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	moses_n	priesthood_n	139	4	10.3992	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19150	Epphata to F.T., or, The defence of the Right Reuerend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of Elie, Lord High-Almoner and Priuie Counsellour to the Kings Most Excellent Maiestie concerning his answer to Cardinall Bellarmines apologie, against the slaunderous cauills of a namelesse adioyner, entitling his booke in euery page of it, A discouerie of many fowle absurdities, falsities, lyes, &c. : wherein these things cheifely are discussed, (besides many other incident), 1. The popes false primacie, clayming by Peter, 2. Invocation of saints, with worship of creatures, and faith in them, 3. The supremacie of kings both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters and causes, ouer all states and persons, &c. within their realmes and dominions / by Dr. Collins ...	Collins, Samuel, 1576-1651.; Bellarmino, Roberto Francesco Romolo, Saint, 1542-1621. Apologia.	1617 (1617)	STC 5561; ESTC S297	540,970	628

copies The rather because the Cardinall alleadging the same place in his controuersies de Rom. Pontif. lib. 1. c. 25. cries out by parenthesis as if he had cause to triumph Ecce nomen capitis Calvino inauditum behold the name of Head which Calvin neuer heard of And the Gentleman by the way as offended with our mens ambitious forwardnesse forsooth calls it taking vpon them to print the Greeke Fathers You take too much vpon you Moses and Aaron said they of old or as Dauids brethren We know thy pride For our defence would not be taken although we should say with Dauid Was there not a cause Belike they should haue tarried till F. T. would haue giuen the onset the signall to the battell as no man among the Persians might shoote the deare till the King had begun But how if the man be so modest that we should haue staied God knowes how long to our no small disaduantage ere he had presumed to venture vpon the worke Shall it notwithstanding be called arrogance or precipitation in our men or taking vpon them Crasse pudet me tui ô stultos Cottas c. I am sorie for Eton Colledge and my honourable and worthy friend Sr Henrie Savile that he vsed no more aduise afore his setting forth of Chrysostome but rashly so precipitated into a worke not for his mowing without the Popes leaue But this complaint comes all too late nowe And no force Yet the Latine translatour found them there as it is most probable you say in the auncient Greeke copies Why not you rather foisted them into his translation or what if he were false and partial to your side as you said euen now the Grecians were to theirs and so put them in where he found them not Shall we not therefore be iudged by the authenticall Greeke copies And yet alas poore Grecians well may I pitie them vpon whome as gardeners set rue by roses for these to purge all their venomous qualities vpon the other to whome such noysomnes is but naturall so now as if they serued for nothing else other mens faults and scapes must be deriued And shall that be called Chrysostome in the trying of the question betweene the King and the Cardinall which is no where to be seene now but in the Translatour of Chrysostome But the last excells Though it be not extant totidem verbis in the place quoted by the Cardinall yet in effect and substance it is to be found you say both in that Homilie and else-where Who euer heard such paltring as this The words must be brought and when they are not to be found the sense must serue So a man may say that the deposition of Kings and worse too is authorised by the Apostle Hebr. 7. 7. not that he speakes a word to that purpose but minor à maiori benedicitur this prooues the superioritie of Priests to Kings in a Iesuits construction and therefore interficitur or deturbatur and what not Is this to giue vs the sēse for the words the spirit for the letter quoth you or do you so maintaine godlines in the power of it Tit. 1 And yet supoose this were right where is the sense or the substance that you talke of If in other places of Chrysostome why are not those places quoted at the first why doe you choose to dwell vpon a counterfeit one Are you not ashamed to runne gadding thus vp and downe first from words to sense then from one place to another to make your lamps to shine with borrowed oile beg'd rather nay stolne apparantly after the thrones are set and the Iudge is come On the other side how direct is the Bishop in his proceedings how square as I may say and exact euerie way Hath hee not satisfied the Cardinall to the very last farthing and paied the score which he brought to conuince the King withall His MAIESTIE calls for the Fathers of such a compasse to disprooue him And you see howe they are brought not onely speaking by an interpretor and not the faithfullest neither whereas there should be no compromitting at all in so serious a canvase but no tinker in his kettleworke was euer more fowly foyled then he in avouching the Cardinals quotations Lysanders two skins to patch the one the other so he his words with senses nay one text with another