A92138:180
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.
Mr. Prynne: To the Argument of Moses his doing all according to the pattern shown in the Mount, It is Answered: 1. The Tabernacle wa• no part of the Church of the Israelites; but only the place of meeting for Worship, answerable to our Churches and Chapels, and so was the Temple; But I pray you, God prescribed the height, length, breadth, form of Tabernacles, Ark, Altar, of every Pin, Ergo, Hath Christ as punctually prescribed to all Christians, and Nations, in express words, the form, matter, dimensions of all Christian Churches, Temples, Chapels, Tables, Chalices, Pulpits, Pews, not varying in one ⟨p. 48⟩pin. 2. God named the men, Bezaliel, and Aholiah, who should make the Tabernacle and all the implements thereof. 3. God expressed the frame, fashion, colours, of the holy Garments of Aaron and his sons: shall it follow, Ergo, only the Artificers whom God nameth, immediately, and none but Embroiderers, Goldsmiths, Carpenters, &c. Not Pastors and Elders are to build up the spiritual Churches of Christ, Ergo, The form, matter and colour of Ministers, and Elders garments are particularly set down in the New Testament. 4. The Tabernacle and Temple were corporal things made by mens hands, not spiritual buildings of mens spirits. 5. All these of the pattern were delivered to Moses the Temporal Magistrate, not to Aaron the Priest; Ergo, the Church under the Gospel is not a spiritual building, whose maker and builder is God; and all is to be ordered by the Civill Magistrate, and Lay-Artificers, not by Pastors: I wonder also you allege not Noah's Ark: And all in the New Testament, are not so particularly set down, as in the Old. Ans. The Tabernacle was no part of the Church; but being a Type and the implements of it, to the least pin, particularly expressed by God to Moses; far more must we have from God an express for every Ceremony, not to retort this also, that a Corner-Cap, or a Surplice, is no part of the Church, and is indeed a teaching sign, and so should not be counted a Positive of Church-Policy. 2. Most false it is that the Tabernacle and Temple were nothing but a meeting place of the people for Worship, as our Churches or Chapels, are, 1.
Mr. Prynne: To the Argument of Moses his doing all according to the patern shown in the Mount, It is Answered: 1. The Tabernacle wa• no part of the Church of the Israelites; but only the place of meeting for Worship, answerable to our Churches and Chappels, and so was the Temple; But I pray you, God prescribed the height, length, bredth, form of Tabernacles, Ark, Altar, of every Pin, Ergo, Hath Christ as punctually prescribed to all Christians, and Nations, in expresse words, the form, matter, dimensions of all Christian Churches, Temples, Chappels, Tables, Challices, Pulpits, Pews, not varying in one