A92138:539
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.
Ans. He beggeth the question: The goodness of sincere obedience to authority (saith he) may countervail the evil, that we in our private choice fear to be in the action. But first, obedience to authority in things wanting Gods word (whereof he speaketh now) is not obedience, but sinning, because doing without faith. 2. I take the Doctor at his word, refusing obedience to mens willworship, or to practise even to the ruin of the weak, things indifferent, for fear of the greatest evil, the offending of God, by adding to his worship, Rev. 22. 18, 19. is obedience to God, and not a privation; the purpose (I say) of this obedience to God, may countervail all evil that can be imagined in non-obedience to men, and sure obedience to God, though probably obedience is as good and better, then obedience to men, though probably obedience.
Ans. He beggeth the question: The goodnesse of sincere obedience to authority (saith he) may countervail the evil, that we in our private choice fear to be in the action. But first, obedience to authority in things wanting Gods word (whereof he speaketh now) is not obedience, but sinning, because doing without faith. 2. I take the Doctor at his word, refusing obedience to mens willworship, or to practise even to the ruin of the weak, things indifferent, for fear of the greatest evil, the offending of God, by adding to his worship, Rev. 22. 18, 19. is obedience to God, and not a privation; the purpose (I say) of this obedience to God, may countervail all evil that can be imagined in non-obedience to men, and sure obedience to God, though probably obedience is as good and better, then obedience to men, though probably obedience.
Jesuits and Formalists say, Rulers are in possession to command; Ergo, We cannot thrust them out of possession, where we are not persuaded that they command against reason, saith Sanches: So I say, God is in just possession commanding us to venture upon no indifferent action, where the conscience doubteth, and shall we not no less contend for Gods just possession, as time-servers do for mortal Rulers unjust possession in this? 2. I prove that it were Lawful then to sin against God: A Jew is alike persuaded, that Mary's Son i the true Messiah, and that he is a deceiver: Opinions