Account of a Late Debate at Lime, Chapter 3
CHAP. III. QUEST. III Whether the Preſent way of the Country in Maintaining Miniſters by a Publick Rate or Tax be Lawful?
I muſt Advertiſe the Reader here, that in the Conference we had with Mr. Wightman and his Brethren before the Debate, he ſignified his diſlike of the Queſtion as thus ſtated, & declared himſelf …ully in Opinion with us, that Miniſters ought to be maintained, but this maintainance he tho't they ought to have from thoſe that heard them, and not ſuch as by Reaſon of Difference in Opinion from them, hold themſelves Obliged to withdraw from them. For which Reaſon the Queſtion was Stated in theſe Words. Viz.
Queſt. Whether Lawful Authority have Right or Power to Compell ſuch to Contribute to the Support of the Eſtabliſhed Miniſtry of the Country, who by Reaſon of Difference in Opinion hold themſelves Obliged to withdraw from it? The Affirmative of this was what I tho't was before me to prove, till it was Read at the Debate in Order to Diſcuſſion: When Mr. Moderator Hitchcock roſe up and ſignified his diſlike of the alteration, and deſired the Queſtion as at firſt ſtated might be Debated: Which was again Complyed with. So that the Poſition before me to Prove was this, Viz.
That the Preſent way of the Country in Maintaining Miniſters by a Publick Rate or Tax is Lawful. In Order to which I told Mr. Hitchcock (for he took upon him the part of a Reſpondent here alſo) that I would firſt Obſerve to the Aſſembly what Evidence we have in Scripture, …hat its the Will of Ch…iſt that the Miniſtry he has Ordained in his Church ſhould be maintained, which having done, I would from thence offer an Argument more Immediately proving the Poſition before me. Accordingly I Obſerved,
[1] That when Chriſt Ordained and ſent forth the Twelve and the Seventy, 'twas with this Expreſs Command or Charge, that they ſhould not Act in the Affair before them, at their own Expence or Coſt. Mat. 10 9.10. Luk 9.1. to 4. and 10.3, 4, 5. Where we find him Expreſly Charging them not to make Proviſion for themſelves of Food, Raiment or Money, but into whatever Houſe they entred and were Received, there to ſtay Eating, Drinking, and Lodging. And at the ſame time, in Teſtimony of their Deteſtation of ſuch as did not Receive and freely Entertain them, to ſhake off the duſt of their feet againſt them. And further, he gives them to underſtand that in thus living upon thoſe among whom they came & were Received, they would not live on their Mercy or Charity, but that there was a Juſtice in their being ſo Subſiſted by them Mat. 10.10. For the workman is worthy of his meat.
[2] That the Apoſtle Paul inſiſts much on this matter, and by Arguments taken from various heads gives abundant proof of it. As, viz.
1. By an Argument taken from the Law of Nature and Common juſtice, Thus 1 Tim. 5.18. Thou ſhalt not Muzzle the Mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corn, and, The Labourer is Worthy of his Meat: Where the Apoſtle alludes to that Ancient Practice among the Jews & diverſe other Nations of Treading out their Corn by the Feet of Oxen, in doing which, it was the Practice of ſome Covetous Perſons to have the Mouths of thoſe Beaſts Muzzled, that while they were Treading out the Corn they might not Ea… of it; which, becauſe it was an Act of Cruelty, GOD forbad it to his People, Deut. 25 4— By this Injuſtice & Cruelty of ſuch Perſons, he ſets forth the Sin of not Contributing to the Support of Miniſters; hereby aſſuring us that the contrary Duty is no other than what is Conſonant to the Law of Nature and Common Juſtice.
