Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	aaron_n	bring_v	levite_n	14	3	10.2663	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16835	The supremacie of Christian princes ouer all persons throughout theor dominions, in all causes so wel ecclesiastical as temporall, both against the Counterblast of Thomas Stapleton, replying on the reuerend father in Christe, Robert Bishop of VVinchester: and also against Nicolas Sanders his uisible monarchie of the Romaine Church, touching this controuersie of the princes supremacie. Ansvvered by Iohn Bridges.	Bridges, John, d. 1618.	1573 (1573)	STC 3737; ESTC S108192	937,353	1,244

ye bryng hym foorthe to better purpose or else whyle yee thynke by clawyng hym thus to wynne hys good fauour yee gette hys heauy displeasure and that he answere ye flatly non hercule veniam tertio he will not come at your cal Howbeit ye will once agayne in hope of better lucke bring him foorth and alleage his authoritie better than ye haue done hitherto Besides that say you it is to be considered as M. D. Harding toucheth that he passed other Princes herein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie So that neither those thinges that the Apologie sheweth of Dauid or those that ye and master Nowell adde therevnto for the fortification of the sayde superioritie can by any meanes induce it This friuolous argument he was a Prophet also aswell as a Prince Ergo his superioritie in that he was a Prince can not be alleaged for other Princes to followe ye vsed before as your owne freshe stuffe to shifte off Moses ensample but as it nothing helped your cause then no more dothe it nowe Onely it detecteth héere your vayne crake there of vnspent stuffe where in déede it was olde rotten stuffe spent before by D. Harding on king Dauid as héere your selfe cōfesse yet there ye brought it as a notable fresh surplusage beyonde all that had bene sayde But as you thus of D. Hardings olde scroppes héere would haue made vs there newe fresh stuffe of your owne wherby the alleaging of him agayne this third time openeth your shame so yet once agayne ye make your M. D. Harding and your selfe for companie confounde your owne tales and speake contrarie to your selues Right now ye sayde and alleaged your masters authoritie for it that king Dauids doings were no more than Queene Maries doings to employ a supremacie Nowe ye say agayne and like wise alleage your master for it that king Dauid passed other princes heerein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie If he passed other princes héerein then he passed Quéene Mary whome many other Princes haue also héerein passed and so his doings were more than were Quéene Maries doings héerein For who knowe not that she was no Prophete and thus the oftner ye alleage your master ye take your master tardie in one lie or another and make him still contrarie both himselfe and his cause also Againe it King Dauid were a Prophete as I graunt he was a Prophete ye wote might and did determine doctrine but your selfe sayde before Dauid in all his doings determined no doctrine and thus ye lie on your owne head and make your master witnesse thereto Well leaue at the length to cite your masters authorities for shame master Stapleton since ye can bring them out no handsomer or howe well so euer ye haue brought them out to your aduantage since they be no better proues than that He affirmeth he noteth he toucheth as though all were gospell that master Doctor Harding affirmeth noteth or toucheth Are ye so fond to thinke any man would yéelde so soone vnto them vnlesse he were as wise as your selfe But since none of all these reasons will serue we shall now haue other stuffe of your owne though not very fresh but such stale refuse as your masters haue refused but to you all is fishe that commes to nette ye do wisely to let go nothing that maye any waye be wrested to helpe so yll a cause And first ye reason from the authoritie of the scripture In déede this is a better way than to reason from D. Hardings authoritie The Scripture say you in the sayde place by you and master Nowell alleaged sayth that Dauid did worke iuxta omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domin●… according to all things written in the lawe of God. What conclusion can ye inferre hereon agaynst the Bishops allegation of Dauid Ergo he had not an especiall care and regard in ordring and setting forth Gods true religion if ye make the quite contrarie conclusion He did worke according to all things written in the lawe of God Ergo as the B. sayth he had an especiall care and regard in ordring directing Gods true religion then should ye make a most true conclusion where otherwise rightly applied it