A92138:1698
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.
Answ. 1. Marriage hath something in it natural, even before the Fall. It was naturally good, that man should not be alone, and this way,1 before, and after the Fall, Marriage in the ground that maketh it necessary, which is an aptitude and inclination to procreation, is most necessary; and so now, after the Fall of man, all that burneth and marr•e•h not, despiseth Gods remedy of lust, and sinneth; and so by necessity of Gods command in the Law of nature, and repeated by the Apostle, 1 Cor. 7. 2, 9. it is necessary in individuo: And although, that which is merely natural in marriage, as the Act of marriage according to the substance, be not formally laudable, and rewarded, because of the naturality thereof; yet ⟨p. 651⟩it is not for that free or indifferent. 2. And when the Doctor saith, That marriage is indifferent in its nature▪ and free; so that there is no necessity of the action, but only of the goodness of the action, he speaketh wonders: For howbeit, marriage be indifferent by a Metaphysical2 indifferency of contrahibility to such and such persons, because marriage may be in some, without sin, and no marriage may also be in other some, without sin; and so praying is indifferent; it is in some without sin, and not praying is in some also without sin, when the man is necessitated to some other action, either Civil, Natural or Supernatural; yet marriage is not Morally or Theologically indifferent: So as to marry, or not marry, is a matter of a mans free choice, and of his own free▪ will not obnoxious to any binding Law, as is kneeling, not-kneeling, crossing, not-crossing, in the mind of our Adversaries. 1. If it were morally indifferent to marry, or not to marry, Rulers might make Laws either commanding all to marry, or none to marry, or some to marry; some not to marry, which were no small tyranny, and the very doctrine of Devils. 2. The gift of Continency, is to some a commandment of God, that they marry not, and burning is to some a commandment, obliging them in conscience to marry, else they sin; therefore to marry, or not to marry, is necessary to all men, or then unlawful, and so not indifferent, as our Divines teach against Papists, their Supererogatory Works. The Lords calling of any to suffer for his Truth is instead of a command of God; though the man might be saved, though he suffer not for the Truth. 3.