Page images
PDF
EPUB

So it must have been, if the Headship of the Tribe of Levi was confined to the Head of the Sacerdotal Family of Aaron. For that very Phineas was the Heir of Eleazar the eldest Son of Aaron who left any Pofterity; and therefore must have been in courfe the Elder of the Tribe of Levi, if the eldest Prieft was intitled to that Honour, on account of his Senio rity: And confidering that the reft of the Levitical Tribe were by God's appointment, given to the Priefts the Sons of Aaron, as Servants under them in the facred Minifteries ; it can by no means feem credible, that any of them could have taken place of the eldeft Prieft as Senior to him in their common Levitical Tribe. This alfo was really the time when the Tribes acted Separately, not as a common Body. Thus the Tribes of Judah and Simeon help one another by agreement, Judg. i. 3., not by any common Authority obliging them both to do fo. The like account is given there, why the other Tribes did not drive out the Canaanites out of their respective Territories. Plainly fuppofing them now to act feparately, not in a Body as before. The fame is the ftate of the Government in these Chapters alfo, which are now prepofterously read in the latter end of the Book of Judges. There alfo the Danites undertake a feparate Expedition for enlarging the Jurifdiction of their own Tribe: Exactly as the other Tribes do in the beginning of the fame Book. There alfo the Levite divides his Concubine, into twelve Parts, to be fent to all the Tribes feparately, not to any one common Council nor Perfon, who might undertake for them all the War defigned against the Men of Gibeah. This therefore fhews, that the beginning and end of that Book relate to the fame

times, confidering that the other circumstances are fo exactly parallel in both places. The El ders therefore of the Tribes, the Phylarchi, are the Perfons that kept the People ftedfaft to their Covenant with the Supreme Being, in the time which immediately fucceeded the time of Joshua. Thence it appears, what influence the Elders of the Tribes had, as Governours of their refpective Tribes, for fecuring perfor mance of the Covenants with God in their own Tribes, whilft the twelve Tribes had no common Governours that could undertake for them all. This was fo univerfal that footsteps of it appear, even in the Heathen Religions that were National. Among the Romans and Greeks, who have the most antient well-attefted Hea then Monuments, their Kings had fo great an intereft in their National Religions, that feve ral of their National religious Rites and Sacrifices could be performed by no other but their Kings in Perfon. This obliged them both, af ter their extirpation of Royal Authority, how. ever to preserve the Name of a King, even in their Commonwealth, in one who was thereby qualified to officiate in thofe Rights which had been fo appropriated to their Kings in Perfon. Such was the Rex Sacrificulus among the Romans, who was therefore fubjected to their Pontifex Maximus, that he might be thereby difabled for challenging any other Regal Rights than these which were thought fo neceffary to the Commonwealths themselves, relating to Religion. Such alfo was the Interrex of Mercbarind's, as the Greek writers call him, who was to renew the Aufpicia, when the an nual Magiftrates had fuffered the time allotted for the Comitia to lapfe, without creating Suc ceffors. This was alfo thought to be an Office

of

[ocr errors]

of Religion of great confequence, for the good of the Commonwealth. Of the like nature was the Archon, who only had the name of Berind's appropriated to him, to diftinguish him from the reft of his Colleague Archontes. And, to return to the cafe of Patriarchal Right, Men have been commonly fenfible of this, as the cause why Efau is called prophane for making fo light a matter of the lofs of his Primogeniture. They account for this Reproach thus, That the Priesthood it felf was then taken for one of the Rights of it.

§. VI.

