A92138:296
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.
Answer, Supernatural Revelation was to these Fathers the rule of Gods worship, and all their actions supernatural, and of all their actions moral, in relation to the last end; but for eating and drinking, they being actions natural, they were to be regulated in these; by natural reason, and the Law of nature, which was apart then of the Divine Tradition that then ruled the Church, while as yet the word was not written. Hooker urgeth thus; It will follow that Moses,1 the Prophets and Apostles should not have used natural Arguments, to move people to do their duty; they should only have used this Argument (As it is written) else they taught them other grounds and warrants for their actions then Scripture. Ans. None can deny natural Arguments to be a part of the word of God, as is clear, Rom. 1. 19. 1 Cor. 15. 36, 37. 1 Cor. 11. 14. Yea, Christ, Mat. 7. 12. teacheth, that this principle of nature (whatsoever ye would men should do to you, do ye so to them) is the Law and the Prophets, because it is a great part of the Law and the Prophets, and therefore they say in effect (As it written in the Scripture) when they say (as it is written in mans heart by nature.) 2. Principles▪ of nature, are made scripture by the Pen-men of the holy Ghost, and do bind as the Scripture. 3. It will be long ere the Law of nature teach Crossing, and kneeling to bread, to be good Ceremony.
Answer, Supernaturall Revelation was to these Fathers the rule of Gods worship, and all their actions supernaturall, and of all their actions morall, in relation to the last end; but for eating and drinking, they being actions naturall, they were to be regulated in these; by naturall reason, and the Law of nature, which was apart then of the Divine Tradition that then ruled the Church, while as yet the word was not written. Hooker urgeth thus; It will follow that Moses,1 the Prophets and Apostles should not have used naturall Arguments, to move people to do their dutie; they should only have used this Argument (As it is written) else they taught them other grounds and warrants for their actions then Scripture. Ans. None can deny naturall Arguments to be a part of the word of God, as is clear,