A92138:420
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.
But if the image be God only representatively, and by way of signification, then is it not God of it self and really, Quod est tale tantum significativé, non est tale per se, & realiter, as a painted man is not of it self, and really a man; the word (Jesus) as written with base ink, is not infinite Jesus, the mighty God, the Prince of Peace, really, but only in mere signification: therefore to give Gods honour and external Religious bowing (which essentially doth note the highest excellency of God) to them, is Idolatry: It is a vain thing to say, The Ambassador is not really the King; yet the real honour due to the King, is done to him. I Answer, where the King declareth that it is his will, that his Ambassador be really honoured as himself; this is not the giving of the Kings glory to another against his will: But here expressly contrary to that (Thou shalt not bow down to them) expounded especially of similitudes, Deut. 4. 15. Ye saw no manner of similitude. The glory of Religious bowing contrary to Gods will, (Who will not give his glory to another) is given to images, and to Bread. 2. It redoundeth kindly to the King, who is absent, and to be obeyed in his absence, that His Vicegerent and Deputy be honoured as himself, and presupposeth an infirmity in the King that he cannot be in many places to receive immediately the honour due to him, and therefore will have that due paid to himself, mediately, by the honoured person of a Deputy. God infinite is in all places, to receive immediately the pay of Religious knee-honour, and it dishonoureth God to have his glory laid down in the hand of any creature; as it dishonoureth the Husband that his wife give her body to another, representing his person: For this cause lBernardus Puiol faith, Images are properly to be Adored, contrary to that which Durandus saith: And mAzorius saith, It is the common opinion that Images are to be worshipped with (Latreia) the highest honour due to God: So (saith he) Thomas, Alexander, Bonaventura, Richardus, Albertus, Paludanus, Alman, Marsilius, Capreolus, Cajetanus, & caeteri juniors sic sentiunt.
But if the image be God only representatively, and by way of signification, then is it not God of it self and really, Quod est tale tantum significativé, non est tale per se, & realiter, as a painted man is not of it self, and really a man; the word (Iesus) as written with base ink, is not infinite Iesus, the mighty God, the Prince of Peace, really, but only in meer signification: therefore to give Gods honour and externall Religious bowing (which essentially doth note the highest excellency of God) to them, is Idolatry: It is a vain thing to say, The Ambassadour is not really the King; yet the reall honour due to the King, is done to him. I Answer, where the King declareth that it is his will, that his Ambassadour be really honoured as himself; this is not the giving of the Kings glory to another against his will: But here expresly contrary to that (Thou shalt not bow down to them) expounded especially of similitudes,