Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	woman_n	word_n	work_n	101	3	4.6538	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A92138	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.	Rutherford, Samuel, 1600?-1661.	1646 (1646)	Wing R2377; Thomason E326_1; ESTC R200646	722,457	814

15. And to wait on them with all patience if God peradventure may give them repentance 7. The destruction of the flesh must be the destruction of the body But the bodies of the godly are saved no lesse then their spirits in the day of the Lord. 8. And for many of the former reasons by delivering to Satan cannot be meant a miraculous tormenting of the body by Sathan with the saving of the life Such as we read was the case of Iob for the delivering to Sathan is to cast out of the Church and declare such an offendor to be of the number of the wicked world of which Sathan is Prince Ioh. 12. 31. Ioh. 14. 30. and God 2 Cor. 4. 4. and that which we assert as the essentials of excommunication are 1. Here is a member of the Church one vvho is within 1 Cor. 5. 12. one who hath fallen in a foul scandall and had his fathers wife ver 1. who by the Church conveened in the name of our Lord Iesus with that spirit of the Apostle given to them by Christ v. 4. was delivered to Sathan that his soule may be saved for that is the genuine and intrinsecall end of Excommunication and to be purged out of the Church lest he should infect the Sheepe ver 7. and Christians were not to bear company with him nor to eate with him ver 9. 10 and he was judged to be cast out as a Heathen and Publican ver 12. 13. and that by a convened court having the name and authority of him who is King of the Church ver 4. and more wee doe not crave Obj. To deliver any to the power of Sathan is no mean of salvation Answ A morall delivering to the efficacy of error and a reprobate minde is not a mean of salvation nor is excommunication such a mean nor in the power of the Church but a medicinall depriving of an offender of the comfortable communion of the Saints and of the prayers of the Church and meanes of grace such is a means and mighty through God to humble CAP. V. Quest 1. Whether the word doth warrant discipline and censures even to the excluding of the scandalous from the Sacraments beside the Pastorall rebukes inflicted by one VVE are not to conceive that there was nothing Morall in the Lawes that God made to his people of Israel to debar the unclean from the society of Gods people and from communion with them in the holy things of God Numb 5. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moses saying 2. Command the children of Israel that they put out of the Campe every leaper and every one that hath an issue and whosoever is defiled by the dead Lev. 5. 2. If a soul touch any unclean thing whither it be a carcase of an unclean beast or the carcase of unclean cattell or the carcase of unclean creeping things and if it be hidden from him he also shall be unclean and guilty 6. And he shall bring his trespasse-offering unto the Lord for his sin which he hath sinned Lev. 7. 20. But the soul that eateth of the sacrifice of the peace offerings that pertaineth to the Lord having his uncleannesse upon him even that soul shall be cut off from the people 21. Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing as the uncleannesse of man or any unclean beast or any abominable unclean thing and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offerings which pertain unto the Lord even that soul shall be cut off from his people In the which observe that here the soul that shall touch any unclean thing is to be cut off but Num. 5. 2. He is only to be put out of the Campe now these were not killed that were put out of the Campe and therefore to be cut off from the people must be a morall cutting off by Excommunication not by death also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to make a Covenant to cut off either by death or any other way as by banishment by which a thing leaveth off to be in use though it be not destroyed as when a branch is cut off a tree 1 Sam. 31. 9. Yea we have Isa 50. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where is that Bill of cutting off or divorce Now this was not a Bill of killing the wife that was divorced but putting her from her husband as our Saviour saith It is not Lawfull to marry her that is divorced Matth. 19. 9. A killed and dead woman is not capable of marriage yet the word is Deut. 24 1. Ier. 3. 8. from that same Theame 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Hebrews have another more ordinary word to signifie death as Exod. 31. 14. He that doth any work on the Sabbath in dying he shall die And it is expounded he shall be cut off from the midst of the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Lev. 7. