Works

§. 1. The Martyrdom of James the great.

WE are now come to the time of Great James his death. For Agrippa coming the last year into Judea, as we saw from Josephus, and it not being probable that he should do this exploit before Easter, as the circumstances told us; we may justly take this year for its proper time and place. Now about that time (saith St. Luke) Herod the King (the Syriac addeth who is called Agrippa) stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the Jews; and he killed James the brother of John with the sword. The first words, About that time, relate to what went before in the preceding Chapter, verse. 28. and meaneth in the days of Claudius Caesar. Now what should be the incentive of the spleen of Agrippa against the Church, is not specified: it may well be supposed it proceeded from that his Ceremoniousness and strict observance of Mosaic Rites, which is mentioned by Josephus: Concerning the Martyrdom of James under this his spleen, we will content ourselves with the words of the Text, He killed James the brother of John with the sword; accounting all other additional circumstances which may be found in officious Authors to be nothing else but gilded legends, and fond inventions: As that mentioned by Eusebius out of Cleniens his Hypotyposeon, concerning his accuser, that seeing his constancy to the death, confessed the faith, and was martyred with him. That by Epiphanius that he lived and died a Virgin: and that by Surius (who is the bell-weather for old winter tales,) that telleth, That his body after his martyrdom was shipped by Ctesiphon and his fellow-Bishops for Spain; that the Ship in six days was directed thither without Pilot or Compass, but only by the influence of the Corps that it carried. That at the landing the body was taken up into the air, and carried near the place of its burial, twelve miles off. That Ctesiphon and his fellows wer • led to it by an Angel: And more such trash, that it is but labor lost, either to read or mention.

§. 2. The Apostles Creed.

The Creed was made upon this occasion (saith Rabanus Ma •… s) as our Ancestors have delivered unto us. The Disciples after the Ascension of our Savior being inflamed with the Holy Ghost, &c. And being charged by the Lord to go to all Nations for the preaching of the Gospel, when they are to part one from another, they first make a common platform among themselves for their future preaching. Lest being severed in place, divers and different things should be preached to those that were invited to the faith of Christ. Being therefore together in one place, and filled with the Holy Ghost, they compose a short platform for their preaching, conferring together what they thought. And this they appoint to be given to them that believe, and to be called Symbolum, &c. Thus he, and very many others with him, conceiving that the Apostles supplied not only the matter of the Doctrine contained in the Creed, but the very form and words also.

For Peter said, say they, I believe in God the Father Almighty.

John, The maker of Heaven and Earth.

James, And I believe in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord.

Andrew, Which was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.

Philip, Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried.

Thomas, He descended into Hell: the third day he rose again from the dead.

Bartholomew, He ascended into Heaven: sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.

Matthew, From thence shall he come to judge both the quick and the dead.

James the son of Alpheus, I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church.

Simon Zealots, The communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins.

Judas the brother of James, The resurrection of the flesh.

Matthias, The life everlasting. Amen.

Thus the hundred and fifteenth Sermon de Tempore, that goeth under the name of Agustine: but apparent that it is not his, by this, that here is reckoned the descent into Hell, which in his book de Fide & Symbolo is quite omitted.

Now were this Tradition as true as it is punctual, it would readily plead for its own place in Chronology, namely, about this time at which we now are, before James his death, for he gave in his symbolum (according to this tradition) among the rest. But that this opinion of the Apostles casting in everyone his parcel, is of no validity, but a presumptuous and false surmise, may be evinced by these Arguments.

First, Because the title of The Catholic Church, is neither used in any of the Apostles writings, nor is it likely that it came into use till after the Apostles days, when the Church was dispersed into all parts of the earth.

Secondly, Because the Article He descended into Hell, is not owned or acknowledged at all by the Nicene Creed, nor by any of the ancientest Fathers next the Apostles times, in their reckoning up of the Articles of the Creed, as see instances in abundance in Polanus his Syntagma, lib. 6. cap. 21.

Thirdly, If the matter and words of the Creed had been from the Apostles themselves, why is it not then Canonical Scripture as well as any of the sacred Writ?

Fourthly, In the giving in of their several Symbols or parcels, after the manner opinionated before, there is so great disproportion and inequality, some giving so much, and some so little, that it maketh the contribution itself to be very suspicious.

Fifthly, The Summary Collection of the points of Christian Religion taught by the Apostles, and delivered by them to others to teach by, consisteth of two heads, Faith and Love, 2 Tim. 1. 13. But the Creed consisted of faith only. I rather think therefore, saith Mr. Perkins, that it is called the Apostles Creed, because it doth summarily contain the chief and principal Points of Religion, handled and propounded in the Doctrine of the Apostles; and because the points of the Creed are conformable and agreeable to their Doctrine and Writings.

§. 3. Traditions.

With their framing of the Creed before their parting, hath Baronius joined also their delivery of Traditions. Sicut symbolo, saith he, ita etiam aliis absque Scriptura traditionibus Ecclesiae imperitis, diviserunt sibi ad quas singuli proficiscerentur orbis terrae provincias. Having thus imparted the Creed, and also traditions without Scripture to the Church, they parted among themselves what Country everyone of them should go unto.

These Traditions the Council of Trent divideth into those which were received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ; or delivered from hand to hand, from the Apostles to our times; the Holy Ghost dictating them unto them. And these those Fathers hold of equal authority with the Scriptures, and the Council curseth them that shall willingly and knowingly contemn them. And well do they deserve it, if they did but certainly and assuredly know that they came from such hands. Bellarmine hath stretched the name and piece of Traditions to one tainterhook higher. For Traditions, saith he, are Divine, Apostolical and Ecclesiastical. Divine, are those which were received from Christ himself teaching his Apostles, and yet are not to be found in the Scriptures; such are those which concern the matter and form of the Sacraments. Apostolical are those which were instituted by the Apostles, not without the assistance of the Holy Ghost, and yet are not to be found in their Epistles. Ecclesiastical traditions are properly called certain old customs, begun either by Prelates, or by people, which by little and little by the tacit consent of the people obtained the power of a Law. Under these heads, especially under the two first, hath he placed these particulars The perpetual Virginity of Mary, the number of the Canonical books, Baptizing of Infants, blessing the water before, bidding them renounce Satan and his works, signing them with the sign of the cross, anointing them with oil, not re-baptizing after Heretics, Lent, Ember week, inferior Orders in the Church, worshipping of Images, &c. To which others add, The oblation of the Sacrament of the Altar, Invocation of Saints, Prayer for the dead, the Primacy, Confirmation, Orders, Matrimony, Penance, extreme Unction, Merits, necessity of Satisfaction, Auricular Confession, &c. Into which controversy not to enter, concerning the thing itself, which so many grave and learned pens have handled sufficiently, reckoned by Bellarmine, though with small good will, in his entry upon this question; let but reason and indifferency censure, concerning that which is more proper to this discourse, namely, the time of delivering these Traditions, whether this or any other: And here in the first place let the Reader but consider that at this time, there was no more of the New Testament written, than the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, if so be that those also were written at this time. And then let him judge how senseless a thing it is to speak of delivering unwritten Traditions to the Church, when almost all the New Testament was yet to be written. Or take it at the Council at Jerusalem, which was divers years hence, when all the Apostles were all together, and giving rules to the Church, or take it at Paul's apprehension at Jerusalem, when imagine all the Apostles to be together again, and even at either of those times, will the same absurdity follow still for no more of the New Testament was written, or very little more than now. And then how ridiculous doth it appear, That the Apostles should offer to give rules to the Church by unwritten Tradition, when they had all their Epistles for rules of the Church yet to write: If they would leave the Church to be regulated by unwritten Traditions, why should they write after? And if they would have her regulated by their writings, why should they give her unwritten Traditions before? A quick wit will nimbly answer, that they left her such Traditions as were not to be expressed in their writings, but let an honest conscience and an unprejudicate judgment censure whether this will abide the test, yea or no. For is it within any compass of likelihood that these Apostles did know what things Paul would not write of in his Epistles, that they should deliver such things beforehand for Tradition, when as yet they hardly knew whether he was to be an Apostle of the Gentiles or no, when they did not know whether he would write any Epistles or no, much less did they know what Epistles he would write? Appello conscientiam, and so much for Traditions.

§. Peters imprisonment and delivery.

James his death was seconded by Peters imprisonment, but his time for martyrdom was not yet come as was the others. Agrippa having laid hold upon him, deferred his execution till after the Passover, either because he would not defile that holy feast with effusion of human blood, or because he would afflict Peter the more, and give the Jews the greater content by his long restraint and strait imprisonment, or rather because he feared a tumult if he should have slain him in that concourse of people as was there at Passover time. Thus lay he guarded, with four quaternions, or (as the Syriac hath it▪) with sixteen Soldiers, which as it seemeth watched him by course, for the four watches of the night, two close by him and two at the gate. Besides these two and two successive jaylors, he was bound with two chains, and if some say true, his two keepers were tied for the more sureness in the same chains with him. Happy men were they sure, that had so great interest in these happy chains, which if you dare believe Surius, had the virtue to work Miracles, to diffuse Grace, to procure Holiness, to heal Diseases, to affright the Devil and to defend Christians. They were preserved, saith he, by some of Herod's servants that believed, and in process of time laid up for a sacred relique at Constantinople, and there either he or they lie.

That very night that preceded Peters intended execution, he being fast asleep between his keepers, is waked, loosed and delivered by an Angel. Baronius maketh a great matter of it that the whole Church▪ prayed for Peter whilst he was in prison, and since the like is not related to have been done by them for any other, he will needs from hence infer his primacy, the whole flock praying for her universal Pastor, whereas the reasons of this expression are apparent to be only these two. First, To show that the Church was praying for him whilst he was sleeping, for after he had taken a part of his first sleep, this night he cometh to the house of John Mark, and they are there still out of their beds and at prayer. Secondly, Because the fruit of their prayers were shown in his delivery. There is no doubt but constant prayers were made for James by the whole Church whilst he was in prison as well as for Peter, but so much is not expressed, because the story could not answer that relation with relation of his delivery: And Atheism and profaneness would have been ready to have scoffed, that the whole Church should have prayed in vain.

