A92138:1902
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.
Object. If we must abstain from the use of no creature granted to us, by the law of creation, except we have the warrant of a positive Ceremonial law for it, then the Romans were not to for, bear eating of such and such meats, before a weak Jew, for fear to scandalize him for whom Christ died, But this later is untrue: for by the law of nature, and a perpetual law, Paul would never, for meat, offend his brother: the law of natural Charity will dictate this to us, without any positive mandate, we are not for a m••thfull of meat▪ the loss whereof is so small, to put the soul of our brother to so incomparable a hazard, as to be loosed.
Object. If we must abstaine from the use of no creature granted to us, by the law of creation, except we have the warrant of a positive Ceremoniall law for it, then the Romans were not to for, beare eating of such and such meats, before a weake Iew, for feare to scandalize him for whom Christ died, But this later is untrue: for by the law of nature, and a perpetuall law, Paul would never, for meat, offend his brother: the law of naturall Charitie will dictate this to us, without any positive mandate, we are not for a m••thfull of meat▪ the losse whereof is so small, to put the soule of our brother to so incomparable a hazard, as to be losed.
Ans. These meats▪ Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 8. 10. were then indifferent, but they are not so now, when the Gospel is fully promulgate, for we may not now to abstain from Meats forbidden in the Ceremonial law, for fear to offend a weak Jew, for our abstinence should harden them in their ••beliefe, that Christ is not yet come in the flesh. To make Temples and houses dedicated to Saint•, as indifferent now as meats were then and the argument were concludent But to demolish Churches and remove their physical use now were as Judaical, as to forbear to eat Swines flesh. We are not to deprive our selves of the physical use of […] of this or this meat as thinking