A42757:344
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.
Fifthly, those Arguments which prove an exclusion of known profane persons from the Temple, will also prove an exclusion of known profane persons from the Passover: for none might eat of the Passover, who might not also come into the Temple. That scandalous profane persons might not come into the Temple, hath been proved already.
Fifthly, those Arguments which prove an exclusion of known prophane persons from the Temple, will also prove an exclusion of known prophane persons from the Passeover: for none might eat of the Passeover, who might not also come into the Temple. That scandalous prophane persons might not come into the Temple, hath been proved already.
Sixthly, I argue from the lesser to the greater. If men were to be kept back for legal uncleanness, much more for moral uncleanness, this being more hateful to God and more hurtful to men then the other. This just consequence Grotius annot. in Luk. 6. 22. doth admit. If by the Law saith he, one that was leprous or had a filthy scab, was separated from mens company, lest he should infect others, it was no ill consequence. that (if no heavier thing) this at least should be imposed on flagitious & wicked persons, who did by the contagion of their sinful example hurt others, & bring a reproach upon the whole congregation from which the congregation could not be made free, but by some public detestation of that wickedness▪ thus Groti:
Sixthly, I argue from the lesser to the greater. If men were to be kept back for legall uncleannesse, much more for morall uncleannesse, this being more hatefull to God and more hurtfull to men then the other. This just consequence Grotius annot. in Luk. 6. 22. doth admit. If by the Law saith he, one that was leprous or had a filthy scab, was separated from mens company, lest he should infect others, it was no ill consequence. that (if no heavier thing) this at least should be imposed on flagitious & wicked persons, who did by the contagion of their sinfull example hurt others, & bring a reproach upon the whole congregation from which the congregation could not be made free, but by some publik detestation of that wickednes thus Groti: