacrilegious mindes. Therefore they who hauehave perswaded our Prince (whom God preserue) to annaly or dispone to themselues, or to others, these Kirk-landes, hauehave done that they might to hauehave him counted Sacrilegious as they are. The lawe also ordeineth the byers of these goods, to lose the price, and to restore the goods againe▪ The Notars of such contractes, to be banished; the Iudges that ratifie the actes of such alienationes, to bee deposed from their dignities. Howe much more are they to be judged gyltie and punished, that take and vsurpe those goods, without alienation to their owne commoditie.
I omit here to cite many ancient Cā nons of Councels to this effect, which would occupy long time. For, who list to reade the volumes of Councels & Cannon-law, may finde them very frequent in many places. Comming then to the lawes of the Countrie, and naturall reason, the foundation of all good lawes, I saye, the corrupted dealing of our time concerning Kirk-robberie, is such as can not stand, neither with the one, nor with the other. For, as to our municipal laws, which are either the lawes of the Majestie, or actes of Parliament. The lawes of the Majesty altogether disallow, alienation of Kirk-goodes, in so far, as if the Prelate himselfe, Abbote, or Bishoppe, make any alienation or disposition thereof,… from the Kirke vse: The byer thereof, should lose the price, and the landes may be taken againe by the King (but not disponed to others) if they were giuen by him or his Predecessors. And in the acts of Parliament, both ancient and recent, commonly the first acte is, that the liberties and freedomes of the Kirke be keiped. And how can these liberties be but hurte, when the Patrimonie of the kirk is taken awaie, and giuen to profane men & profane vses? Now, to come in particular, to these new erectiones, and new found infeftmentes of Kirk-Lands, they are (as I vnderstande) of two sortes. For some are giuen before the annexation of them to the Crowne, and some thereafter. As to the former, I woulde know by what law or reason they could be giuen by a simple gifte of the Prince, they being not yet come in his handes, and the consent of the true Kirke, neuer had thereto? For, as to the consent of Abbots and Bishoppes, being the moste parte of the Papisticall promotion, and chiefe wrackers of the Kirke, no… hauing any commission from the true reformed Kirke, it cannot bee of any force in this case, to defraude the Kirke of her Patrimonie. And albeit, the whole Kirke had consented, their consente could not bee sufficient to dilapidat or annaly the Kirk Lands in propertie to any person, they being themseues onelyonly vsufructuares, and not proprietares thereof. And as to the Princes parte, can he take any priuate mans heritage from him, and giuegive it to whome hee pleaseth, without consent of partie, or fore faltrie? I think all men will say no. Much lesse then, may he dispone these lands from God and his Kirk, by sik simple donationes. As to the other sorte of infeftmentes or erectiones giuen after the annexation, they can be no better in effect, for giuing only for arguments cause, that these lands were lawfullie annexed to the Crown; whereuppon I wil not now farther dispute. I say, the King cannot by the Lawes of his Realme, dispone the same againe from the crowne, they being once annexed therto. Reade the 43. acte of King IAMES the seconde, the 86. of King IAMES the Thirde, the 24. of King IAMES the Fourth, and likewise his Revocation, acte 83. As also the 4. and 54. of King IAMES the Fifth: with others, tending to the like purpose. Yea, they would make our Kinges Majestie that now is, bee involved in periurie by these dispositiones, it being expresse against his oath, made at his Hienes coronation, and inacted amongst the acts of Parliamente. The time straites me, that I cannot insist longer vponupon this head.
