A42757:538
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 last reason which I brought from the last verse, was this, The Church is there called Christs fullness in reference to his Headship. This Mr. Hussey saith, seemeth to come tolerably from the Text; but the next words, that which makes him full and complete so far as he is a Head or King: he calls a fallacy, How cometh this word King in here? saith he; First here he yields that the Church makes Christ full and complete so far as he is a Head, whence it followeth that as Mediator he is only the Churches head, and there is no other body of Christ but the Church; for if the Church be his fullness, his complete body, there can be no other body of Christ. Doth not this destroy what he hath been arguing for, that Christ as Mediator is head of all Principality and Power? And for the word King, it may well come in where Head cometh: for is not Christs ⟨p. 229⟩Kingdom as Mediator, commensurable with his Headship as Mediator? Is he as Mediator King to any to whom he is not Head? Surely this very answer as it is his last, so it really yieldeth the cause.
The last reason which I brought from the last verse, was this, The Church is there called Christs fulnesse in reference to his Headship. This Mr. Hussey saith, seemeth to come tolerably from the Text; but the next words, that which makes him full and compleat so farre as he is a Head or King: he calls a fallacy, How commeth this word King in here? saith he; First here he yeelds that the Church makes Christ full and compleat so farre as he is a Head, whence it followeth that as Mediator he is onely the Churches head, and there is no other body of Christ but the Church; for if the Church be his fulnesse, his compleat body, there can be no other body of Christ. Doth not this destroy what he hath been arguing for, that Christ as Mediator is head of all Principality and Power? And for the word King, it may well come in where Head commeth: for is not Christs ⟨p. 229⟩Kingdom as Mediator, commensurable with his Headship as Mediator? Is he as Mediator King to any to whom he is not Head? Surely this very answer as it is his last, so it really yeeldeth the cause.