firft epiftle to the Corinthians, and introduces it by declaring that the precept was more than human, it was of divine authority: Say I these things as a Man? Or faith not the Law the fame alfo? For it is written in the Law of Mofes, Thou shalt not MUZZLE the mouth of the OX, that treadeth out the corn. I Cor. ix. 8, 9.

From the question immediately following these words,-Doth God take care for Oxen? Some might infer, that the Apostle meant to fet aside or weaken the precept ; or that it is only to be interpreted in a figurative or typical fenfe. To me it appears in another light, and that the inference of the

Apostle is an establishment of the

command

commandment. It was the fcope of St. Paul, to prove that the Minifters of the Gospel have a right to a maintenance, because they labor in the word and doctrine*: and to this purpose he might have laid the stress of his reafoning upon the almoft fimilar cafe of the Maintenance of the Priefts under the Jewish Law, (which indeed he notices in ver. 13.) but he begins with an argument of greater force and more extenfive obligation, which the change of the Priesthood did not, and could not cancel; an argument, which, though enjoined by the Law of Mofes, was founded on the Law of Nature, and acknowleged by heathens and infidels, viz. that

I Tim. v. 17.

the

the laboring Beast had a right to fupport and if the voice of nature, and of the God of nature require and command that the Cattle fhall have the wages of their work, it is but reafonable that They which wait at the altar, fhould be partakers with the altar*; and for the fame reason, the Lord had so ordained that they which preach the gospel, should live of the gofpel +. This then was the force of the Apoftle's argument, not to infringe the duties of humanity and tenderness to the brutes, but to confirm them, and thereupon to build an argument of fimilar nature. To fuppofe otherwife, is to accufe the Apostle of weak reasoning. It is to suppose him

* 1 Cor. ix. 13.

+ Ver. 14.

to

to lay a foundation, and then to dig it up as foon as he begins to erect his building, which would be no great credit to a mafter builder.

*

wife

Upon the equity of the Maxim, acknowleged by all men, that the Laborer is worthy of his reward; and upon the positive Precept of the Law, that the Laboring OX fhould not be muzzled; St. Paul grounds his proof, that the claim of the Ministry to a maintenance is both just and legal. He thought his argument fo ftrong and evident upon this foundation, that he fcruples not to compare the cafe of himself and his brethren to that of Oxen plowing in the field.

* 1 Cor. iii, ro,

I

Nor

Nor did he do any difcredit to his minifterial character by the parallel, or produce an inftance unbecoming the dignity of his fubject. For his bleffed Master upon a matter of more extenfive importance, than the maintenance of the ministry, descends much lower than St. Paul has done in this inftance. Our Lord JESUS, to teach his difciples the duty and fecurity of trusting in GOD for protection or deliverance from trouble, might have carried their thoughts to reflect upon the interpofing and overruling providence of GOD in the affairs and revolutions of states and empires; or might have drawn his argument from the general view of nature directed by his wisdom and love;

but