A42757:845
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.
Sixthly, Whereas they say that the way prescribed by Christ Matth. 18. is such as is agreeable to the Law of Moses, and they understand by Tell the Church, Tell the Magistrate, I ask what Magistrate? If the Judges and Magistrates of the Cities, as Bishop Bilson thinks, then he who did not hearken to those Judges might appeal to the great Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, or the Judges themselves might refer and transmit the case thither: so that the man was not to be straight way accounted as an Heathen man and a Publican. But if by the Church they understand the great Sanhedrin it self, he that would not hearken to it was to be put to death by the Law Deut. 17. So that it had not been agreeable to the Law of Moses, to teach that he who will not hearken to the great Sanhedrin is to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publican; for this supposeth that he shall not dye but be suffered to live.
Sixthly, Whereas they say that the way prescribed by Christ Matth. 18. is such as is agreeable to the Law of Moses, and they understand by Tell the Church, Tell the Magistrate, I aske what Magistrate? If the Judges and Magistrates of the Cities, as Bishop Bilson thinkes, then he who did not hearken to those Judges might appeale to the great Sanhedrin at Hierusalem, or the Judges themselves might referre and transmit the case thither: so that the man was not to be straight way accounted as an Heathen man and a Publican. But if by the Church they understand the great Sanhedrin it self, he that would not hearken to it was to be put to death by the Law Deut. 17. So that it had not been agreeable to the Law of Moses, to teach that he who will not hearken to the great Sanhedrin is to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publican; for this supposeth that he shall not dye but be suffered to live.
Seventhly, the Erastian principles do plainly contradict and confute themselves. For both Erastus, Bishop Bilson, and Master Prynne hold that he Jewish Sanhedrin in Christs time was a temporal Magistracy and a civill Court of justice, which had power to scourge, imprison, torture, and outlaw offenders, yea to put to death as the first two do positively aver.