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
A20661	A proufe of certeyne articles in religion, denied by M. Iuell sett furth in defence of the Catholyke beleef therein, by Thomas Dorman, Bachiler of Diuinitie. VVhereunto is added in the end, a conclusion, conteinyng .xij. causes, vvhereby the author acknovvlegeth hym self to haue byn stayd in hys olde Catholyke fayth that he vvas baptized in, vvysshyng the same to be made common to many for the lyke stay in these perilouse tymes.	Dorman, Thomas, d. 1577?	1564 (1564)	STC 7062; ESTC S110087	184,006	300

But if he wer not a priest what was he then Could he be greater The psalme vttreth that he was a priest Moyses and Aaron emongest his priestes They wer therefore both our Lordes priestes Here I beseche yow good readers behold the false and vneuen dealing of an heretike the author of the harborough of whom a little before I made mention He minding to elude this manifest exposition of S. Austen answereth in this manner that S. Austen was ignorant in the Hebrue tongue whereby being easely deceauid and wrapped in thiese two places of scripture wherein there seemed contradiction he leaueth them at a iarre as he found them the one to saie he was a priest thother to saie that he was none Which manner of interpretation and reconciling of scriptures how it is to be liked he leaueth he saieth to the learned reader to iudge For answer to this mere cauillation of this vaine iangler before I procede any farder because he shall not abuse S. Austens ignorance in the Hebrue tongue to the deceauing of yow good readers yow shall vnderstand that S. Hierō was not ignorant therin and yeat doeth he so expounde the place The .70 interpretours chosen and picked as it wer out of the best learned and cūning est in that tongue by all likelihood that could be found Sanctes Pagninus and Sebastianus Munster yea that most learned Rabbine Abrahamus Esdras ● Iewe born wer not ignorant but pearlesse Paragōs therein and yeat doe all thiese expound the Hebrue word to signifie priestes as Sainct Austen doeth And where he saieth that S. Austē being thus wrapped in thiese two contrarie textes was driuen to leaue them as he found thē the one to saie he was a priest thother that he was none in th'one he hath belied● the holie scriptures in thother he hath sclaundred that holie and learned bishop For where or what scripture saieth that Moyses was no priest as he saieth that one texte saide he was an other that he was none Let him show somme such scripture or elles hath he lied apon the scripture He may show I confesse where the scripture as there apon S. Austen made his obiection speaking of him calleth him not by the name of a priest which in many other places it doeth also of Aaron Is this therefore a good reason to saie The scripture in that place made no mention that he was a priest therefore it saied that he was none Yea truelie euen as good as is this The scripture maketh no mention that th'apostles wer euer baptized therefore it saieth that theie neuer wer baptized Or doe thiese textes make anie iarre the one affirming the other denieng to saie Aaron the priest in one place and Moyses and Aaron his priestes in an other But as this is a lewd lye so to goe about to note S. Austē to the world of such ignorance in the scriptures as though he had not byn able to vndoe this simple knot a knot if it be but was forced to leaue the two places at a iarre vnreconciled I can call it no better but euen by the name of wilfull malice As appeareth by that that guilefully in alleaging after their māner without cotatiō the easelier thereby to deceaue the reader this place of S. Austen he left out thiese later wordes Ergo erant illi domini sacerdotes therefore they wer Moyses and Aaron our lordes priestes Now here note I beseche yow diligently that ar of the learned sorte thiese wordes of S. Austen which import in them thus much It maie seeme saieth he to some man that Moyses because the scripture nameth there onelie Aaron by the name of a priest and not him wer no priest but of them that so gather I would know if he wer no priest what he was then whether they can make him King Emperour or any thing that should be greater And although the scripture in that place doe not call him by the name of his office yet neither doeth it therefore deny him to be a priest nor we ar destitute of other places to proue the same by as namelie this psalme wherein expresselie he is so called Wherefore seing neither that place or any other doe saie that he was not a priest and there is plaine scripture that doeth call him one I maie boldelie conclude Erant ergo illi sacerdotes domini Therefore they wer bothe our lordes priestes This is no dout the true sense of S. Austēs wordes wherebie yow maie see how greate the difficulties wer in which he was wrapped and how he woūd him selfe out But then saieth this stout champion there wer two high priestes at once which could not be by the lawe and also Moyses must nedes be inferior to Aaron because Aaron and not he is there called the high prieste This obiection hath in dede a showe of somewhat although in their manner of gouernemēt to haue manie heades wer no greate absurditie at all But to this obiection answereth most fully S. Austen him self in an other place after this sorte Cùm ergo videatur c. Seing therefore that the highe priestehood seemeth to haue begonne in Aaron what thincke we that Moyses was If he wer not a priest how did he thē all those thinges which he did If he wer howe say we that the high priestehood began in his brother Aaron Although the Psalme also where it is saide Moyses an● Aaron emongest his priestes doeth remoue all cause of ●oubte affirming that Moyses was also a priest Wer they therefore Moyses and Aaron bothe chief priestes or rather Moyses the chief and Aaron vnder him yea Aaron also the chiefest in respect of the bishoppes apparell and Moyses the chief in re●pect of a more excellent ministery For ●t the beginning wa● it said to Moyses of Aaron He shall be thy director in those thinge● that ar to be handled with the people and thow his in such busines as is to be done with god Hetherto S. Austen by whome we learne that it is no absurditie that two should be chief in two seuerall respectes the one in ouerseing and prescribing what shalbe doē th'other in practising and putting in execution the thinges prescribed the one absolutely without relation the other in a respect by a comparison As in the newe lawe a figure whereof diuerse well learned mē haue expounded this priestehood of Moyses and Aaron to be Christ we see is of his churche onely simply and absolutely the head Peter and after him his successors no otherwise but in comparison of other inferiour membres Moyses as he was with god more familier thē anie other as he receiued immediatly without the help of anie other instrument to conuey it by vnto him from the mouthe of almightie god his holie will and pleasure he was there is no doute thereof the high and chiefest priest Aaron also as he was by almightie god chosen to publish to the people those thinges which Moyses had giuen him in charge as he offred the

