A42757:225
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.
As for the authority, by which a man was excommunicated, we see (by that which hath been already noted) that it was a public and judicial act, and it was necessary there should be at least an Assembly of ten. Those formulae before cited, make it evident, that it was an authoritative sentence of an Ecclesiastical Assembly, (and therefore done as it were in name of the Court ⟨p. 48⟩of heaven, to which purpose domus Judicii superioris seu coelestis, was mentioned in the business, and it was a juridical or forensicall act, and done solemnly in the Temple, in that case of the Cuthites) Drusius de tribus Sectis Judaeorum lib. 4. Num. 237. concerning the Discipline of the Essaeans, and their Excommunicating of ungodly persons, tells us it was done by a hundred men Assembled together. It is very true, which Mr. Selden observeth, de Jure nat. & Gentium l. 4. c. 8. the Hebrews writ of a Judicial excommunication, and of an extrajudicial excommunication, by which one private man might excommunicate another. Yet, that extrajudicial excommunication could not stand in force, unless it were ratified by the Court; and of it self, it was rather optative, or imprecative, than obligative: as is manifest by the Instance, which dJo. Coch gives us ex Gem. Moed Caton. Two men having mutually excommunicated each other, it cometh to an authoritative decision. He that had excommunicated the other, for that for which he ought to have been punished by a pecuniall mulct, but not by excommunication, was himself justly excommunicate by the other, according to the last of the 24. causes of excommunication before mentioned, that is, that he who unjustly excommunicateth another, shall be himself excommunicated. So the excommunicating of the one man for a civill injury was declared null: and the excommunicating of the other, for his unjust act of excommunication, was ratified. Which doth not only prove what I have said of private, or extrajudicial excommunication: but also confirm what I asserted before, concerning the causes of excommunication, that it was not for personal or civill injuries, but for matter of scandal. And that pecuniary mulcts and excommunication, were not inflicted for the same but for different causes. And so much for the authority.
As for the authority, by which a man was excommunicated, we see (by that which hath been already noted) that it was a publike and judiciall act, and it was necessary there should be at least an Assembly of ten. Those formulae before cited, make it evident, that it was an authoritative sentence of an Ecclesiasticall Assembly, (and therefore done as it were in name of the Court