2. By an Argument taken from the reaſonable expectation of all Labourers in other affairs, Thus 1 Cor. 9. where ver. 6. having aſſerted his right to forbear working with his Hands, and to demand ſupport from thoſe among whom he Laboured, he goes on with a proof of it by this Medium, and inſtances in the Souldier that goes not on a Warfare at his own Coſt, but expects Support & Wages from thoſe who Employ him. In the Planter of a Vineyard, who expects Fruit from it; and in the Shepherd, who, as he keeps and feeds the Flock, ſo expects to eat of the Milk of it: ver 7. Who goeth a Warfare at any time at his own charges? Who Planteth a Vineyard and Eateth not of the Fruit thereof? or, Who Feedeth a Flock and Eateth not of the Milk of the Flock? And then adds, ver. 8, 9, 10. Say I theſe things as a Man? or ſaith not the Law the ſame alſo? For it is written in the Law of Moſes, Thou ſhalt not Muzzle the Mouth of the Ox that Treadeth out the Corn: Doth GOD take care for Oxen? Or ſaith he it altogether for our ſakes? For our ſakes, no doubt this is Written that he that Ploweth ſhould Plow in Hope; and he that Threſheth ſhould be partaker of his Hope. q. d. Is this what the Law or light of Nature only Suggeſts? or is it not what the Law of GOD does ſo too? Yes ſurely, for the reaſon of the Law, Deut. 25.4. more forcibly obliges with reſpect to Men, eſpecially ſuch Men as are employed in a Miniſtry for your Souls, than it did with reſpect to the Ox that trod out the Corn. Did GOD take ſuch care of that Inferior Creature, as to ordain that Men ſhould not deal Cruelly & Unmercifully with it, while it was Labouring for them, & does he take no care of Us? Yes ſurely, the reaſon of that Law reaches us with a greater force, that as he that Ploweth for another Ploweth in hope to get Bread for himſelf by his Labour, and he that Threſheth for another, Threſheth in hope of the ſame; ſo We that are the LORD's Plow-men, working together with Him in Plowing up the Fallow ground of Men's Hearts, & Sowing the Seeds of Righteouſneſs there; and His Threſhers, (by our Labours, Exhortations and Arguments beating the Fruits of Good-works, to the Glory of GOD, out of theſe among whom we Labour) might alſo labour in hope of a Livelihood for ourſelves, while we are doing His work and his Peoples.
3. By an Argument taken from the diſparity or inequality of the things mutually imparted or given by Miniſters and their People that Support them. ver. 11. If we have Sown unto you Spiritual things, is it a great thing if we ſhould Reap your Carnal things? q d. How reaſonable is it that every one ſhould chearfully Contribute to the Support of their Miniſters, and ſince there is ſuch a Diſparity or Inequality between the things they give to and receive from them? Miniſters give them not only a Quid for a Quo, i. e. a juſt Compenſation for ſuch Support, but what is of much more value, there being a vaſt Diſproportion in point of worth or excellence between the Spiritual things beſtowed by the Miniſter, & the Carnal things beſtowed by the People. Finally,
4. That it is the Will of CHRIST that the Goſpel Miniſtry ſhould have Support from the People, he proves from the care he took of his Miniſtry under the Law, ver. 13, 14. Do ye not know that they which Miniſter about Holy things Live of the things of the Temple? and they which wait at the Altar, are partakers with the Altar? Even ſo hath the LORD Ordained, that they which Preach the Goſpel ſhould Live of the Goſpel. q d. The Will of CHRIST in theſe days of the New Teſtament is the ſame that it was during the time of the Old. He had a Miniſtry then, the Tribe of Levi, for which Tribe he Ordained a Live-lihood, Numb. 18.22. Deut. 1….9. and 18.1. So that they needed not to eat Bread by the Sweat of their Brows. The caſe is the ſame now, its His Will and He has Ordained that thoſe who are taken off from their Worldly employments, and ſpend their time in the Study and Preaching of the Goſpel ſhould have a Live-lihood by their Labour. Having obſerved theſe things, I told Mr. Hitchcock 'twas evident from the Scriptures cited, and what had been ſaid on them, that, ſuppoſing the Eſtabliſhed Miniſtry of the Country is a true Goſpel Miniſtry, the Duty of Maintaining them is not among the number of meer Poſitives in Religion, but Moral, and ſuppoſing that to be ſo, for proof of the point before me I offered this Argument, Viz.
That if Lawful Authority have Right or Power to Determine the Ʋndetermined Modes of Moral Duties, then the preſent way of the Country in Maintaining Ministers by a Publick Rate or Tax is Lawful.
But Lawful Authority have Right or Power to Determine the Undetermined Modes of Moral Duties.
Therefore the preſent way of the Country in Maintaining Miniſters by a Publick Rate or Tax is Lawful.
To which I added, That the Support of Miniſters by a Publick Rate or Tax, was one Mode or Manner (among diverſe others) of Subſiſting them, and that the Word of GOD tho' it had plac'd this among the number of Morals in Religion, yet had not Determined the Mode of it, or in what manner it ſhould be done, whether by Publick Rate or Tax, or Weekly Contribution, or any other, only in General, that it ſhould be done in ſome way or other: And that if in ſuch a caſe where Moral Duties are thus Ciroumſtanc'd, Lawful Authority may Rightfully Interpoſe and Determine the Mode of them, then the preſent way of the Country in Supporting Miniſters muſt be Lawful, becauſe 'twas what ſuch Authority had by poſitive Law determined. And this Ended the Debate, no Reply that I remember being made to it. Whereupon the Reverend Mr. Mather Concluded with Prayer.