A92138:518
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.
The Proposition is clear, because sin against God, essentially includeth a relative obligation to eternal punishment. 5. In matters of Gods worship this is clear. The School-men, as hAquinas, iSuarez, kFerrariensis, lConradus teach us, that there is a twofold good. The first is, an objective and primordial goodness, whereby things are agreeable to Gods Law, if rulers find not this in that good which they command, they are not just, and so not to be obeyed. There is another goodness that cometh from the will of authority, & so only divine authority must make things good; the will and authority of Rulers findeth objective goodness in them, and therefore enacteth Laws of things, but because they enact Laws of things, they do not therefore become good and Lawful, It is the will of the Creator of all beings which is the measure, rule, and cause of the goodness of things, as Adams not eating of the tree of knowledge is good and grateful obedience, from Gods forbidding will, and it should have been as grateful obedience to eat of that tree, if God had commanded so. Men cannot make worlds; nor can their will create goodness in acts indifferent, nor can their forbidding will illegitimate or make evil any actions indifferent, and therefore things must be morally good, and so intrinsically good without the creative influence of humane Authority, and from God only are they apt to edify, and to oblige the conscience in the terms of goodness moral.
The Proposition is clear, because sin against God, essentially includeth a relative obligation to eternall punishment. 5. In matters of Gods worship this is clear. The School-men, as hAquina•, iSuarez, kFerrariensis, l