is the most naturall representation of his dodging here In so much as if I should not answer a word more in the behalfe of the Bishop yet you see how he hath performed as much as he vndertooke namely to maintain the kings challēge against the Cardinal about the iudgement of the Fathers within such a space and this fellow cannot refute him without such shamefull shifts as lay him open to more disgrace Yet to two places I will say somewhat for the other are not worth the while § 6. Out of the Homily aforesaid Peter was a diamond Ieremy a brasen pillar or an iron wall And which meant Chrysost for the stronger of the two or did he meane to magnify one aboue the other at all yet you should speake to their authoritie and let their constancie alone Their vertue is one thing their place another howsoeuer how confound them Vnlesse you thinke that because with you place goes for vertue witnesse Hildebrande in Dictatis therefore with them vertue may inferre place too which is nothing so But let vs heare the rest Ieremy was set ouer one nation Peter ouer the whole world And what is this but the difference of the old testament and the new the field and the garden fons signatus Cant. 4. and fons patens or reclusus Zach. 13. the breaking downe of the partition-wall Eph. 2. the rending of the vaile c. I hope euery minister in the new testament not Peter onely hath not the land of Palaestine which might be Ieremies limitation but the latitude of the whole world to deale with Yea it is your owne doctrine c. 2. numb 50. and 52. that as farre as the Church reaches which at this day reaches through out the whole world the office and function of euery minister may extend But the Apostles specially betweene whome and Peter herein there was no ods whatsoeuer difference there might be in their prouinces as they parted them among themselues Yea but Peter might haue chosen Matthias Apostle without communicating with the rest for which you quote Chrysostome hom 3. in Acta Quid annon licebat ipsi eligere Licebat quidem maximè c. And againe in the same place Quàm est feruidus quàm agnoscit creditum à Christo gregem Might not he chuse yea verily he might Then How feruent is he how doth he acknowledge the slocke of Christ committed to his charge No doubt he regards the flocke of Christ in speaking first in the congregation about the choice of an Apostle which much concerned the Church at that time not to be destitute of a pastor

that the Adioynder presumes all to make for him which he can but finger with Midas S. Austens words are Caepisse ab Aaron videatur summum sacerdotium the high-high-priesthood may seem to haue begun in Aaron Therefore if Moses be high Priest in ordinary he is Aarons juniour and so subiect to him Yet the Adioynder would haue Aaron to bee vnder Moses as High Priest I trow vnder the higher High Priest Once there is no difficulty in my opinion neither in S. Austens words nor at all in the question about Moses priesthood if wee will be ruled by S. Austen Quid putamus saies S. Austen fuisse Moysen si non fuit sacerdos quomodo per illum omnia illa gerebantur si autem fuit quomodo summum sacerdotium ab eius fratre coepisse definimus So that you see it is definimus with him not onely videatur S. Austen hath laid it downe for a sure ground that the high-priesthood began in Aaron And as for Moses his priesthood it is a matter of question with him Fuit an non fuit was he a Priest or no As for that which followes Ambo ergò tunc summi sacerdotes erant Moses Aaron i. Both of them were high Priests both Moses and Aaron I haue answered it before that they were both Cohenim that is both excellent but in a distinct kind the word sacerdos agreeing to them both but not vniuocally Concerning the next clause which the Adioynder vaunts in Aaron vero sub illo Aaron was vnder Moses it makes for vs who hold the High Priest to be subiect to the authority of the Temporall Magistrate S. Austen guiding vs as it were by the hand to that opinion in the words immediately following Aaron quidem summus fortè propter vestem Pontificalem ille verò propter excellentius ministerium That is Or was not Aaron the higher for the garment that he wore that is by way of Priesthood but Moses his better in regard of a more excellent function that he discharged correspondent no doubt to the Regall with vs. For he is called a King without any more circumstance Deut. 33. 5. And indeed what higher calling after the Priesthood then that The Kingdome then to S. Austen is excellentius ministerium if we compare it with the Priesthood So as neither Moses was Priest and yet superiour to the High-priest by the doctrine of S. Austen which is the doctrine of our Church concerning Supremacie § 61. The Adioynder hath almost brought his tale to an ende There are but two more accusations of the Reuerend Bishop and those very ridiculous yet sutable to the shoppe that the rest were forged in we will dispatch them in a word One that he dissents from the doctrine of Protestants the other that he agrees not with our acts of Parlament describing the Supremacie § 62. For his bragges betweene I hold not worth the replying to A Thraso and the Supplement must be in euery leafe of him or else he is not himselfe In his Numb 42. The place in Deuteronomie for sooth is nothing to our purpose Nay all cleane contrarie and that he hath shewed in his ninth Chap. Let the gentle Reader resort to the Answer if he thinke so meet in the 9. of this § 26. 