Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n aaron_n bless_v moses_n 28 3 7.5353 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A73418 Roger Widdringtons last reioynder to Mr. Thomas Fitz-Herberts Reply concerning the oath of allegiance, and the Popes power to depose princes wherein all his arguments, taken from the lawes of God, in the Old and New Testament, of nature, of nations, from the canon and ciuill law, and from the Popes breues, condemning the oath, and the cardinalls decree, forbidding two of Widdringtons bookes are answered : also many replies and instances of Cardinall Bellarmine in his Schulckenius, and of Leonard Lessius in his Singleton are confuted, and diuers cunning shifts of Cardinall Peron are discouered. Preston, Thomas, 1563-1640. 1619 (1619) STC 25599; ESTC S5197 680,529 682

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

whosoeuer hath a flux of seede and is polluted vpon the dead as well man as woman cast ye out of the campe 20 So likewise it belongeth to the Priests of the new Law to declare what is the Law of Christ and to iudge what is heresie vsurie or any other crime forbidden by the law of Christ and to command temporall Princes to roote out hereticks vsurers and such like malefactors by the meanes of temporall punishments for all this doth not exceede the bounds of spirituall authoritie but it doth not belong to the Priests of the new law as they are Priests to giue sentence of death or to punish temporally heretikes vsurers or any other malefactours by inflicting temporall punishments but only to temporall Princes who haue in their hands and power the sword of life and death and who therefore as I obserued o Disputat Theolog. ca. 7. sec 2. nu 17. Bannes 2.2 q. 11. ar 4. q. 1. in fine out of Bannes may pardon sometimes the punishment of death and punish heretikes in some other manner 21 And therefore to as little purpose also is that which Mr. Fitzherbert next adioyneth that God gaue also to the high Priest an infallibilitie of doctrine and iudgement in causes of doubts and controuersies euen of temporall matters For I willingly grant that the high Priests of the old Testament had an infallibilitie of doctrine and iudgement at least wise for many yeares together in doubts and controuersies euen of temporall matters which could not be determined by the law yea and a greater infallibilitie of doctrine and iudgement then is now in the new law in doubts and controuersies of particular facts as whether they should ouercome in such a warre how such an inheritance of particular men was to be deuided c. Either because as well obserueth Abulensis Abulensis q. 3. in 17. Deut. in fine Abulensis q. i9 in cap. 22. lib. 1. Reg. in Defensor part ● cap. 41. the high Priest did iudge in the presence of some Prophet to whom the truth was reuealed by God or because they did know the secrets of things by the pla●es of the Priests vestement which was called the rationale wherein was contained doctrine and truth whereof we haue treated saith Abulensis Exod. 28. 22 Or thirdly as the same Abulensis obserueth when the high Priest consulted our Lord about any thing by entering into the Sanctuary in the day of Expiation which happened but once a yeere for on that day the Priest did speake vnto our Lord within the Sanctuary and did heare him speake in the Propitiatory as hath beene declared Leuit. 16. For therefore it was commanded that at what time the high Priest did enter into the Sanctuary no man should be in the Tabernacle to wit least he should heare those things which were spoken in the Sanctuary Thus Abulensis none of which wayes to finde out the truth infallibly in any doubtfull matter is ordinarily granted to the Priests of the new Law Neuerthelesse it can not from hence bee sufficiently concluded that the high Priests of the old Law had a soueraigntie of temporall authoritie or in temporall things but onely in spirituall for that as well obserueth the saide Abulensis p Q. 23. in cap. 11. Num. to instruct in the questions of the Law and to consult almighty God was a spirituall thing 23 But that which Mr. Fitzherbert immediately addeth that the Leuites and Priests were separated wholly from temporall and ciuill state in such sort that they had no dependance thereon is very vntrue and Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth the contrarie to bee probable q Supra nu 6. For as I aboue obserued out of S. Bonauenture S. Thomas Abulensis and many other learned Diuines in the Olde Testament the Priesthood was subiect to the Kingdome and Priests were directly subiect to the King as Laymen were to wit in temporalls as it appeareth saith Abulensis Num. 17. where God said that Eleezar who was the high Priest and the rest of the Israelites were subiect to Iosue who was a Secular Prince to wit of the tribe of Ephraim yea and in the time of Moses Aaron who was the high Priest was in temporalls subiect to Moses and for that cause called him his Lord Exod. 32. although in spiritualls Aaron was greater then Moses Q. 10. in 9. Leuit. Moses saith Abulensis expounding those words of Leuit. 