A92138:1093
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.
Ans. This consequence is so strong (though the consequent be not ours) to prove a Synedrie, that Erastus shall never be able to refute it; for that the Priests might teach the people, they were to judge and govern the people, and w•re to judge between the holy and profane, not only that the Priests might inform the peoples minds, but that the Priests and Levites might, 2 Chron. 9. 8▪ 9 10. Deut. 17. 8, 9 give judgement between blood and blood, between plea and plea, between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy, and hard to be judged by the inferior judges; these concerned not the instruction of the people as matters of opinion, as Erastus imagineth; but they concerned the governing of the people in justice, that v. 12. the man that will do presumptuously, or will not hearken unto the Priest or the judge, shall die the death? Was not this to govern the people and to judge them? Certainly Erastus in the same Chapter saith so, to wit, that there was one common Synedrim of civill judges, Priests and Levites at Jerusalem, that the Priests and Levites were Judges in capital matters, and gave out the sentence of death, de capite & sanguine, 1and he proveth page 270. 271. that the Priests were civill judges, and did give sentences of blood, of life and death: Ergo, the Priests did not discern between the clean and the unclean, between blood and blood only, that they might teach the people, but that they might regulate their own practise in judgement, and govern the people; yea that the Priests might pronounce some unclean, and to be put out of the Camp so many days, that they might debar out of the Sanctuary the unclean, the uncircumcised, the strangers, and Lev. 10. the end of judging and governing is expressly set down, v. 10. and so a judicature, and the other end, v. 11. that they may teach the children of Israel all the Statutes which the Lord hath spoken by the hand of Moses. 2. From the Elders preaching the Word and dispensing the Sacraments, simply we infer no judicature2 at all, far less a politic judicature, which we do not ascribe to the Priests, for John Baptist both preached the Word and baptized, and yet was no judge, nor did he erect any Church judicature, but from the power of the keys given to the Church, and exercised by the Church,