A42757:98
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.
CHAP. VII. That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication, and (b• a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpretation) Suspension from the Sacrament of a person un excommunicated.
The weight of our proofs not laid upon the phrase of delivering to Satan. Which phrase being set aside that Chapter will prove Excommunication, verse 8. Let us keep the Passover▪ &c. applied to the Lords Supper, even by M. Prynne himself. Master Prynnes first exception from 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. & 11. 20 21. concerning the admission of all the visible members of the Church of Corinth, even drunken persons to the Sacrament, answered. His second, a reflection upon the persons of men. His third, concerning these words, No, not to eat, confuted. Hence Suspension by necessary consequence. His fourth exception taken off. His three conditions which he requireth in Arguments from the lesser to the greater, are false and do not hold. Our Argument from this Text doth not touch upon the rock of separation. Eight considerations to prove an Ecclesiastical censure, and namely excommunication from 1 Cor. 5. compared with 2▪ Cor. 2. More of that phrase, to deliver such a one to Satan.
THe weight of our proofs not laid upon the phrase of delivering to Sathan. Which phrase being set aside that Chapter will prove Excommunication, verse 8. Let us keepe the Passeover▪ &c. applied to the Lords Supper, even by M. Prynne himselfe. Master Prynnes first exception from