A42757:471
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.
just as a Magistrate delivers a thief from the gallows, that he may not be able to steal any more, and (as he tells us some speak) that he may learn to steal no more: He is herein confuted, not only out of the Text, but out of himself. So then, the end of Church-censures is [Greek or Hebrew], that the offenders may learn or be instructed to do so no more; which belongeth to the inward man or soul. The end of civil punishments is, Ut non possint (as Erastus tells us) that the offenders may not be able or at least (being alive and some way free) may not dare to do the like, the sword being appointed for a terror to them who do evil, to restrain them from public and punishable offences, not to work upon the spirit of their minds, nor to effect the destroying of the flesh by mortification, that the spirit may be safe in the day of the Lord.
just as a Mastgirate delivers a theef from the gallows, that he may not be able to steal any more, and (as he tels us some speak) that he may learn to steal no more: He is herein confuted, not onely out of the Text, but out of himself. So then, the end of Church-censures is 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, that the offenders may learn or be instructed to do so no more; which belongeth to the inward man or soul. The end of civil punishments is, Ut non possint (as Erastus tels us) that the offenders may not be able or at least (being alive and some way free) may not dare to do the like, the sword being appointed for a terrour to them who do evil, to restrain them from publike and punishable offences, not to work upon the spirit of their mindes, nor to effect the destroying of the flesh by mortification, that the spirit may be safe in the day of the Lord.
The fifth difference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers, is in respect of the effects. The effects of the Civil power are Civil Laws, Civil punishments, Civil rewards. The effects of the Ecclesiastical power, are Determinations of Controversies of Faith, Canons concerning Order and Decency in the Church, Ordination or Deposition of Church-Officers, Suspension from the Sacrament, and Excommunication. The powers being distinct in their nature and causes, the effects must needs be distinct, which flow from the actuating and putting in execution of the powers. I do not here speak of the effects of the Ecclesiastical power of Order, the dispensing of the