Before I speake of the teindes, I come to the finall reason, or rather excuse that robbers of the Kirk pretend for them to colour their Sacrilege. The landes, with the other rents of the kirk (say they) giuē to it in time of Papistrie, ar ouer-large, & more then sufficient, for the necessary vses of the Kirk that now is. For, as to the Ministers, what should they hauehave but their necessary sustentation, with an gray gowne, to go vponupon their feete Preaching from place to place, as the Apostles did? They are as …eedie as the Papistes; with many other like tearms of their reprochfull Rethoricke. And why may not the King (say they) giuegive these landes to Noble-men, Gentle-men, and others, able to serue his Majestie; the teindes being more then sufficiente to susteine all the charges of the Kirke. As to the estate of the Ministers, it is no marvell that they who care for no Religion, but so far as it serues their turne, would wel vouch safe to see them poore, that they might goe the lighter to heauē, following the footsteps of IVLIAN the Apostate, or rather IVDAS the traytour, who envyed for the oyntmente that was bestowed vppon Christ, because hee was a Sacrilegious thiefe, and would hauehave had the price thereof to his owne vse. Would these men commend vntounto vsus such poverty, as Christ did to the poore in Spirite, or if necessitie required, to loose all thinges for his names sake, they should doe well. But seeing they labour so farre as they may, to bring Ministers in contempt, & consequently, to depriue the people of the doctrine of Saluation, we cannot admit their vngodly devises: For wee hauehave sufficiente warrant in the word of God, that the labourers in this function, are worthye of their wages; not onelyonly for the honeste intertenemente of themselues, but also of their wiues, children and families, and for hospitalitie. Which things being ministred vntounto vsus, for our owne partes, wee would be well contented, so that none of vsus did lacke, as it was in the Primitiue Kirke, providing not the lesse, that the reste of godly vses belonging to the Kirk, were not neglected: And speciallie, the schooles and the poore: whose large portion ought to be comprehended therein, seeing the Kirkrentes were justly called, …he Patrimonie of the poore. As to the reste (this being done) we might well agree, it should supplie the necessarye affaires of the Prince, and the Realme, and such other Godly vses as the worlde allowes. And the ensample of former ages agreeable thereto hauehave practized. But the abuses we cannot allow, as that of the Papistes, of defrauding the poore of that parte of the Kirkes Patrimonie, which should be bestowed vponupon them.
Wee knowe that the Kirk-rentes of olde were divided in foure partes. The one parte thereof was bestowed vppon the Pastour or Bishoppe for his owne vse, and for vp-holding of hospitalitie. An other, vppon the reste of the officebearers, in the Kirke (called the Clergie.) The thirde, vppon the Poore. And the fourth and laste parte, vppon the interteinemente of Kirkes, Hospitalles, Brigges, and other publicke and Godlie affaires: Whereinto, the necessities of the Prince, and publicke affaires of the Countrie are to be also considered. But the degenerate posteritie of the Antichristiane Kingdome, applyed all these goodes, to the interteinement of idle bellies, diuiding all the Kirkes Patrimonie, into Prelacies, and benefices, & in erection of Abbaies & Cloisteres, such as are not to be found in the booke of God, nor in any ensample of the Primitiue Kirke, and such as ought to hauehave no place in any reformed Kirke or common wealth. And yet this corruption remaineth amongst vsus, by distributing of newe titles, not onelyonly to the Bishoppes, but also to Abbottes, and newe Prelates (as they call them) after the manner of the olde Papisticall promotion. The affaires of the true Kirke, in the meane time, not being duelie seene to nor provided. And as concerning benefices vnderunder Prelacies, there is a newe craftie and fradulente inuention founde out, that these greedie gormandes hauehave procured at the Princes hands, gifts of the Patronages therof: therby to defraude best qualifyed Ministers of the same, to giuegive them, or rather sel them to whom they can finde out, who wil be cō tent to make vnlawful paction with them, to take a little portion of the fruits thereof (serue as they please) and let the moste parte remaine with themselues, either by setting of vnlawfull tacks, or by some other fraudulent way.
