A92138:1762
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.
Quest. III.
Whether or no we may deny obedience to the laws of our Superiors, for fear of Scandal causelessly taken.
Whether or no we may deny obedience to the lawes of our Superiours, for feare of Scandall causleslie taken.
This is not my question, but a question of the Doctors of Aberdeen, yet it conduceth for the times, and because one of the learnedest of these Doctors did agitate the question of scandal with me in private, before the writing of that book, I desire liberty to vindicate my self, by discussing two chapters of this purpose.
THis is not my question, but a question of the Doctors of Aberdeen, yet it conduceth for the times, and because one of the learnedest of these Doctors did agitate the question of scandall with me in private, before the writing of that book, I desire libertie to vindicate my selfe, by discussing two chapters of this purpose.
And first the question seemeth to me many ways vain. 1. They ask about denial of obedience, which is not proved, but presumed to be obedience. 2. They presume that the Masters, the Lord Prelates of Perth faction are our Superiors, by no law of God, or our Church was ever any superiority conferred upon them. 3. They say for scandal causelessly taken: if they mean that there be no just reason indeed why any should take scandal, they say nothing against us, for we think to take scandal, is to sin, if they know any just reason or cause of sin, except Satan and mens free-will, we shall be taught of them. If they mean scandalously taken, that is, not culpably given by the practisers of Ceremonies, this is a Chimera, and to us no question, for we are not to deny obedience to lawful laws, for eschewing Scandal, when obeyers do give no cause culpably of Scandal, they would have formed the question to our reverend and learned Brethren if they had dealt plainly. Whether or no, we may desist from practising Ceremonies, which, setting aside the law of Superiors, are indifferent, when from the practising of them ariseth the ruin of many souls, for whom Christ died. In things necessary commanded and forbidden of God, we cannot deny obedience, but the matter of the laws is silenced in the question to deceive the reader.