A80640:210
The way of Congregational churches cleared in two treatises. In the former, from the…
The way of Congregational churches cleared in two treatises. In the former, from the historical aspersions of Mr. Robert Baylie, in his book, called, A dissuasive from the errors of the time. In the latter, from some contradictions of Vindicæ Clavium : and from, some mis-constructions of learned Mr. Rutherford in his book entitled The due right of presbyteries. / By Mr. John Cotton, sometime preacher at Boston in Lincoln-shire, and now teacher of the Church at Boston, in New-England.The way of Congregational churches cleared in two treatises. In the former, from the historical aspersions of Mr. Robert Baylie, in his book, called, A disswasive from the errors of the time. In the latter, from some contradictions of Vindicæ Clavium : and from, some mis-constructions of learned Mr. Rutherford in his book intituled The due right of presbyteries. / By Mr. John Cotton, sometime preacher at Boston in Lincoln-shire, and now teacher of the Church at Boston, in New-England.
London: printed by Matthew Simmons for John Bellamie, 1648
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.
Hereupon some of the Messengers of our Church withdrew themselves, and appeared no more in the Synod, such as did appear, did much what forbear any prosecution of argument in such causes. But that (to my remembrance) was the first time of my discerning a real and broad difference, between the judgments of our Brethren (who leaned to Mistress Hutchinson) and my self. And therefore to clear my self, and the sounder Members of our Church from partaking in those manifold errors there presented, I declared my judgment openly before all the assembly, That I esteemed some of the Opinions, to be blasphemous: some of them, heretical: many of them, Erroneous: and almost all of them, incommodiously expressed: as intending to except those chiefly, wherein I had declared mine own opinion, as before.
Hereupon some of the Messengers of our Church withdrew themselves, and appeared no more in the Synod, such as did appear, did much what forbear any prosecution of argument in such causes. But that (to my remembrance) was the first time of my discerning a real and broad difference, between the judgments of our Brethren (who leaned to Mistris Hutchinson) and my self. And therefore to clear my self, and the sounder Members of our Church from partaking in those manifold errors there presented, I declared my judgment openly before all the assembly, That I esteemed some of the Opinions, to bee blasphemous: some of them, hereticall: many of them, Erroneous: and almost all of them, incommodiously expressed: as intending to except those chiefly, wherein I had declared mine own opinion, as before.
But because I would deal openly and ingenuously with Mr. Baylie, and hide nothing from him, that might fortify his accusation against me, there was some colour of my leaning to one Antinomian Tenet in one day of the Synod. For though in answer to the questions of the Elders before the Synod, I had affirmed Faith to be an instrument for the receiving the righteousness of Christ to our justification: yet for as much as some great Divines had let fall some expressions, that seemed to favour the Antinomian party in a contrary Tenet, I was desirous to hear that Point a little further ventilated, and to see the difficulties a little more fully cleared. Dr. Twice (not suspected for an Antinomian, much less for a Familist) in his vindiciae gratiae, de electione, Parte 2. Section. 25. Numero 5. bringeth in Arminius, arguing against Mr. Perkins, thus: The righteousness of Christ wrought or performed, is not ours, as wrought or performed, but as by Faith imputed to us. Whereto the Dr. answereth,