A92138:395
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.
do thereby acknowledge, that the Image it self had not the honour of giving Responses, as God hath, but that the enclosed Godhead gave these Responses, and therefore the enclosed Godhead was that which they worshipped. So cAquinas, and dVasquez saith, The Heathen acknowledged a Godhead to dwell in the Images: And eBellarmine saith, It is not improbable that the Jews believed that they worshipped the true God in an Idol: Papists then may take to them Heathens Idolatry, for Heathens worshipped God in Images, and not Images as they are such: and fAbulensis, and gCajetan ⟨p. 153⟩in the Commentaries of the first Edition, on Exodus, said this same. 3. Though the Jews believed the Calf to be essentially God, yet it was God as God▪ that they intended to worship, not the work of mens hands as such: Papists believe that the Image is not God, and yet give the highest worship that is to them. 4. Bellarmine saith with us, when he saith, They saw a Calf in Egypt and Adored it, they believed Jehovah himself to be a Calf, therefore they made the image of a Calf, and Dedicated it to Jehovah. But (I Answer) That Image so Dedicated, they worshipped as Jehovah, and called the very material Calf Jehovah, and Dedicated it to the Honour of Jehovah; therefore they believed the Lord Jehovah, and the Calf Dedicated to his Honour, (which Calf also they worshipped) to be two divers things, as the Image and the thing signified are Relata and opposite: Ergo, they believed not that that Image which Aaron had made, was Jehovah essentially; therefore in setting up that Image, they worshipped it not as a creature. All the Prophets (saith he) proveth that the Idols are not gods, because they speak not, they neither see, nor hear, Isa. 46.