A92138:808
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 to put a good face on the business, saith, scanning on the 1sense of the words, Christ therefore saith rebuke him, Matth. 18. That we may understand, that he is to be convinced of his error, and iniquity, that he may acknowledge it not only to us, and before men, but far more to God, and so thou hast gained thy brother, and lost him, if he refuse to hear thee, that is, If he suffer not himself to be convinced, and do not acknowledge his fault, he is bound in Heaven, and this is that which I would say, this gaining of him is the pardoning (of a civill wrong) that he may be received in friendship.
Erastus to put a good face on the businesse, saith, scanning on the 1sense of the words, Christ therefore saith rebuke him, Matth. 18. That we may understand, that he is to be convinced of his error, and iniquity, that he may acknowledge it not onely to us, and before men, but far more to God, and so thou hast gained thy brother, and lost him, if he refuse to hear thee, that is, If he suffer not himself to be convinced, and do not acknowledge his fault, he is bound in Heaven, and this is that which I would say, this gaining of him is the pardoning (of a civill wrong) that he may be received in friendship.
- 1Pag. 188.
Ans. If Christs intention be, that he may rather acknowledge his fault to God then to the offender, as Erastus granteth, then Christs scope in these words, must be his spiritual gaining to God, not a civil depulsion of a civill wrong, but the former▪ Erastus granteth: 2. If spiritual gaining be intended in all the steps of our Saviours progress, and when this is obtained, the progress doth cease; then means rather crossing and thwarting that scope, then suitable spiritually thereunto, are not to be attempted: then is not civill depulsion of injuries our Saviours scope in the words, but the former is true; Ergo, So is the latter; the Proposition is evident, from the nature of a scope, and end in any speech. I prove the Assumption by parts. 1. If rebuking of an offending brother, gain him to repentance, then it is clear the offended man is to rest there, and not to Tell the Church or Magistrate, for he hath obtained even the end, for which Erastus contendeth, and who goeth about new means to compass an end already obtained? Christ would never command that; yea, when Christ saith, ver. 16. If he hear not thee, then take with thee one or two more; Ergo, If he had heard him, he was not to take one or two more, and ver. 17. If he should neglect to hear them, he was to tell the Church: Ergo, If he should hear