A42758:275
An assertion of the government of the Church of Scotland in the points of…
An assertion of the government of the Church of Scotland in the points of ruling-elders and of the authority of presbyteries and synods with a postscript in answer to a treatise lately published against presbyterial government.An assertion of the government of the Church of Scotland in the points of ruling-elders and of the authority of presbyteries and synods with a postscript in answer to a treatise lately published against presbyteriall government.
Edinburgh: printed for James Bryson, 1641Edinburgh: printed for Iames Bryson, 1641
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.
Now as we have the institution of these two supreme Courts, Deuter. 17. and the restitution of them both, 2 Chron. 19. so have we an example of both, Jerem. 26. For first, Jeremiah was condemned, as worthy of death, because he had spoken against the Temple and the holy place, verse 8.11. and herein saith, Oecolampadius on that place, he was a Type of Christ, against whom it was pronounced in the Council of the chief Priests and Elders,1 He is guilty of death. So did this Ecclesiastical Court conclude against Jeremiah, He is worthy of Death: yet the contrary was concluded in the civill Sanhedrin, verse 10.16. This man, say they, is not worthy to dye, for he hath spoken to us in the Name of the Lord our God. As much as to say, you Priests have given sentence de jure against Jeremiah, but we find he is not guilty of the fact whereof he is accused, for he hath spoken nothing but the truth which the Lord sent him to speak; therefore as you pronounced him worthy of death, upon supposition of the fact, we now pronounce ⟨p. 175⟩that he is not worthy of death, because we find him blameless of the fact. Sutclivius denieth that the Priests were Judices Juris, 2and the Princes Judices facti; only the Princes did against the will of the Priests set Jeremiah free, whom they had destinated to death: But say I, he must either deny that Jeremiah was judged in two several Courts, or not, if he deny it, the Text is against him: for that he was judged in the Court of the Princes, it is plain from verse 10.16. and that he was judged in the Court of the Priests, is plain also from verse 8.9. Where we find the Priests coming together, neither to reason with Jeremiah (for they had no such purpose as to give him leave to speak for himself) nor yet to accuse him; for that they do before the Princes, v. 11. Therefore it was to give sentence for their part against him, which they did; but if he grant that sentence was given in two Courts, I would gladly know what difference could be made betwixt the one sentence and the other, except that difference, de jure, and de facto, especially the same suiting the Text so well as hath been said.