A92138:1348
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. But if he be visibly no Member of the invisible Church, but in the eyes of the Church visibly a dog or a swine, neither ought the external symbols, that are even externally the holy things of God to be given to him: for otherwise, this Argument shall conclude, if one be baptised, and a member of the Church, though a dog, yet the pearls of the Gospel are to be cast to such a dog, which Erastus himself denieth: And so this Argument hurteth Erastus as much as us.
Ans. But if he be visibly no Member of the invisible Church, but in the eyes of the Church visibly a dog or a swine, neither ought the externall symbols, that are even externally the holy things of God to be given to him: for otherwise, this Argument shall conclude, if one be baptised, and a member of the Church, though a dog, yet the pearls of the Gospel are to be cast to such a dog, which Erastus himself denieth: And so this Argument hurteth Erastus as much as us.
That this Author saith, God commanded those that transgressed his 1holy Law with an high hand, and presumptuously to be killed, lest they should live and profane his holy things; I defend not: But sure Erastus erreth, who will have all such to be killed by the Magistrate under the New Testament, because they were killed in the Old: Then are we to stone the men that gathereth sticks on the Lords day; the child that is stubborn to his Parents, the Virgins, daughters of Ministers that committeth fornication are to be put to death. Why, but then the whole judicial Law of God shall oblige us Christians as Carolosladius and others teach? I humbly conceive that the putting of some to death in the Old Testament, as it was a punishment to them, so was it a mysterious teaching of us, how God hated such and such sins, and mysteries of that kind are gone with other shadows. But we read not (saith Erastus) where Christ hath changed those Laws in the New Testament. It is true, Christ hath not said in particular, I abolish the debarring of the leper seven days, and he that is thus and thus unclean shall be separated till the evening; nor hath he said particularly of every carnal Ordinance and judicial Law, it is abolished. But we conceive, the whole bulk of the judicial Law, as judicial, and as it concerned the Republic of the Jews only, is abolished, though the moral equity of all those be not abolished; also some punishments were meetly Symbolical, to teach the detestation of such a vice, as the boring with an Ale the ear of him that loved his Master, and desired still to serve him, and the making of him his perpetual servant. I should think the punishing with death the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath was