A92138:1727
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.
4. Proposit. Observers of days, or non-observers of days should have certainty of Faith in these indifferent things; Ergo, the light of the Word should lead Rulers, and People here, v. 5. in things indifferent.
4. Proposit. Observers of dayes, or non-observers of dayes should have certaintie of Faith in these indifferent things; Ergo, the light of the Word should lead Rulers, and People here, v. 5. in things indifferent.
5. Proposit. The observer of indifferent things, as days in that case at Rome, and the non-observers of days should not trouble one another▪ because both are to observe, and not observe indifferent things, for Gods glory. 1. Both gives thanks. 2. Both liveth and dieth as Christs, for Gods glory. 6. 7. 8. 9. Therefore Gods glory is the end that ruleth the use of Ceremonies, as they are indifferent.
5. Proposit. The observer of indifferent things, as dayes in that case at Rome, and the non-observers of dayes should not trouble one another▪ because both are to observe, and not observe indifferent things, for Gods glory. 1. Both gives thankes. 2. Both liveth and dieth as Christs, for Gods glorie. 6. 7. 8. 9. Therefore Gods glorie is the end that ruleth the use of Ceremonies, as they are indifferent.
Proposit. 6. v. 10. 11. 12. a Christian should not condemn a Jew▪ no• one brother another, in things indifferent. 1. Because we are brethren. 2. Because it is Christs place to judge; and condemn. 3. Because every man must give an account for himself. Ergo. Laws of Rulers to condemn or punish, are not to be made in such cases.