A92138:1933
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.
Ob. The people had the more opinion of Deity in the thing they adored the baser it was. None hath any such opinion of the cross. ⟨p. 89⟩Ergo, it is no scandalous object. Ans. All our Divines hold, that Heathens of old, and Papists of late, worship Images, as religious memorative signs of God, Hooker with one dash of his Pen, against the Prophets and Scriptures, acquiteth them of Idolatry, therefore the Cross may be adored, without any opinion of Deity in it.
Ob. The people had the more opinion of Dietie in the thing they adored the baser it was. None hath any such opinion of the crosse. ⟨p. 89⟩Ergo, it is no scandalous object. Ans. All our Divines hold, that Heathens of old, and Papists of late, worship Images, as religious memorative signes of God, Hooker with one dash of his Pen, against the Prophets and Scriptures, acquiteth them of Idolatrie, therefore the Crosse may be adored, without any opinion of Dietie in it.
Obj. Be it true, that crosses were purposely appointed to ••• adored, yet not so now. The Jews would not admit of the Image of Caesar in the Church, yet they abolished it not, but admitted it in their coin. The adored cross differeth as far from this, as the Brazen Serpent that Solomon made to bear up the Cistern of the Temple, and that which Israel adored in the wilderness, And the Altars that Josiah destroyed, as being mere Instruments1 of Idolatry, and that which the Tribe of Reuben erected beyond Jordan. Solomon destroyed not the Temple and Idols framed only of purpose for the worship of foreign Gods, because2 they stood now as forlorn, and did no harm. Josiah afterward razed them for some inconvenients, yet God saith both these Kings, in religion walked straightly.