A92138:958
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. Though we should grant, That those that eat leaven were debarred from the Passover; yet it shall not follow, that those that live wickedly, shall be debarred from the Lords Supper, for the Feast of unleavened bread, typified not the Supper of the Lord, but the whole time of our life: Otherwise, saith he, (in his Thesis) we may live ⟨p. 349⟩wickedly all our days, except when we come to the holy Supper; as1 the Jews might eat unleavened bread at any time, except on those days when the Lord forbade them.
Erastus. Though we should grant, That those that eat leaven were debarred from the Passeover; yet it shall not follow, that those that live wickedly, shall be debarred from the Lords Supper, for the Feast of unleavened bread, typified not the Supper of the Lord, but the whole time of our life: Otherwise, saith he, (in his Thesis) we may live ⟨p. 349⟩wickedly all our dayes, except when we come to the holy Supper; as1 the Jews might eat unleavened bread at any time, except on those dayes when the Lord forbade them.
- 1Putting away of leaven.
Ans. 1. We contend not, that debarring of men from any one Ordinance, was signified by putting away of the Leaven: But that by putting of leaven from their houses and Table, was typified (as Paul here expoundeth it) the putting of a wicked person out the midst of the Church, 1 Cor. 5. 2. compared with ver. 5, 6, 7. 13. If the Feast of unleavened bread, typified all our life that we should be holy; yet it had a special relation to our Purification, when we did partake of the most holy Ordinances of God, such as was the Passover then, and to us the Lords Supper: Else, Erastus might say, God hath forbidden single Christians to live at all, except they lived holily, which is a vain conceit. It is not lawful to Erastus to put significations on types, it his will; and therefore that that Feast pointed out holiness all our life, is utterly denied; for eating of leavened bread, except in these days forbidden, was not a sin, nor any Ceremonial type at all, no more then our common bread and wine are signs of Christs body and blood. 2. Paul compareth the Feast to the lump of the Visible Church; so as the leaven was to be removed out of all houses of Israel; because it did Ceremonially infect, corrupt, and leaven them, and so was to be purged; so did the instuons man, leaven the Visible Church of Corinth, and was to be purged out: Nor do I contend, that the Lords Supper here is meant, though I know no solemn Spiritual Feast that the visible Church now hath, but the Supper of the Lord: But rather I understand, Church-Communion in the dainties of the Gospel, which are set forth to us under the similitude of a Feast,