The Angel, and Peter (thus loosed) pass two watches, and then come to the iron gate; there are some that hold these watches to be two prisons, and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be taken as it were passively for places where men are kept, and that Peter was in a Gaol within these two, as in the worst, basest and surest place, and that all were closed with a gate of Iron. But others hold these watches to be guards of men, and that the prison was without the City, between or within the two outmost walls, but in these things it is not material to insist for determination. The latter is far the more probable, both in regard of the signification of the Greek word, and that Josephus mentioneth three walls about Jerusalem, and divers towers in every wall, as also in regard of the greater heightening of the miracle, in that Peter escapeth, not only his own sixteen men's watch, at the prison door, but also two watches more at the two walls gates, and the second which was the Iron gate gave them free passage of its own accord.

Peter being cleared of the danger, and left of the Angel, betaketh himself to the house of Mary the mother of John Mark, where when Rhoda upon his knocking and speech averred constantly it was Peter, the whole company there assembled conclude that it was his Angel. Here is some ambiguity about their thus concluding. Some understand it of his tutelary Angel, and from hence would strongly plead the opinion that every man hath his proper and allotted Angel to attend him.

But first, we sometimes read of one Angel attending many men.

Secondly, Sometimes of many Angels attending one man.

But thirdly, If the matter may be agitated by reason, if a singular Angel be destined to the attendance of every singular man, what doth that Angel do till his man be born, especially what did all the Angels but Adams and Eves and a few more for many hundreds of years, till the world was full? Others therefore understand it of a messenger, which the Disciples supposed Peter had sent to them upon some errand. But this opinion is easily confuted by Rhoda's owning of Peters voice. There is yet a third opinion as much unwarrantable as either of these; That the Disciples concluded that an Angel by this knocking and voice came to give them notice of Peters death to be near at hand, and that therefore they call him his Angel, and that it was sometimes so used that one Saint should know of another's death by such revelations. The Jews indeed in their writings make frequent mention of Samael the Angel of death, but they call him so for inflicting it, and not for foretelling it: And we have some examples indeed in the Ecclesiastical history of one man knowing of another's death by such revelations and apparitions as these: but because those stories are very dubitable in themselves, and that the Scripture is utterly without any such precedent, this interpretation is but utterly groundless and unwarrantable. The most proper and most easy meaning therefore of those words of the Disciples, It is his Angel, seemeth to be, that they took it for some Angel that had assumed Peters shape or stood at the gate in his resemblance.

The place whither he went is not to be known, because not revealed by Scripture. As for his going to Rome, which is the gloss that Papists set upon this place, it is a thing senseless and ridiculous, as was touched before, and might be shown at large were it worth the labor. I should as soon nominate Antioch for the place whither he went at this time, as any other place at a far distance: For I cannot imagine any time when he and Paul should meet at Antioch, and Paul reprove him, Gal. 2. 11. so likely as this time: for it is most probable that Peter being put to flee for his life, would get out of the territories of Herod for his safety: now there was no place more likely for his safety than in Antioch, where not only the distance of place might preserve him, but the new born Church would seek to secure him.

Th •… s of this Herod Agrippa after his coming from Rome to Jerusalem and the man •… s death are largely described by Josephus, and therefore we will trace them in 〈…〉 in our Jewish Story.

PART II. The ROMAN Story.

§. 1. Some Acts of Claudius this year.

THE Roman year was now taken almost wholly up with sacrifices and holy days, even as it is at this day, to the great hindrance of the people in their employments and occasions, therefore Claudius being now Consul abrogated abundance of these days and solemnities, and contracted those that he let remain into as narrow compass as was possible: Many things that Gaius had foolishly given away, he remanded, and many again that he had wickedly wronged he repaired: He brought Lycia under servitude, because in a tumult they had slain some Romans, and he joined it to Pamphylia: and disfranchised a Lycian Ambassador that came to treat about the business, because he could not speak Latin, saying, That it was not fit that he should be a Roman that understood not the Roman tongue: and many others he disfranchased for other causes, yet on the contrary was he most lavish, he, Messalina and his and her favorites in conferring the Roman freedom and other offices for money, insomuch that he was glad to give an account of it in an oration in Campus Martius. He exhibited some sword plays this year in the Camp.

§. 2. The abominable whoredoms and actions of Messalina the Empress.

She lived in continual lust and uncleanness: and was not content to do so herself, but she forced divers other women to the same course: Nay she caused some women to commit adultery even in the very sight of their own husbands: And those that consented to her villainy she honored and rewarded, and those that did not, she hated and sought to destroy: These her detestable carriages she kept long unknown from Claudius, providing him lasses for his bed, while she took whom she thought good to hers: and killing and taking out of the way, whomsoever she suspected likely to tell Claudius. So slew she Catonius Justus, to prevent his telling of tales: and the two Julia's upon other occasions.

A Roman Knight was also this year executed as for some conspiracy against the Emperor.

§. 3. An expedition into England.

This year did Aulus Plautius with much ado lead an Army into Britain: For one Bericus, who had been expelled thence for sedition, had persuaded Claudius to send an Army over: But hardly would the Soldiers be gotten out of Gaul over thither, they being incensed and taking it ill that they should go fight even out of the world: Narcissus being sent by Claudius to the Army, made a speech to them which exasperated them the more, in so much that they made the outery of Jo Saturnialia: or All Masters, and were ready to make head, but at last they willingly followed Plautius: He parted his army into three parts, because that if they were repelled and opposed in one place, they might land in another: They had some trouble in their passage, through cross winds, but they took heart and bare it out, and the rather because a bright light or flame ran from the East toward the West even that way that they were to go: they entered the Island without opposition: for the Britain's suspected not their coming: but when they were now entered and they not ready to withstand them, they ran into the woods and bogs, hoping to weary out the Romans with following and seeking them, and so to cause them to return without doing anymore.

It cost Plautius a great deal of toil accordingly to find them out, which at last he did, and overcame first Cataratacus and then Togodumnus the two sons of Cynobellinus, who himself was but lately dead.

These fleeing, he took into homage part of the Boduni, who were subject to the Catuellani, for the Britain's were now subject to divers Kings. He leaving a Garrison there, marched on till he came to a river, which the Britain's thought he could not have passed without a bridge, and therefore they encamped carelessly on the other side: But Plautius sent over some Germane Soldiers, who were accustomed to swim over Rivers, and they suddenly assault the enemy, but wounded not the men, but only their horses that should have drawn their Chariots, and so spoiled and undid the Riders. Then sent he over Flavius Vespasian, who was afterwards Emperor, and Sabinus his brother, who passing the River slew many of the enemies on a sudden: yet did not the rest flee but gave battle the next day, and the fortune of the fight was doubtful till C. Sidius Geta, being in danger to be taken, did so stoutly behave himself, that he got the victory, and triumphal honors, though he were not Consul.

Then did the Britain's betake themselves to the Thames towards the place where it falls into the Sea and flows high, and they easily get over, knowing the convenientest places: but the Romans following them were in danger: when the Germans had again swum the River, and others had passed at a bridge above, they fell upon the Britain's on all parts, and made a great slaughter: but in pursuit of them they fell into some marishes, and so lost many of their men.

Upon this mishap, and because the Britain's were exceedingly exasperated for the death of Togodumnus, and made still greater preparations for war, Plautius proceeded no further, but garrisoning those places that he had gotten, he sends for Claudius: for so he had been commanded to do if he came to a pinch.

Claudius receiving the tidings, prepares for the expedition, and among many other things brings divers Elephants along with him, and coming to his army at the Thames, and passing the River he fights a pitched battle and obtains the victory, and takes in Camalodunum the chief City of Cynobellinus; disarms the Britain's, leaves them that were conquered to be governed, and the rest to be conquered by Plautius, and so goes for Rome, where the Senate gives him the title of Britanni • us, appoints triumphs and Statues for him, and honors for Messalina.

§. 3. A Whorish trick of Messalina.

Little did she either deserve either honor or respect, but fear and flattery regard not desert. Among her various and continual adulteries, she cast her eyes of lust upon one Mnester, an Actor or Player, a man that had been very intimate with Gaius, and never the better to be thought of for that. This man she solicits to her bed, with words promises and gifts, but prevails not with him, not for any honesty that was in the man, but for fear of the displeasure of Claudius: When the shameless strumpet could not prevail with all her solicitations, she goeth to Claudius, and desires him to command Mnester to do what she would have him: which Claudius did, not knowing what he commanded. And then did Mnester adulterate the Empress so freely from fear of Claudius, that he thought it had been the Emperors express mind he should so do. And by divers other men did Messalina practice the very same project. And to that impudency did she grow in her whoredom with this Mnester, that when the Senate had commanded that all the brass coin that bare Gaius his Image should be melted, and this in detestation of Gaius, she caused pictures of Mnester to be made of it.

PART III. The JEWISH Story.

§. 1. Agrippa his actions at Jerusalem after his return from Rome.

AGRIPPA returned the last year to Jerusalem, where as we observed and saw before, he performed much ceremoniousness, and changed the High priest, slew James and imprisoned Peter. Besides these things he remitted a tribute to the men of Jerusalem, for their kindness in entertaining of him: he obtained the letters of Petronius to the men of Dor for the removal of Caesar's statue, which some seditious men had set up in their Synagogue: He removed Cantharas from the High priest again, and placed Matthias in his stead. He imprisoned Silas the Master of his Horse for his free discourse concerning his service done to him in the time of his calamity and poverty, but on his birth day festival he enlarged him again, where he continuing still in the same freedom of speech, he imprisoned him again. He began to fortify Jerusalem, and to make it exceeding strong, but Marsus (the present Governor of Syria in steed of Petronius ) got letters from Claudius to stop his work, as suspicious towards innovation. He was exceedingty observant of his Countries Laws, and much care and cost he bestowed on sacrifices, yet was he challenged by one Simon that took on him to be a teacher, for an unholy man and one unfit to come into the Temple: which Simon he sent for to Cesarea, where he questioned with him about the words, and dissuaded him without punishment but with a reward.

