A92138:1528
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.
8. This would ever be remembered, that in case of the Churches erring in judgement, which must be thought of as a sort of extraordinary case, the godly Magistrate may do more, then what ordinarily he can do; and so may the Church, when the Magistrate oppresseth in judgement, as great Junius saith.
8. This would ever be remembred, that in case of the Churches erring in judgement, which must be thought of as a sort of extraordinary case, the godly Magistrate may do more, then what ordinarily he can doe; and so may the Church, when the Magistrate oppresseth in judgement, as great Iunius saith.
9. We grant when any complaineth to the Magistrate, that they are oppressed in judgement by the Church, that the Church is obliged to give an account of their doings, but that from common charity to remove the scandal, and that they owe to all Christians, as may be evidently collected from 1 Pet. 4. 15. but this will not prove a subordination to common Christians as to Judges, nor yet to the Magistrate. 2. The Magistrate, when his judging is deemed scandalous, is to give an account to the preachers of the Gospel, who watch for his soul: as King Saul gave an account to Samuel, (with a false Apology, I grant) that he had obeyed the Commandment of the Lord; but if Saul had been faultless in sparing gag and the cattle, yet was he obliged to give an account to Samuel. ⟨p. 583⟩But that will not prove that King Saul was subordinate to Samuel to be judged of him, because Prophets are but servants and Ministers to declare Gods will, yet is it all the subordination that we require in this, according to that, And the people believed the Lord and Moses. Now all the Arguments before alleged to prove that Pastors as Pastors are not subordinate in their pastoral acts to the civill Magistrate, do also prove that there is no appeal from the Church in an Ecclesiastical business to the civill Magistrate: For 1. If two Painters contend touching any controversy in the mystery of their Art, they cannot appeal to the King as Judge; the King then should formally be a painter, and which is absurd, not by accident; but as a King and so here, if the King were the judge, to whose determination we might appeal from the Church in a Church controversy, sure the King as King should be a Church Officer: if the Priests in controversy touching burning incense, or offering strange fire to God, should appeal to the decision of the King as the King; sure the King in that as King should be an eminent High Priest, and right of burning incense to the Lord, should belong to him, in as far as the Kings lips in that controversy should preserve knowledge, and they should seek the Law from his mouth, which is proper to the Priests,