A42757:531
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 ninth Argument brought to prove that all Government is given to Christ as Mediator, and that the Christian Magistrate holds his office of and under Christ, as the head of Magistracy and Principality, is from Eph. 1. 21, 22, 23. This Argument first propounded by Mr. Coleman, is prosecuted by Mr. Hussey pag. 32, 33. &c. He demurs upon that which I said, that this place maketh more against him then for him; the meaning whereof was no more then this, that this place doth rather afford us an Argument against him, then him against us. Come we to the particulars. My first Reply was, The Apostle saith not that Christ is given to the Church, as the head of all Principalities and Powers. The Brother saith so, and in saying so he makes Christ a head to those that are not of his body. This exception Mr. Hussey quarrelleth, but when he hath endeavoured to prove from that Text that Christ is the head of Principalities: because he that is head of all things, is also head of Principalities: though he will never be able to make it out from that Text, that Christ (as Mediator) is head of all things, but only, that he who is the Churches head is over all things; and gave him to be the head over (not of) all things to the Church, saith the Text, which as I told before, the Syriac readeth more plainly thus, and him who is over all, he gave to be the head to the Church.) At last he fairly gives over the proof. It is true saith he, disputations do require men to keep close to terms, but in Col. 2. 10. ye have the very words, head of all Principality and Power. In Col. 2. 10. Christ as he is the eternal Son of God, is called head of all Principality and power: as we shall see anon: but ⟨p. 225⟩Ephes. 1. where the Apostle speaketh of Christs headship, in reference to the Church, and as Mediator, he is not called the head of all Principality and Power. So that I had reason to except against Mr. Colemans argument which made that Text Ephes. 1. to say what it saith not. Now what saith he to the reason I added, can Christ be a head to them that are not of his body? He tells me the visible Church is not the body of Christ, but only the faithful. He might have observed the visible Church consisting of visible Saints, plainly spoken of, as the body of Christ,