by virtue of his sacerdotal office, which our apostle principally considereth, so I make no question, but he was peculiarly actuated by immediate inspiration from God, in what he did. And in this sort of blessing the apostolical maxim maintains its evidence in the light of nature...

§4. (de μEVEEL SE) "Here verily but there." These words, "here" and "there" express the several different states under consideration. Here, in the case of the Levitical priesthood; there in the case of Melchisedec, Gen. xiv.

The foundation of the comparison, that whereon both agreed, is in this, that they received tithes. It is expressed of the one sort only, the Levitical priests, but is understood of the other also, as supplied in our translation. The opposition and difference lie in the qualification and properties of them by whom they are received. Those on the one side were (aroνYoиOVleg ævdpwwoi, homines qui moriuntur; or, homines morientes) "men that die," that is, men subject to death, who lived and died in the discharge of their office, according to the common laws of morality. They had both "beginning of days and end of life.”

In opposition to this state of the Levitical priests, it is affirmed that (ɛɛ) there, in the case of Melchisedec, (μaprúpuμevos oli ~`Ç) "it is witnessed that he liveth.” What the scripture conceals of Melchisedec is to instruct us in the mystery of his person and ministry, as types of Christ. Hence the silence of scripture,in what it useth to express, must, in this case, be interpreted as a testimony to the contrary. So it witnessed of him, that he was without father, without mother, without descent, and that it mentioneth none of them. And whereas he had neither beginning of days nor end of life recorded in the scriptures, it is thereby witnessed,

that, as to his typical consideration he liveth; for there are no bounds or periods fixed to his priesthood, nor did it expire by the bringing in that of Levi, as that did by the introduction of Christ. What is represented in the type, but is really, subjectively, and properly found only in the antitype, may be affirmed of the type as such. So it is in all sacramental institutions; as the paschal lamb was called expressly God's passover, Exod. xii, 11, when it was only a pledge and token thereof; as under the New Testament, the bread and wine in the sacred supper, are called, "the body and blood of Christ," which they do but represent. Thus it is true really and absolutely of our Lord Jesus Christ, that "he liveth for ever;" that he is a "priest for ever:" which the apostle much insisteth on afterwards. This eternity, or ever living of Jesus Christ, was represented in Melchisedec, in that it is not said any where in the scripture that he died; it is witnessed, therefore, that he liveth, because he whom he represents doth really so; and his own death is not mentioned, on purpose that he might so represent him. And the apostle's argument to the dignity and preeminence of Melchisedec above the Levitical priests in this instance, is of an unquestionable evidence. For, consider Melchisedec, not in his natural being and existence, which belongs not to this mystery, but in his scripture being and existence, and he is immortal, always living, wherein he is more excellent than those who were always obnoxious to death in the exercise of their office.

$5. (NS ETOS ETTET) "As I may so say." The instance being new, and he arguing from what was vir tual only, as if it had been actual, he gave his assertion this qualification. Or, rather, as I incline to judge, he useth this phrase for as much as, ut verbo

of

dicam, "to sum up the whole in a word," to put an issue to this dispute between the Levitical priesthood and that of Melchisedec; I say, that not only Abraham, but even Levi himself, was tithed by him. By "Levi" he intendeth his posterity, or the whole tribe proceeding from him, so far as they were interested in the priesthood; for Levi himself never received tithes any, the priesthood being erected in his family long after his death, in the person of his great grandchild Aaron. (Adenallar dig Abgaap) "He was tithed, or paid tithes, in Abraham," or through him, and by him, as the word denotes. When Abraham himself gave tithes to Melchisedec, he did it not in his own name only, but in the name of himself and his whole posterity.

"For he was yet in the loins of his father when Melchisedec met him." Abraham was now called of God, and separated to his service, so as to be the foundation of a new church in the world; and there is a relation to such an original stock in all the branches beyond what they have to any other intermediate progenitors. He had now received the promise that "God would be a God to him and his seed after him;" whereby all his seed were taken into covenant with him. What God said and did to Abraham, he said and did to all his seed in him. The promises were theirs, and the inheritance theirs; and, on the other hand, Abraham acted as a public person in the name of his posterity. Hence when the people came actually to possess the land, they held it always on this condition, that the tenths of all should be given to God; and this Abraham, in his taking seisin of it for them, paid in their name: so truly and virtually was Levi himself tithed in the loins of Abraham when Melchisedec met him. Wherefore it was not merely Levi

being in the loins of Abraham with respect to natural generation, whence he is said to be tithed in him, but his being federally in him. And thus our apostle's reasoning being duly inquired into, we find is resolved into the firm principles of reason and religion.

§6. It has been questioned, whether Christ himself may not as well as Levi be said to pay tithes in Abraham as being in his loins? No; for Christ was never in Abraham as a federate, one taken in covenant with him, and so represented by him, as Levi was. Abraham was taken into covenant with Christ, as the surety and mediator of the new covenant. Hereon he was the representative of Abraham and all believers, and what he did is imputed to them; but he was never taken into covenant with Abraham, nor was capable of it.

And this makes way for the solution of another general question, How one may be said to do any, which shall be reckoned to him as his own act? Which is no otherwise than by virtue of a covenant. Abraham was taken into a new administration of the covenant, with new promises and seals; but he neither was, nor could be, the head and representative of that covenant itself whereinto he was taken, otherwise than typically. Hence his moral good or evil could not be reckoned to his posterity in covenant. But yet he was made the head and spring of the administration of its outward privileges. Wherefore, seeing what he did to Melchisedec belonged to the administration of the covenant committed to him, Levi is rightly said to have done it in him also: and these things do mutually illustrate one another. But to deny (as Schlictingius does in his comment on this place) that we were all in Adam, as the head of the first covenant, that we sinned in him, and that any sin can be imputed, is not

4

to dispute with us, but expressly to contradict the Holy Ghost.

§7. (II.) From the preceding exposition we may make the following observations:

1. We can be made partakers of no such grace, mercy, or privilege in this world, but that God can, when he pleaseth, make an addition to it. He who had received the promises was afterwards blessed. Wherefore, as it is required of us to be thankful for what we have, or to walk worthy of the grace we have received, yet we may live in constant expectation of more from him; and this inestimable privilege should be the great comfort and relief of our souls.

2. It is the blessing of Christ, typified by Melchisedec, that makes promises and mercies effectual to us. He is himself the great subject of the promises, and the whole blessing of them cometh from him alone; all without him is under the curse. In him, from him, and by him alone, are all blessings to be obtained.

3. Free and sovereign grace is the only foundation of all privileges.. All that is spoken of the dignity of Abraham is resolved into this, that "he received the promises."

§8. Obs. It is a great mercy and privilege when God will make use of any in blessing others with spiritual mercies. It is God alone who originally and efficiently can confer a blessing on any; yet he generally maketh use of others, in various degrees of usefulness, instrumentally to communicate them: so parents bless their children and household, and ministers the church.

First; PARENTS bless their children in the name of the Lord several ways; particularly, by endeavoring to instate them in their own covenant interest; by communicating to them the privilege of the initial seal of