He built sumptuous things in Berytus, as a Theater, Amphitheater, Baths, Porches, and such like magnificences, and set 700 and 700 condemned men to fight together for pastime, and so destroyed them. From thence he went to Tiberias of Galilee whither divers Kings came to him to visit: And so did Marsus also the Governor of Syria; but he seeing so many Kings together with him (for they were five) he suspected the matter as tending to innovation, and therefore he commanded them home. Herod after this went down to Cesarea, and there he made sports and shows in honor of Caesar; and on the second day being most gorgeously appareled, and the Sun shining very bright upon his bright clothing, his flatterers saluted him for a god, and cried out to him; Be merciful unto us, hitherto have we feared thee as a man, but henceforward we will acknowledge thee to be of a nature more excellent than mortal frailty can attain unto. The wretched King reproved not this abominable flattery, but did digest it: And not long after he espied his Owl which the German had foretold to be the Omen of his death. And suddenly he was seized with miserable gripings in his belly, which came upon him with vehement extremity, whereupon turning himself towards his friends, Lo, saith he, he whom ye esteem for a God is doomed to die; and destiny shall evidently confute you in those flattering and false speeches which you lately used concerning me. For I who have been adored by you as one immortal, am now under the hands of death: And so his griefs and torments increasing, his death drew on a pace, whereupon he was removed into the Palace, and all the people put on sackcloth and lay on the ground praying for him, which he beholding could not refrain from tears: And so after five days he gave up the Ghost being now 54 years old, and having reigned seven years, four years in the time of Gaius and three under Claudius: He left a son behind him of seventeen years old named also Agrippa, and three daughters, Bernice, Mariamme and Drusilla. Before his death was published, his brother Herod the Prince of Chalcis, and Chelchias the Kings Lieutenant, caused Silas to be put to death.

SECT. I. How the unclean were kept from the Temple.

UPON the observation of what persons were prohibited access to the Temple, lest they should defile it, two things methodically do come to hand to be considered thereupon, as referring to it; and those are, 1. What course was taken for the prohibiting of the unclean from coming there. And, 2. What was the penalty of those that were in their uncleanness, yet would dare to come.

The former inquiry is not of so easy resolution as is the latter, and the reason is, because thousands of persons might come, that were not in a fit case to have come thither; and yet it was impossible, without immodesty and uncivility, unless it were by oath, to discover in what case they were. There were indeed Porters and Guards at the gates, but thousands of unclean persons might pass them, and they never the wiser, unless they should have put the passengers to an oath, which I believe was never yet dreamed of by any writer that hath handled the Jews customs. Men in issues of blood or seed, and women in their ordinary or extraordinary fluxes, could neither be discerned by their face in what case they were, nor do we find that they were ever at all examined, much less sworn or searched. They might repel and keep back, indeed, what or whosoever carried with them visible defiling, as one that appeared to be a Leper, one that came with things about him that might not be brought into the Temple: or they might keep back those that would go beyond their bounds: or they might have an eye to any that came suspiciously either to steal or to disturb the Service: or they might check those that shown any lightness at their coming in, or being entered: or they might direct those that were not well acquainted with the place what to do and how to behave themselves there: or they might admonish all that came, to take heed of coming there if they were unclean: But as for keeping out all that were in any uncleanness, and such as whereby the place might receive defilement, it was a thing so far impossible, that it is far from being imaginable. A man might have touched a dead Corps, or might have touched a Woman in her separation, or suffered Gonorrhoea in the night, or twenty such like cases as these, and he cometh to enter into the Temple, and no one in the world knew how the case was with him but himself, how should this man be possibly discovered or restrained, unless it were by the spirit of Prophesy, or by giving him an oath, which power we never read the Porters to have had, nor is there any ground or color to suppose such a thing.

The security of the place therefore from such pollutions lay more in the severity of the penalties that were sentenced against and inflicted upon those that were deprehended offenders in this kind, than it did in any possible care, or practical prevention they could use that they should not come there: And as the rigor and strictness of Laws, and execution upon offenders in other cases, is the surest prevention of such offenses, the like was the way of caution and prevention here.

SECT. II. Penalties doomed upon unclean Persons found in the Temple. Death by the hand of Heaven, and Cutting off.

FOur sad and severe punishments [for punishments I cannot but call them all] were severally allotted, two in sentence or doom and two in execution, upon those that presumingly by their uncleanness, did violate the Holiness of the place and service, some upon one degree of offending, and some upon another: And those were these,

1. There is a penalty of which the Jews do speak exceeding often, due as they hold to divers sorts of offenders, and amongst other, to some of those that we are speaking of, namely such as being unclean, yet would for all that go into the Temple, and they do call it Death by the hand of Heaven [or by the hand of God, for they do very commonly call God Heaven, ] An unclean person, [saith Maymony,] that serveth in the Sanctuary profaneth his service, and is guilty of Death by the Hand of Heaven, though he stay not there. And again A Priest that serveth and washeth▪ not his hands and feet in the morning, he is guilty of Death by the hand of Heaven. And again, Men or Women with Fluxes, Women in their Separation and upon Childbirth, or one unclean by a creeping thing or by a carcase, or the like, may not deal with the service, nor go into the Court: But if they do, they are liable to cutting off for their going in thither, and to Death by the hand of Heaven for their serving. And divers other instances and examples might be given in other delinquencies and offenses, to which Death by the hand of Heaven is doomed as the proper punishment of them, but these may be sufficient to our present purpose.

2. There is likewise as frequent mention, if not more, among the Hebrew Writers, of another doom or penalty upon divers offenders [and amongst others upon those of whom we are speaking, who would go into the Temple in their uncleanness, knowing how the case was with them] which they call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 kereth or Cutting off: And the Talmud in the Treatise Kerithuth which bears the name upon this very subject doth reckon up six and thirty offenses to which, if willfully committed, this penalty accrued. It may not be amiss to give the matter at large in their own words, and that the rather because we have not only some occasion to look after them now, but shall have again also, when we come to treat concerning sin-offerings, which was a part of their service, and which, as we shall see then and even in the words now before us, had somewhat to say to the matter of Cutting off. Their words are these.

There are six and thirty cuttings off in the Law: He that lieth with his mother, or his fathers wife, or his daughter in Law, or with a male, or with a beast, or a woman lying with a beast: or a man lying with a woman and her daughter, or with another man's wife, or with his own sister, or his fathers sister, or his mothers sister, or his wifes sister, or his brothers wife, or his fathers brothers wife, or with a woman in her separation: or he that blasphemeth, or comitteth Idolatry, or giveth his seed to Molech, or useth Sorcery, or profaneth the Sabbath, or eateth holy things in his uncleanness, or that cometh into the Sanctuary he being unclean: or that eateth fat or blood, or what is left of the sacrifice, or any sacrificed thing not offered in season, or that killeth or offereth up a sacrifice out of the Court, or that eateth leaven at the Passover, or that eateth ought on the day of Expiation, or doth any work on it: or that makes oil or incense like the holy, or that anoints with holy oil: that delayeth the Passover or Circumcision for which there are affirmative precepts: All these if done willfully, are liable to cutting off, and if done ignorantly, then to the fixed sin-offering: and if it be unknown, whether he did it or no, then to a suspensive trespass-offering: but only he that defiles the Sanctuary and its holy things, for he is bound to an ascending or descending offering.

Now that we may the better understand what Death by the hand of Heaven, and Cutting off mean; we are first to take notice, that neither of them was any penalty inflicted by the hand or sentence of man, but both of them do import a liableness to the wrath and vengeance of the Lord in their several kinds. And the Jews do ever account Cutting off to be the higher and more eminent degree of Divine vengeance: As to spare more evidences of this, which might be given copiously, this passage of Maimonides is sufficient, and it is remarkable, when he saith Is it possible for a Priest that serveth in his uncleanness, to stay so little in the Court 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 As that he should be guilty of death by the hand of Heaven only, and not guilty of cutting off? He had had those words but a little before which were cited even now. An unclean person that serveth in the Sanctuary profaneth his Service, and is guilty of death by the hand of Heaven, although he stay not there: and then he comes on, and is it possible, (saith he) that he should stay so little as to be guilty only of death by the hand of Heaven, and not to be guilty of cutting off? Apparently showing that cutting off was the deeper degree and die of guilt and vengeance by the hand of God, and Divine indignation.

By Death by the hand of Heaven in their sense therefore is to be apprehended some such a sudden avengeful stroke as the Lord shown upon Nadab, and Abihu, or Ananias and Sapphira to take them away. And this may the better be collected by two passages usual in the Rabbins about this matter: First, In that they give up the offense of the Priests drinking wine before they went to serve, [which is held to have been the offense of Nadab and Abihu; ] to death by the hand of Heaven, which argues that they mean such a kind of stroke as they two had. And secondly, In that wheresoever the Law enjoineth Aaron and his sons, and the people about the affairs of the Sanctuary, they shall or they shall not do thus or thus, lest they die; they interpret this of death by the hand of Heaven.

But what to understand by Cutting off, is not so readily agreed among them: Kimchi alledgeth it, as the opinion of their Doctors, That Dying before fifty years old is death by cutting off. [Compare Joh. 8. 57.] Rabbi Solomon saith, It is to die childless, and to die before his time: Baal Aruch giveth this distinction between Cutting off, and Death by the hand of Heaven, that Cutting off is of himself and of his children, but Death by the hand of Heaven, is of himself, but not of his children. But mean it which of these you will, or all these together, or [which may have good probability to conceive] a liableness to cutting off from the life of the world to come; both this, and Death by the Hand of Heaven, were held by that Nation, with whom the phrases were so much in use, to mean, not any censure or punishment inflicted by man, but an impending vengeance of God, and a continual danger and possibility when indignation should seize upon him that was fallen under these gilts: Anathema Maran Atha, one under a curse whensoever the Lord shall come to inflict it: as Joh. 3. 18, 36.

