Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...

CHAP. VII. That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication, and (b•• a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpre∣tation) Suspension from the Sacrament of a person un excommunicated.

THe weight of our proofs not laid upon the phrase of delivering to Sathan. Which phrase being set aside that Chapter will prove Excommunication, verse 8. Let us keepe the Passeover▪ &c. applied to the Lords Supper, even by M. Prynne himselfe. Master Prynnes first exception from 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. & 11. 20 21. concerning the admission of all the visible mem∣bers of the Church of Corinth, even drunken persons to the Sacrament, answered. His second, a reflection upon the persons of men. His third, concerning these words, No, not to eate, confuted. Hence Suspension by necessary consequence. His fourth exception taken off. His three conditions which he requireth in Arguments from the lesser to the greater, are false and doe not hold. Our Argument from this Text doth not touch upon the rock of separation. Eight considerations to prove an Ecclesiasticall censure, and namely excommunication from 1 Cor. 5. compa∣red with 2▪ Cor. 2. More of that phrase, to deliver such a one to Sathan.