A92138:1840
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.
Duplyers, pag. 69.
Ye will say this argument is Popish, and leadeth men to acquiesce. without trial, upon the determination of the Church. But we answer in matters of faith the truth, whereof may be infallibly concluded out of the word of God▪ we ought not, without trial to acquiesce unto the Doctors of the Church, and in this respect we dissent from Papists, who ascribe too much to the authority of Councils, as if their decrees were infallible. But in matters of Policy, if we be certain, that in their own nature, they are indifferent, and if the expediency of them only be called in question, seeing no certain conclusion, concerning their expediency, can be infallibly drawn out of Gods word—we are to acquiesce to the decrees of the Church. 1. Because otherwise it is impossible to agree ⟨p. 44⟩in one conclusion, in matters of this kind. 2. Disobedience shall prove more hurtful then obedience.
Yee will say this argument is Popish, and leadeth men to acquiesce. without tryall, upon the determination of the Church. But we answer in matters of faith the truth, whereof may be infallibly concluded out of the word of God▪ we ought not, without tryall to acquiesce unto the Doctors of the Church, and in this respect we dissent from Papists, who ascribe too much to the authoritie of Councells, as if their decrees were infallible. But in matters of Policie, if we be certaine, that in their owne nature, they are indifferent, and if the expediencie of them onely be called in question, seeing no certaine conclusion, concerning their expediencie, can be infallibly drawn out of Gods word—we are to acquiesce to the decrees of the Church. 1. Because otherwise it is impossible to agree ⟨p. 44⟩in one conclusion, in matters of this kind. 2. Disobedience shall prove more hurtfull then obedience.