A92138:1041
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.
Erastus▪ The questions why Paul did not command to excommunicate the false Apostles in Galathia? Or why he did not miraculously kill them? are both urgent; But the latter is most urgent, for the ⟨p. 377⟩power of miraculous afflicting men, was given to few men, and to Apostles: But it is a wonder, if excommunication was ever, and every where to be observed in all Churches. Yet Paul neither practiseth it here, nor else where, nor commandeth others to practise it; now here he desireth they may be cut off, but not excommunicated.
Erastus▪ The questions why Paul did not command to excommunicate the false Apostles in Galathia? Or why he did not miraculousty kill them? are both urgent; But the latter is most urgent, for the ⟨p. 377⟩power of miraculous afflicting men, was given to few men, and to Apostles: But it is a wonder, if excommunication was ever, and every where to be observed in all Churches. Yet Paul neither practiseth it here, nor else where, nor commandeth others to practise it; now here he desireth they may be cut off, but not excommunicated.
Ans. We say the last is no question, you never read in the New-Testament, or in the Old, that Prophets or Apostles consulted, or advised with the people, whether they should work miracles or not: 2. Though Excommunication was an ordinary power, as the power of binding and loosing given to the Church, Matth. 16. 19. and 18. 18. Joh. 20. 22, 23. Yet the actual exercise of Excommunication, being the highest and weightiest censure, and the most severe of any other on earth, it is no wonder that Paul be as sparing and rare in the exercise of it, as the Apostles were in killing mens bodies. 3. It is a begging of the question, to say, Paul neither practised himself, nor commanded others to excommunicate, for he did both.