9. and Aaron stretching forth his handes to the people hee blessed them was in temporalls greater then Aaron because hee iudged the whole people as it is contained Exod. 18. Chap. and he commanded the people those things which they ought to doe But in spiritualls Aaron was simply greater then Moses For Aaron was the high Priest but Moses one of the simple Leuites Also because Aaron had directly a right to minister but Moyses had onely this for want of Priests but this hee had not by any order or ordination And if thou say that Moses was greater then Aaron because hee commanded him to doe these sacrifices and whatsoeuer he did I answere saith Abulensis that it is not inferred from this because Moyses did not therefore commaund these things as hauing authoritie to commaund by some Prelacie or Order but because hee was the messenger of God relating those things which God had commaunded whereupon it is not properly saide that Moyses did commaund but that hee did declare the things to be done 24 But if thou yet obiect that Moyses was greater then Aaron because Moyses did consecrate Aaron It is answered saith Abulensis that it is not deduced from this for therefore Moyses did consecrate Aaron because there was no high Priest that could consecrate him nor also then any inferiour Priests for that as well the high Priest as the inferiour Priests were consecrated and yet neuerthelesse this consequence is not of force this man doth consecrate that man therefore hee is greater then hee For the Pope is consecrated by a Cardinall Bishop of Hostia who is inferiour to the Pope and after his consecration the Pope doth command him that consecrated him So also it happened among the high Priests in the Olde Testament For except the consecration of Aaron which was done by Moyses who was no Priest to wit by ordination but onely by the speciall priuiledge of God as the same Abulensis declareth q. 7. in cap. 17. Exodi and except the consecration of Eleazar which was done without any ceremonies as we shewed at large Exod. 19. all the later consecrations of the high Priests were done by inferiour Priests therefore Moyses was not greater for that he consecrated Aaron but Aaron was greater and because as the Apostle writeth Hebr. cap. 7. alwaies the lesser is blessed by the greater it was fit that the blessing ouer the people should bee done by Aaron Thus Abulensis See him also q. 2. in cap. 2. Num. 25 Now Mr. Fitzherberts next argument is as insufficient as the former I added further
shall go out and go in and not that Eleazar at the word of Iosue shall goe out and goe in yet from thence it can not rightly be concluded that Iosue was subiect to Eleazar in temporals but onely in spirituals for that to consult the Lord and declare to Iosue and the people the commandement of God when any difficultie should arise yea and to command Iosue and the people to obey his declaration and to follow that which God had reuealed which Theodoret doth onely affirme was not a temporall but a meere spirituall thing as before I declared out of Abulensis Abulens q. 11. in cap. 33. Exodi Neither can my Aduersarie denie but that Iosue did succeed Moyses in the temporall gouernment and therefore vnlesse he will denie as I thinke he dare not that Aaron the high Priest was subiect to Moyses in temporals and might be punished by him temporally if he should transgresse the law of God he can not with any probabilitie deny but that Eleazar the high Priest was also in temporals subiect to Iosue who succeeded Moyses in the temporall gouernment and that he might be punished by him temporally if he should offend against the law of God 30 The next argument of Mr. Fitzherbert is also as weake as the former Also the holy Scripture sayth he x Nu. 8. pag. 7● Iosue 19. declaring how the Land of Promise was diuided setteth it downe in this manner Hae sunt possessiones c. These are the possessions which Eleazar the Priest and Iosue the sonne of Nun and the Princes of the families and of the tribes of the children of Israel diuided by lot in Silo c. Thus sayth the Scripture giuing the preheminence in the diuision of the land to the high Priest before the temporall Prince 31 But this argument prooueth at the most that the spirituall Priesthood is in worth dignitie and nobilitie more excellent then the temporall Soueraigntie but it doth not prooue that Priests are in temporall Soueraigntie greater then temporall Princes As likewise Cardinall Bishops haue the precedence and preheminence before Cardinall Priests and Cardinall Priests before Cardinall Deacons and a Cardinall who is first created hath the precedence and preheminence before an other Cardinall who is afterwards created yet from hence it cannot be concluded that one Cardinall is greater in authoritie then another or that one Cardinall hath power to command and punish another 32 Also learned Abulensis expounding those words of holy Scripture y Iosue 14. This is it which the children of Israel possessed in the land of Canaan which Eleazar the Priest and Iosue the sonne of Nun and the princes of the families by the tribes of Israel gaue to them c. answereth this argument at large Here saith he are related the persons diuiding the land of the nine tribes Abulens q. 1. 