A92138:161
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.
Hooker, That Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive 1Laws for all things, in such sort as Moses did; the very different manner of delivering the Laws of Moses and the Laws of Christ, doth plainly show, Moses had Commandment to gather the Ordinances of God together distinctly, and orderly to set them down according to their kinds, for each Public duty and Law: But the Laws of Christ we rather find mentioned by occasion in the writings of the Apostles, then any solemn thing directly written to comprehend them in a Legal sort. 1. The Law Moral and Ceremonial were not delivered one & the same way; the former was uttered by the Voice of God, in the hearing of six hundred thousand. 2. Written with Gods finger. 3. Termed•a Covenant. ⟨p. 35⟩4. Given to be kept without time, how long, or place where. The latter not so, and restricted to the Land of Jury, Deut. 4. 5. 12. Deut. 5. 22. And if God had respect in Positive Laws, to time and place, and the Manners of that Nation, seeing Nations are not all alike, then the giving of one kind of Positive Laws unto one only people, without any Liberty to alter them, is but a slender proof, that therefore one kind should be given to serve everlastingly for all. Ans. This Argument reduced to form, shall want both matter, and form, and reason. If the Laws of Moses be distinctly and orderly set down, and gathered together according to their several kinds for each Duty; and 2the Laws of Christ be occasionally only written; then Christ did not mean to set down particular Positive Laws, for all things in such sort as Moses did. But this difference is true, Ergo, &c. Both the Major Proposition and the Assumption are false, and neither of them can be proved: For the occasional writing of some Articles of Faith, and of Dogmatical points, should then prove that Christ meant not to set down all Articles of Faith particularly; for Christ, Matth. 22. upon occasion of the Sadducees tempting; Paul, upon occasion of some at Corinth who denied the Resurrection,