A92138:1279
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. If Erastus would argue logically (as to me in my humble apprehension, he is still weak in all his book in this) we should find frothy grounds: as thus, If those who were scourged and cast out of the Synagogue (to wit, unjustly and against all Law of God for preaching Christ Jesus) were never accused for going into the Temple and using the Sacraments, and say, truly they did nothing against1 the Law, then the cast out of the Synagogue might lawfully go to the Temple and partake of the Sacraments; the proposition is the greatest untruth that can be. 1. Erastus must prove that the Jews accused the Apostles of all and every thing, which they conceived to be against the Law. I conceive this is a conjecture, and false. 2. The other part of the proposition is as false as to say, light is darkness; if Paul cast out of the Synagogue, and excommunicated against all Law of God and Moses, yet go to the Temple and sacrifice, and partake of Sacraments, say he doth nothing against the Law; then casting out of the Synagogue and Excommunication doth not exclude any from the Temple, sacrifices and Sacraments: this is as much as Paul should say, unjust Excommunication against all Law of God and of Moses for righteousness sake, doth exclude no man from the Temple and the sacrifices and Sacraments; Ergo, casting out of the Synagogue and Excommunication rightly administered, doth exclude none from the Temple, sacrifices and Sacraments: ⟨p. 468⟩Surely […] is abominable to ascribe as much to unjustly administered ordinances, as to the j•st ordinances of Christ. Erastus must lay down the Popish ground of Navarre and Gregory, that Excommunication2 sive de justa, sive de i•justa causa, either for a just or an unjust cause is to be feared, and hath force. Might not Paul though he had been unjustly excommunicated, go to the Temple and Sacraments, and yet say he had done nothing against the Law? might not the man whom Jesus found after he was unjustly cast out of Temple and Synagogue, Joh. 9. 39. say, I have done nothing against the Law, nor do against it, though I go to the Temple? 3. How will Erastus prove that the Apostles,