A92138:1483
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.
and the other horn of the Argument, is as weak for this, The heathen Magistrate as such manageth his office under, or for the Devil, is blasphemous, for so Magistracy and the office should be intrinsically unlawful, and for the Devil: But it is intrinsically the Ordinance of God, Rom. 13. and apply this to God as creator, it shall appear of force. The Magistrate as the Magistrate, doth either manage his office under, and for God creator, or under, and for the Devil. The former part is true, because God creator and nature made the office of Magistracy, apply it to a heathenish husband, Father, Master, Musician, Painter, under these reduplications and it shall make the relation of Husband Devilish, or this proposition, ⟨p. 566⟩(a Husband, a Father as a Father, and a Husband, manage their office, under, and for Christ the mediator, or under, or for the Devil) is most false and blasphemous: the former part is false; for there should have been, and was Father and Husband which did manage the duties of these relations, for God creator, not for Christ mediator; though Christ had never taken on our nature, never been mediator, never been King and Priest of his redeemed Church. The latter part is blasphemous, for then Adam had managed the part of Husband and Father under the Devil, and for the Devil, even before he fell in sin, and in the state of Innocency. 3. Mr. Colemans meaning is, that the Magistrate as the Magistrate, and by office is under Christ mediator, as his supreme and immediate vicegerent as mediator; now in this sense, Christs saying (he that is not against us, is with us) shall not prove the truth of the proposition, which must be this, and is most false, to wit, that (The Magistrate as the Magistrate, by office, is either under Christ mediator, as the supreme and immediate vicegerent of him as mediator, or he is by office under the Devil.) This we deny, for one might argue thus of the Apostle Paul, who was either as an Apostle for Christ, or against Christ; Paul as an Apostle is either under Christ the mediator, and his supreme and immediate vicegerent, having power of both Swords, or he is under the Devil: The proposition is most false; for Paul is neither of them, so say we here; the Magistrate doth neither manage his office, as a Magistrate under Christ mediator, as his Vicar, and a little head of the Church;
and the other horne of the Argument, is as weak for this, The heathen Magistrate as such manageth his office under, or for the Devil, is blasphemous, for so Magistracy and the office should be intrinsecally unlawfull, and for the Devil: But it is intrinsecally the Ordinance of God,