A92138:1567
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.
Propos. 1. The Magistrate as a Magistrate is not the Vicar nor Deputy of Jesus Christ as Mediator; 1. Because this is the heart and soul of Popery, that the Papists teach that Christ as Mediator hath left a temporal, an earthly and visible Monarch as his Vicar on earth. Now that learned and singular ornament of the Protestant Churches, Andreas Rivetus hath well said, Christ hath instituted neither Kings nor Princes in the Church as his successors, nor any Vicars with a domination, but only Ministers and Servants, who are to discharge their Embassage, in the Name of the only Prince Christ; for an Embassage cannot institute other Ambassadors, either Kings or Princes, but only Ministers, who do serve, not reign in the Kingdom of Christ, he himself only reigns; the Servants of this great King promote the Kingdom of their Prince, ⟨p. 602⟩nor do they ever usurp the royal power. Yea, all the arguments of Protestants that are brought to prove that the Pope, a Bishop, and a Church man▪ because he is a Bishop and a Steward in the Church, and in Christs spiritual Kingdom that is not of this world, cannot be an earthly Prince and Monarch having power either directly or indirectly in ordine ad spiritualia, to dispose of Kingdoms and crowns, and enthrone and dethrone Kings, do also prove that the King cannot be head of the Church, nor the Magistrate1 an Officer of the Church. Do not Protestant Divines condemn that blasphemous speech of Cardinal Bertrandus, that Christ who was a temporal Lord on earth, should not seem a discreet and wise Prince, if he had not left a Temporal Vicar behind him in the Church, and that of Armacanus to be false; that Christ by birth was the true King of Judea, and so a Temporary Prince, hence (say they) there should be a temporary Prince, and an earthly Monarch, the successor of Christ as King and Mediator. This Becanus the Jesuit maketh a special ground of the Popes Headship of the Church, and for this Suarez disputeth; yea, the Jesuit Aegid. Conninck saith, It is the common and received opi•••n of all the (Romish) Doctors, that Christ as man hath a true Kingly power, and a direct dominion over all the Kingdoms of the world, to give them laws, and to exercise all Kingly power over them, though de facto he abstained from it; and is not upon this pillar builded the Popes Supremacy?