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is four times used without any such expression ver 20 21 25 27. To which may be added that when zealous Hezechiah did finde that the people were not prepared According to the purification of the Sanctuary though they had celebrated the Passeover the King did not only not kil them but prayed God might be mercifull to them and the Lord killed them not saith the spirit of God but healed them Exod. 12. 15. He that eateth unleavened bread that soul shall be cut off from Israel but it is expounded ver 19. That soul shall be cut off 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Church of Israel Certainly he that is killed is cut off from both State and Church and from the company of all mortall men on earth Isa 38. 11. Then to be cut off from Israel is onely to be deprived of the comfortable society of the Church of Israel as the holy Ghost expoundeth it Also Lev. 4. If any commit any sin but of ignorance and so if he touch any unclean thing or eat unleavened bread forbidden of God he is excluded from the holy things of God while the Priest offer for him according to the Law Now if he was presently to be killed either by the Magistrate or in that act killed by Gods own immediate hand as Aarons sons were there was not a journey to be made to the place the Lord had chosen to sacrifice there which might have been three dayes journey from his house who was unclean yea when the man that gathered sticks was stoned and the false Prophet stoned Deut. 13. there was no sacrifices offered for any of them before they were killed and I hope there were no sacrifices in Moses his Law offered for the dead Hence learn we 1. That to cut off from the Congregation was not to kill but it was the Iewish Excommunication greater or lesse 2. That Moral sins under the Old Testament debarred men from the holy things of God while the Priests sacrificed for them and brought them in a capacity to receive the holy

you never read that the Priests yea or the High Priest said fall upon such an ill doer and kill him nor was this any Law of God that the Ecclesiastick Sanedrim should put to death and politically condemne any man to die or command any mans blood to be shed they but declared and resolved a case of conscience to the judges and a plea and said This is a matter of blood and deserveth death by the Law of God and he that hath done such a fact in point of Law ought to die But there were two things left to the civil● Iudges 1. Whether this man hath done such a fact 2. A sitting in the Tribunall and saying I or we command and decree such a man who hath shed such blood hath inflicted such a stroake on this woman who is with childe of living birth to be stoned to death to be hanged Erastus hath not proved nor never shall prove that the High Priests Priests or Levites by Gods Law did thus judge any That Ananias commanded Paul to be beaten and the lictors of the High Priest smote Christ on the face at the command of the Priests was against Law they had no power so to doe by Law yea and our Presbyteries that judge of sorceries witchcrafts incests adulteries and other capitall crimes and of bloods in point of Gods Law what is witchcraft what is incest that the husband that striketh his wife being with quick child and killeth the birth is a Murtherer but that they judicially say such a woman is a Witch and so ordain her to be hanged and burnt and such a husband is a Murtherer and decerne him to die is utterly unlawfull therefore this is an ignorant speech of Erastus This synedrie of Priests and Levites whether in point of Law or in point of ●act did give out sentences of death therefore they were politick judges it followeth not and that the Priests said this man deserveth to die and therefore they gave out as civill judges sentences of death for the civill judge draweth not the sword with his owne hand is a foul consequence for lawyers do say such a man is worthy to die but it followeth not that Lawyers are civill judges to condemne a man to die for the Priests said this man deserveth to die in point of Law not absolutely as this man but upon supposition that he hath committed the fact deserveth to die and their meaning is any man whosoever he be though they never hear nor see the man who hath committed such a fact ought to die Now Gods Law never appointed any judge to condemn a man to die whom the judge never did accuse heare or see this were extreame unjustice Now this supposition is and was to be proved and judged by the civill Iudge and whereas Erastus saith the judge draweth the sword with his owne hand against no man 1. It is not to purpose for the hangman is in Law the hand and instrument of the judge but he is neither hand nor instrument of the Lawyer of the Priests and Levites who in matters criminall of life and death judge of the Maior proposition and of the Law except Erastus would have a Major proposition to prove an Assumption which were to shame all Logick For the Priest never commanded this or this man because he had done this fault to be stoned by such such executioners 2. It is doubtful whether the judge did never