SECT. III. Penalties inflicted upon unclean persons found in the Temple. Whipping and the Rebels beating.

IT was not a small awe, that this might work in the hearts of the people, towards their restraining from going into the Sanctuary in their uncleanness, to have this impressed and inculcated upon them [as it was continually,] that such a venture did hazard them both body and soul, and brought them ipso facto into God's dreadful displeasure, and into undoubted danger of accruing judgment.

But did they let the offender thus alone, that had offended, as if he was fallen under the guilt of death, by the Hand of Heaven, or under the guilt of cutting off, that they had no more to do with him, but leave him to the justice of God, and to judgment, when it should fall upon him? Many a wretch would make sleight of this matter, and because sentence upon his evil work was not executed speedily, his heart would be fully set in him to do so again, as Eccles. 8. 11. Therefore they let not the Delinquent so escape, but as he had fallen under the wrath of God, so they also brought him under a penalty by the hand of man. And this penalty was twofold, either 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whipping by the appointment of the Judges, or mawling and beating by the people.

1. There was the penalty of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whipping or scourging, upon the censure of the Judges, according to the Law, Deut. 25. 2. Where he was to receive forty stripes: but their Tradition brought it to forty save one, 2 Cor. 11. 24. And the reason of this was, because they would make a hedge to the Law, and whereas that commands that they should not give to a Delinquent that was whipt, above forty stripes, lest their brother should seem vile unto them, they abated one of forty to make sure to keep within compass: The measure and manner of their whipping is largely described in the Treatise Maccoth, thus in their own words How many stripes do they give him? [saith the Mishueh there.] Why, forty lacking one: As it is said by a certain number, forty stripes; that is a number near to forty: Rabbi Judah saith, he is beaten with full forty; and where hath he the odd one above thirty nine? Between his shoulders: They allot him not stripes, but so as they might be triplicated: They allot him to receive forty, he hath had some of them, and they say he is not able to bear forty, then he is quit: they allot him to receive eighteen, and as he is in whipping they say he is able to bear forty, yet he is quit. How do they whip him? His hands are tied to two pillars or posts, and the Officer of the Court lays hold of his garments, and rip or rent, it is no matter; he pulls them down till he have bared his breast. Now there was a stone lay behind him, upon which the Officer of the Court stood, with a whip of whit-leather in his hand, platted four plats, and two lashes hanging by it; the handle was a hand breadth long, and the whip a hand breadth broad, and the end of it raught to his belly: A third part of his stripes he gave him before [on his belly,] two parts behind: And he beats him not standing nor s •• ting, but bowed down, as it is said, The Judge shall cause him to lie down, and he strikes him with one hand with all his might▪ And in the mean while, one standing by, reads or says these portions of Scripture: But if thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this Law, &c. Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, &c. Deut. 28. 58, 59. And therefore ye shall keep the words of this Covenant, &c. And he concludes with, But he being full of compassion forgives iniquity, and destroyeth not, Psal. 78. 28.

This was the manner of their scourging; a very sharp penalty, thirteen lashes with a three-lash whip, which by that triplication, arose to forty save one, or if the number were allotted less, yet it was as many stripes as they conceived the party could bear.

2. There was the penalty of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Rebels beating, the beating or the mawling by the people; which was a terrible rugged beating by all the people, without any sentence of the Judges passed upon him at all, and without any measure: As in divers cases, if a man were deprehended faulty in such or such an offense, the people made no more ado, but fell upon him pell mell, with fists, staves or stones, and mawled him immeasurably, and very often to death: Rabbi Nathan describes it thus, The beating according to the Law is, of those that transgress against negative precepts, and it is by measure, and for admonition, and with a three corded whip: But he that transgresseth against affirmative speeches, they beat him till his life depart, and not with a threefold whip. And likewise, whosoever transgresseth against the words of the wise men, they beat him without number and measure, and they call it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Rebels beating, because he hath rebelled against the words of the Law, and against the words of the Scribes. The reason of this beating, [saith another Jew] is because he transgressed against a prohibition of theirs, in a thing which hath its foundation in the Law, and he is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Son of Rebellion: The frequent taking up of stones by the People to have stoned our Savior, and that incursion upon him, Mat. 26. 67. and upon Stephen, Act. 7. 57, 58. for blasphemy as they would have it, and upon Paul, Act. 21. 31. for defiling the Temple, as they supposed, were of this nature.

Thus he that committed a transgression for which he became liable either to Death by the hand of Heaven, or to Cutting off, he did not escape barely with that liableness, but either he was to be whipt, or thus mawled, or in some cases was to suffer death by the sentence of the Judges: Every negative precept [saith Maymony.] upon which they become liable to death by the hand of Heaven, they are beaten for it: Much more where there is a liableness to cutting off, which is the greater guilt. And the same Author reckons eighteen offenses, that fell under liableness to death by the Hand of Heaven, and for which the Offenders were whipt: and twenty one that fell under liableness to cutting off, and for which the Offenders were also whipt, and were not put to death by the Judges.

Amongst those transgressions that deserved these penalties; going into the Sanctuary in uncleanness; fell under as many of them as any one offense whatsoever: It were too tedious to insist upon all particulars, let us take up these few, and guess and conjecture of the rest by them: A Priest or any other that went into the Court being unclean, fell under the guilt of being cut off, and if they served there in their uncleanness, the Priest at the Altar, and any other person in laying on of his hands on the sacrifice, or waving any part of it, they then became liable to death by the hand of Heaven. And such a Priest being deprehended thus faulty, they never brought him before the Sanhedrin; but the young men of the Priests thrust him out of the Court, and dashed out his brains with the billets: And the like they did by the other persons; A Leper that entered into the Mountain of the House was beaten with eighty stripes: He that was defiled by the dead, or unclean for a day, if he went into the Court of the Women, he was to be beaten with the Rebels beating: And so was he that came in, having eaten or drunk any unclean thing, or after a seven days uncleanness would go into the Court of Israel before his atonement was made. And he that brought in a Vessel, or came in any Clothes which one that was defiled by the dead had touched, was to be whipt. And not to multiply particulars, whosoever came within the holy Ground, being unclean, and knowing of it, and yet would come in, he incurred the guilt of cutting off ipso facto; and if he were discovered, and the matter proved by witness, he was sure either to be whipt, or else to be mawled with the Rebels beating, the former always most terrible, the latter deadly very oft. It is indeed a common saying among the Talmudic Writers; that for such or such offenses, though a man be not whipt, yet is he beaten with the Rebels beating, as if the latter were the gentler castigation; they do not mean, that the Rebels beating was the less penalty, but they intend this, that though there be no express in the Law, that appoints his whipping, yet the decrees of the Wise-men which he hath broken, appoint him to be beaten: Whosoever had incurred the guilt of being Cut off, after he is whipt is acquitted from that guilt: as it is said, Lest thy brother be vile in thine eyes: Behold after he is whipt he is thy brother again: But the beating with the Rebels stripes, very ordinarily cost the life.

This then was the sure guard of the Temple, that kept it from defilement and pollution: the dreadful penalties that were sure to light upon those that were discovered to be unclean, and to know so much, and yet to have dared to enter there: Nay, he that knew not of his uncleanness, if he came in there, was not so entirely excused by this his ignorance, but that whensoever he came to know in what case he was, he was bound to bring an Offering for this his sin, and so was he to do in the other cases [whose witting and willful committing them, deserved cutting off ] if he did any of them unwillingly and not knowing: Did he eat fat or blood, and not know what he eat, or come into the Sanctuary in uncleanness, and not know that he was unclean, or commit any of the other transgressions mentioned, and not know that he transgressed, there was an Offering appointed to atone for him, which he was to bring as soon as he came to know that he had misdone: but he that knowingly and willfully would run into those faults, there was no Sacrifice to atone for him, but he fell under the indignation of God, and liableness to divine vengeance, and human penalty, and expectation when it would seize upon him: And to this the Apostle writing to the Hebrews who were very well acquainted with these things, seemeth to allude in those words, Heb. 10. 11. If we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there is no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, &c. Heb. 10. 26, 27.

SECT. I. How the unclean were kept from the Temple.

UPON the observation of what persons were prohibited access to the Temple, lest they should defile it, two things methodically do come to hand to be considered thereupon, as referring to it; and those are, 1. What course was taken for the prohibiting of the unclean from coming there. And, 2. What was the penalty of those that were in their uncleanness, yet would dare to come.

The former inquiry is not of so easy resolution as is the latter, and the reason is, because thousands of persons might come, that were not in a fit case to have come thither; and yet it was impossible, without immodesty and uncivility, unless it were by oath, to discover in what case they were. There were indeed Porters and Guards at the gates, but thousands of unclean persons might pass them, and they never the wiser, unless they should have put the passengers to an oath, which I believe was never yet dreamed of by any writer that hath handled the Jews customs. Men in issues of blood or seed, and women in their ordinary or extraordinary fluxes, could neither be discerned by their face in what case they were, nor do we find that they were ever at all examined, much less sworn or searched. They might repel and keep back, indeed, what or whosoever carried with them visible defiling, as one that appeared to be a Leper, one that came with things about him that might not be brought into the Temple: or they might keep back those that would go beyond their bounds: or they might have an eye to any that came suspiciously either to steal or to disturb the Service: or they might check those that shown any lightness at their coming in, or being entered: or they might direct those that were not well acquainted with the place what to do and how to behave themselves there: or they might admonish all that came, to take heed of coming there if they were unclean: But as for keeping out all that were in any uncleanness, and such as whereby the place might receive defilement, it was a thing so far impossible, that it is far from being imaginable. A man might have touched a dead Corps, or might have touched a Woman in her separation, or suffered Gonorrhoea in the night, or twenty such like cases as these, and he cometh to enter into the Temple, and no one in the world knew how the case was with him but himself, how should this man be possibly discovered or restrained, unless it were by the spirit of Prophesy, or by giving him an oath, which power we never read the Porters to have had, nor is there any ground or color to suppose such a thing.

