A42757:714
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.
From all which it doth appear, that it is not without good reason that Martyr and Pareus upon 1 Cor. 5. do maintain the necessity of Excommunication, under a Christian and pious Magistrate, as well as under an Infidel and profane Magistrate.
From all which it doth appear, that it is not without good reason that Martyr and Pareus upon 1 Cor. 5. do maintain the necessity of Excommunication, under a Christian and pious Magistrate, as well as under an Infidel and prophane Magistrate.
Eleventhly, The end and use for which Church-censures are necessary, is not intended and endeavoured, much less attained, by the government of the Christian Magistrate. For though the Christian Magistrate punisheth many (I cannot say all) gross and scandalous sins with corporal or civil punishments: yet to punish sin is one thing; to seek the salvation of the sinner is another thing: so the offender his suffering of punishment ⟨p. 326⟩and satisfying the Law of the Land is one thing; his declaring of his repentance, and public confession of his sin, for taking away the scandal which he hath given to the Church, is another thing. Suppose a delinquent (whose fault is not capital by the law of the land, for instance a Fornicator, a drunkard, a common swearer, a Sabbath-breaker, or the like) to have suffered in his person or estate, all the punishment which he ought to suffer, so that he hath now made a civil atonement (as I may call it) for his offence, and the Christian Magistrate hath no further to charge him with. Suppose also that he is by such corporal or civil punishments as by a bit and bridle overawed and restrained from committing again the like external acts: Notwithstanding he hath not the least sign of true repentance and godly sorrow for his former foul and scandalous sins, and he is known to be not an accuser, but an excuser of himself for those faults and scandals. Such a one comes and desires to receive the Sacrament. Must his penal satisfaction to the Christian Magistrate be a sufficient penitential satisfaction to the Church? Here is a rock which the Erstians dash upon, unless they admit of a distinct Ecclesiastical Judgement, concerning the signs of repentance in a scandalous sinner, according to which, as these signs shall appear or not appear, he is to be admitted or not admitted to the Sacrament.