A92138:545
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. To resist the Laws positive and particular in connection with the moral reason of the Law, is to resist the Ruler, true. But so the question is not concluded against us: for by accident in that sense, humane Laws bind the conscience; but to resist the particular Laws, as particular Laws, as particular positive Laws, is not to resist the Ruler: A Ruler as a Ruler, doth never command a thing merely indifferent as such, but as good, edificative, profitable, and except you resist the morality of the positive humane Law, you resist not the Ruler; yea, nor yet is the Law resisted.
Ans. To resist the Laws positive and particular in connexion with the morall reason of the Law, is to resist the Ruler, true. But so the question is not concluded against us: for by accident in that sense, humane Laws binde the conscience; but to resist the particular Laws, as particular Laws, as particular positive Laws, is not to resist the Ruler: A Ruler as a Ruler, doth never command a thing meerly indifferent as such, but as good, edificative, profitable, and except you resist the morality of the positive humane Law, you resist not the Ruler; yea, nor yet is the Law resisted.
3. The Jesuit Lod. Meratius hobjecteth: Every true Law obligeth, either to guiltiness, or to punishment, but the civill and Canonic Laws are Laws properly so called. But they do not ever oblige to punishment only. Ergo, They oblige to sin.
3. The Iesuit Lod. Meratius hobjecteth: Every true Law obligeth, either to guiltinesse, or to punishment, but the civill and Canonick Laws are Laws properly so called. But they do not ever oblige to punishment only. Ergo, They oblige to sin.
- hLodovi Merat. par. 1. tract. de leg disp. 1. Sect. 13.