The security of the place therefore from such pollutions lay more in the severity of the penalties that were sentenced against and inflicted upon those that were deprehended offenders in this kind, than it did in any possible care, or practical prevention they could use that they should not come there: And as the rigor and strictness of Laws, and execution upon offenders in other cases, is the surest prevention of such offenses, the like was the way of caution and prevention here.

SECT. II. Penalties doomed upon unclean Persons found in the Temple. Death by the hand of Heaven, and Cutting off.

FOur sad and severe punishments [for punishments I cannot but call them all] were severally allotted, two in sentence or doom and two in execution, upon those that presumingly by their uncleanness, did violate the Holiness of the place and service, some upon one degree of offending, and some upon another: And those were these,

1. There is a penalty of which the Jews do speak exceeding often, due as they hold to divers sorts of offenders, and amongst other, to some of those that we are speaking of, namely such as being unclean, yet would for all that go into the Temple, and they do call it Death by the hand of Heaven [or by the hand of God, for they do very commonly call God Heaven, ] An unclean person, [saith Maymony,] that serveth in the Sanctuary profaneth his service, and is guilty of Death by the Hand of Heaven, though he stay not there. And again A Priest that serveth and washeth▪ not his hands and feet in the morning, he is guilty of Death by the hand of Heaven. And again, Men or Women with Fluxes, Women in their Separation and upon Childbirth, or one unclean by a creeping thing or by a carcase, or the like, may not deal with the service, nor go into the Court: But if they do, they are liable to cutting off for their going in thither, and to Death by the hand of Heaven for their serving. And divers other instances and examples might be given in other delinquencies and offenses, to which Death by the hand of Heaven is doomed as the proper punishment of them, but these may be sufficient to our present purpose.

2. There is likewise as frequent mention, if not more, among the Hebrew Writers, of another doom or penalty upon divers offenders [and amongst others upon those of whom we are speaking, who would go into the Temple in their uncleanness, knowing how the case was with them] which they call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 kereth or Cutting off: And the Talmud in the Treatise Kerithuth which bears the name upon this very subject doth reckon up six and thirty offenses to which, if willfully committed, this penalty accrued. It may not be amiss to give the matter at large in their own words, and that the rather because we have not only some occasion to look after them now, but shall have again also, when we come to treat concerning sin-offerings, which was a part of their service, and which, as we shall see then and even in the words now before us, had somewhat to say to the matter of Cutting off. Their words are these.

There are six and thirty cuttings off in the Law: He that lieth with his mother, or his fathers wife, or his daughter in Law, or with a male, or with a beast, or a woman lying with a beast: or a man lying with a woman and her daughter, or with another man's wife, or with his own sister, or his fathers sister, or his mothers sister, or his wifes sister, or his brothers wife, or his fathers brothers wife, or with a woman in her separation: or he that blasphemeth, or comitteth Idolatry, or giveth his seed to Molech, or useth Sorcery, or profaneth the Sabbath, or eateth holy things in his uncleanness, or that cometh into the Sanctuary he being unclean: or that eateth fat or blood, or what is left of the sacrifice, or any sacrificed thing not offered in season, or that killeth or offereth up a sacrifice out of the Court, or that eateth leaven at the Passover, or that eateth ought on the day of Expiation, or doth any work on it: or that makes oil or incense like the holy, or that anoints with holy oil: that delayeth the Passover or Circumcision for which there are affirmative precepts: All these if done willfully, are liable to cutting off, and if done ignorantly, then to the fixed sin-offering: and if it be unknown, whether he did it or no, then to a suspensive trespass-offering: but only he that defiles the Sanctuary and its holy things, for he is bound to an ascending or descending offering.

Now that we may the better understand what Death by the hand of Heaven, and Cutting off mean; we are first to take notice, that neither of them was any penalty inflicted by the hand or sentence of man, but both of them do import a liableness to the wrath and vengeance of the Lord in their several kinds. And the Jews do ever account Cutting off to be the higher and more eminent degree of Divine vengeance: As to spare more evidences of this, which might be given copiously, this passage of Maimonides is sufficient, and it is remarkable, when he saith Is it possible for a Priest that serveth in his uncleanness, to stay so little in the Court 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 As that he should be guilty of death by the hand of Heaven only, and not guilty of cutting off? He had had those words but a little before which were cited even now. An unclean person that serveth in the Sanctuary profaneth his Service, and is guilty of death by the hand of Heaven, although he stay not there: and then he comes on, and is it possible, (saith he) that he should stay so little as to be guilty only of death by the hand of Heaven, and not to be guilty of cutting off? Apparently showing that cutting off was the deeper degree and die of guilt and vengeance by the hand of God, and Divine indignation.

By Death by the hand of Heaven in their sense therefore is to be apprehended some such a sudden avengeful stroke as the Lord shown upon Nadab, and Abihu, or Ananias and Sapphira to take them away. And this may the better be collected by two passages usual in the Rabbins about this matter: First, In that they give up the offense of the Priests drinking wine before they went to serve, [which is held to have been the offense of Nadab and Abihu; ] to death by the hand of Heaven, which argues that they mean such a kind of stroke as they two had. And secondly, In that wheresoever the Law enjoineth Aaron and his sons, and the people about the affairs of the Sanctuary, they shall or they shall not do thus or thus, lest they die; they interpret this of death by the hand of Heaven.

But what to understand by Cutting off, is not so readily agreed among them: Kimchi alledgeth it, as the opinion of their Doctors, That Dying before fifty years old is death by cutting off. [Compare Joh. 8. 57.] Rabbi Solomon saith, It is to die childless, and to die before his time: Baal Aruch giveth this distinction between Cutting off, and Death by the hand of Heaven, that Cutting off is of himself and of his children, but Death by the hand of Heaven, is of himself, but not of his children. But mean it which of these you will, or all these together, or [which may have good probability to conceive] a liableness to cutting off from the life of the world to come; both this, and Death by the Hand of Heaven, were held by that Nation, with whom the phrases were so much in use, to mean, not any censure or punishment inflicted by man, but an impending vengeance of God, and a continual danger and possibility when indignation should seize upon him that was fallen under these gilts: Anathema Maran Atha, one under a curse whensoever the Lord shall come to inflict it: as Joh. 3. 18, 36.

SECT. III. Penalties inflicted upon unclean persons found in the Temple. Whipping and the Rebels beating.

IT was not a small awe, that this might work in the hearts of the people, towards their restraining from going into the Sanctuary in their uncleanness, to have this impressed and inculcated upon them [as it was continually,] that such a venture did hazard them both body and soul, and brought them ipso facto into God's dreadful displeasure, and into undoubted danger of accruing judgment.

But did they let the offender thus alone, that had offended, as if he was fallen under the guilt of death, by the Hand of Heaven, or under the guilt of cutting off, that they had no more to do with him, but leave him to the justice of God, and to judgment, when it should fall upon him? Many a wretch would make sleight of this matter, and because sentence upon his evil work was not executed speedily, his heart would be fully set in him to do so again, as Eccles. 8. 11. Therefore they let not the Delinquent so escape, but as he had fallen under the wrath of God, so they also brought him under a penalty by the hand of man. And this penalty was twofold, either 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whipping by the appointment of the Judges, or mawling and beating by the people.

1. There was the penalty of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whipping or scourging, upon the censure of the Judges, according to the Law, Deut. 25. 2. Where he was to receive forty stripes: but their Tradition brought it to forty save one, 2 Cor. 11. 24. And the reason of this was, because they would make a hedge to the Law, and whereas that commands that they should not give to a Delinquent that was whipt, above forty stripes, lest their brother should seem vile unto them, they abated one of forty to make sure to keep within compass: The measure and manner of their whipping is largely described in the Treatise Maccoth, thus in their own words How many stripes do they give him? [saith the Mishueh there.] Why, forty lacking one: As it is said by a certain number, forty stripes; that is a number near to forty: Rabbi Judah saith, he is beaten with full forty; and where hath he the odd one above thirty nine? Between his shoulders: They allot him not stripes, but so as they might be triplicated: They allot him to receive forty, he hath had some of them, and they say he is not able to bear forty, then he is quit: they allot him to receive eighteen, and as he is in whipping they say he is able to bear forty, yet he is quit. How do they whip him? His hands are tied to two pillars or posts, and the Officer of the Court lays hold of his garments, and rip or rent, it is no matter; he pulls them down till he have bared his breast. Now there was a stone lay behind him, upon which the Officer of the Court stood, with a whip of whit-leather in his hand, platted four plats, and two lashes hanging by it; the handle was a hand breadth long, and the whip a hand breadth broad, and the end of it raught to his belly: A third part of his stripes he gave him before [on his belly,] two parts behind: And he beats him not standing nor s •• ting, but bowed down, as it is said, The Judge shall cause him to lie down, and he strikes him with one hand with all his might▪ And in the mean while, one standing by, reads or says these portions of Scripture: But if thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this Law, &c. Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, &c. Deut. 28. 58, 59. And therefore ye shall keep the words of this Covenant, &c. And he concludes with, But he being full of compassion forgives iniquity, and destroyeth not, Psal. 78. 28.

This was the manner of their scourging; a very sharp penalty, thirteen lashes with a three-lash whip, which by that triplication, arose to forty save one, or if the number were allotted less, yet it was as many stripes as they conceived the party could bear.