Now, concerning the teinds (whereof I promised laste to speake) I graunt indeede, if they were rightly gathered and bestowed to the right vse, they would both helpe the poore labourers of the grounde, and serue to many good vses in the Kirkes affaires. But as things nowe go amongst vsus, they are little more profitable to these vses, then the Kirk lands. For they who wrongfully hauehave invaded the landes, marke as greedely for the teinds: and are entred already in possession of the greatest part thereof. And now begin to make question, what title or right the Kirke hath thereto: So insatiable is the greede of them who hauehave once made shippe-wrack of conscience, that they would Crucifie Christ againe for his coate. Herefore it is expedient, as shortnesse of time will now serue vsus, to deduce from the originall, the payment of teindes. First, before any written law, we finde, that ABRAHAM gaue to MELCHIZEDECK,Gen. 14. as Priest of the moste high God, teindes of all the spoyle that he had obteined of the discomfiture of the enemies, as pledge of his thankfulnesse towarde God. IACOB also passing to Mesopotamia, after that notable Gen. 28.vision of the ladder, reaching from earth to heauen, made a solemne vow, that if the Lord should be with him, preseruing him in his way, and giuegive him foo…e and rayments, of all that the Lorde should giuegive him, he should render againe the teind vntounto the Lord. Whereby, it may well appeare, that by the very instinction of nature, this custome was receiued amongst the Godly Patriarcks, to giuegive teindes vntounto God, of that whatsoeuer he bestowed vponupon them, aswel by offring sacrifices, as applying the same to the vtilitie of the Priestes of the Lorde, the poore, and other godly vses. As to the offringe and paying of teindes vnderunder the Law, we neede to make no question, for the same is so set foorth at length, in the bookes of the Law of MOYSES, that the adversaries can make no argument against it. Wherein▪ among many other thinges it is written, That all the …erit. 27.teind of the increase of the Lande, aswell of cornes, as of bestiall, perteined to the Lord as holy. And that he distributed the same againe to the Priestes and Leuites, and their families, for their seruice. And concerning theNum. 18 teindes of euerie thirde yeare likewise, that the strangers, widdowes, fatherlesse, and poore of the Land, should be participant thereof, so that I neede not insiste further thereupon at this present: only, calling to your remembrance, that solemne protestation (of the which I made mention before) that the people were ordained to make, that they had brought in all the teindes of the Lord, & defrauded nothing therof. Read the place. Deu. 26.
It restes to declare then, what hath bin the vse concerning teinds, vnderunder the Gospel amongst Christians. Certainely the vse of payment thereof hath bin so ancient, that it is difficil to finde out the firste original thereof. Alwaies it appeareth euidently, that godly Princes & common wealths, being willing to provide the Pastours, & other godly affaires of the Kirk, of competent living & revenues, did rather choose the teindes, then any other meanes to that effect; following the example of the godly before the lawe, and imitating the cōmand of God, vnderunder the Lawe. Which loueable vse and custome, hath remayned through many ages (I thinke) inuiolably obserued in all Christiane kingdomes & common-wealthes. For it is more then a thousand yeares by. paste, since the payment of teinds vnderunder the Gospell, was called an auncient custome, which the Christians had obserued by common consente, by ayplyingConcil. Matisc. 2, Can. 5. the same to the vse of the holy Ministery, the poore, redeeming of captiues, and other godly vses, as we may finde in some ancient cānons of councels. So that I can not marvaile ynough of a certaine man, who held himself very wel beseen in the laws & customs of the cuntry, who was not ashamed to affirm, that the paimēt of teindes to the Kirke, was not olde, but of late brought vp. If this man had red diligently the Scottes Chronicles only, he…. li. 9. f. 192. might hauehave found how CONVAL King of Scottes, who reigned about the yeare of our Lorde, fiue hundreth, three score and eight yeares. Did statute by lawe, that the teindes of all that grew vponupon the grounde, should be brought in vntounto the Priests, and service of God, vsed in these daies, which from that time by long prescription hath bene obserued amongst this our Scottish Nation. So that the question cannot nowe hauehave place, whether the teindes perteine to the Kirke or not; I will not deny but the teinds might be possibly changed, in other meanes of sufficient provision for the Kirke, if such godly zeale were nowe amongst men, as was of olde time. But in so farre as we see the plain cōtrarie, that men are now readier to take away, thē euer our predecessors were to giuegive; it were a foolish thing to loose the certaine for the vncertaine, and that which is neuer likely to come to passe. And the wisedome of the fathers, hes done better in this behalfe, then any thing that wee can nowe deuise or performe. Therefore, whosoeuer now doe abstracte the teindes from that vse; for the which they hauehave bene of so auncient time appoynted amongst Christians, they are to be repute as violaters of that godly and publick order, and good estate of Christian common-wealths and cannot be excused from Sacrilege.
