A92138:1004
The divine right of church-government and excommunication
The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peaceable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justified, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examined; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.
London: printed by John Field for Christopher Meredith, 1646
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
2. Observe good Reader, How craftily Erastus passeth from one question to another: All his Arguments hitherto, both in his Thesis and in his Book, conclude that no man, in either Old, or New Testament, ever was, or ought to be debarred from the holy things of God: Because there is neither precept, nor promise, nor practise in Moses, in the Prophets, or Apostles for it: 2. Because, The Sacraments are helps of repentance. 3. Because all are invited and commanded to come. Now here Erastus flieth to another Question: Whether the unworthy should be debarred by Priests in the Old, and by certain select and chosen Elders in the New Testament? This is a far other Question: for let him answer our Arguments, by which we prove that pearls and the holy things of God, ought to be denied to all Dogs, Swine, and profane men, whereas Erastus saith, all ⟨p. 365⟩those are invited to come; and then we shall yoke with Erastus, or any other, by whom, or by whose authority these pearls ought to be denied: whether by the Church, that is, by the Elders of the Church, and people consenting, or by the civill Magistrate. Now this latter question to Erastus, is no question at all▪ for if none ought to be debarred from the Sacraments at all; but all must come promiscuously, as their own good or evil spirit inclineth them, it is a vain thing for Erastus to make any question at all, by whom they ought to be debarred; for it is all one, as to ask the question, by whom should those who are to be gradued Doctors of Physic, be tried and examined, whether by the faculty, and College of of Physicians of the place, or by none at all: If you lay down this ground, that there neither is, nor ought to be any graduated Doctors at all in the world, the other of those, who are to try those who are graduated is vain, if all be invited to a free banquet, poor, and rich, leper, and clean: it is a vain question, whether be there some Masters of the house who should try who are worthy, and to be admitted to the feast, and who unworthy, and to be debarred.
2. Observe good Reader, How craftily Erastus passeth from one question to another: All his Arguments hitherto, both in his Thesis and in his Book, conclude that no man, in either Old, or New Testament, ever was, or ought to be debarred from the holy things of God: Because there is neither precept, nor promise, nor practise in Moses, in the Prophets, or Apostles for it: 2. Because, The Sacraments are helps of repentance. 3. Because all are invited and commanded to come. Now here Erastus flyeth to another Question: Whether the unworthy should be debarred by Priests in the Old, and by certain select and chosen Elders in the New Testament? This is a far other Question: for let him answer our Arguments, by which we prove that pearls and the holy things of God, ought to be denied to all Dogs, Swine, and prophane men, whereas Erastus saith, all