A92138:399
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.
Hear what aSuarez bBellarmine and Papists say, It is not Lawful to represent God by a proper and formal similitude, which representeth his essence; but it is Lawful to represent him by Images Analogically, signifying such a form or shape in the which he appeared in Scripture, according to these metaphors, and mystical significations, that are given to him in Gods word.
Hear what aSuarez bBellarmine and Papists say, It is not Lawfull to represent God by a proper and formall similitude, which representeth his essence; but it is Lawfull to represent him by Images Analogically, signifying such a forme or shape in the which he appeared in Scripture, according to these metaphors, and mysticall significations, that are given to him in Gods word.
- aSuarez tom. 3. q. 25. dis. 1. in 54. art. 3 Sect. 2.
- bBellar. to. 2. de relig. sanct. lib. 2. c. 8. The evasions of Bellarmine and Suarez answered.
Ans. 1. Why should not unwritten Traditions (which to Papists are Gods word) express to us Gods nature in Images, no less then the written word? 2. The Heathen did represent God by the Image of a man, with eyes, nose, tongue, ears, head, hands, feet, heart, understanding, all which are given to God in Scripture, yet were they Idolaters in so doing, because God saith, Isa. 46. 9. I am God, and there is none like to me. 3. If we may portrait▪ God according to all metaphors given unto him in Scripture, then ye may Portrait him, in the shape of a Lyon, a Leopard, a Bear, a Man full of wine, a Thief stealing in the night, an unjust Judge, a Giant, a man of War on horse-back, &c. All which were folly; and we might worship a Lyon, a Bear, an unjust Judge, a thief stealing in the night, a man mad with the spirit of jealousy. 4. The Essence and specific nature of nothing in Heaven and earth, can be portraicted or painted, no more then Gods essence; all painted things are but such and such things by external proportion and shape; and it is unreasonable to say that Portraits and Pictures of God, Physically impossible to the Art of Craftsmen, are forbidden only (whereas the Lords word setteth down to us no precepts for Art, as for painting, Music, speaking right Latin) whereas the Lord forbiddeth universally Gods pictures in any thing in heaven, on earth, or under the earth,