Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	aaron_n	acknowledge_v	priesthood_n	50	3	10.2407	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01258	The reformed politicke. That is, An apologie for the generall cause of reformation, written against the sclaunders of the Pope and the League VVith most profitable aduises for the appeasing of schisme, by abolishing superstition, and preseruing the state of the clergie. Whereto is adioyned a discourse vpon the death of the Duke of Guise, prosecuting the argument of the booke. Dedicated to the King by Iohn Fregeuille of Gaut.; Politique reforme. English	Frégeville, Jean de.	1589 (1589)	STC 11372; ESTC S102664	75,347	102

equall with him selfe I say then that the Ecclesiasticall dignities haue place euen to the highest but not vniuersall which vsurpeth dominion euen ouer kinges yea so farre forth as to dispose of their scepters and crownes and I will proue my saying thus The high Priesthood of Aaron was subiect to the iudgemēt seat of Moses and the kingdome of Iuda Also in the law which God set downe there was no Priesthood aboue the kinges and that by reason of the law sith that vnder the principalitie of Moses there was a high Priesthood therfore it followeth that vnder euery Christian soueraigne principalitie there should be a chief Bishop yet not so as to acknowledge any vniuersall Bishop Sith also that Iesus Christ would not ordeine any to be greatest among the Apostles it followeth that there ought not to be the greatest among the chief And Iesus Christ forbiddeth his Apostles to vsurpe dominion the vniuersall Bishopricke is therfore no lawfull order but a cōfusion engēdred by Babell If any mā will alledge the pretended donation of Constantine the great I aunswere that many impugne it as false besides that a couenant cā not be of any force to abuse or to vse it cōtrary to good maners as the Pope striueth to vphold superstition repugnant to all good maners and true godlinesse yea the ingratitude of the receauer of the donation maketh the donation voyde but the Popes haue practised all ingratitude against the Emperors procuring their subiectes many times to rebell prescribing their Empires working their deathes betraying of them as Fredericke Barbarossa was betrayed to the Turke and treading vpon their throates with such other ingratefull insolencies Againe the Emperour hath no authoritie in Fraunce he can not then giue the Pope any there In Fraunce Constantines authoritie is vnknowen neither doth any man giue that which he hath not nor can transferre any further right then his own But if he beare him selfe vpon the authoritie of Doctors I will alledge one Doctour euen S. Gregory who saith that the first that shall take vpon him to be vniuersall Bishop shall be the forerunner of Antichrist If they alledge the Coūcels I answere that some of them haue improued the Popes authoritie albeit some others assembled by the Popes driftes and practises haue approued it And admit the Councels had without contradiction approued it yet let vs looke whether their Decrees be grounded vpō Gods word for in that case we must obey them as also if they be not contrary to Gods word But Iesus Christ expressely forbiddeth such dominion then may no Councell authorise it For S. Paule saith that he may doe nothing contrary to the truth how then shall the Councels be of force against Christes expresse prohibition Againe in Fraunce the king hath the Ciuill dominion and the Parliamentes haue no dominion but the iurisdictiō likewise in England the Queene hath the dominion and the Bishops the Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction But the authoritie which the Pope vsurpeth is a dominion which exalteth it selfe aboue kinges and therefore by Gods word expresly forbidden Thus hath the Pope no right neither any colour in Gods word neither is there any king or prince by Gods word subiect vnto him no not so much as any chief Bishop that is bound to acknowledge him But all kinges and soueraigne princes may in their kingdomes and principalities establish chief Bishops after the maner and example of England I haue before shewed that the state of the Clergie is no cause of our separation from those whom in Fraunce we call Catholickes and therefore the abuse may be thought to be the cause but it is not for there is no gouernement wherein there may not be abuse but the abuse simply it not sufficient cause of schisme We know that there was neuer any more excellent gouernement then the same which God established yet did the childrē of Hely the high Priest cōmit great abuses defiling the women appointed to watch the tabernacle against the peoples willes and contrary to the custome established in the law chusing such meates as they liked in the Priestes kettles