A92138:1068
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.
now then he should say the same thing needlessly, and with a moreover, if this judicature at Jerusalem were not a judicature Ecclesiastic and different from the judicature civill, that he appointed at Jerusalem as one of the prime fenced cities, which was common with the civill judicatures in other fenced cities. 3. The persons in the judicatures are different, for v. 5. the members of the court, 2 Chro. 19. 5, 6, 7▪ are called [Greek or Hebrew] judges; these could not be Churchmen, for of these he speaketh v. 8. & they are expressly distinguished from the Levites, Priests and Elders, v. 8. who are all Church-men, for the fathers of the people were no other thing then our governing Elders, and these were members of the other court, v. 8. 4. The ⟨p. 388⟩objects of these judicatures are very different. The Spirit of God saith of the one ver. 5. That they judge for the Lord, ver. 13. for▪ 1all the Kings matters, this must be all civill causes, in which the King, and inferior judges under the King do judge; but the object of the other is higher. The Priests and Levites are appointed by Jehoshaphat for the judgement of the Lord, ver. 8. And in every matter of the Lord, v. 13. Now whereas Erastus putteth a note of ignorance on all that hath been versed in the Old Testament before him, whereas he confesseth he understandeth not the Original Language, let the Reader judge what arrogance is here, where ever there is mention (saith he) of judgement, there is signified not religious causes, but also other causes, especially the cause of the widow and Orphan: It bewrayeth great ignorance. For, 1. The matters of the Lord, and the matters of the King, are so evidently distinguished, and opposed the one to the other, by two divers presidents in the different judicatures, the one Ecclesiastical, Amaziah the chief Priest, in every word or matter of the Lord▪ and the other Zebadiah, the son of Ishmael the ruler of the house of Judah, for all the Kings matters, that the very words of the Text, say that of Erastus which he saith of others, that he is not versed in the Scripture: for then the causes of the Lord, and the causes of the King in the Text, by Erastus should be the same causes, whereas the Spirit of God doth distinguish them most evidently. 2.