Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
order_n	aaron_n	according_a	priesthood_n	608	4	10.2709	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09876	A discourse, of the true and visible markes of the Catholique Churche vvritten by M. Theod. Beza. Vezelius; De veris et visibilibus Ecclesiae Catholicae notis. English	Bèze, Théodore de, 1519-1605.; T. W. (Thomas Wilcox), 1549?-1608.	1582 (1582)	STC 2014; ESTC S101560	55,907	134

they shall proue that there are more wise men than fooles Now then I thinke it doth sufficiently appeare that by this bare successiō which they brag of that true catholike church wherein we must abyde cannot be discerned from the false Churche from which we ought of necessitie to depart But yet before that we conclude this place we muste refell an argument which these Sophisters would haue to be deemed such a one as cannot be ouercome For say they Hovv the fathers vsed the argumēt of personall succession the fathers so dispute from the succession of bishoppes against auncient heretiques But againe what can be more corrupt than this subtle kind of reasoning for this is that which is well knowne euen to children which they are wount to call an elench [a] The fallacie of composition or diuision is a false conclusion made by a wrong application of wordes alleadged or spoken referring that to one which is alleadged or spoken to an other or a fallacy of composition and diuysion First therfore I deny that any of the auncient fathers were mynded to vse the recitall of Bishops but to haue recourse rather euen to the Apostles And why so that the authoritie of doctrine rather than of persons shoulde be mainteined But these men obiect vnto vs the succession of their bishops not in déede bishops so far letting passe the mention of that Apostolicall doctrine that they woulde haue it accounted a wicked thing to demaund it at his handes that woulde proue him selfe to succeed the auncient byshoppes Now I pray you howe many authors of blasphemies haue sit in those chiefe seates of Alexandria Antioche Constantinople yea what seat will these men shew me somewhat more famous where some hereticall bishops haue not helde their seate And as touching the Romish chayre from which these men by a rottē coard hang the catholique church Honorius the [a] Monothelites were certain heretiks about the yeare 565 who affirmed that there vvas but one will and one action in Christ denying that ther was in him two naturall willes and actions which might aunsvvere to his two natures Monothelite openly condemned of the sixt general councell and priuately of Agatho another Roman Bishoppe And Iohn the 22. thinking euill touching the soule of man in like manner condemned of the colledge of Sorbon in Paris were sounde to haue sit in that seate To let passe [a] Liberius for ambitions sake fell into the Arrian heresie Liberius [b] He while Siluerius the Pope liued by the ayde of Belisarius the captaine of the Emperors armie obteined the popedome Vigilius and [c] He meaneth of Anastasius the 2. who fell into the heresie of Arrius and Eutiches which heresies Acatius also him selfe did propound about the yeere 484. Anastasius whom I see of some to be excused although Gratian. 2. Disti 19. reckeneth this last also as an Acatian heretique amongst the condemned Popes But if any man would obiect that these are blotted out of the number of Byshops and therfore are not comprehended in that title or role of succession yet this he shal be inforced to graunt vs to wit that the succession of the seat of Rome was then at the least broken of when these were therefore blotted out which persons notwithstanding they themselues as yet number in their Catologue because they had declined from the Apostolicall doctrine Whervpon followeth that which Tertulian rightly affirmeth that religion ought to be proued or tried not by the persons Tertulian but the persons by religion But here truly I confesse that I do somwhat ouershoot my self for seeing the question is of doctrine what doth this appertaine to the Byshops of the Churche of Rome whome all Christendome knoweth nowe so manye yeeres to haue beene for nothing lesse carefull then for anye doctrine eyther true or false but onely for to establishe and enlarge theire owne tyrannie But they will say no man hath condēned these Popes I confes it For who would haue taken to himself this lawful authority against their tiranny who had perswaded all men that they ought to be iudged of none Therefore there hath bene not of late onely but many ages together not an interruption but a full abruption or renting of the succession of Rome from the body of the catholique true church except peraduenture these men iudge that it is something lesse eyther to belleeue nothing or to teache nothing than to be an Heretique And I beséeche you what impudencie is this True doctrine ought to go before true succession to haue the knowledge of trueth to hang vpon succession wheras on the contrary these men themselues can not deny but that the trueth ought necessarily to go before succession And these Sophisters The Christian church in the time of Christe coulde not be knovvne by the succession of Persons if they had bene in the times of Christ by what Bishoply succession would they haue acknowledged the true church surely not by the title or name of the Leuiticall high priests because that priesthood was then at an end and Christ cannot be called the successour of Aaron vnlesse Iudaisme be agayne established wherefore also he is sayd to be made a high priest Heb. 7.16.17 not according to the order of Leui but according to the order of Melchisedec Therefore the holy men at that time acknowledged the Catholique church without the marke of personall succession to wit by the comparison of the doctrine of the Prophetes with the doctrine of Christe him selfe and the Apostles Which is so farre true that on the contrarye none haue lesse acknowledged Christe than they that haue cleaued to a Byshoply succession Therefore that personall succession is no true and perpetuall marke of the Catholique Church These men happely beeing driuen from the Leuiticall succession will againe obiect another succession from the Prophetes But neyther so shall they speake the truth if they sticke in the persons them selues for the succession of Prophetes was not perpetuall no more than the succession of Priests yea rather it was broken of a long time especially after Malachie They wil also obiect vnto vs that saying Mat. 23.2 The Scribes Pharises sit in Moses chaire But agayne they shold remember the same Christ to haue said Take heed of the leauen of the Pharisees Mat. 16.6 And therefore by that saying of Christ we are not called backe to a succession of persons but to a succession of doctrine But I haue besides an other thing more peremptorye as they them selues speake to aunswere againste that in which these men falsly boast themselues to followe the authoritie of the Fathers in discrying the church by which thing also their wilines may more and more be made manifest I denie therefore The auncient fathers vsed not the argument of personall succession against all heretiques that any of the auncient fathers haue at any time made mention of this succession but either against Schismatiques whilest