A92138:1701
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. Necessity of obeying the Church can make nothing necessary1 and good, for the Church commandeth it, because it is necessary and good, and it hath not goodness, necessity and aptness to edify from mens will, and the Churches commandment. 2. I ask if no kneeling, now in Scotland laying aside the respect of Authority and Law, be in it self undecent, and unapt to edify; if not, then the Church hath no more ground and reason for order and decency in our Ceremonies (for what I say of one, holdeth true in all) then there is for the want of Ceremonies; and if that be true, the sole will and lust of Authority maketh our Ceremonies lawful: What can Romish impudence give more to the Man of sin? But if there be unorderlinesse and indecency in our Ceremonies, then kneeling now must be sin, even laying aside the respect of Humane Laws. 3. It is strange Divinity, That that which is no sin, of it self, cannot be omitted without sin, for the sole will and pleasure of men. Humane Authority then may make it sin, not to rub our Beards, not to claw our Heads, when we come to the Church to hear Gods Word. If Humane Authority can make an indifferent Act lawful, and the omission of it, sinful; they may make all the indifferent Acts in the World lawful Acts, they might then make piping, leaping, laughing Acts o• Divine Worship, and might make a Decalogue of their own: And if they may make an indifferent Act to be sin, if it be omitted, they may by as good reason, make sinful Acts, as Adultery, Incest, Murder, Robbery, to be lawful Acts; For if mans inhibiting will be the formal reason of sin, then his commanding will must be the formal reason of obedience: And so Rulers might command Murder, Robbery, Incest, Blasphemy.
Answ. Necessitie of obeying the Church can make nothing necessary1 and good, for the Church commandeth it, because it is necessary and good, and it hath not goodnesse, necessitie and aptnesse to edifie from mens will, and the Churches commandment. 2. I ask if no kneeling, now in Scotland laying aside the respect of Authority and Law, be in it self undecent, and unapt to edifie; if not, then the Church hath no more ground and reason for order and decency in our Ceremonies (for what I say of one, holdeth true in all) then there is for the want of Ceremonies; and if that be true, the sole will and lust of Authority maketh our Ceremonies lawful: What can Romish impudence give more to the Man of sin? But if there be unorderlinesse and indecency in our Ceremonies, then kneeling now must be sin, even laying aside the respect of Humane Laws. 3. It is strange Divinity, That that which is no sin, of it self, cannot be omitted without sin, for the sole will and pleasure of men. Humane Authority then may make it sin, not to rub our Beards, not to claw our Heads, when we come to the Church to hear Gods Word. If Humane Authority can make an indifferent Act lawful, and the omission of it, sinful; they may make all the indifferent Acts in the World lawful Acts, they might then make piping, leaping, laughing Acts o Divine Worship, and might make a Decalogue of their own: And if they may make an indifferent Act to be sin, if it be omitted, they may by as good reason, make sinful Acts, as Adulterie, Incest, Murther, Robbery, to be lawful Acts; For if mans inhibiting will be the formal reason of sin, then his commanding will must be the formal reason of obedience: And so Rulers might command Murther, Robbery, Incest, Blasphemy.