2. in cap. 14. Iosue and a halfe to wit Eleazar Iosue and the ancients or elders of Israel Wherein it is to be considered that Moyses alone before the passage of Iordan diuided the land of two tribes and a halfe although Eleazar the Priest and the multitude of the Israelites to wit the Princes of the multitude did assist him as it appeareth Num. 32. and if he had liued none other had diuided the land But when he was dead there did succeed other diuiders and it was not giuen to Iosue as the onely diuider because God would not giue to any one after the death of Moyses all this power as he had giuen to Moyses for that he would not appoint any one equall to him Therefore before the death of Moyses he caused that there should be assigned diuiders of the land of Canaan whereof the principall power he gaue to Iosue as it appeareth Deuter. cap. 3. 31. to wit that Iosue should take the land from the hands of the enemies and he should diuide it by lots But there were giuen other coadiutors of euery tribe and Eleazar was giuen For Eleazar the high Priest is put as a helper of Iosue in all things as it appeareth Num. 27. And Eleazar is put here in the first place not for that he was the more worthie either for state or holinesse Iosue did sufficiently excell seeing that he was greatly beloued of God and God did speake vnto him very often which is not apparant of Eleazar 33 Neither was the state of Priests in the old Testament more excellent then the state of Kings but Priests were iudged by Kings and this not onely concerning Kings but also Iosue who was not a King was greater then the high Priest as it appeareth Num. cap. 27. where it is said that Eleazar the high Priest and euery one shall at the commandement of Iosue goe in and goe out that is shall doe whatsoeuer they ought to doe Therefore Iosue was the greater because to command is an act of the greater Yet Eleazar is here put before because Samuel the writer of this booke would obserue the order of the writing of Moyses But when Moyses described the diuiders of the land of Canaan he put Eleazar before Iosue and all the Israelites as it appeareth Num. 34. and therefore he did here keepe the same order Thus Abulensis And the cause why Moyses did preferre Eleazar before Iosue may be easily gathered out of the same Abulensis z q. 1. in cap. 27. Num. q. 42. for that Eleazar was then the high Priest and in that respect most honoured among the people next to Moyses Whereupon both Moyses and Eleazar did sit to iudge great causes both of them also did number the people Cap. 26. Num. as it appeareth in the former chapter and this honour did appertaine to all the high Priests c. But Iosue was then a minister and seruant of Moyses and was not the chiefe temporall Prince of the people but after Moyses death although Moyses in his life time did by Gods commandement appoint him to be his successour in the temporall gouernment of the people 34 The next argument of Mr. Fitzherbert is all one with the former And when the daughters of Salphaad saith he a Iosue 17. demanded their inheritance venerunt sayth the Scripture in conspectu c. they came into the presence of Eleazar and of Iosue the sonne of Nun and of the Princes wherein you see also that as Iosue who was the chiefe temporall Prince is preferred before the other Princes so is also the chiefe Priest preferred before Iosue Thus farre in my Supplement c. But why Eleazar the high Priest was named in the first place before Iosue the temporall Prince I haue shewed before out of Abulensis and from hence it doth onely follow that the state or office of the high Priest which was to consult the Lord in doubtfull matters and to be the chiefe minister in the sacrifices and worship of God was in worth dignitie or nobilitie more excellent then the temporall state or Princedome albeit Abulensis
fiftie men did oppose against him And also the three Princes of the tribe of Reuben to wit Dathan Abiron and Hon for the high Priesthood saying that hee gaue it vniustly to Aaron to wit in giuing all things to his kinred and he purged himselfe saying in this you shall know that our Lord hath sent mee to doe all things that you see Num. 16. and that I haue not forged them of my owne mind if they shall die the accustomed death of men our Lord hath not sent me Also before in the same Chapter Core said to Moyses and Aaron Let it suffice you that all the multitude consisteth of holy ones and our Lord is among them why lift you vp your selues aboue the people of our Lord But if Moyses had beene a Lord or a King no man could haue said this vnto him for that hee who was a Lord might haue lifted himselfe vp yea there is no greater lifting vp then to be a Lord. Thus Abulensis 40 And although Moyses alone did iudge the people without the helpe of any other Iudges who were subordained to him vntill Iethro father in law to Moyses came vnto him into the desert of Sin neere to the mount Sinai which happened either in the ende of the first yeere or in the beginning of the second since their departure out of Aegypt after that the law was giuen to Moyses in the mount Sinai yet afterwards by the aduise of Iethro who perceiuing that Moyses could not long sustaine so great a