A42757:774
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
Book 3 › Chapter 2: Whether Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. prove Excommunication.
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.
2. Those words [Greek or Hebrew], let him be unto thee, &c. do not look backward but forward; neither is the matching and comparing of the scandalous impenitent Brother, with an heathen, à priori, but à posteriori, so that no comparison is to be made between the preterite Estate of an offending Brother, and the preterite Estate of an Heathen man, but between the future Estate of an offending obstinate Brother, and the present Estate of an Heathen man.
2. Those words 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, let him be unto thee, &c. do not look backward but foreward; neither is the matching and comparing of the scandalous impenitent Brother, with an heathen, à priori, but à posteriori, so that no comparison is to be made between the praeterite Estate of an offending Brother, and the praeterite Estate of an Heathen man, but between the future Estate of an offending obstinate Brother, and the present Estate of an Heathen man.
3. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen, is as much as have no communion nor fellowship with him in the holy Assemblies nor in the Temple; for Heathens were not permitted to come into the Temple Ezek. 44. 7. 9. Act. 21. 28. whereupon Paul is accused for bringing Greeks into the Temple and so polluting that holy place Act. 21. 28. Heathens were excluded from Atrium Israelis, the Court of Israel, which was without the Court of the Priests. There was without the Court of Israel, Atrium Gentium, the Court of the Heathen, otherwise called Intermurale, because it lay between the Temple and the utter wall mentioned Ezek. 42. 20. Into this utmost Court or intermurale Heathen men were admitted to come and worship there, according to that