can no ways serue your turn Thus bring ye out that which once again ouerturnes your cause and proues K. Dauids supreme gouernmēt And euen so the Q. Maiestie by this ensample of K. Dauid is taught to do the like as praysed be to god for hir therfore she foloweth wel herein the steps of K. Dauid doing iuxta omnia quae scripta sūt in lege domini according to all things written in gods law And where the papists in al their errors this amōg other of the supremacie do praeter cōtra omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domini besides against all things writtē in gods law As Dauid redressed eccl. disorders crept in before his time so the Q. highnes now hath redressed such disorders as she foūd before hir time crept in Thus the more ye reason the more stil ye make against your selfe Ye had néed adde some better stuffe thā this or els if ye thus hold on your friends wold wish M. Fec had hired ye to hold your peace when he first moued you to plead for him Master Stap. séeing it now more than high time to adde some notable thing to better his cause VVherevnto I adde sayth he a notable saying of the scripture in the sayd booke by you alleaged concerning Dauids doings by you brought foorth touching the Priestes and Leuits Vt ingrediantur domum dei iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron patris corum sicut pr●…ceperat dominus deus Israel King Dauids appoyntment was that the Leuits and Priestes should enter into the house of God there to serue vnder the gouernment of whome I pray you not of King Dauid but vnder the spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father Aaron and his successours The gouernour of them was Eleazarus Upon this notable sentence for your purpose as ye thinke you gather thrée notes And bicause ye would go orderly ye begin first with the last note VVhere we haue to note first say you that Dauid appoynted hereto the Leuits nothing of himself But sicut praeceperat dominus deus Israel as the Lorde God of Israel had before appoynted VVe haue here againe to note first in you M. Stap. no plaine dealing that begin with the last part of the sentence first And wherefore I pray you but that that which is spoken here of this matter in especiall ye woulde make it séeme to serue for all Dauids doings in generall VVe haue to note againe your hacking and wresting of this sentence which sheweth a playne destination betweene theyr turnes of comming in and their ordinarie ministerie in theyr turnes in attending on the highe priest The text is thus ●…ae vices eorum secundum ministeria sua vt ingrediantur domum domini iuxta ritum

contrarie Thus saith the king the priest and the Bishop shal haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to God. Ergo the Prince that thus appointeth him thereto hath an other supreme gouernment of appointing and ouerseing euen the priests gouernment Doth not the King appoint the one to his office so well as he appointed the other are not both gouerned in their offices vnder him Yet say you ouer gods matters is the priest not as the kings commissioner but as the priests were after the example of Moses The Bishop refuseth not the example of Moses but alleaged euen the same and your selfe then refused that example saying he had such prerogatiues that he of all other could not be alleaged for exāple bicause of his especial priuilege And now contrary to your former sayings you say the priests were not as the Kings cōmissioners but were alwaies after the example of Moses But go to be it so how doth this helpe your matter or not rather quite confute it In Moses time Aaron and after him Eleazar were the chiefe priestes ouer gods matters vnder whome were the other Priestes and Leuites But all of them yea Aaron and Eleazar so wel as the rest were vnder the supreme gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes so well as temporall of their Prince and ruler Moses Ergo If Moses be an example how the priestes should alwayes gouerne vnder Gods matters then muste their gouernment be alwayes vnder the princes supreme gouernment to ouersée order and direct them as Moses did And where ye say the Priest here was not the Princes commissioner in these matters the very text is most playn to the contrarie I stande not on the worde least I should minister to you occasion of wrangling with me as ye do with the byshop but goe to the matter What call ye him that the Prince sendeth foorth in a commission committing a charge vnto him call ye him not a commissioner and his commissioner that so sendeth him in commission did not Iosaphat so sende about his priestes and Leuites on this commission that they shoulde teache and set foorth euery where the worde of God Tertio