A92138:739
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.
Erastus. He that was legally unclean a long time, or all his life,1 as a Leper; was not esteemed as no Jew, or uncircumcised, or a damned man, he was to keep the Sabbath; yea, none unclean were excluded from the Sacrament of the general expiation in the 10. Month, Lev. 16. and 23. Yea, every soul under the pain of cutting off, was to afflict his soul that day: then the Lepers were not as Heathen and Publicans and condemned men, yea the Magistrate could not punish a man for Leprosy.
Erastus. He that was legally unclean a long time, or all his life,1 as a Leper; was not esteemed as no Iew, or uncircumcised, or a damned man, he was to keepe the Sabbath; yea, none unclean were excluded from the Sacrament of the generall expiation in the 10. Moneth, Lev. 16. and 23. Yea, every soul under the pain of cutting off, was to afflict his soule that day: then the Lepers were not as Heathen and Publicans and condemned men, yea the Magistrate could not punish a man for Leprosie.
- 1134.
Ans. This is a poor argument, because Ceremonial Excommunication differeth from Christian Excommunication; Ergo, the former is not a type of the latter, it followeth not. Isaacs blood was never really shed, Christ was really crucified, Isaac was not mocked, spitted on, did not wear a crown of Thorns, Jews and Gentiles crucified him not, between two Thieves. Ergo, Isaac was no figure of Christ offered for our sins, it followeth not. 2. Nor are Lepers no Jews, but in some respect, they might no more come to the Temple. 2. Nor amongst the people of God, nor 3. Eat the Passover, then Heathens might do; and so are the Excommunicated with u•, they are not exempted from faith, repenting, afflicting their soul for the sins of the Land, nor are they eternally damned, so they repent. But Erastus hath no ground to say, because the unclean were to afflict their souls, and abstain from servile work in the day of atonement, (as our Excommunicants are not loosed from the duties of the ten Commandments wholly, but from some public Church duties) but I see not how it follows; Ergo, The unclean were to come to the holy convocation in the day of expiation, and to observe the public solemnities with Gods people; One Law of God is not contradicent to another, and the Leper and unclean were separated, Ergo, God could not tie them to be mingled with his people. 3. The Leper was not punished by the Magistrate, for he suffered only for