God the Secu

This intereft of the Supreme Magiftrate for fecuring Covenants of National Religion, I take This denying to be the true Reafon why God was fo difplea- rity he had for fed at the Ifraelites for chufing a King; and performance why he looks on it as a rejection of himself of the Covefrom being their King, to which he had be- nant on the Peoples part, fore obliged them by the Covenant, for fecu- by naming the ring Religion, and by the nature of the Theo Governours, cracy, with which he had favoured them par- was the thing ticularly above any other Nation. But this has that God Lookbeen fo commonly mifunderftood, that it will ed on, as incon fiftent with his not be amifs on this occafion, to explain it. own Kingship, It is very strange that Fofephus, or our late In- in their having novators, fhould take this for a Reflexion on Hereditary Monarchy in general: For they can never give Kings. any inftance before this time, that the Ifraelites were ever governed otherwife than Monarchically, Mofes was a Monarch, and fo was FoShua, and all the Judges. And fo must all thofe Governments have been of the Phylarchi in their feveral Tribes, when there was no common Governour over their whole Body, and indeed all that other Government that was regularly derived from a Patriarchal Original, which is most agreeable to the Accounts, not only of the Old Tefiament, but of all other ge

nuine Antiquity. Nor was it the name of a King that was thought fo inconfiftent with the Divine Sovereignty. Mofes himself is called a King, Deut. xxxiii. 5. And fo is Foshua, and all the Judges, and the common Governours of all the Tribes, when the Government of the Tribes feparately is defcribed by there being no King in Ifrael, as I have now fhewn. What is it therefore that is taken in the Kingly Go vernment as inconfiftent with the Kingly Go vernment of God? Nothing that I can find, but the Hereditary Succeffion which was then generally received in Kingly Government among the Nations that were about them, Deut. xvii.14. Such an Hereditary Succeffion is taken for derogatory to the Divine Sovereignty, and inconfiftent with it in the cafe of Gideon, though he had not fo much as the ftyle of a King in the appropriate fenfe. The words of the Text are very plain to this purpose, though not fo commonly obferved: Then the Men of Ifrael faid unto Gideon, Rule thou over us, both thou, and thy fon, and thy fons fon alfo: for thou haft delivered us from the hand of Midian. And Gideon faid unto them, I will not rule over you, neither fhall my fon rule over you: The LORD fhall rule over you, Judg. viii. 22, 23. It appears by this very Text, that the Right of the Judges was not heredi tary: For Gideon was a Fudge before; yet was not fuppofed to have a Right to convey the Office to his Pofterity till this new Establishment of the People, if he had accepted of it. The fame appears from the numerous Iffue of Fair the Gileadite, who had thirty Sons, yet none of them fucceeded him in his Office. But when Saul was made King in the fenfe with which God was so displeased, from that

time forward, the Office was fuppofed hereditary. This is very plain from Saul's words to his Heir apparent Fonathan: As long as the Son of Feffe liveth upon the ground, thou fhalt not be established, nor THY KINGDOM, 1 Sam. xx. 31. The reafon why God looks on this hereditary Conftitution as fo derogatory to his own Kingdom, feems to have been plainly this. Whilft the Office was not hereditary, God always reserved in his own Hands the right of nominating the next Succeffor, upon the death of the Fudge for the time being: And he took care to nominate none but fuch as were well affected to his Law, and to the National Covenant for fecuring it. Accordingly in the whole Succeffion of the Fudges, we find not one fingle inftance of any who did not anfwer Expectation and the Truft repofed in him. But in the King's time, when the Office was made hereditary, we then find as great uncertainty and inconftancy among the Ifraelitish Kings as among the Kings of other Nations, some Patrons of the Law it felf, and of the National Covenant which had been made in favour of it, and fome as vigorous and active in deftroying the Law and God's Security for keeping it. This God forefaw, though Man did not, and was therefore fo concerned to prevent it as was confiftent with the Freedom of fecond Caufes: And this in kindness to the People, whofe Patronage had been undertaken by him. He knew very well how uncertain the People must be of his Favours in fo great a variety and mutability of Succeffors, when no Security could be had of Perfons well affected to the Law, and confequently to the Peoples Interefts, which were fo infeparable from the obfervation of it. Accordingly, when God by Samuel,

tells

« PreviousContinue »