A92138:1888
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.
1. Concl. Monuments, or instruments of idolatry, are of two sorts, either such things as have no other use at all, but to contribute1 sorne subservient influence in, or unto idolatrous worship, and because these have all their warrant from a mere commandment of man, they are simply not necessary, as the graven image, the idols themselves, all positive observances in Gods worship destitute of any command of God, and the use of these in any case must be scandalous, and so unlawful, because, if the Brazen Serpent now losing its primitive divine effect, which was to cure the stung people, if it be but the passive object of robbing God of his glory, in that Incense is burnt to it, have no use at all▪ but to be, as it were, a robbers Den to receive the stolen-away glory of God, it must be abolished. It is true things necessary abused in regard of our corruption, are to be purged, and restored to their own use, but if ⟨p. 63⟩they be useless, and of themselves have no fruit, but only, that they are fit to be abused, as useless pits by the way side, and the Brazen Serpent, and a Razor put in the hand of a child, and images, they are to be removed, both subject and accident, for that they be uncapable of purgation, therefore they are capable only of abolition. It is not enough to say that we may 2devise a good use for them, as we may use Images to put us in remembrance of God, for we may never devise the use of a thing not necessary in Religion, when as we cannot devise the thing it self. But here we cannot devise the thing it self. Yea, if the thing it self be good, and lawfully useful. As the eating of flesh, yet if it be less necessary, for the life, then the edification of my brother. The Apostles excellent rule, Rom. 14. v. 15. must stand as a law discharging my eating▪ No man for this or this m•at, which is less necessary, ought to hinder the salvation of his brother, which is more necessary, by destroying his brother for meat. For clear it is, this or that meat, without which I may live, is of fa•re less necessity comparatively, then the salvation of one for whom Christ died.