A42757:869
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 6: Of the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18.
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.
as likewise to loose them and pronounce them free from such burdens, as men would impose upon them contrary or beside the word of God 1 Cor. 7. 23. An example of both we have Act. 15. 28. The Synod of the Apostles and Elders bindeth upon the Churches such Burdens, as were necessary by the Law of love for the avoiding of scandal, but did pronounce the Churches to be free and loosed from other burdens which the Judaizing Teachers would have bound upon them. Now therefore if we will expound Matth. 18. 18. by other Scriptures (it being the only surest way to expound Scripture by Scripture) it is manifest and undeniable, that Church-Officers are by other Scriptures enabled and authorised to bind & loose in both those respects afore-mentioned. But we no where find in Scripture, that Christ hath given either to all private Christians, or to the civill Magistrate, a Commission and Authority to bind or loose sinners; I know a private Christian may and ought to convince an impenitent brother, and to comfort a repenting brother, ex charitate Christiana: But the Scripture doth not say, that God hath committed to every private Christian the word of reconciliation, and that all Christians are Ambassadors for Christ, nor is there a promise to ratify in heaven the convictions or comforts given by a private Christian: No more then a King doth engage himself in verbo principis to pardon such as any of his good Subjects shall pardon, or to condemn such as any of his good Subjects shall condemn: but a King engageth himself to ratify what his Ambassadors, Commissioners or Ministers shall do in his name and according to the Commission which he hath given them to pardon or condemn. Besides ⟨p. 413⟩all this, if Christ had meant here of the brother to whom the injury was don, his private binding or loosing, not condemning or forgiving, then he had kept the phrase in the singular number, which Erastus observeth diligently all along the Text vers. 15, 16, 17. But he might have also observed, that vers. 18. carries the power of binding and loosing to a plurality, Whatsoever ye bind, &c. As for the Magistrate, it belongeth to him to bind with the cords of corporal or civill punishments, or to loose and liberat from the same, as he shall see cause according to law and justice. But this doth n t belong to the spiritual Kingdom of Jesus Christ;