all, and receiving his blessing. But when he met him, he was refreshed also with his kingly bounty. Many poor sinners go unto Christ principally, if not only at the first, upon the account of his sacerdotal office, to have an interest in his sacrifice and oblation, to be made partaker of the mercy and pardon procured thereby. But when they come to him in a way of believing, they find that he is a king also, ready, able, powerful to relieve them, and unto whom they owe all holy obedience. And this answers the experience of many, it may be the most of them that do believe.

III. This kingly office of Melchisedec is farther asserted by the specification of the place where he was king and reigned— he was king of (Zaλ) Salem. There hath been great inquiry about, and much uncertainty there is, concerning this place or city. Two opinions, all sorts of those who have inquired into these things with any sobriety, do incline unto. For as for one who hath not long since affirmed, that this Salem is Jerusalem that is above, the mother of us all, he hath thought meet to give other instances also, how little he understands the things he undertakes to treat about. But some think it was that city, and no other, which was afterwards called Jerusalem, and became in David's time, and so for a long continuance, the principal seat of the church and solemn worship of God. This place, they say, was first called Salem, and afterwards, it may be presently after the reign of this Melchisedec, and on the occasion thereof, by the addition of 787 or 187, a vision,' or 'they shall see' Peace, called Jerusalem. Others think that Salem was a city or town not far from Shechem, which was afterwards destroyed; and there are reasons for both opinions.

6

Of this latter opinion Hierome is the principal author and maintainer in his Epistle to Evagrius. And there are three reasons for it, whereon he much insists. 1. That there was a city near Shechem that was called Salem, and no otherwise. And this is plainly affirmed in the Scripture, Gen. xxxiii. 18. "And Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan. For those who render the words, bu apy` nau Oy, Et venit Jacob pacificus, or incolumis ad urbem Shechem, so making the word appellative, and not the name of a place, are undoubtedly mistaken. For the same place is mentioned again in the New Testament by the same name, John iii. 23. "John was baptizing in Enon near to Salim." For, that Salim and Salem are the same, Hierome well shews, with the reason of the variation. 2. He affirms, that at that time were seen at Shechem the ruins of the palace of Melchisedec, which manifested it to have been a munificent structure. 3. It is pleaded that the circumstances of the story make it necessary to judge that it was this Salem. For Abraham was passing by

the place where Melchisedec reigned, who thereon went out to meet him. Now, whereas he was returning from Hobah, which was on the left hand, or north side of Damascus, Gen. xiv. 15. Jerusalem was not in the way of his return, but Salem was.

On the other side, it is pleaded with more probability, that Jerusalem was the seat of his kingdom. For, 1. It was anciently called Salem, which name is afterwards occasionally applied unto it, as that whereby it was known, Psal. lxxvi. 2. “ İn Salem is God's tabernacle, and his dwelling-place in Sion," where Jerusalem only can be intended. Afterwards some think that when it was possessed by the Jebusites, it began at first to be called Jebus-Salem, that is, Salem of the Jebusites, which by custom was transformed into Jerusalem. But the approved etymology from 87 and 7, so that the name should signify, a sight or vision of peace,' is certainly true, and probably given by God himself. 2. In the days of Joshua, the king of Jerusalem was called Adonizedec, a name of the same signification with Melchisedec, which possibly from him was the name of the kings who afterwards reigned in that city. And that man, as it should seem, was in some reputation for righteousness among the Canaanites, whence he managed their common cause in their danger, Josh. x. 1-4. 3. Abraham dwelt at this time at Hebron, in the plain of Mamre; and in his return from Hobah or Damascus, the way lay near unto Jerusalem, as all charts yet declare; and Shechem was more to the north than that he should conveniently pass that way. 4. Jerusalem being designed to be the place where the Lord Christ was to begin and exercise his priestly office, it may well be supposed that there this his illustrious type was to appear and be manifested; especially considering that it was to be the place where the seat of the church was to be fixed, until the signification of the type was to be effected.

