A80608:461
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.
It is no Babel, or Babylonish confusion to punish corporal, or civill offences, with Spiritual or Church-censures. What if a Brother be a striker, an oppressor, a murderer, a fornicator, or Adulterer? all these are corporal, and civill offences. But shall not therefore the Church punish these with spiritual, and Church-censures? Then the Apostle was mistaken, who directeth so to do, 1 Cor 5.11. why the Discusser putteth in that parenthesis (the offender not being a member of it:) I cannot tell: sure I am, it is nothing to the purpose. For as the Church cannot punish any offender, unless he be a member of the Church, so neither may the Civill Magistrate punish an Heretic or other spiritual offender, unless he be a member of his Common-wealth.
It is no Babell, or Babilonish confusion to punish corporall, or civill offences, with Spirituall or Church-censures. What if a Brother be a striker, an oppressour, a murderer, a fornicator, or Adulterer? all these are corporall, and civill offences. But shall not therefore the Church punish these with spirituall, and Church-censures? Then the Apostle was mistaken, who directeth so to doe, 1 Cor 5.11. why the Discusser putteth in that parenthesis (the offender not being a member of it:) I cannot tell: sure I am, it is nothing to the purpose. For as the Church cannot punish any offendor, unlesse he be a member of the Church, so neither may the Civill Magistrate punish an Heretick or other spirituall offendor, unlesse he be a member of his Common-wealth.
And if it be no confusion to punish civill offences with Church-censures, it is no confusion to punish spiritual offences with civill censures. And the reason of both these is the same, there be sundry civill offences, which are also transgressions of the Rule of the word, and so offences to the Consciences of the Church, and so justly subject to Church-censure. There be also offences to the Order and peace of the Church, which tend likewise to provoke wrath against a Civill State. As the King of Persia said, Whatsoever is commanded by the God of Heaven for the House of God, let it be diligently done: for why should there be wrath against the King and his Sons? Ezra 7.3