To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
FIrst, we hold it to be a great blasphemie to say, that the Priesthood & sacrifice of Christ vpō the Crosse, is not that sacrifice or Priesthood into the which the old sacrifice & Priesthood was translated & changed. The Apostle proueth the contrary: for that sacrifice, whereby the new Testament is established, is that,
whereunto the old sacrifice and Priesthoode is translated: but this is done by the singular sacrifice of Christ, who is the suretie of a better testament, Hebr. 7.23. Ergo, his singular sacrifice vpon the crosse, is that whereinto the old Leuiti∣call sacrifices are changed, and no other. Againe the Priesthoode after Mel∣chisedechs order is that, into the which the old Priesthoode is changed: but the Priesthoode of Christ vpon the Crosse was after that order. Ergo. But here they are not ashamed to denie, that the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse was after Melchisedechs order, but doe most impudently and blasphemously affirme, that it was after the order of Aaron, Heskin. lib. 1. cap. 13. And thus euery vile masse∣monger shall be more properly a Priest after Melchisedechs order, then Christ himselfe.
Secondly, none but Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech: for vnto whome the Lord saide, Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchi∣sedech, to him the Lord saith also in the same Psalme, Sit thou at my right hand, Psal. 110. But this cānot agree to any popish Priest: therefore not the other. A∣gaine, the Apostle maketh this difference betweene the Priesthoode of the lawe and the Gospell: because then there were many Priests, they being prohibited by death to continue: but Christ is the onely Priest of the New Testament, be∣cause he dieth not, Heb. 7 23.24. If they answer, as they doe, that although there be many Priestes, yet it is but one Priesthoode, because Christ concurreth with them in the actes of the Priesthoode, Rhemist.
We answer, first, Christ concurreth with his faithfull ministers in the actes of their Ministerie: but no such Priesthoode doe wee acknowledge. Secondly, so Christ concurred in the actes of the Leuiticall Priesthoode, and the sacrifices of the law that were rightly offered: wherefore this concurrence of Christ dooth no more take away the multitude of Priests in the Gospell, then it did in the lawe.
Thirdly, concerning the name of Priests in their sense, as it implieth an autho∣ritie of sacrificing, we vtterly abhor it: secondly, but as it is deriued of the Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ which signifieth an Elder, we refuse it not, but wish rather, that it had not bin abused in cōmō speach to signifie popish sacrificers. Thirdly, as for the word (sacerdos) which may be englished a sacrificer, we finde it no where in the New Testament giuen to the ministers of the Gospell, and so much Bellar∣mine confesseth, cap. 17. And therefore vnfitly and vnproperly agreeth vnto them. If some of the fathers haue confounded the names of Sacerdos and (Pres∣byter) they are not to be commended. The word Sacerdos, a sacrificer, being a proper name of the Leuitical Priests, cannot properly be attributed to the Mi∣nisters of the Gospell. To conclude, this word (Priest) as it is the English of (Sacerdos) we doe not approue: but as it giueth the sense of (Presbyter) from whence it is deriued, we condemne it not: for so it signifieth nothing else but an Elder. If common vse of speech haue drawne it to a contrarie sense, it would be amended.
* 1.1Augustine saith, Sacerdotiū Iudaeorum nemo dubitat, &c. No faithful mā doub∣teth, but that the Priesthood of the law was a figure of the royall Priesthoode in
the Church, whereby all that pertaine to the bodie of Christ are consecrated. He acknowledgeth no other Priesthood abiding in the Church, then that whereby all Christians are made Priests, to offer spirituall sacrifices vnto God through Christ.
Quaest. euangelicar. lib. 2. quaest. 40.