A80608:1179
The bloody tenet, washed, and made white in the blood of the LambThe bloudy tenent, washed, and made white in the bloud of the Lambe
The bloody tenet, washed, and made white in the blood of the Lamb: being discussed and discharged of blood-guiltiness by just defence. Wherein the great questions of this present time are handled, viz. how far liberty of conscience ought to be given to those that truly fear God? And how far restrained to turbulent and pestilent persons, that not only raze the foundation of godliness, but disturb the civill peace where they live? Also how far the magistrate may proceed in the duties of the first table? And that all magistrates ought to study the word and will of God, that they may frame their government according to it. Discussed. As they are alleged from divers Scriptures, out of the Old and New Testament. Wherein also the practise of princes is debated, together with the judgement of ancient and late writers of most precious esteem. Whereunto is added a reply to Mr. Williams answer, to Mr. Cottons letter. / By John Cotton Bachelor in Divinity, and teacher of the church of Christ at Boston in New England.The bloudy tenent, washed, and made white in the bloud of the Lambe: being discussed and discharged of bloud-guiltinesse by just defence. Wherein the great questions of this present time are handled, viz. how farre liberty of conscience ought to be given to those that truly feare God? And how farre restrained to turbulent and pestilent persons, that not onely raze the foundation of godlinesse, but disturb the civill peace where they live? Also how farre the magistrate may proceed in the duties of the first table? And that all magistrates ought to study the word and will of God, that they may frame their government according to it. Discussed. As they are alledged from divers Scriptures, out of the Old and New Testament. Wherein also the practise of princes is debated, together with the judgement of ancient and late writers of most precious esteeme. Whereunto is added a reply to Mr. Williams answer, to Mr. Cottons letter. / By John Cotton Batchelor in Divinity, and teacher of the church of Christ at Boston in New England.
London: printed by Matthew Symmons for Hannah Allen, 1647
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.
Reply. 3. That which they allege out of Matth. 10.7. (they mean 17.) is as far wide from the purpose, as the former. It is true, the Apostles ought not to deliver the People (whom they are sent to convert) unto Councils, or Prisons, or to make their Religion Felony, or Treason.
Reply. 3. That which they alledge out of Matth. 10.7. (they meane 17.) is as farre wide from the purpose, as the former. It is true, the Apostles ought not to deliver the People (whom they are sent to convert) unto Councels, or Prisons, or to make their Religion Felony, or Treason.
But what is this to such as being converted to the Profession of the Faith, do Apostate from the Faith, and seek to subvert the Faith, which they have professed? Or what is this to such, as do seek also to subvert the civill State, to kill Kings, or dethrone them, and to dispose of their Kingdoms? may not such (Religion shall I say, or Rebellion:) be made Felony or Treason? But see here the partiality both of the Letter, and of the Discusser: if a Christian King set not up the Popish Religion, but make Laws for the establishment of the Truth, this shall be condemned in him as Heretical pravity, himself prescribed, dethroned, killed, and his Kingdom alienated to a stranger. And this shall pass with Toleration. But if a Prince shall make Laws for the security of himself and his Kingdom, and condemn such seditious, and rebellious Attempts for Felony and Treason, this shall be taxed as unchristian Persecution, and contrary to the way of Christ, and his Apostles.
But what is this to such as being converted to the Profession of the Faith, doe Apostate from the Faith, and seeke to subvert the Faith, which they have professed? Or what is this to such, as doe seeke also to subvert the civill State, to kill Kings, or dethrone them, and to dispose of their Kingdomes? may not such (Religion shall I say, or Rebellion:) be made Felony or Treason? But see here the partiality both of the Letter, and of the Discusser: if a Christian King set not up the Popish Religion, but make Lawes for the establishment of the Truth, this shall be condemned in him as Hereticall pravity, himselfe prescribed, dethroned, killed, and his Kingdome alienated to a stranger. And this shall passe with Toleration. But if a Prince shall make Lawes for the security of himselfe and his Kingdome, and condemne such seditious, and rebellious Attempts for Felony and Treason, this shall be taxed as unchristian Persecution, and contrary to the way of Christ, and his Apostles.