A42757:217
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversy concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiastical government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlessness of the chief objections made against the Presbyterial government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...
London: printed by E.G. for Richard Whitaker, 1646
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The despising of an Officer or messenger of the house of judgement. He that casteth up to his neighbour a servile condition, or calls his neighbour servant. He that contumaciously refuseth to appear at the day appointed by the Judge. He that doth not submit himself to the Judicial sentence. He that hath in his house any hurtful thing, as a mad dog or a weak leather. He that before Heathen Judges beareth witness against an Israelite. He that maketh the blind to fall. He that hath Excommunicate another without cause, when he ought not to have been Excommunicate. Thus you have the 24 causes of the Jewish Excommunication; of which some were mere scandals: others of a mixed nature, that is, partly injuries, partly scandals; but they were reckoned among the causes of Excommunication qua scandals, not qua […]. Jo. Coch. Annot. in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin. pag. 146▪ explaining how the wronging of a Doctor of the Law by contumelies, was a cause of Excommunication, showeth that the Excommunication was because of the scandall. Licet tamen condonare nisi res in praputulo gesta sit. Publicum Doctoris ludibrium in legis contemptum redundat. […] ob causam Doctor legis honorem […] remittere non potest. Ubi res clam & sine scandalo gesta est, magni animi & sapientis est injuriam contemptu vindicare. If there was no scandal, the injury might be remitted by the party injured, so as the offender was not to be Excommunicate▪ But if the contumely was known abroad, and was scandalous, though the party wronged were willing and desirous to bury it, yet because of the scandal, the Law ⟨p. 44⟩provided that the offender should be excommunicate. For they taught the people that he who did contend against a Rabbi did contend against the holy Ghost (for which see Gull. Vorstius annot. in Maimon. de fundam. legis. pag. 77, 78.) and hence did they aggravate an Ecclesiastical or Divine (not a Civill) injury. Whence it appeareth that the causes of Excommunication, were formally looked upon as scandals. Add that if qua injuries, then a quatenus ad omne, all personal or civill injuries had been causes of Excommunication. But all civill injuries do not fall within these 24. causes. If it be objected, that neither do all scandals fall within these 24. causes. I answer they do; for some of the causes are general and comprehensive, namely these two, the 5th.
The despising of an Officer or messenger of the house of judgement. He that casteth up to his neighbour a servile condition, or cals his neighbour servant. He that contumaciously refuseth to appeare at the day appointed by the Judge. He that doth not submit himselfe to the Judiciall sentence. He that hath in his house any hurtfull thing, as a mad dogge or a weake leather. He that before Heathen Judges beareth witnesse against an Israelite. He that maketh the blind to fall. He that hath Excommunicate another without cause, when he ought not to have been Excommunicate. Thus you have the 24 causes of the Jewish Excommunication; of which some were meere scandals: others of a mixed nature, that is, partly injuries, partly scandals; but they were reckoned among the causes of Excommunication qua scandals, not qua . Io. Coch. Annot. in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin. pag. 146 explaining how the wronging of a Doctor of the Law by contumelies, was a cause of Excommunication, sheweth that the Excommunication was because of the scandall. Licet tamen condonare nisi res in praputulo gesta sit. Publicum Doctoris ludibrium in legis contemptum redundat. ob causam Doctor legis honorem remittere non potest. Ubi res clam & sine scandalo gesta est, magni animi & sapientis est injuriam contemptu vindicare. If there was no scandall, the injury might be remitted by the party injured, so as the offendor was not to be Excommunicate But if the contumely was known abrond, and was scandalous, though the party wronged were willing and desirous to bury it, yet because of the scandall, the Law