27. c. § 63. Num. 43. Once againe you would sweare he were a Master of the fence an only Myrmillo What wonderfull prizes hath he played in his Supplement But heare you sir Ad populum phaleras If you be ready with your daunce behold your stage Ecce Rhodus ecce saltus begin when you will Does your skill faile you as Adioynder that you runne to your Supplement to shrowde you vnder the talke of what you haue done there If the examples of Salomon Ezechias and Iosias be nothing to the purpose with you then S. Austens arguments be nothing to the purpose nor Charles the great nor diuerse more By name S. Cyrills of Alexandria See 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad Theodos in Concil Ephes pag. 229. editionis per Commelinum 1591. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It was also profitable and necessarie in certaine other respects to your royall Maiestie that he should be banished from the holy altars that had prophaned them And how banished I will tell your Maiestie alleadging what is recorded in holy Scripture for your more assurance sake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Israelites vpon a time contemning the Ordinances of that wisest Law-giuer Moses c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But after that Ezekias a holy man and a good came to raigne ouer them hee reformed things which were amisse and after that hee had purged the Temple of God consequently offered such oblations to God as were due by Lawe and belonging to him Furthermore it is thus written of him And Ezekias raigned and bespake the Leuites saying Hearken to meye Leuites make you now cleane and hallow the Temple of the Lord your God and cast forth all vncleanenesse out of the holy places c. And the Leuites rose vp and gathered together their brethren and purified themselues ACCORDING TO THE COMMAVNDEMENT OF THE KING to the ende that they might cleanse the house of the Lord c. And in the sixteenth day of the first moneth they made an ende of all and they went in to King Ezechias and said vnto him We haue made clean all things in the house of the Lord c. But what is this to Theodosius or to Christian Kings liuing vnder the new Testament Nothing at all saies the Adioynder their date is our Let S. Cyrill be iudge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is Consider from hence O godly king c. Yea your sacred Maiestie hath alreadie done the like thing to the glorie of Christ For it is your custome and fashion to offer sacrifice in the Churches and with plentifull hand to contribute alwaies something to the glory of God But it was necessary they should first purge the Temple and cleare it from all scandall and filth and so you to sacrifice at your due time Now the dishonour that is offered to our Sauiour Christ is a slaunder more hainous then any pollution whatsoeuer But you commaunded your Priests as I lately said and loe they haue purged the Church of such filth against your entrance that you might inherit the more glorie both with God with Angels and with all mankind Now let the Adioynder expostulate with S. Cyrill for vrging Theodosius with the example of King Ezechias nothing to the purpose § 64. To his Numb 44. He bids vs shew by what Commission as he calls it the Supremacie of authority in Ecclesiasticall affaires was translated to

taken in Courts notwithstanding his mustering here of his Canonists to little purpose but the oaths de credulitate perhaps in matters of fact when the case is doubtfull to the oath of Supremacie we haue euidence enough which respects not fact but is the auerring of our iudgements concerning his MAIESTIES iustest title to the Imperiall Crowne and the rights thereof with promise on our parts not onely not to oppose but to assist him and to abet him to the vtmost of our abilities § 58. As for that he addes moreouer that if it bee not of faith the Scriptures no where containe it neither expressely nor by implication c. what more rude and more vnlearned iust like all the rest Would the Bishop be so contradictory doth he thinke to himselfe from whome I hope they will not derogate the praise of so much iudgement as to heede his owne methodes though most maliciously they depraue him otherwise at pleasure as to alleadge diuerse Scriptures for the Kings Supremacy and yet not impertinently as he here crakes and saies he hath answered them but most soundly and most seasonably as we before haue shewed and then conclude it is no point of faith properly so called but of perswasion onely yet most grounded perswasion if he had not well perceiued the vnrepugnancie of these two and how compatible they are betweene themselues which the Adioynder cannot skill of But so I haue heard of an old plodder in Logicke that to his dying day could neuer conceiue how the accident of blacknes might