with his owne hand cast a stone at any stoned to death Lastly there was no provocation from the great Sanedrim at Ierusalem true in matter of Law what then Ergo they were politick judges it followeth as the like consequences of Erastus doth follow Yea for the fact and the judiciall condemning of the man they were neither the highest judicature nor any judicature at all the civill Iudges of the high Sanedrim did that onely It is true he was to die who would not stand to the sentence of the judge or Priest in the matter of Law the man being judged to be guilty of the fact by the civill judge but this shall never prove that the Priests were civill judges Erastus The late Iewes referre to this Sanedrim at Ierusalem questions of making warre or consecrating the Priest of tributes of charges of the Temple of judging of Tribes of the censuring of false Prophets and of Soothsayers c. How then is it not a politick judicature in which all causes belonging to worship Ceremonies civill policy bloods and capitall punishments were handled for when Moses had spoken of the punishing of Idolaters he presently addeth Deut. 17. If any thing be hard for thee c Ans It is like enough the Iewes referred such as these to the Sanedrim but we contend for two Sanedrims one civill and another of Priests Levites and Elders who judged of matters onely of Ecclesiasticall cognizance and of bloods and punishing Idolaters and false Prophets with death onely in a spirituall way in point of Law and I judge the holy Ghost Deut. 17. hath so framed the words that it is evident as I have proved that capitall crimes belonged to them in point of Law for he saith not he that refuseth to die when the Priests and Levites condemne him to die hee shall surely die and have the benefit of appeal to no higher judicature Now this he should have said by Erastus his way but he that will not stand to the sentence of the Priest or judge shall die Hence it is clear he speaketh of things in matters of Law in which the guilty might dis-assent and alledge the Priests had not judged according to Law But how was it the minde of the holy Ghost that any could refuse the Sentence of death given out by the Priests for the meaning must be by Erastus his way he that refuseth to die when the Priest condemneth him to die he shall surely die 2. He saith not that the Priests and Levites shall give out sentences of death and blood against any man but they shall shew and teach thee when thou shalt inquire the sentences of judgement even of Idolaters blasphemers of Murthers and blood according to the Law of God the knowledge of which the Priests lips should preserve Erastus Moses instituted no other publike judicatures for punishing of wickednes but those he maketh mention of Exod. 18. Numb 11. Deut. 1. 16 17. But all th●se were onely civill not Ecclesiasticall Iudges The seventy that were indued with the spirit of prophecy were given to helpe Moses and ●ase him not to be assistants to helpe Aaron and it cannot be doubted but Moses his government was civill Ans Both the Major the Minor is false the Major is from some particular places negativè he should argue from all the Old Testament and he argueth from some places onely he leaveth out Levit. 10. and all the places where the Priests were onely to judge the Leper the uncleane which are spirituall judicatures not civill 2.

the Magistrate under the New Testament because they were killed in the Old Then are we to stone the men that gathereth sticks on the Lords day the childe that is stubborn to his Parents the Virgins daughters of Ministers that committeth fornication are to be put to death Why but then the whole judiciall Law of God shall oblige us Christians as Carolosladius and others teach I humbly concieve that the putting of some to death in the Old Testament as it was a punishment to them so was it a mysterious teaching of us how God hated such and such sins and mysteries of that kinde are gone with other shadows But we read not saith Erastus where Christ hath changed those Laws in the New Testament It is true Christ hath not said in particular I abolish the debarring of the leper seven dayes and he that is thus and thus unclean shall be separated till the evening nor hath he said particularly of every carnall Ordinance and judiciall Law it is abolished But we conceive the whole bulk of the judiciall Law as judiciall and as it concerned the Republick of the Iews only is abolished though the morall equity of all those be not abolished also some punishments were meetly Symbolicall to teach the detestation of such a vice as the boaring with an A●le the ear of him that loved his Master and desired still to serve him and the making of him his perpetuall servant I should think the punishing with death the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath was such and in all these the punishing of a sin against the Morall Law by the Magistrate is Morall and perpetuall but the punishing of every sin against