A92138:692
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. Belike it was a crime then to bring the Greeks into the Temple: 2. It is a begging of the question to say, all were admitted to the Passover: See how this is before answered. 3. Christ admitted Judas into the Passover; What then? may Timothy lay hands suddenly on all he knows to be Judases, that they come in and lap the blood of souls? contrary to 1 Tim. 3. Christ is above the Law, and if his practise in this were the rule, because Christ admitted Judas whom he knew to be a Traitor, and did eat ordinarily at Table with him, and committed the flock to such a known wolf. We are also to eat with covetous extortioners, which Paul forbiddeth, 1 Cor. 5. 11. And we are to commit the flock of God to known Wolves, where we have a precept on the contrary, 2 Tim. 2. 2. Christ would rather teach that we are to admit to the seals all not ignorant and scandalous, and not be too curious in striking up a window in the conscience of others: 4. Pauls practise at Corinth is but a negative ex particulari, and not concludent: The heathen came to hear the word at Corinth, 1 Cor. 14. 23. And Paul doth no where command the Heathen should be excluded from the Sacraments: Will Erastus then have them admitted? 5. When Paul saith, that unworthy Communicants were guilty of the Lords body and blood, and required fidelity in the Stewards, 1 Cor. 4. He taketh for confessed, scandalous persons should not be admitted by the Church; its true, the sin of others who communicate unworthily, is not the sin of another fellow-communicant, who hath not authority to debar his fellow-communicant.
Ans. Belike it was a crime then to bring the Greeks into the Temple: 2. It is a begging of the question to say, all were admitted to the Passeover: See how this is before answered. 3. Christ admitted Iudas into the Passeover; What then? may Timothie lay hands suddenly on all he knows to be Iudases, that they come in and lap the blood of souls? contrary to 1 Tim. 3. Christ is above the Law, and if his practise in this were the rule, because Christ admitted Iudas whom he knew to be a Traitor, and did eat ordinarily at Table with him, and committed the flock to such a known wolfe. We are also to eat with covetous extortioners, which Paul forbiddeth,