be separated from a Crow so much as in cogitation and another that was as hardly brought to digest that euery thing either is or is not So here the Adioynder as if his wits were be-breecht If it be not of faith saies he then it is not in Scripture neither directly nor yet implicitely Belike not Pauls cloake or Peters scabberd both reuealed in Scripture and yet neither of thē of faith And to defcēd a little lower to their other kinds of Scriptures Tobyes dogge I ween or rather his dogs tayle which the Text saies he wagged and Campian your Martyr made such mirth with in the Tower proouing thence the verie point which you now deny that all is not de fide which is comprehended in Scripture But he petulantly and profanely enough as his guise was yet with you a graue disputant in matters of religion or a mortified man drawing on to martyrdome For though nothing be of faith which is not reuealed in Scripture as we hold though you deny yet there are many things in Scripture which are not of faith as neither we deny and your selues hold at least when you are not captious as now it seemes you are to crosse your selfe rather then you will not carpe another I say some things are not de fide which are contained in Scripture not but that we must beleeue all to be most true which the holy Scripture containeth but some things are so without the circuit of our faith as it is no preiudice to vs though we take no notice of them as Pauls cloake perhaps as Peters net and sword-sheath or if you will as Tobies dogge and the like others most necessary and most wholesome to be receiued as our dutie to Superiours our deportment to Ethnicks and them that are without our discreet and laudable conuersation towards all which the Creed is no rule of that narrow verge though the Scripture in her latitude thinke no scorne to be It remaines therefore that the Bishoppe might argue for the Supremacy either from Moses Law or Moses his practise though it bee not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only not a matter of faith but of firme perswasion which yet is more then Bellarmines Pie credimus § 59. Neuerthelesse to infringe the Bishops argument you say Moses did not lay aside his Priesthood but Aaron and he remained Priests together So as from thence we can draw no proofe for the Temporalties preheminence aboue the Clergy in what degree soeuer Moses stood to Aaron But who euer heard of two high Priests together viz. Moses and Aaron both at one time Or how could they both be the High Priests that is each of them supreame to all Priests What greater corruption was in those declining times when Anna● and Caiphas both possest the seate if at least such corruption then were But when couetousnesse and ambition preuailed most and drew them most aside into degeneration what greater deflexion I say could there be then this from the originall institution Yea how could the Priesthood of our Sauiour Christ be typically shaddowed and prefigured by two whereas he is our one and onely High Priest without copartner How the Popes sole-regencie be deduced from thence as Bellarmine would and diuerse more Vnlesse they meane to admit multitudes into the chaire and then where is Monarchy Sure Theodoret in Numer Quaest 23. calls Aaron the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the roote and fountaine of Priest and Priesthood which how could he be if Moses were equally participating with him in that preferment and the Priestly of spring of succeeding ages to deriue their pettigree as well from the one as from the other Where is the vnitie now that the Papists so hunt after Where the reducing of all particular propagations spreadings Ecclesiasticall as they speak to one originall and primitiue head May we not say that the Adioynder was dreaming all this while in bicipiti Par●●sso of a double head of Priesthood in Moses and Aaron For as for the word Cohen Psalm 1. 18. it signifies not the Priest onely but a principall man such as Moses and Aaron might be both at once though in diuerse kinds So as Caietan in his exposition of Psal 100. sayes onely thus Aaron fuit summus Sacerdos Moses fons sacerdotij inuenitur dum ipse consecrauit Aaron Where we may note three things First that he does not giue the name of summus sacerdos the standing high Priest to Moses at all but to Aaron only Secondly that Moses was fons sacerdotij Yet not to crosse with Theodoret who said a little before that Aaron was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but rather that we may hold Ecclesiasticall Iurisdictions to be deriued after a sort from the temporall Prince of which hereafter For it should seeme he esteems Moses here as a temporall gouernour hauing giuen away the name of high Priest to Aaron Thirdly and lastly he makes Moses priesthood to be resigned againe and laid downe in that he vses the word dum Dum consecrauit Aaron which the Adioynder saies is to make it like a ierkin or a iacket Numb 41. this is his merriment but wee proceede § 60. To the authoritie of S. Austen lib. 3. in Leuit. Quaest 23. I see not what S. Austen could say more for vs if hee meant to plead our cause most but