And these reasons do prevail with me to judge that Jerusalem was the place of the habitation and reign of Melchisedec. As for what is affirmed by Hierome concerning the ruins of his palace at Shechem, it is notoriously known how little credit such traditions do deserve. Besides Josephus, who lived 400 years before him, makes no mention of any such thing. And it is probable that the ruins which Hierome saw were those of the palace of Jeroboam, who there fixed the seat of the kingdom of Israel, 1 Kings xii. 25. as king of the place where he obtained the crown, ver. 1. But credulous and superstitious posterity chose to consider it as the memorial of Melchisedec, rather than of him, who being the bane and ruin of the nation, his memory was accursed. And to inquire how this city came afterwards into the hands of the Jebusites, is directly contrary to the design of the Holy Ghost, which was to hide from us

the end of his life and offices, as our apostle declares. And herein also possession was taken of the seat of the church in the tents of Shem, on the behalf and in the name of the Gentiles descended from Japheth. And may we not observe, that,

Obs. VII. God, in his sovereign pleasure, gives various intervals unto places, as to the enjoyment of his worship and ordinances.-This Jerusalem, which was at first ennobled by the priesthood of Melchisedec, was afterwards left for a long season unto the idolatrous Jebusites. In process of time it was visited again, and made the fixed station of all solemn divine worship, as it is now left unto salt and barrenness. So hath he dealt with many other places, and in particular, notwithstanding their boasting, with the city of Rome, some time a seat of the gospel, now the throne of antichrist. "Go to my place which was in Shiloh," Jer. vii. 12. 14. xxvi. 6.

By the way, we must here give an account of somewhat that the apostle doth not say, as well as of what he doth. After the mention of Melchisedec, and his being king of Salem, in the story, Gen. xiv. it is added, that he met Abraham, and brought forth bread and wine," ver. 17, 18. Of his meeting Abraham the apostle takes notice, but of his bringing forth. bread and wine, not at all. Hereof undoubtedly no reason can be given, but only that that particular action or passage belonged not at all unto his purpose. For he who takes notice of all other circumstances, arguing as well from what was not said of him, as from what was, would not have omitted any thing which is so expressly affirmed as this is, had it any way belonged unto his purpose. But the importunity of the Papists, who with a strange kind of confidence do hence seek countenance to their missatical sacrifice, makes it necessary that we should inquire a little farther into it.

Melchisedec, they tell us, as a priest and type of Christ, did offer this bread and wine in sacrifice to God. Herein, they add, alone was he typical of Christ, who offered himself unto God under the appearance of bread and wine. And he also instituted the sacrifice of the mass, wherein he should be so offered continually unto the end of the world. And on that account alone, they say, he continueth a priest for ever. For if he had not appointed priests here in his room to offer him unto God, that office of his would have ceased, as Bellarmine disputes at large.

It were easy to make naked the fondness of these imaginations, would our present design permit. Some few things may be remarked on their assertions. As, 1. The apostle in this whole discourse wherein Melchisedec is introduced and concern, ed, treateth not at all of the sacrifice of Christ, nor intimates any resemblance between the offering of Melchisedec and that