the Morall Law tali modo so and so with death with spitting on the face I much doubt if these punishments in particular and in their positive determination to the people of the Iews be morall and perpetuall As he that would marry a captive woman of another Religion is to cause her first pare her nailes and wash her self and give her a moneth or lesse time to lament the death of her Parents which was a Iudiciall not a Ceremoniall Law that this should be perpetuall because Christ in particular hath not abolished it to me seems most unjust for as Paul saith He that is Circumcised becomes debter to the whole Law sure to all the Ceremonies of Moses his Law So I Argue à pari from the like He that will keep one judciciall Law because judiciall and given by Moses becometh debter to keep the whole judiciall Law under pain of Gods eternall wrath We do not teach that men are to be Excommunicated for whatever scandalous sins deserve death at the hand of the Magistrate whether they openly repent or not if any give evident signification of their repentance for murther they are not to be Excommunicated for the end of Excommunication being once obtained which is the visible and known repentance and saving of the offenders soul the mean is not to be used which is Excommunication But if any commit murther whether he repent or repent not the Lord hath made no exception of regenerate or not regenerate of men repenting or not repenting he should die by the sword of the Magistrate Gen. 9. 9. It is true some are to be Excommunicated for the very atrocity of the sin it being parricide but that is because he giveth no positive signes of repentance to the Church which is contumacy added to his parricide Erastus would prove That God would not have men dedebarred from the Sacraments because they commit haynous sins to be punished with death by the Judge 1. Facinora saepe sunt occulta such crimes are often unknown to the world Ans That which is denied is not concluded a fault in Logick for only scandals as scandals to the Church and so known to the Church are to be censured with Excommunication Erastus He thus would prove the same often these crimes cannot be punished as David durst not punish the murther of Ioab 2 Sam. 3. Often for other causes they are neglected by the Magistrate as David neglected to punish the incest and murther of Absolon but shall we think such were not to come to the Temple and Sacraments so Psal 14. David saith There was not one that doth good those were not all punished by the Magistrate yet were they not removed from the Sacraments Ans Let Erastus argue here and we shall see his logick Those that commit parricides sorceries and do trample the holy things of God under feet whom yet the Magistrate dare not punish because of their power and greatnesse those are not to be debarred from the Sacraments But there be many scandalous persons in the Church such as Ioab whom the Magistrate dare not punish for their greatnesse Ergo Ans The Major is manifestly false and a begging of the question For Erastus saith pag. 207. He thinketh such ought not to be admitted to the Sacraments who will trample on the Sacraments and prophane them For though the Magistrate dare not punish them which is his sinfull neglect if they be dogs and swine as often they are and bloody men such as Ioab they ought not yea they never were by any Law of God admitted to the Temple and Sacraments what they did de facto or the Priests permitted is not the question It was Davids sinne that he took not away the head of bloody Ioab when he killed Abner and Amasa 2. How doth Erastus prove that David neglected to punish the incest of Absolon his sinfull neglect in not punishing his murther I yield for Absolon was never in Davids power to punish after he committed that incest possibly he neglected to punish his owne Concubines that is but a conjecture It is as like Absolon forced the Concubines to that incest as any other thing 3. For that Psal 14. There is none that doth good it is spoken of the naturall corruption of all mankind who therefore cannot be justified by the works of the Law as Paul expoundeth it Rom. 3. 9 10 11 19 20 21. and not of scandals punishable by the Magistrates and where this corruption did break out in bloods within the Church it ought to have been punished both by the Magistrate and Church so it is an argument yet a facto ad jus and a great inconsequence 4. I aske for what cause doth the Spirit of God rebuke killing of the Children to Molech and coming that same day to the Temple Because it was a sinne and particularly a prophaning of the Sanctuary which was one speciall holy thing to God Ezek. 23. 38 39. Ier. 7. 8 9 10 11. It was no sin to come to the Temple Sure it was commanded of God in his Law as Erastus yieldeth What was the sin then to come with their hands full of blood and of the unnaturall blood of their owne Children was the sinne and yet if they had repented to come after they had killed their Children was