A92138:620
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 cannot say as some do, that persons were deprived amongst 1the Jews, of Church communion in the holy things of God, because of Ceremonial, not of Moral uncleanness, but now under the new Testament only Moral uncleanness can exclude persons from the holy things of God; and therefore to argue from ceremonial uncleanness in the old, to moral uncleanness in the new, is no good consequence. I2 answer, the Ceremonial uncleanness in the Old, which did exclude from the holy things of God, doth strongly conclude that moral uncleanness under the New Testament doth exclude from the holy things of God, if that exclusion of the Leper out of the camp seven days, and the touching of the dead, though imprudently, did typify some other exclusion from the holy things of God, as no question it did, then the consequence must be strong. 2. It is also false that moral uncleanness did not exclude from the holy things of God under the Old Testament, For 1. what was more ordinary, then that sacrifices should be offered for sins of ⟨p. 246⟩ignorance, for trespasses, and while this was done, the person was not admitted to partake of the holy things of God. 2. Whence was the Lords frequent complaints of wearying his soul with sacrifices, solemn assemblies, feast days, and new Moons, when they were morally unclean, and their hands were full of blood, and they had not put away the evil of their doings, did not love judgement and justice, Isaiah 10. 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19. And when God complaineth so of them, Jer. 7. 8. Will ye steal, murder and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other Gods whom ye know not? 10. And come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my Name? Ergo, Murderers and adulterers were debarred from entering into the Congregation of the Lord, and partaking of the holy things of God, while they repented. Let none say by prophesying, or the keys of knowledge in preaching the Word, they were declared unworthy to enter into the Temple; but that will not conclude that it was the Priests office by power of discipline to exclude them from coming unto the Sanctuary of God. Ans. But if the Porters were set at doors of the Lords house, to hold out the unclean, and if the Lord charge the Priests with this crime, that they