ann●… regni sui misit c. in the thirde yere of his raigne he sent out certayne of hys princes Benail and Obdias and Zacharias and Nathaniel and Micheas that they should teache in the cities of Iuda and with them the Leuites Semeiah Nethamah Zebediah and Asahel and Semiramoth and Ionathas and Adonias and Thobias and Tob Adoniah Leuites and with them Elizama and Ioram Priests And they taught the people in Iuda hauing with them the booke of the lawe of the Lord and they went about throughout all the cities of Iuda and taught the people Were they not héere sent in this commission thus to do frō the king Their doctrine was not the kings but Gods commission the Lords booke but this their maner of traueling in setting it foorth was the kings commission And they so wel the Priests and Leuites as the Princes were bothe of them the kings commissioners In lyke case the Quéenes maiesty sendeth out hir godly learned commissioners sendeth by them the worde of God Gods booke and truthe to be set foorth The truth thus set foorth hath not his authoritie from hir cōmission nor the preachers to preach only by hir outward commission but they haue another inward cōmission from God and are Gods commissioners by the calling ministerie of their office Howbeit in this outward maner of visitation setting it foorth in this sorte of traueling about hir highnesse townes and cities reforming abuses directing all eccl. causes they are therin euen aswell the Quéenes cōmissioners as those priests Leuites in al their reformatiō of religion were cōmissioners from king Iosaphat And thus euery thing in the ende is moste euident agaynst you But yet ye blunder still on in your owne conceite and thinke ye haue héere gotten a wonderfull strong argument And marke well M. Horne this poynt say you Zabadias is set ouer suche workes as belong to the kinges office But suche workes are no maner thing perteyning to the seruice of God for ouer them Amarias the Priest is President Ergo the kinges office consisteth not about thinges perteyning to God but is a distinct function concerning the common weale Ergo if the king intermeddle in Gods matters especially if he take vpon him the supreme gouernement thereof euen ouer the priests thē selues to whom the charge is committed he passeth the boūdes of his office he breaketh the order appoynted by God and is become an open enemie to Gods holy ordinance Your crakes and reuilings that ye powder your argument with I remitte to their proper common places to the argument I aunswere If it be marked well as ye would haue it saying Marke well this poynte M. Horne First the marker shall finde it neither in any moode nor figure Secondly the marker shall finde an Equiuocation in these words workes kinges office pertayning to Gods seruice Which words béeing diuerfly vnderstoode in either proposition Thirdly make a paralogisme of foure termes Fourthly in these words ye make a Fallation a secundum quid ad simpliciter Lyra liuiteth the●…e words super ea operaerit quae ad regis officium pertinent He shall be ouer those workes that perteyne to the kings office onely to the ayding and strengthening the Priests and the Leuites by the temporall sworde to punishe the disobediente But is there no other works of the Kings office besides this Uatablus vnder standeth it that as the priest medled with the weightie causes at Ierusalem so also the Leuites shoulde be ouer the lesser causes Causae Ciutū cognoscebontur à Leuitis causaeautē Regtae à Zabaudi●… The causes or controuersies perteyning to the citizens should be herd of the Leuites and the causes and controuersies perteyning to the King should be herd of Zabaudias Neither of these vnderstande these words so generally of al the doings belonging in any wise to the office of a king In lyke case for the priestes gouernment in suche thinges as belong to God Id est sayth Uatablus quod pertinet ad rem diuinam To wite so farre as perteyneth to the diuine seruice or the dyuine administration And you wrest it to be vnderstoode simply for all ecclesiasticall matters and all causes of religion Besides that Fifthly ye reason styll after youre wonted fashion from the distinction of the thynges and vvorkes of eithers perticuler functions to the taking away of the Princes supreme gouernement ouer those distincte workes and functions Howe dothe this argument followe The king appoyntes one ouer Gods workes and another distinct from him ouer his owne workes Ergo the king hath not a supreme gouernement ouer them both to ouersée thē to do those works Your conclusions therfore last of all are faultie neither directly following vpon your premisses and comprehending much more then they inferre This part of your conclusion that