A92138:424
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.
For I Worship Judas and Peter in that act with Civill homage Commanded in the fifth Commandment, as they be Christs Apostles, and represent him; but in that same I Worship Christ with the highest honour, called Latreia: Vasquez and Burges make them one external Worship. The three Children might have kneeled to the Image of Nebuchadnezzar, for their mind and will (as Formalists say) might have put another signification of honouring the Lord Jehovah, upon their knee-worship; and external kneeling could not have been denied to the Lord Jehovah; and so the three Children should not have given Divine honour and knee glory to the Image, and they were fools who did hazard their bodies to the fire: But wise men think, if they had given knee-worship (what ever their heart thought) they should have obeyed the King, yet they profess disobedience, Dan. 3. 18. We will not worship thy graven image. 2. Neither think we the Athenians gave that same honour to the similitude Act. 17. 29. of God, that they gave to the God that Paul Preached, who made Heaven and earth, v. 23, 24. Yet in giving Worship external to both, they were Idolaters, ver. 29. Nor did the men of Lystra give the same heart-honour to the Deities of Jupiter and Mercury, which they gave to the shapes of men; yet are they Idolaters in that. 3. Mr. Burges saith, Israel 1 Chron. 29. 20. in one and the same act (external) Worshipped God and the King, because one and the same word expresseth honour both to God and the King. But how shall we call that act? Civill, or Religious, or mixed? and did they transmit Latreia, divine honour through the King to God? he hath a Metaphysical faith who believeth such dreams, because one word is used to express both the worshipping of God and the King, therefore it was one external act of worshipping, and differenced in the mind and intention of the worshippers; the consequence is most weak, 1 Sam. 12. 18. All the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel, Prov. 24. 21. My son, fear the Lord and the King, is it one manner of fear really, that is both religious to God, and to Samuel, and to the Lord, and the ⟨p. 171⟩