burden as to iudge himselfe alone the whole people of Israel sitting in iudgement from morning vntill night he was perswaded to impart the burden thereof to others and so choosing substantiall men out of all Israel he appointed them Princes of the people Tribunes and Centurians and Quinquagenarians and Deanes who iudged the people at all times and whatsoeuer was of greater difficultie they referred to Moyses they themselues iudging only the easier causes 41 But because these Iudges who were all subordinate to Moyses iudged onely of smaller causes and all matters of difficultie were referred to Moyses hee was neuerthelesse ouermuch troubled and therefore not long after at the sepulcher of Concupiscence Num. 11. almightie God at the request of Moyses appointed seuentie men of the ancients of Israel whom Moyses had chosen to assist him to whom hee gaue also the spirit of prophecie and to them were committed those things which did peculiarly belong to Moyses to wit that they should iudge of great matters as Moyses did for the iurisdiction of the 70. Iudges appointed by the aduise of Iethro who iudged the smaller matters did still remaine and also that they should consult our Lord and giue answeres concerning the questions of the law as Moyses did g Abul q. 24. in c. 11. nu and so that Iurisdiction which before by the aduise of Iethro did onely belong to Moyses was now by the commandement of God giuen to seuentie ancients or Elders who also were not Priests or Leuites but Lay-men chosen out of the ancients of Israel h Abul q. 61. and yet they had Iurisdiction both in spirituall and temporall causes i Abul q. 24. And after these seuentie men were appointed to helpe Moyses hee neuer complained in all the fortie yeeres that the Israelites were in the wildernesse that hee was burdened with the multitude of so many causes of the people k Abul q. 23. Num. 27. 42 Now to succeede Moyses and to bee the Captaine and Prince of all the people God appointed Iosue the sonne of Nun Moyses yet liuing And he was truly a Prince of the people for at his commandement not only the people but also Eleazar the high Priest were moued yet he was not a King but a Prince or Captaine neither also had he authoritie to iudge saith Abulensis but Iudges were appointed otherwise Neither is this against that which God commanded Numer 27. Abulensis q. 19. in cap. 8. Iudic. that as well Eleazar as all Israel were mooued at the commandement of Iosue because this is to be vnderstood concerning those things which appertained to warre and because all or the chiefe time of Iosue was in making warre by subduing the people of Chanaan therefore the power of Iosue was great Yet he was neuer called Lord or King 43 After the death of Iosue God raised other Princes of the people who were called Iudges or Sauiours Iudic. 2. and 3. neither were they Kings but their Princedome or principalitie was lesser neither were they called Lords as it appeareth Iudic. 8. when all the men of Israel said to Gedeon haue thou dominion ouer vs and thy sonne and thy sonnes sonne because thou hast deliuered vs from the hand of Madian To whom hee said I will not domineere or haue dominion ouer you neither shall my sonne haue dominion ouer you but the Lord shall haue dominion ouer you and yet Gedeon was a Captaine in the warres and a Iudge of the people of Israel and this principalitie or gouernment of the Iudges did continue for a long time together to wit for aboue 340. yeeres to the time of Samuel who was the last of the Iudges in whose time the Israelites desired a King as other nations had 44 After the Iudges the Kingly gouernment or principalitie did succeede For the people desired of Samuel a King and God commanded that hee should appoint Saul to bee a King ouer them and this principalitie or Kingly gouernment did endure a long time to wit to the captiuitie of Babylon when Sedechias was King 4. Reg. 45. After the returne of the Iewes from Babylon they had no King but the high Priests as Abulensis saith were the Princes of the people and this principalitie continued vntill the birth of Christ. Abulensis q. 91 in cap. ● Math. Neuerthelesse for a certaine time before the Natiuitie of Christ the high Priests who were Princes of the people did take the Kingly name and diademe and they did continue so vntill the time of Herod the stranger who killed his father in law Hircanus who was the high Priest and King and by the power of the Romanes was made himselfe the King of the Iewes and at this time Christ our Sauiour was borne and how the authoritie of Kings was greater then of the Iudges See beneath nu 52. seq 46 Lastly the Iewes not onely in the time of their Kings but also of Moyses Iosue and the Iudges had other Princes who had great authority and priuiledges among the people of Israel Q 5 in cap. 5. 1. Paralip See Abulensis q. 6. 7. in c. 5. 2. Paralip of which their rights and priuiledges Abulensis treateth at large For all the people of Israel were diuided into tribes families and houses all which are names of companies or congregations and they differ in this that one company is greater an other lesse and one doth containe or is contained in the other And first all the