A92138:521
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.
6. Conclus. All humane or Ecclesiastic laws binding the conscience, have necessary, and not probable deduction only, by the warrant of both the Major Proposition and Assumption from the ⟨p. 206⟩Word of God, and Law of Nature. This conclusion is against eSuarez, he seeketh only a probable connection betwixt obliging Laws and the Divine law. And fGregorius de valent. is in very deed against Gerson, who teacheth three things of all humane laws. 1. That they are in so far just. 2. That they in so far oblige the Conscience, as they have necessary dependence upon natures law, or Gods word, and therefore compareth them to these precepts that Physicians give to sick persons, they oblige the conscience of the sick, (as I think) from the sixth Commandment, (Thou shalt do no murder,) for if the patient sleep at such a time, or drink wine in such a case, he killeth himself, but they have not obliging power from the fifth Commandment, not as if the King being sick were obliged by the fifth Commandment to obey the Physician, as his superior. 3. He will have all humane laws that properly obligeth, to be only declaratory, and to manifest only the Divine law, and to apply it to such and such a matter. The Conclusion is clear from what is said before, because all civil laws as merely positive, in the case of non-contempt do not oblige, and in the case of non-scandall, as gMedin. hAlmain, iGerson teach. And it followeth from a sure ground, that kVasquez layeth down, and he hath it from lDriedo, to wit, that the efficacy of obligation in humane laws, cometh not from the will of Lawgivers, or their intention, but from the dignity or weightiness of the matter. If then the matter be not from Gods law, just, the obligation is none at all; for if the law from mans will, shall lay on an obligation of three degrees, whereas Gods law from Gods vvill, before men enacted this in a Law, laid on an obligation of two degrees only, tying the Conscience, then the will of man createth obligation, or the obligative power of conscience in the matter of the Law and by that same reason he createth goodness, which is absurd, for that is proper to God only.