2. There was the penalty of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Rebels beating, the beating or the mawling by the people; which was a terrible rugged beating by all the people, without any sentence of the Judges passed upon him at all, and without any measure: As in divers cases, if a man were deprehended faulty in such or such an offense, the people made no more ado, but fell upon him pell mell, with fists, staves or stones, and mawled him immeasurably, and very often to death: Rabbi Nathan describes it thus, The beating according to the Law is, of those that transgress against negative precepts, and it is by measure, and for admonition, and with a three corded whip: But he that transgresseth against affirmative speeches, they beat him till his life depart, and not with a threefold whip. And likewise, whosoever transgresseth against the words of the wise men, they beat him without number and measure, and they call it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Rebels beating, because he hath rebelled against the words of the Law, and against the words of the Scribes. The reason of this beating, [saith another Jew] is because he transgressed against a prohibition of theirs, in a thing which hath its foundation in the Law, and he is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Son of Rebellion: The frequent taking up of stones by the People to have stoned our Savior, and that incursion upon him, Mat. 26. 67. and upon Stephen, Act. 7. 57, 58. for blasphemy as they would have it, and upon Paul, Act. 21. 31. for defiling the Temple, as they supposed, were of this nature.

Thus he that committed a transgression for which he became liable either to Death by the hand of Heaven, or to Cutting off, he did not escape barely with that liableness, but either he was to be whipt, or thus mawled, or in some cases was to suffer death by the sentence of the Judges: Every negative precept [saith Maymony.] upon which they become liable to death by the hand of Heaven, they are beaten for it: Much more where there is a liableness to cutting off, which is the greater guilt. And the same Author reckons eighteen offenses, that fell under liableness to death by the Hand of Heaven, and for which the Offenders were whipt: and twenty one that fell under liableness to cutting off, and for which the Offenders were also whipt, and were not put to death by the Judges.

Amongst those transgressions that deserved these penalties; going into the Sanctuary in uncleanness; fell under as many of them as any one offense whatsoever: It were too tedious to insist upon all particulars, let us take up these few, and guess and conjecture of the rest by them: A Priest or any other that went into the Court being unclean, fell under the guilt of being cut off, and if they served there in their uncleanness, the Priest at the Altar, and any other person in laying on of his hands on the sacrifice, or waving any part of it, they then became liable to death by the hand of Heaven. And such a Priest being deprehended thus faulty, they never brought him before the Sanhedrin; but the young men of the Priests thrust him out of the Court, and dashed out his brains with the billets: And the like they did by the other persons; A Leper that entered into the Mountain of the House was beaten with eighty stripes: He that was defiled by the dead, or unclean for a day, if he went into the Court of the Women, he was to be beaten with the Rebels beating: And so was he that came in, having eaten or drunk any unclean thing, or after a seven days uncleanness would go into the Court of Israel before his atonement was made. And he that brought in a Vessel, or came in any Clothes which one that was defiled by the dead had touched, was to be whipt. And not to multiply particulars, whosoever came within the holy Ground, being unclean, and knowing of it, and yet would come in, he incurred the guilt of cutting off ipso facto; and if he were discovered, and the matter proved by witness, he was sure either to be whipt, or else to be mawled with the Rebels beating, the former always most terrible, the latter deadly very oft. It is indeed a common saying among the Talmudic Writers; that for such or such offenses, though a man be not whipt, yet is he beaten with the Rebels beating, as if the latter were the gentler castigation; they do not mean, that the Rebels beating was the less penalty, but they intend this, that though there be no express in the Law, that appoints his whipping, yet the decrees of the Wise-men which he hath broken, appoint him to be beaten: Whosoever had incurred the guilt of being Cut off, after he is whipt is acquitted from that guilt: as it is said, Lest thy brother be vile in thine eyes: Behold after he is whipt he is thy brother again: But the beating with the Rebels stripes, very ordinarily cost the life.

This then was the sure guard of the Temple, that kept it from defilement and pollution: the dreadful penalties that were sure to light upon those that were discovered to be unclean, and to know so much, and yet to have dared to enter there: Nay, he that knew not of his uncleanness, if he came in there, was not so entirely excused by this his ignorance, but that whensoever he came to know in what case he was, he was bound to bring an Offering for this his sin, and so was he to do in the other cases [whose witting and willful committing them, deserved cutting off ] if he did any of them unwillingly and not knowing: Did he eat fat or blood, and not know what he eat, or come into the Sanctuary in uncleanness, and not know that he was unclean, or commit any of the other transgressions mentioned, and not know that he transgressed, there was an Offering appointed to atone for him, which he was to bring as soon as he came to know that he had misdone: but he that knowingly and willfully would run into those faults, there was no Sacrifice to atone for him, but he fell under the indignation of God, and liableness to divine vengeance, and human penalty, and expectation when it would seize upon him: And to this the Apostle writing to the Hebrews who were very well acquainted with these things, seemeth to allude in those words, Heb. 10. 11. If we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there is no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, &c. Heb. 10. 26, 27.

SECT. I. To the building of the Temple.

THE Catalogue and Succssion of the High-priests, from the first institution of this Order, to the last times mentioned in the Old Testament, are thus given us in Scripture.

• 1. Aaron, Lev. 8. 7, &c.
• 2. Eleazar, Num. 20▪ 28.
• 3. Phinehas, Num. 26. 13. Judge. 20. 28. He is tenaciously held by the Jews to be Elias.
• 4. Abishua, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 5. Bukki, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 6. Uzzi, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 7. Zeruhiah, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 8. Merajoth, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6. Here the High-priesthood changed from the Line of Eleazar into the Line of Ithamar.
• 9. Eli of Ithamar, 1 Sam. 1. 9. & 2. 35. 36.
• 10. Phinehas, 1 Sam. 4.
• 11. Ahitub, 1 Sam. 14. 13. & 22. 20.
• 12. Ahimelech or Ahijah, ibid.
• 13. Abiathar, 1 Sam. 22. 20. He was put out of the High-priesthood by Solomon, 1 King. 2. 26.

In the time of these High-priests of the House of Ithamar, there were these successions in the Line of Eleazar.

• Amariah, 1 Chron. 6. 7.
• Ahitub, 2 Sam. 8. 17.
• Zadok, 2 Sam. 8. 17.

Now whereas it is said in the place cited last, that Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar were Priests; it is to be understood as the like is in the 1 Sam. 1. 3. of Hophni and Phinehas, that they were Priests unto the Lord, chief among the Priests, and Chief Overseers in the constant service and matters of the Sanctuary, but their Father Eli was High-priest; so in the beginning of David's settlement in his Kingdom, Abiathar was chief Priest, and he was of the House of Ithamar; now the High-priest did not so much attend the ordinary and common service of the Sanctuary; therefore Zadok of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of Ithamar, were the chief in that service under him.

SECT. II. The High-priests from the building of the Temple to the Captivity.

AS soon as Solomon was set upon the Throne, he put Abiathar from the High-priesthood, as a man guilty of Treason in the Conspiracy of Adonijah, and he put in Zadok in his room, and now Eleazars Line hath the Priesthood again.

Zadoks son was Ahimaaz, 2 Sam. 15. 36. his son Azariah, and his son Johanan, 1 Chron. 6. 9. These six are omitted by Ezra in his reckoning up of the Line of the High-priests, Ezra 7. and the reason of the omission we may guess to be, because from the time of Amaziah the House of Eli began in the Function, and till the time of Azariah the son of Johanan the service in the Temple of Solomon did not begin.

The son of Johanan was Azariah. He it was that executed the Priests Office in the Temple which Solomon built in Jerusalem, 1 Chron. 6. 10. But the question is, What time it was when he executed this Office, whether at the beginning of the Temple service, when it was new built, or in after times? The Jews do very generally hold, that this Azariah was he that withstood Uzziah when he went into the Temple to burn Incense, 2 Chron. 26. 17. 21. And because he stood so gallantly for the honor of the Priesthood against the King, that therefore it is said of him alone, that he executed the Priests Office in the Temple.

But Kimchi goes yet further, holding indeed that this was Uzziahs Azariah, but that he was born in Solomon's time, and so he makes him to live at the least two hundred years, an Age not usual in those times. But by looking over the • imes of the High-priests that succeeded him to the Captivity, it will be apparent enough that this Azariah the son of Johanan, was High-priest in Solomon's time, and was dead and rotten many years before Uzziah was born.

This Azariah begat Amariah, as it is recorded, 1 Chron. 6. 11. Now this Amariah was High-priest in the days of Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron. 19. 11. Amariah begat Ahitub, 1 Chro. 6. 11. this Ahitub was Jehoiada, 2 Chron. 23. 1. &c. and he is called Ahitub the Ruler of the House of God. 1 Chr. 9. 11. Neh. 11. 11. because of his great power and sway in the crowning of Joash, and in the work of Reformation.

Ahitub begat Zadok, 1 Chron. 6. 12. this Zadok was father in law to King Uzziah. 2 Chr. 27. 1. Now Zadok was not Ahitubs immediate Son, but his grand-child, for Zadok was the son of Merajoth the son of Ahitub, 2 Chr. 9. 11. which Merajoth may well be supposed to be Zechariah, the son of Jehoiadah, who was stoned in the Temple Court, 2 Chr. 24. and named here Merajoth, in Memorial of that great Rebellion of the People against God, his Prophet, and his Temple, and omitted in the Line of the Priests, 1 Chron. 6. because he was not used like an High-priest, his High-priesthood was not long, and he died as a Prophet.

Zadok begat Shallum, 1 Chron. 6. 12. or Meshullam, 1 Chr. 9. 11. one of those two it was, either the father or son, that opposed Uzziah when he would have offered Incense, but I rather believe it was Zadok the Kings father in law, who in that story is called Azariah after the Kings name; either he or Shallum is called Urijah, 2 King 16. 10.

Shallum begat Hilkiah, 1 Chr. 16. 13▪ this Hilkiah found the Manuscript of Moses in the days of Josiah, 2 Chr. 34. 14.

Hilkiah begat Azariah, 1 Chr. 6. 13 & 9. 11. Ezra 7. 1.

Azariah begat Serajah, 1 Chr. 6. 14. this Serajah begat Jozedek and Ezra, Ezra 7. 1. he was slain by Nebuchadnezzar at the destruction of Jerusalem, 2 King▪ 25. 18.