The people cōplained hereof yet made they no schisme as in deede they ought not and now if we were to complaine of the Catholickes but for their simple abuses we should haue no cause to make any schisme well might we haue occasion to cōplaine yet not therefore to separate our selues It may be thought also that ceremonies are the cause of our separation from the Catholickes yet are they not so howbeit I make great difference betweene ceremonies and superstitions for superstition is forbidden by Gods word so are not ceremonies for there be three kindes of simple ceremonies one Legall an other Euangelicall and the third indifferent yet not contrary to the word of God The Legall are abolished as concerning the letter but doe remaine as concerning the spirite cōsidering that their truth is eternall abideth for euer as the word of God The Euangelicall as the Sacraments are necessarie And others there are which be indifferent as not forbiddē by the word of God for the which one should not condemne an other The same are such as are vsed in sundry Reformed places as in Englād Switzerland and els where In which ceremonies the Reformed faithfull ought to haue respect to modestie one to beare with an other according to the rule of S. Paul who saith Let not him that eateth not despise him that eateth and he that eateth let him not reproue him that eateth not that is to say let not one condemne an other True it is that there be foolish and trifling ceremonies as in Baptisme to put the spatle of the Priest into the childes mouth when as sometimes the Priest shall be halfe a lazare halfe rotten and haue rotten teeth or a stincking or corrupt breath which can not but be daungerous for the child and therefore vpon so villanous a custome the father may sometimes take occasion not to cleaue thereto as also there be garments which being worne vpon any signification and for distinction in callinges are ceremonies but if we attribute any vertue vnto them they be superstition The cause thē of our separation cōsisteth not in the state of the Clergie neither in the abuses nor in the ceremonies but in the superstition Superstition do I call all worshipping of false Gods false worshipping of the true God or euery worship contrary to the word of God As for the word superstition it is a Latin word and may be taken diuerslly It may be takē for that which in Latin is called Superstitum parentatio that is to say the suruiuours funerals there hence transferring it to any other false worship or rather super statutū cultum extranea prophana adiectio taking super in stead of praeter or contra which signifieth all worship that is added besides the same which God hath established The Greekes do call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the worshipping

aunswere that the Mosaicall gouernement is spirituall first because the spirite of God penned it secondly because S. Paule saith that the law is spirituall but the part is of one kinde in his course and there is as great difference betweene this gouernement and a gouernement simply externall as there is betweene Gods law and mans traditions For the law is spirituall and mans traditiōs are carnall and purge no more but the outside of the cup whereas Gods word is penetratiue euē to the partition of the soule and the spirite of the sinewes and marow and this gouernement is Gods word which clenseth the whole cuppe as well within as without and therefore can not be called simply externall but internall whose principall end tēdeth to rule the inward man Againe S. Paule saith that the law is good if it be lawfully vsed Then must we without question seeke out the lawfull vse therof that is we must take it after the spirite newnesse therof and not after the old letter Now the spirite of the law is the equitie thereof but the letter is the rigour of the wordes And therefore we must not after the rigour of the wordes take eye for eye or tooth for tooth neither do I thinke that the iudges that liued vnder the law did in such points folow the letter Thus we may see wherefore S. Paule in his Epistle to the Ephesians inuiteth vs to the gouernement of Israell when he laid open the vanitie of the righteousnesse of the law against the merites of workes and the abolishment of the law against such as constituted righteousnesse in outward ceremonies whom he teacheth that the new Testament abolisheth the old howbeit that is to be vnderstood concerning the old letter whereto is opposed the newnesse of spirite A third reason will I also adde for that S. Paule saith that the law was giuen for the transgressions for by that we know that we are to vse it to correct transgressions and that selfe place serueth for a farther explication of the lawfull vse of the law whereof we spake in the former