A80608:2049
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.
2. Though we believe our calling to be of God, yet we do neither believe nor profess, that every difference from us which other Churches may use in the calling of their Ministers, doth straight way make their callings no callings, or no callings of Christ. Though it be our manner (and as we believe according to the word) that every Church chooseth and calleth their own Ministers, and ordaineth them by the Presbytery of the same Church: yet if the Presbytery of other Churches commend a Minister to a vacant Church, and upon the acceptance of the Church, if the presbyters of those Churches do ordain him with the consent of the Church, we do not profess that this is no calling of Christ, or that these are no Ministers of Christ. The f•ee choice of the Church is preserved (for ought we know) in their free acceptance of a Minister commended to them. And whether the Minister be ⟨p. 132⟩ordained by imposition of hands, at all, or no, and if by imposition of hands, by the hands of fellow-Elders of other Churches with the consent of the Church: We neither put so much weight in such a Rite, though Apostolical; nor do we so far restrain the liberty of communion of Churches, that if they shall communicate such intercourse of Church-actions one to another, then all their callings and administrations to be of none effect. We are not so masterly and peremptory in our apprehensions: And yet (with submission) we conceive, the more plainly and exactly all Church actions are carried on according to the letter of the rule, the more glory we shall give unto the Lord Jesus, and procure the more peace to our Consciences, and to our Churches, and reserve more purity and power to all our Administrations.
2. Though we beleeve our calling to be of God, yet we doe neither beleeve nor professe, that every difference from us which other Churches may use in the calling of their Ministers, doth straight way make their callings no callings, or no callings of Christ. Though it be our manner (and as wee beleeve according to the word) that every Church chooseth and calleth their own Ministers, and ordaineth them by the Presbytery of the same Church: yet if the Presbytery of other Churches commend a Minister to a vacant Church, and upon the acceptance of the Church, if the presbyters of those Churches doe ordaine him with the consent of the Church, we doe not professe that this is no calling of Christ, or that these are no Ministers of Christ. The fee choice of the Church is preserved (for ought we know) in their free acceptance of a Minister commended to them. And whether the Minister be