lettres or worde leauing the free election notwithstanding to them to whome of right it apperteineth as this placing of Sadoc in Abiathars office may welbe vnderstande To th'example of Ezechias I answer with the scripture that of all those thinges here rehersed and what so euer elles may be he was onelie the executor the councell and ordering thereof comming alwaies from Esaias the prophete Who as the mouth commaunded the arme that is the prince to doe and put in execution this or that In like māner I answer to the example of Iehu who killed the wicked prophetes but by thaduertisement and sentence as it wer first giuen ageinst them by Haelizeus the prophete sent to Iehu as king by him to be put in execution How Iosias warned the priestes of their office and duety it appeareth in the fourth booke of the kinges where he required the priestes to demaund at goddes handes councell what he and his people should doe so that what so euer he did also he cā be counted no otherwise to haue doen but as a ministre apon the aduertisement and relation of the priestes Nowe as for Iosaphat and Ioas if th'one ouerthrewe the wooddes and hilles where the people lurcked from the temple the other warned the priestes to see better to the reparation of the same what greate matter is this I praie yow or how doeth this proue that kinges ought to haue the chief rule ouer the churche If princes that haue byn in times past had so well looked in this point to their duetie as of right they ought and all good men wishe they had if they had scoured your luskes corners and ouerthrowen the wooddes the blinde cellers and rotten barnes in which yow first vttred your poisoned doctrine neither had that made thē rulers of the church but faithefull and trusty ministers nor yow byn here nowe to trouble the churche of god as yow doe As if on thother side they had also folowed th'example of Ioas in calling apon the reparation of goddes house neither would any good man haue found faulte therewith all nor any wise man haue thought that this should haue made thē the chief gouernours in religion nor finally so many churches lien at this day flat on the ground so many monasteries in which god was serued and the pooer relieued made stables for horses housen for shepe or sties for swine And thus may yow see good readers that all thiese examples alleaged by our aduersaries ar to no purpose as of the which some as of king Dauid who was not a king onely but a prophete also conteine a manifeste fallacie other as that of Iosue that he should receiue especiall commaundemēt of almightie god to meddle with religion an impudent lie some as of Salomon Ezechias and Iehu a figure or phrase of speche as by the scriptures I haue proued and as of Iosias may be also truely answered who enterprised nothing before he had caused the priestes first to goe and consult what he should doe and other some such as of Iosaphat and Ioas as no man euer denied to kinges yea many wishe that in the practising thereof they had in times past and at this daie also would showe them selues much more forward then they haue or doe And last of all yow may see that all wer it so that euery example had plainely concluded their intention that yet it is no good reason to say that therefore our kinges nowe a daies must haue the like auctoritie no more then this that if Moyses had byn no priest it should folow that other temporall gouernours might consecrate bishoppes because he did being none consecrate his brother Aaron or that because Dauid had many wiues therefore our kinges also maie or the cleargie put to death kinges because Samuel did or priestes kille adulterers after th'example of Phinees or one spoile an other I meane of them that be of contrarie opinions in religion because the children of Israel spoiled the Egiptians And here there cōmeth to my remēbraunce an other cause why that reason of theirs should be naught which is this that the priestehod of the Iewes was altogether carnall and fleshelie and might therefore the rather be subiect to the kinges whereas the priesthod of the newe testament is so much more excellent then that as by how much the matter and obiect about which it is occupied the head author and chiefe priest thereof which is no other then Christ him self the eternall priest according to the ordre of Melchisedech doeth far surmount either the matter the priest or priestehod of theirs Which thing S. Petre did not obscurely signify by these wordes vos estis regale sacerdotium yo we ar a kingelie priestehoode as who should say the priestehood before was not kingly for that that kinges ruled ouer priestes but nowe is the priestehod kingly for that to it be subiect euē kinges them selues Which neither is any such greate absurditie if we indifferentlie wey the matter as some men would haue it seme to be considering that Ignatius disciple to S. Iohn the euangelist that all the auncient fathers doe most plainely affirme the same neither yet anie greate reason why thiese wordes should be to any man cause of offence seing that when all is counted this honor of gouernement resteth not in the priestes but goeth farder to god him self whose ministres they ar as contrarywise the dishonor the contumelies and reproches doen vnto them ar doen also to Christ as him selfe witnesseth Qui vos spernit me spernit he that dispiseth yow dispiseth me The which thing I would to god our aduersaries which glory so much of the name of Christians vaunt them selues of the knowledge of the gospell would not thinck scorne to learne by the exāple of a pagane and infidell I meane Alexander the greate Who although he wer by religion an ethnike by nature intollerably proude so that not contentid as Quintus Curtius writeth of him to be born of the race of mortall men he cōueighed his petigrue frō the goddes not suffering but commaunding also that apon peine of his indignation all men should call him the sonne of Iupiter and to encrease the more that naughty humor of his and to poure as the prouerbe is oile in to the fier by fortune so happy that the whole worlde was in a manner by the dent of his sword conquered and brought vnder that at his name the proudest tirants trembled and barbarouse nations stooped he yet all this not withstanding being such and so mighty a Monarche when on a time he should entre in to the citie of Ierusalem as sone as he once perceiued Iaddus the highe priest comming towardes him fell downe and reuerenced him Whereat whē Parmenio one of his trusty friendes marueiling not a little had demaunded of him why he whom all other men worshiped and had in reuerence did worship the prince of the Iewish priestes his answer was