Jozedek, the eldest son of Serajah, was captived into Babel, 1 Chr. 6. 15. and thence he never returned: and thus have we the High-priests till the Captivity: And now if we look back upon these times that we have observed, it is no hard thing to conclude, that that Azariah which is said to have executed the Priests office in Solomon's Temple, 1 Chr. 6. 10. did do it presently after the Temple was built, either at the very first service of it, or at the restoring of the service upon Solomon's Repentance after his Apostasy.

SECT. III. The High-priests under the second Temple.

IT may not be amiss for the entrance into this discourse concerning the High-priests after the return out of the Captivity, till the ruin of the Temple, to produce a passage out of the Jerusalem Talmud, which speaketh something unto that occasion. In the first Temple [saith the Gemara in Joma] the High-priests served, the son still succeeding the Father, and they were eighteen in number: But in the second Temple, they got the High-priesthood for money, and some say they destroyed one another by witchcraft: so that some say▪ that there were fourscore High-priests in that spac • e. some four ••• re and one, some fourscore and two, some fourscore and three, some fourscore and four, and some fourscore and five.

Not to insist upon examination of their number of eighteen before the Captivity [which, falls something in with what was said before, though R. Solomon think it is to be read eight ] it may be as a piece of Apology before hand, if we cannot exactly reckon up the persons after the Captivity, seeing the number by their own confession is so very various and uncertain, as some to say thus differently one thing, and some another.

• 1. JOSHUA the son of Jozedek [called also Jeshua after the Syrian pronunciation] returned out of Captivity [where his father had died] with Zerubbabel and began and forwarded the building of the second Temple, and the settlement of the People. He was High-priest all the time of Cyrus and Ahasuerus, and some part of the time of Darius. The High-priesthood that was now grown poor and low, is restored and beautified to him in a Vision, Zechar. 3. who as he bare the name, so he was a figure of the Lord Jesus.
• 2. JOAKIM, Neh. 12. 10.
• 3. ELIASHIB, Neh. 12. 10.
• 4. JOJADA. Neh. 12. 10. Josephus calls him Judah.
• 5. JONATHAN or JOHANAN, Neh. 12. 11. 22. Josephus calleth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or John, and relateth how he slew his own brother Jesus in the Temple, whom Bagoses the chief Commander for Artaxerxes the younger would have made High-priest: for which foul fact Bagoses broke into the Temple, and laid a Tax of forty Drachmes upon every Lamb that was sacrificed in the daily sacrifice.
• 6. JADDUA, Neh. 12. 11. 12. He had a brother called Manasseh which married Sanballat’s daughter, and for that was driven from the Priesthood, and went and occasioned the building of the Temple on mount Gerizim. This Jaddua met Alexander in the High-priests Garments, when he marched in fury against Jerusalem, and the very sight of him appeased him.
• 7. ONIAS the son of Jaddua.

• 8. SIMON or SIMEON the just: There is exceeding famous mention of this man among the Hebrew Writers, and of him they speak many eminent things: As that he was the three and twentieth receiver of their Traditions, that he burnt two red Cows to make purifying ashes, that he was the last of the 120 of Ezra 's great Synagogue, that he took but one Nazarites offering all his time; that every day of Expiation an Angel went in with him into the most holy place, and came out with him, only the last time he went in, the Angel went in with him, but came not out, whereupon he knew he should die that year, and that when he died, the fire on the Altar slacked much, &c. and that he left behind him Shimei and Onias: he would have had Onias to have been High-priest, but his brother Shimei put him to flee to Alexandria, where he built that famous Temple, &c.

  Some think this Simeon the just to have been the same with Jaddua, and to have been the son of Joshua or Jesus whom his brother Jonathan slew, but this matter we will not dispute here.

• 9. ELEAZAR: he was Simeon's Brother. This Eleazar was he that sent the Lxx. Elders to Ptolemy Philadelphus to translate the Law into Greek.
• 10. MANASSES Eleazars Uncle.
• 11. ONIAS the son of Simeon the just, a covetous Wretch, and that brought the displeasure of Ptolemy Euergetes against him by his covetize.
• 12. SIMON the son of Onias.
• 13. ONIAS the son of Simon.
• 14. JESUS the brother of Onias, for Onias left a son behind him, but very young: this Jesus called himself Jason.
• 15. ONIAS the brother of Jason or Jesus, he called himself Menelaus. This Wretch quarrelling with his brother Jason, calleth in Antiochus Epiphanes, and himself forsaketh his Countrys Laws and Religion: And Antiochus coming in, destroyed all Laws and Religion, and brought in such trouble as Israel never had since they were a Nation, until that time, Dan. 12. 1. of which read Dan. 11. 30. 31. 1 Mac. 1. 44, 45, &c.

• 16. The desolation that Antiochus had brought upon Religion and the Temple, causeth Mattathias a Priest of the course of Jojarib▪ which was the first course of the four and twenty, he being now old, to stand up for the maintenance of Religion, and for the deliverance of his Country. The Chaldec Paraphrast calls him the High-priest, Cant. 6. 6.

  Here began the Name and Renown of the Asmonaean Family▪ of which there is so frequent and famous mention in all Authors; The Chaldec Paraphrast applies that speech of Hannah to this Family, in 1 Sam. 2. 4. They that stumbled are girded with strength. Hannah, saith he, prophesied of the Greeks Kingdom, when she saith, The bow of the mighty are broken: and of the Asmonaean Family, which was weak, and for which signs and wonders were done, when she saith, They that stumbled are girded with strength. And so doth the Targum on the Canticles, apply the seventh verse of the sixth Chapter of that Book to the same House: As a piece of a Pomegranate are thy Temples: The Kingdom, saith it, of the Asmonaean Family was full of Judgments as a Pomegranate, &c.

  Not to be inquisitive after the derivation of the word [which we find in Psal. 68. 32. and which is generally interpreted by the Jews to signite great Dukes and Princes] Mattathias not living long after his first appearing a Champion for his distressed Country, he left the charge of that War and Expedition to his sons after him: amongst whom

• 17. JUDAS [surnamed Maccabaeus from these four Acrostick Letters in his Ensign, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which meant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Exod. 15. 12. Lord who is like thee among the mighty? ] undertook the quarrel of his People, and of the Law, Religion▪ and Covenant, and did very victoriously; but at last was slain.

  In these times when all things were in a combustion and confusion in the Land, and in Religion, one ALCIMUS bare the name of High-priest, being indeed of that Line, but a man for mischief and impiety more like a Heathen than a High-priest of Israel, doing much evil whilst he lived, and coming at last to a most fearful end.

• 18. JONATHAN succeedeth his brother Judas as chief Commander: he was made High-priest by Alexander the son of Antiochus; and confirmed therein by Antiochus the son of Alexander, doth many valiant acts, and at last is slain by Trypho.
• 19. SIMON his brother succeedeth him: valiant also and advantageous to his people like his brethren, but slain at last treacherously by his own son in Law.
• 20. JOHN called also Hyrcanus, or Hyrcanus Jannai: He sacked Samaria, destroyed the Temple at Gerizim, slew many of the wise men at Jerusalem, was High-priest eighty years and turned Sadducee.
• 21. ARISTOBULUS his son: He first took upon him to be King.
• 22. ALEXANDER: He bare also the name of King; made many Wars, and at last died of a Quartan Ague, which had held him three years.
• 23. HYRCANUS his son is made High-priest: but his mother Alexandra by the support of the Pharisees sways the Kingdom.
• 24. ARISTOBULUS younger brother to Hyrcanus, after the death of their mother Alexandra, maketh War upon his brother, drives him from his Kingdom to a private life, and takes both Kingdom and High-priesthood upon himself: They both desire help and assistance from the Romans, Scaurus, and Pompey; Aristobulus provoking Pompey by some dalliance causeth the sacking of Jerusalem, and the subjecting of the Jews to the Roman yoke, from under which they were never delivered. Pompey restoreth the High-priesthood to Hyrcanus, and carries Aristobulus and his son Antigonus prisoners to Rome, and his two daughters.
• 25. ALEXANDER the son of Aristobulus escaped the hands of Pompey, when he captived his father and his brother to Rome: and he in Judea raised divers stirs and tumults, and affecting the Kingdom is twice suppressed by the Roman Gabinius.
• 26. ANTIGONUS, Aristobulus his other son escaping from Rome into Judea, first by the help of the King of Tyrus, and after by the help of the Parthians busleth for the High-priesthood and power, out of the hands of Hyrcanus: getteth Hyrcanus prisoner, causeth his ear to be cut off, and by that blemish or maim he maketh him uncapable of the Priesthood: But as Hyrcanus lost his ears, so at last Antigonus lost his head, by the ax of Antony at Antioch: having been first crucified and whipt.
• 27. ANANELUS an inferior Priest, sent for out of Babylon, is made High-priest by Herod. Here Alexandra the daughter of Hyrcanus, and wife of Alexander the son of Aristobulus took indignity, and so did Mariam Herod's wife who was Alexandra's daughter, that an inferior person should be preferred to the High-priesthood, and Aristobulus Mariams brother and Alexandra's son be passed by: These women's shifts and importunities obtain the High-priesthood for Aristobulus, and the deposition of Ananelus.
• 28. ARISTOBULUS a young man of a rare beauty is made High-priest, being not much above fifteen years old: after a years enjoyment of it or little more, he is drowned by Herod's policy, as he was swimming: And then Ananelus becomes High-priest again.
• 29. JESUS the son of Favens: him Herod removed again.
• 30. SIMON the son of Boethus: he was but a Priest before: But Herod marrying his daughter, a woman of a rare beauty, he made him High-priest.
• 31. MATTHIAS the son of Theophilus: Herod deposed his father in law Simon from the High-priesthood, because he thought both he, and his daughter [ Herod's wife] were privy to the counsels of his son Antipater.
• 32. JOZARUS the son of Simon, Herod's brother in law; Matthias being deposed by Herod.
• 33. ELEAZAR made High-priest by King Archelaus, Jozarus being deposed.
• 34. JESUS the son of Sie shoulders Eleazar out.
• 35. JOZARUS again: He was now in the place when Judea was taxed under Cyrenius, Luke 2. [at the birth of Christ] and when the people were ready to rebel rather than be taxed, he overcame them with persuasions.
• 36. ANANUS upon the removal of Jozarus, made High-priest by Cyrenius.
• 37. ISMAEL promoted by Valerius Gratus, upon Ananus his removal.
• 38. ELEAZAR the son of Ananus promoted by the same Gratus upon Ishmael's removal: he enjoyed the High-priesthood but one year.
• 39. SIMON the son of Kamith, advanced by the same Gratus. The Jerusalem Talmud calls him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and relates this story of him, that on the Eve of the day of Expiation, he went out to speak with the King, and some spittle fell upon his garments and defiled him, therefore Judah his brother went in on the day of Expiation, and served in his stead: and so their Mother Kamith saw two of her sons High-priests in one day. She had seven sons and they all served in the High-priesthood; hence came up this Proverb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All meal is meal, but Kamiths meal is fine flower. In Joma per. 1.
• 40. CAIAPHAS, who was also called Joseph: He was Gratus his creature too; and all these changes were made by Gratus in eleven years: and now are we come up to the time of our Savior's death, and to a wretch that had not a small hand in it. Annas or Ananus who had been High-priest four changes before him, is said to be High-priest with him, Luke 2.
• 41. JONATHAN the son of Ananus made High-priest by Vitellius in the room of Cajaphas, whom he removed.
• 42. THEOPHILUS the brother of Jonathan, upon the removal of Jonathan by the same Vitellius is made High-priest.
• 43. SIMON called also Kantheras made High-priest by Herod Agrippa, Theophilus being removed: this was he whose daughter Herod married, and who was removed from the High-priesthood so many changes ago.
• 44. JONATHAN the son of Ananus restored by Agrippa again: but he desires that his brother Matthias might be put in the place as a fitter man than himself: which was a wonder in the great ambition for the High-priesthood which commonly was afoot.
• 45. MATTHIAS put in the room of Jonathan.
• 46. ALIONEUS or Elioenai placed by Agrippa in the room of removed Matthias
• 47. JOSEPHUS the son of Kanei: promoted by Herod King of Chalcis.
• 48. JONATHAN slain by an Assassin by the contrival of the Governor Felix.
• 49. ISMAEL the son of Fabi.
• 50. JOSEPH the son of Simon.
• 51. ANANUS the son of Ananus mentioned before. This man was a Sadducee: He put to death James the brother of our Lord, he is called Ananias a whited wall, one whom Paul will not own for High-priest, Act. 23. 3, 5.
• 52. JESUS put in by Agrippa King of Chalcis in the room of Ananus: this Jesus was the son of one Gamaliel.
• 53. MATTHIAS the son of Theophilus. And here began the Wars of the Jews, which at last were their destruction.

