A42757:882
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.
Eighthly, that the binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. is juridical, not doctrinal, belonging to the power of jurisdiction, not of order, is the sense of the ancients above cited, as likewise of Scotus lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Quaest. 1. art. 5. Tostatus in Matth. 18. Quest. 113. yea the current both of Schoolmen and of Interpreters, as well Protestant, as Popish, runneth that way. It were too long to cite all. Yea further Salmasius in appar. ad lib. de primatu p•p. 296. understands the binding and loosing Matth. 16. 19. Joh. 20. 23. of Discipline. So Walaeus Tom. 1. pag. 92. So divers others. From the same places Aretius Theol. probl. loc. 133. de excom. draws Excommunication as an Ordinance of Christ. From the same two Texts Joh. 20. 23. and Matth. 16. 19. Dionysius Areop agita de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 7. sect. 7. doth prove that Christ hath committed unto the Ministers of the Church [Greek or Hebrew]. His ancient Scholiast Maximus upon that place tells us, that he speaks [Greek or Hebrew] of excommunications and separations, or (as he there further explaineth) the judging and separating between the righteous and the wicked. Salmeron upon Matth. 16. 19. thinks that the ⟨p. 419⟩latter part of that verse, And whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth, &c. doth belong to the power of jurisdiction and censure: Hugo de S. Victore de Sacramentis lib. 1. cap. 26. doth also expound Matth. 16. 19. of the forensicall power of Excommunication. Now if in these places binding and loosing, remitting and retaining sins comprehend a juridical power of laying on or taking off Church censures; how much more must this Juridical power be comprehended