A92138:1103
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 late Jews refer to this Sanhedrin at Jerusalem1 questions of making war, or consecrating the Priest, of tributes, of charges of the Temple, of judging of Tribes, of the censuring of false Prophets, and of Soothsayers, &c. How then is it not a politic judicature in which all causes belonging to worship, Ceremonies, civill policy, bloods, and capital punishments were handled? for when Moses had spoken of the punishing of Idolaters, he presently addeth Deut. 17. If any thing be hard for thee, &c
Erastus. The late Iewes referre to this Sanedrim at Ierusalem1 questions of making warre, or consecrating the Priest, of tributes, of charges of the Temple, of judging of Tribes, of the censuring of false Prophets, and of Soothsayers, &c. How then is it not a politick judicature in which all causes belonging to worship, Ceremonies, civill policy, bloods, and capitall punishments were handled? for when Moses had spoken of the punishing of Idolaters, he presently addeth Deut. 17. If any thing be hard for thee, &c
- 1Page 269.
Ans. It is like enough, the Jews referred such as these to the Sanhedrin, but we contend for two Sanhedrims, one civill, and another of Priests, Levites and Elders, who judged of matters only of Ecclesiastical cognizance, and of bloods, and punishing Idolaters and false Prophets with death, only in a spiritual way, in point of Law; and I judge the holy Ghost Deut. 17. hath so framed the words that it is evident, as I have proved that capital crimes belonged to them in point of Law; for he saith not, he that refuseth to die when the Priests and Levites condemn him to die, he shall surely die, and have the benefit of appeal to no higher judicature, Now this he should have said by Erastus his way; but he that will not stand to the sentence of the Priest or judge shall die. Hence it is clear, he speaketh of things in matters of Law, in which the guilty might dis-assent, and allege the Priests had not judged according to Law. But how was it the mind of the holy Ghost that any could refuse the Sentence of death given out by the Priests? for the meaning must be by Erastus his way, he that refuseth