of Christ; but it is the office alone, and its dignity, which he insists upon, designing to treat afterwards at large about his sacrifice. And when he doth so, he doth not in the least compare it with the sacrifice of Melchisedec, but with those of Aaron according to the law; so that here was no occasion for him to mention any sacrifice of Melchisedec's, should any such thing be supposed in the text of Moses. 2. A supposition of such a sacrifice of bread and wine as that pleaded for, is contrary to the apostle's design, and destructive of it. For whereas he endeavoureth to prove that the priesthood of Melchisedec was far more excellent than that of Levi, he could not do it by this, that he offered bread and wine in sacrifice, for so also did the Levitical priests, Lev. vii. 13. xxiii. 13. 18. But all the excellencies which the apostle insisteth on, consist in the dignity of his office, and the qualifications of his person, not in the matter of his sacrifice. 3. Let all be granted they can desire, yet are they not advantaged as unto their especial end thereby. For what is the offering of real bread and wine, and no more, unto the offering of the body and soul of Jesus Christ, under the appearance of them? 4. As unto what they contend, that the Lord Jesus Christ would not be a priest for ever, unless he had those priests on earth who continue to offer him in the sacrifice of the mass; it is so far from truth, as that the contrary is irrefragably true and certain. For if he indeed hath need of other priests to carry on his office, he doth not continue the administration of it himself, or all the apostle's arguings against the perpetuity of the Aaronical priesthood are invalid. But because I am not willing to engage in any thing controversial beyond what is absolutely necessary, I shall only tender some considerations evidencing that no such thing as a sacrifice can be included in that expression, "He brought forth bread and wine;" and so proceed.

1. The process of the story directs unto another sense of the words. Abraham was now returned with his forces unto the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale, Gen. xiv. 17. a place not far from Jerusalem, called, as it is likely, the king's dale, from Melchisedec, unto whom it belonged; where afterwards Absalom built a pillar, for the memorial of his name, 2 Sam. xvii. 18. Here probably he continued for a while, as to refresh his own people, so to stay for the coming of the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. For upon their defeat in the battle, they had left the plain, and fled into the mountains, ver. 10. giving up the cities with all their spoil unto the conquerors. But now, hearing of the success of Abraham, and his recovery of the captives with their goods, they resort unto him for relief: he who intended to restore all unto them, stayed for them, as it is probable, some days in the king's dale. Now, it was the man

ner in those countries, where any forces were on an expedition, that those in their way who were at peace with them, did bring forth supplies of bread and wine, or water for their refreshment. For the neglect of this duty, wherein they brake the laws of friendship and hospitality, did Gideon so severely punish the inhabitants of Succoth and Penuel, Judges viii. 5-7. 13-16. And the observance of this duty is recorded unto the commendation of Barzillai the Gileadite, who sent refreshment unto David and his army; for he said, "the people are hungry, and thirsty, and weary in the wilderness," 2 Sam. xvii. 27, 28, 29. In this state of things, Melchisedec, being the neighbour, friend and confederate of Abraham, when he came with his army and abode so near unto him, brought forth bread and wine for their refreshment; which being merely a civil action, our apostle takes no notice of it. And they who can discover a sacrifice in this expression, have either more skill in the opening of mysteries than he had, or a better invention in coining groundless fables and imaginations of their own.

2. This act of Melchisedec is immediately subjoined to the mention of him as king, being an instance of kingly power and munificence: "Melchisedec, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine." After this is added, "and he was a priest of the Most High God;" which is a plain introduction of, and preparation for the expression of his exercise of that office in his blessing of Abraham, which ensues in the next words. The Romanists contend that vau in 1 is reditive, giving a reason of what was before affirmed: "He brought forth bread and wine," because he was the priest of the high God. But as this offers force to the universal usage of that particle, which is connexive only; so it will not serve their occasion. For they would have it that Melchisedec only offered this sacrifice of bread and wine; whereas, if the reason why he did so, was because he was the priest of the high God, then every one who was so, was in like manner to offer the same sacrifice. And whereas they place the whole especial nature of the Melchisedecian priesthood in this his sacrifice, if this were common to him with all others, then was he not a priest of a particular order; and so the whole discourse of the apostle is vain and impertinent. But it is plain that he having nothing to do with, nor inference to make from, his royal office or acts, doth therefore omit this which evidently was an act of kingly bounty.

3. The word here used, &, he brought forth,' or caused to be brought forth, bread and wine, is no sacred word, nor is ever used in the Scripture to express the sacred action of oblation or offering in sacrifice. It is always a common action that is denoted thereby.

4. The apostle's silence in this matter casteth this pretence.