Because time hasteth me to an ende, I am compelled for the present to cut many thinges. Therefore I come shortly to the laste refuge of these Kirk-robbers, whereas they alleage for themselues, their titles, tacks, and assedations, with oother evidentes & rights, whereby they possesse and brooke the teindes. And many wil say also, that their predecessors hauehave had kindnesse thereto of long time by-past. And others, moreouer will alleage and say, wee hauehave payed great gressomes, and sums of entresse silver therefore, besides our yearely dutie, hauing these teindes disponed to vsus, by them who had power to set the same. To aunswere shortly to all this, first I say, to the takes-men, that all their tackes and titles, for the moste parte are set contrarie to the common Lawe, and so are null in themselues. And if wee shall examine them by the Lawe of Conscience, which is the chiefe Lawe that Christistians ought to liue by; it will be harde to purge the taker and also the setter of Sacrilege. The first cause that moouedConcil. Carthag, 5 cap. 6. them of the Kirke to let teindes in tackes, was to defende them from the invasion and violence of such mightie robbers, as spoyled them of their possessions. For otherwise, it was not lawfull in any case by their Cannones, that any of them, (whome they called the Laick sorte) should hauehave any medling therewith. But now it falles out plain contrariwise, that none doe greater hurte to the Kirk, then those tackesmen, to make their own greedie gaine of the Kirk-goods. And they may wel be compared to manchpresents (as we speake) taking to themselues the best parte, & leauing the least portion to the Kirks vse. So I say, that none of them that take the teindes in assedation, with euident diminution of the olde rentals can pretende, but they greatly hurte the Kirke, contrary to good lawes & conscience. Yea, many of their tacks are not only within the halfe of the just availe; but oftentimes within the tent part, as victuals now are solde.
For colouring of the which, there is a new fraud of the law devised, by converting victuall into money, vnknowne to our Fore-bearers▪ because (say they) v…ctuall was sometime sold for such prices: But where finde they that argumente, à Contrad…. …d leg. …. l, p…ecia.posse ad esse, valiable in the Law? or why preferre they not at least, the option to the receiuer, rather to choose, then to the giuer? or els, why will they not paye Sterling money, or the auaile thereof, as good as it was, when victualles were so solde? Who will go to the market now with our money, to buy victuall of such prices, and not be mocked? Whereto should I insiste longer vppon the newe mainteined corruptiones of this age, to defraude the Kirke of her due right? It shoulde weary both mee to rehearse, and you to heare it. When as tackes was not set in times by-paste, but for the space of ninetene years the farthest. Now three nintene years, with three life-rents, all in one tacke, is thought nothing. Yea, many make heritage of the teindes, as they hauehave done of the landes. I omitte to speake of the oppression of the poore laborers of the grounde, whereof I made mention before. As to the kindnesse, which these men alleage, because it is of no force in the Lawe, I cease likewise to speake thereof. And as to the power of them that set these tackes, being for the most parte titulars of Prelacies, I counte them no lesse Sacrilegious, then the takers, as if I had time and space, I might easely prooue. With them also I joyne a sort of false brethren, called, beneficed Ministers, who make as little conscience to dilapidate the kirk-rents, as others do. So that there is no estate free of Sacrilege in the…e vnhappie daies. Lorde arise and caste out all byers and sellers, with thieues and robbers, and corrupted Sacrilegious dealers out of the Kirke, and stirre vppe some zealous reformers of these manifolde deformities, that the Kingdome of Christ maye continue amongst vsus, and his Gospell not be removed and taken from vsus, for our great ingratitude and sinnes, in abusing the name and profession of the same. To whome with thee, O Father and holie Ghost, be all honour and glorie. A…en.