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	arise_v	priesthood_n	215	4	10.5579	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46370	A preservative against the change of religion, or, A just and true idea of the Roman Catholick religion, opposed to the flattering portraictures made thereof, and particularly to that of my Lord of Condom translated out of the French original, by Claudius Gilbert ...; Préservatif contre le changement de religion. English	Jurieu, Pierre, 1637-1713.; Gilbert, Claudius, d. 1696?	1683 (1683)	Wing J1211; ESTC R16948	129,160	215

brought them out of Egypt If it be the Intention of Jesus Christ that there shall be in his Church a perpetual Sacrifice of his Body and of his Blood we must not flatter our selves we follow not the Religion of Jesus Christ But if that continual Sacrifice hath not been instituted by the Lord assuredly they make a new Christianism and a new Religion The Question then is to know if without any other Mystery we should pass into a Religion which is Essentially different from ours 2. But it is not only the Question to know If Men should introduce into the Church a new Sacrifice but if Men should Sacrifice the Lord Jesus Christ the Son of the Living God It is the greatest Oblation the Noblest and most important in the World And that deserves well methinks to have Reflexion made thereon before we engage to Re-union whereto they invite us If any rash Person would sprinkle with the Blood of Oxen and Sheep their Altars according to the Usage of all People and of the Ancient Church there would not be Thunders enough to crush to death such an Undertaker If such an Impious Man should form a Society wherein they might practice such Sacrifices they would arm all the Powers of Christianism to abolish such a Religion Yet would that agitation be but about the Sacrifices of some Beasts The business is to Sacrifice the God of Heaven the Master of the World and they will perswade us that it is a business of Nothing 3. The Question again is to know Whether they should put into the hands of a Man the GOD of the Universe as an Oblation in the hands of a Sacrificer that is if we should debase the Creatour into the hands of a Creature It is a Truth which good Sense dictates among all Nations and all Ages that the Sacrificer is greater than the Oblation Without contradiction the lesser is blessed of the greater It is the Principle of St. Paul the Priest blesses the Oblation They put the Lord Jesus Christ into the hands of a Priest as an Oblation they then lift up the Priest above Jesus Christ We cannot but have regard to that as to a very good Affair 4. We cannot also keep our selves from seeing that this Doctrine doth annihilate the Priesthood of Jesus Christ by good and legitimate Consequences If the Lord Jesus Christ was to have Successors in his Off ce of Priest he is not then himself an Eternal Priest Either St. Paul's Reasoning is bad or my Proof is invincible For in fine I Reason like him He said If Perfection had been in the Levitical Priesthood was it needful that another Priest should arise after the Order of Melchisedeck and who should not be called after the Order of Aaron The Priesthood being changed there must of need be a change of the Law I say the same If Perfection was found in the Priesthood of Jesus Christ who is the Eternal Priest of Melchisedecks Order why should Men introduce new Priests which much more like to be after the Order of Aaron than after the Order of Melchisedeck And if the setling of a new Priesthood after the Order of Melchisedeck hath overthrown the Levitical Priesthood doth not the Priesthood of these Sacrifices annihilate the Priesthood of Jesus Christ This is your Errour say they you suppose that this is a new Priesthood and it is not so for it is the same it is the Priesthood after the Order of Melchisedeck which is Eternal because it abides still in the Church and without that the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ would not be Eternal after the way of that of Melchisedeck Why would Men oblige us to believe things that are incredible to justifie the Church of Rome They tell us That the Priesthood of their Priests is the same as that of Jesus Christ I know not whether Heaven and Earth are more distant and if Light and Darkness be more different Jesus Christ is God those Priests are Men. Jesus Christ abides for ever those Priests die No Man succeeds Jesus Christ Priests succeed one the other Jesus Christ offered not for himself the Priests offer for their own Sins as for those of the People Jesus Christ is Holy separate from Sinners Priests are often engaged into great Disorders Jesus Christ hath offered once one sole Sacrifice these offer every day and reiterate their Sacrifice Jesus Christ finishes his Sacrifice in the Holy Places not made with hands Priests make their Sacrifices upon Altars of Stone and in Temples made by Mans hand In fine Melchisedeck was a singular Man and only it must needs be therefore that he who was to sustain that Priesthood whereof his was the Figure should be a singular and only Person but the Priests are in great Numbers After that can Men deny that Priests are Sacrificers much rather like the Order of Aaron than that of Melchisedeck And if it be so we say it once more The Establishment of their Priesthood destroys that of Christ by good Consequence Though that should be granted say they it is a disavowed Consequence and which by consequence should not prove an obstacle to the Re-union To that I say Though Men disavow it yet we see it and fear it still because it produces actually its effect It is not in Points of Practise as in those of Speculation In these it is true so the Consequence be disavowed it must not be imputed although it do arise from the Speculative Principles of those that disavow it But when a Practise or Worship destroy by consequence an important Truth that is in vain to disavow the Consequence while People remain in the Worship and in that Practise they are actually guilty of having done prejudice against such a Truth For Example A Pagan doth joyn to the Adoration of God the Sovereign many Inferiour Deities We tell him That by this Worship he offers a great Wrong to the Soveraign God He may Answer That it is a Consequence which he disavows and that his Intention is to render an infinite Honour to this Soveraign God Because he disavows the Consequence is he justified 5. Finally We cannot keep our selves from seeing That the Sacrifice of the Mass doth a great dishonour to the Sacrifice of the Cross for if it be needful to reiterate every day that Sacrifice the first Oblation which was made thereof must have been insufficient We Reason as the Apostle that saith The Sacrifices that are offered every year cannot sanctifie them that have recourse to them otherwise they had ceased them from offering them since the Offerers being once sanctified should have had no more Conscience of Sin We Reason as these Doctors themselves We shall hear one of them presently saying to us If the Mass were infinite it were in vain to offer many Masses Let 's be permitted to say also If the value of the Sacrifice of the Cross were infinite it is in vain to offer so many others It is here that