article For the law consisteth in Commandements commanding naturall equitie and thereof doth S. Paule call it the law of Commandementes but the Gospell requireth a supernaturall perfection wherof the creature man who is naturall is vncapable which perfection is expounded by instructions admonitions counsels and examples Now he that fulfilleth not the law is by the law punishable as hauing sinned for sinne is the transgression of the law as S. Iohn teacheth saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But there be things concerning the profession of the Gospell which who soeuer fulfilleth not is reproueable and yet not punishable and therefore the law remaineth to bridle and punish transgressions The thinges belonging to perfectiō are not to looke vpō a woman to couet her after a blow on the one cheeke to turne the other to him that requireth but thy coate to giue both coate cloake to do good to our enemies to be perfect as our father that is in heauen is perfect who so doth not these thinges is neuerthelesse not subiect to punishment but he that contrarie to the law defloureth a maiden must according to the punishmēt of the law giue her a dowrie or mary her he that hath stolen foure sheepe must according to the punishmēt of the law be taught by his pastor to restore fiue I omit that which concerneth the Ciuill Magistrate and speake onely of that that toucheth the gouernment of the Church and this satisfaction which the pastor is to impose taketh place when the man cōmeth of him selfe to cōfesse his sinne Here may some man obiect vnto me that the law was a schoolemaister to bring vs to Christ to whō I answere in this place S. Paule speaketh of the ceremoniall law which setteth a distinction betweene cleane and vncleane things grounded vpō the elements of this world and were neither tasted of nor eaten but were shadowes of things to come vnder Christ In the law was to be considered gouernement and ceremonie also that there was two kindes of gouernement the Ciuill the Ecclesiasticall where Moses had the Ciuill Aaron the Ecclesiasticall likewise in the Priesthood of Aaron there were two things the Ecclesiasticall gouernemēt and the ceremonie some Priests there were that medled rather with the ceremonie then with the gouernement but there were likewise Leuites that were not Priestes but dealt onely in Ecclesiasticall iudgementes being Doctours of the law of whom some remained in the sanctuarie townes there to iudge of murthers by chaunce medley howbeit they could not iudge by tradition but by law Deut. 17. Vpon the estate of the Clergie depended these fiue thinges 1. ceremonie and the right of the sacrifices 2. The reuenues 3. possessions 4. dignities and fifthly the lawes whereby they should iudge the people For the ceremonie they had sacrifices For their reuenues they had the tenthes for their possessions they had 48. townes their cattell and the houses that they purchased also the vowes and in stead of this the French Clergie haue their demaines tenthes for their dignities they had the order of Iethro Exod. 18. Deut. 17. And the lawes that they were to obserue were the lawes conteined in the law Deut. 17. Act. 23. Now it is to be noted that the law gaue the Priestes authoritie to iudge that in such sorte that who soeuer did not obey them was denounced worthy of death howbeit hereto were added two bonds The one that the Priest could not cōdemne but in specifying the law of God whereby he did cōdemne the other that the person condemned dyed not but by the Ciuill Magistrates handes who had authoritie to looke whether the man were iustly condemned according to the law cited in his condemnation Deut. 17. I say therefore that the Christian Clergie liuing holily may possesse their reuenues neither will I be a more seuere censurer of their estate thē Iesus Christ was of the state of the Pharisies But alas if Iesus Christ bewailed the wretchednesse of the Pharisies because they tithed the mint and had left iustice or mercy how much more lamētable is the wretchednesse of that Clergy which termeth it self Catholick which possesseth these holy reuenues to the end to mainteine Gods lawes and yet haue not onely forsaken them and cleaued to traditions but also do mainteyne superstition contrarie to Gods lawes yea and persecute such as will not cleaue to the like How much better were it for them to possesse them holily in liuing according to God whereby they might liue honestly with lawfull wiues where as now they wast them vnworthely vpon harlots Hetherto haue men thought that the part of the God of this world was fauorable to the Clergie and that Gods part was contrarie to them but in deede Gods part is more fauorable to the Clergy then the contrary part and not to the Clergie onely but to all the