A42757:368
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 most of that strength which doth militate against these Erastian Principles, is presented and drawn up in this preceding Book. That which I now intend is only an additional debate.
The most of that strength which doth militate against these Erastian Principles, is presented and drawn up in this preceding Booke. That which I now intend is onely an additionall debate.
And first of all it is to be observed that the same point of Controversy is debateda with the Anabaptists, they holding as the Erastians do, that in the old Testament, there was but one kind of government, one kind of jurisdiction, one kind of punishment, and that it was Civill or Temporal; but an Ecclesiastical Judicature or censure in the old Testament they deny. Wherein they are contradicted by those that writ against them.
And first of all it is to be observed that the same point of Controversie is debateda with the Anabaptists, they holding as the Erastians doe, that in the old Testament, there was but one kind of government, one kind of jurisdiction, one kind of punishment, and that it was Civill or Temporall; but an Ecclesiasticall Judicature or censure in the old Testament they deny. Wherein they are contradicted by those that writ against them.
- aS•e A•psiagius Dip: adv. Anabapt. pag. 276. Joh. Cloppenburg. in Gangraena Theol. Anabapt. part. 3. Disp. 11. citeth these words out of a book of the Anabaptists de Censur. Eccles. Ante adventum Christi tempore veteris Testamenti, unicum tantum institutum suisse regimen, ac non nisi unicam punitionem, videlicet d m•gistratu exercendam secundum scriptam lagem à Mose traditam: quâ luendum erat vel in bonis vel in corpore, c sustinenda aut Mors, aut carcer, aut muleta pecuniaria: quae omnia politici […], non Ecclesiastici judicii. In opposition hereunto he addeth. In Ecclesiis reformatis creditur ex verbo Dei, fuisse à Deo jam olim in U. T. […] duplex regimen, duplici officio gubernátionis, qua politicae, qua Ecclesiasticae; distinctum.