A42757:367
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.
I Have said enough (as I suppose) of a Church-Government and Church-Censures distinct from Magistracy and civill Justice among the Jews, whereby the seeming Old Testament strength of the Erastians, is sufficiently yea abundantly broken; And now it appeareth how ill grounded that Assertion is which did lately come abroad in the Discourse entitled, The difference about Church-government ended Pag. 8. Moses was first the sole Ruler, &c. Afterwards when Kings reigned in Israel, King Solomon put Abiathar the high Priest from his Office, setting up Zadok, and David distinguished the courses of the Priests, and other godly Kings from time to time ruled in things Ecclesiastical, and Priests never; till that after their return from the Babylonish captivity, &c. ⟨p. 134⟩And no better grounded are the first five questions in Mr Prynne his Diotrephes catechised, in which he doth intimate that there was no distinct Ecclesiastical jurisdiction among the Jews, and that all scandalous sins and offences now pretended to be of Ecclesiastical cognisance, were by Gods own institution throughout the old Testament, inquireable, examinable, determinable, and punishable only by the temporal Magistrates or •ivill powers, not by any Ecclesiastical persons or Officers. But when he should prove that there was no Ecclesiastical jurisdiction distinct from the civill, he brings many Scriptures to prove that there was a civill jurisdiction and civill or temporal punishments in the Old Testament. How cold the consequence from hence will be, against Church-Government, the intelligent Reader cannot but perceive.
I Have said enough (as I suppose) of a Church-Government and Church-Censures distinct from Magistracy and civill Justice among the Jewes, whereby the seeming Old Testament strength of the Erastians, is sufficiently yea abundantly broken; And now it appeareth how ill grounded that Assertion is which did lately come abroad in the Discourse entituled, The difference about Church-government ended Pag. 8. Moses was first the sole Ruler, &c. Afterwards when Kings reigned in Israel, King Solomon put Abiathar the high Priest from his Office, setting up Zadok, and David distinguished the courses of the Priests, and other godly Kings from time to time ruled in things Ecclesiasticall, and Priests never; till that after their returne from the Babylonish captivity, &c. ⟨p. 134⟩