In which time, the confusion of the times did breed such confusion and jumbling about the High-priesthood, in choosing and counterchoosing, and putting in and out according to the pleasure of this or that faction that prevailed, that it would be but confused work to go about to give a Catalogue or account of them; therefore having led the row of the High-priests thus far, as till all order both in Church and State were perished, and the dignity and respect of that Order was utterly lost, we will supersede with this number that hath been related, and pass on to the other ranks of Priests that are before us.

SECT. I. To the building of the Temple.

THE Catalogue and Succssion of the High-priests, from the first institution of this Order, to the last times mentioned in the Old Testament, are thus given us in Scripture.

• 1. Aaron, Lev. 8. 7, &c.
• 2. Eleazar, Num. 20▪ 28.
• 3. Phinehas, Num. 26. 13. Judge. 20. 28. He is tenaciously held by the Jews to be Elias.
• 4. Abishua, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 5. Bukki, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 6. Uzzi, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 7. Zeruhiah, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6.
• 8. Merajoth, 1 Chron. 6. 5, 6. Here the High-priesthood changed from the Line of Eleazar into the Line of Ithamar.
• 9. Eli of Ithamar, 1 Sam. 1. 9. & 2. 35. 36.
• 10. Phinehas, 1 Sam. 4.
• 11. Ahitub, 1 Sam. 14. 13. & 22. 20.
• 12. Ahimelech or Ahijah, ibid.
• 13. Abiathar, 1 Sam. 22. 20. He was put out of the High-priesthood by Solomon, 1 King. 2. 26.

In the time of these High-priests of the House of Ithamar, there were these successions in the Line of Eleazar.

• Amariah, 1 Chron. 6. 7.
• Ahitub, 2 Sam. 8. 17.
• Zadok, 2 Sam. 8. 17.

Now whereas it is said in the place cited last, that Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar were Priests; it is to be understood as the like is in the 1 Sam. 1. 3. of Hophni and Phinehas, that they were Priests unto the Lord, chief among the Priests, and Chief Overseers in the constant service and matters of the Sanctuary, but their Father Eli was High-priest; so in the beginning of David's settlement in his Kingdom, Abiathar was chief Priest, and he was of the House of Ithamar; now the High-priest did not so much attend the ordinary and common service of the Sanctuary; therefore Zadok of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of Ithamar, were the chief in that service under him.

SECT. II. The High-priests from the building of the Temple to the Captivity.

AS soon as Solomon was set upon the Throne, he put Abiathar from the High-priesthood, as a man guilty of Treason in the Conspiracy of Adonijah, and he put in Zadok in his room, and now Eleazars Line hath the Priesthood again.

Zadoks son was Ahimaaz, 2 Sam. 15. 36. his son Azariah, and his son Johanan, 1 Chron. 6. 9. These six are omitted by Ezra in his reckoning up of the Line of the High-priests, Ezra 7. and the reason of the omission we may guess to be, because from the time of Amaziah the House of Eli began in the Function, and till the time of Azariah the son of Johanan the service in the Temple of Solomon did not begin.

The son of Johanan was Azariah. He it was that executed the Priests Office in the Temple which Solomon built in Jerusalem, 1 Chron. 6. 10. But the question is, What time it was when he executed this Office, whether at the beginning of the Temple service, when it was new built, or in after times? The Jews do very generally hold, that this Azariah was he that withstood Uzziah when he went into the Temple to burn Incense, 2 Chron. 26. 17. 21. And because he stood so gallantly for the honor of the Priesthood against the King, that therefore it is said of him alone, that he executed the Priests Office in the Temple.

But Kimchi goes yet further, holding indeed that this was Uzziahs Azariah, but that he was born in Solomon's time, and so he makes him to live at the least two hundred years, an Age not usual in those times. But by looking over the • imes of the High-priests that succeeded him to the Captivity, it will be apparent enough that this Azariah the son of Johanan, was High-priest in Solomon's time, and was dead and rotten many years before Uzziah was born.

This Azariah begat Amariah, as it is recorded, 1 Chron. 6. 11. Now this Amariah was High-priest in the days of Jehoshaphat, 2 Chron. 19. 11. Amariah begat Ahitub, 1 Chro. 6. 11. this Ahitub was Jehoiada, 2 Chron. 23. 1. &c. and he is called Ahitub the Ruler of the House of God. 1 Chr. 9. 11. Neh. 11. 11. because of his great power and sway in the crowning of Joash, and in the work of Reformation.

Ahitub begat Zadok, 1 Chron. 6. 12. this Zadok was father in law to King Uzziah. 2 Chr. 27. 1. Now Zadok was not Ahitubs immediate Son, but his grand-child, for Zadok was the son of Merajoth the son of Ahitub, 2 Chr. 9. 11. which Merajoth may well be supposed to be Zechariah, the son of Jehoiadah, who was stoned in the Temple Court, 2 Chr. 24. and named here Merajoth, in Memorial of that great Rebellion of the People against God, his Prophet, and his Temple, and omitted in the Line of the Priests, 1 Chron. 6. because he was not used like an High-priest, his High-priesthood was not long, and he died as a Prophet.

Zadok begat Shallum, 1 Chron. 6. 12. or Meshullam, 1 Chr. 9. 11. one of those two it was, either the father or son, that opposed Uzziah when he would have offered Incense, but I rather believe it was Zadok the Kings father in law, who in that story is called Azariah after the Kings name; either he or Shallum is called Urijah, 2 King 16. 10.

Shallum begat Hilkiah, 1 Chr. 16. 13▪ this Hilkiah found the Manuscript of Moses in the days of Josiah, 2 Chr. 34. 14.

Hilkiah begat Azariah, 1 Chr. 6. 13 & 9. 11. Ezra 7. 1.

Azariah begat Serajah, 1 Chr. 6. 14. this Serajah begat Jozedek and Ezra, Ezra 7. 1. he was slain by Nebuchadnezzar at the destruction of Jerusalem, 2 King▪ 25. 18.

Jozedek, the eldest son of Serajah, was captived into Babel, 1 Chr. 6. 15. and thence he never returned: and thus have we the High-priests till the Captivity: And now if we look back upon these times that we have observed, it is no hard thing to conclude, that that Azariah which is said to have executed the Priests office in Solomon's Temple, 1 Chr. 6. 10. did do it presently after the Temple was built, either at the very first service of it, or at the restoring of the service upon Solomon's Repentance after his Apostasy.

SECT. III. The High-priests under the second Temple.

IT may not be amiss for the entrance into this discourse concerning the High-priests after the return out of the Captivity, till the ruin of the Temple, to produce a passage out of the Jerusalem Talmud, which speaketh something unto that occasion. In the first Temple [saith the Gemara in Joma] the High-priests served, the son still succeeding the Father, and they were eighteen in number: But in the second Temple, they got the High-priesthood for money, and some say they destroyed one another by witchcraft: so that some say▪ that there were fourscore High-priests in that spac • e. some four ••• re and one, some fourscore and two, some fourscore and three, some fourscore and four, and some fourscore and five.

Not to insist upon examination of their number of eighteen before the Captivity [which, falls something in with what was said before, though