A92138:460
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.
We forbid the Church (saith the civill Law) to be obscured with Images. Have the Image of God, (saith xEphrem) in thy heart, non colorum varietate in ligno, not in Images and colours. Who can make (saith yDamascene) a representation of the invisible God. zGretserus saith, the Jews would not admit of Ensigns and Trophies of the Romans for fear Images should be hidden under them. So said Josephus abefore him. Their own men say with us, bHulcot who lived an. 1346. saith Latreia, divine worship belongeth to God only, the Image is not God, neither the Cross; (saith Joan. Pic. Mirandula, Concl. 3.) nor the Image of Christ is to be adored (adoration Latreia eo modo quo ponit Thomas) with divine worship, the guise of Thomas Aquinas cPeresius Ajala a Popish Bishop, for adoration of Images, saith he, there is neither Scripture, nor Church tradition, nor consent of Fathers, nor good reason to make it good. For saith dGabriel ⟨p. 187⟩Biel, The image either considered in it self as it is metal or stone, or as it is a holy sign, is a sensible Creature, to which Latreia, Divine honour should not be given: and the Romish cDecrees saith, We commend you that you forbid images of Saints to be Worshipped: The dDouai Doctors say, Idols have eyes and cannot see, &c. Now if they have Images of God and Christ which can see, and hear, and speak, we exceedingly desire to know: e