A92138:329
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.
If they come from the Spirit, inspiring the Apostles, they cannot err in such Traditions; If from the spirit guided by the holy Ghost, they come from Scripture. 3. If these traditions come from no spirit led by light of Scripture, we shall not know, whether they be Lawful, or not, for the Scripture is a Canonic rule of lawful and unlawful. 4. If any Apostolic spirit be given to Authors of Ceremonies, why not also ⟨p. 126⟩in preaching and praying? How then do many of them turn Arminians, Papists, Socinians? 5. The Apostolic spirit leading institutors of Ceremonies, doth either infuse light natural, supernatural, or Scriptural in devising Ceremonies, and so Eatenus, in so far they were essential worship▪ or the Apostolic spirit doth lead them, with no light at all, which is brutish Enthusiasm: or 3. Gods Apostolic spirit infuseth the general equity, and negative Lawfulness of these truths (Surplice is an Apostolical sign of Pastoral holiness) and (Crossing a sign of Dedication of a child to Christs service) Now light, for this we would exceedingly have. If this light be immediately infused, then Surplice, Crossing are as Divine, as if God spake them; for truths immediately inspired lost no divinity, because they come through sinful men; for Balaam his Prophecy of the star of Jacob, was as Divine, in regard of Authority, as if God had spoken it, but if these trash come from an inferior spirit, we desire to know what spirit speaketh without the word. But some may object; The preaching of the word is somewhat humane, because its not from the infallible spirit that dited the word; Ergo, Ceremonies may come from the holy Spirit, though they be not as lawful as Scripture. Ans. Let them be proved to be from the warrant, that the word is preached, and we yield to all▪ 5. Apostolic Ceremonies, but not Divine have Gods general allowing will for the accepting of them. Now Samsons mother, Judg. 13. 23. proveth well, The Lord hath accepted our offering; Ergo, it is Lawful, and he will not kill us. So God accepted Abel, and Noah their Sacrifices; Ergo, they were Lawful, and Divine worship. So Hosea 8. 8. They sacrifice flesh for the sacrifices of my offerings, and they eat it, but the Lord accepteth them not. Ergo, offerings of flesh without offering of themselves as living sacrifices to God are now unlawful: