A92138:195
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.
be not restricted to the written Word, but applied to the Word of God in its Latitude, as it comprehendeth both the written word or Scripture, and the unwritten word or Traditions; then beside the word is all one with this, contrary to the word, which Formalists constantly deny. For Lorinus the Jesuit saith, Comment. In Deut. 4. 2. Quo pacto Paulus Anathèma dicit, Gal. 1. 8. Iis, qui aliud Evangelizant preter id quod ipsi Evangelizaverit, id est, adversum et contrarium. So doth Cornelius a Lapide, ⟨p. 58⟩and Estius expound the place, Gal. 1. 8. And they say, that Paul doth denounce a Curse against those that would bring in a new Religion and Judaism beside the Gospel: But withal, they teach, that the Traditions of the Church are not contrary to Scripture, but beside Scripture; and that the Church which cannot e•re, and is led in all truth, can no more be accused of adding to the Scripture, then the Prophets, Apostles and Evangelists who wrote after Moses, can be accused of adding to Moses his writings; because the Prophets, Apostles and Evangelists, had the same very warrant to write Canonic Scripture, that Moses had; and so the Church hath the same warrant to add Traditions to that which the Prophets, Evangelists and Apostles did write; which they had to add to Moses; And therefore the Council of Trent saith, S. 4. c. 1. That, unwritten traditions coming either from the mouth of Christ, or the ditement of the holy spirit, are to be received and Religiously Reverenced with the like pious affection and Reverence that the holy Scriptures are received, Pari pietatis affectu ac Reverentiâ; And the truth is, laying down this ground, that the Scripture is unperfect, and not an adequate rule of Faith and manners, as Papists do; then it must be inconsequent, that because Traditions are beside the Scripture, which is to to them but the half of the Word of God; Yea, it followeth not, this Popish ground supposed, that Traditions are therefore contrary to the Scripture, because beside the Scripture, no more then it followeth that the Sacraments of the New Testament, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord, in all their positive Rites and Elements are not ordained and instituted in the Old Testament; and in that sense [Greek or Hebrew], beside the Old Testament; that therefore they are against the Old Testament;