A92138:1341
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.
He saith, The Magistrate may choose some of the congregation to Excommunicate; which if he say, I consent not to him, and see no warrant for it in Scripture: But I rather believe his sense to be, That the godly Magistrate may command the Church to Excommunicate ⟨p. 491⟩and punish them, if they be negligent in this. But hence it followeth not, that the Magistrate may Excommunicate them, as Erastus inferreth, no more then of old; it followeth, King Uzziah might command the Priests to burn incense to the Lord, and punish them; if in this they should neglect their duty: Ergo, King Uzziah might lawfully in his own person burn incense to the Lord: Erastus himself will deny this consequence.
He saith, The Magistrate may chuse some of the congregation to Excommunicate; which if he say, I consent not to him, and see no warrant for it in Scripture: But I rather believe his sense to be, That the godly Magistrate may command the Church to Excommunicate ⟨p. 491⟩and punish them, if they be negligent in this. But hence it followeth not, that the Magistrate may Excommunicate them, as Erastus inferreth, no more then of old; it followeth, King Vzziah might command the Priests to burn incense to the Lord, and punish them; if in this they should neglect their duty: Ergo, King Vzziah might lawfully in his own person burn incense to the Lord: Erastus himself will deny this consequence.
Erastus saith, It is evident this Author meaneth, That God commanded 1not a Presbytery to be, but that it is necessary for orders cause. But I had rather that he had proved it from the Authors words: And so I deny it, while Erastus bring his own words to prove it: I believe he fancies many things of this worthy Author, as that he subjects not the Magistrate to the Presbytery: And why? Because he saith, None ought to be Excommunicated without the consent of the Magistrate. Truly it is a weak reason; for if the Magistrate be a godly man, and a Member of the Church, it is necessary that his positive consent be had, that he may in light and faith use the sword against him, as against other evil doers. But I give him no negative voice, nor any authoritative or Ecclesiastically judicial voice in Excommunication, which can be due to him as a Magistrate: So the Author doth not at all disagree from us; Erastus is mistaken.