A92138:750
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. All the arguments that Erastus made to prove that legal1 separation and uncleanness, proveth not Excommunication and Moral uncleanness, will with the same force conclude, that Legal uncleanness is not that which excludes men out of heaven, As for instance; to begin with the last, Legal uncleanness signifieth sin original, not wicked actions, therefore it signifieth not scandals, then by this Legal uncleanness that caused legal separation, is signified mens exclusion out of the high Jerusalem, for only sin Original, not for actual sins. This type must be a lying type, for actual sins especially debars us out of the New Jerusalem, Rev. 21. 8. c. 22. 15. 1 Cor. 6. 9. 2. Legal uncleanness and corruption of nature, differ as much as legal uncleanness and actual wickedness. But Erastus said the former cannot typify the latter. 1. Because Legal uncleanness is often involuntary, 2. It is not universally forbidden. 3. Many godly men may be legally unclean, but actual moral wickedness is not so, even so say I. 1. All natural or original uncleanness is voluntary in Adam. 2. Is universally forbidden. 3. It cannot consist with that holiness which we must have, or we cannot see God. 3. By Erastus his fourth difference, legal uncleanness was otherwise punished then natural corruption, for natural corruption is punished with the first and second death, Ephes. 2. 2. Rom. 5. 15, 16. the like may be said of all the rest. 4. Numb. 12. 14. Shame was unseparably annexed to Leprosy with contagion, so leavening of others, and shame is annexed to •oul scandals, and annexed to casting out of the Church, 1 Cor. 5, 6, 7. 2 Thes. 3. 14. Gal. 5. 9, 10