A80608:1971
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. 1. What the Non-conformists did bear, it was no more then they thought they might bear with a good Conscience, according to the light they had received. If they did bear more, then what in Conscience they judged lawful to be borne, they had no reason to bear with themselves in so doing.
Reply. 1. What the Non-conformists did beare, it was no more then they thought they might beare with a good Conscience, according to the light they had received. If they did beare more, then what in Conscience they judged lawfull to be borne, they had no reason to beare with themselves in so doing.
But if the Bishops bore the less with them in such their subjection, it was because they looked at them not as pretended friends, but as more dangerous enemies: as knowing both that the Lord was with them, (which made Saul the more afraid of David, 1 Sam. 18.28, 29.) as also that the grounds which they gave of their judgement and practise, were more agreeable to Scripture, and to the judgement of all reformed Churches, and therefore more likely in time to prevail, to the utter overthrow of their usurped Hierarchy. But as for the Separatists, the Bishops did not discern, either the Lord going forth in like sort with them, or their grounds so likely to subvert their freehold. Though the Separatists struck at the root of the Constitutions of their Churches, (which was indeed a greater blow then to strike at the root of Episcopacy:) yet because the Episcopacy saw that the Separatists struck at the things of Christ, together with themselves, they knew such strokes would not much hurt their standing.
But if the Bishops bore the lesse with them in such their subjection, it was because they looked at them not as pretended friends, but as more dangerous enemies: as knowing both that the Lord was with them, (which made Saul the more afraid of David, 1 Sam. 18.28, 29.) as also that the grounds which they gave of their judgement and practise, were more agreeable to Scripture, and to the judgement of all reformed Churches, and therefore more likely in time to prevaile, to the utter overthrow of their usurped Hierarchy. But as for the Separatists, the Bishops did not discerne, either the Lord going forth in like sort with them, or their grounds so likely to subvert their freehold. Though the Separatists struck at the roote of the Constitutions of their Churches, (which was indeed a greater blow then to strike at the roote of Episcopacy:) yet because the Episcopacy saw that the Separatists struck at the things of Christ, together with themselves, they knew such stroakes would not much hurt their standing.