A80850:52
Helps for discovery of the truth in point of tolerationHelpes for discovery of the truth in point of toleration
Helps for discovery of the truth in point of toleration: being the judgment of that eminent scholar Tho. Cartwright, sometimes Divinity-Professor in the University of Cambridge in the reign of Queen Elizabeth of happy memory, and then a famous non-conformist, for which through the tyranny of the Bishops he suffered exile. Wherein the power and duty of the magistrate in relation to matters of religion is discussed; as also whether the judicial laws given by Moses to the Jews are abrogate by the coming of Christ. More particularly in relation to some sins, viz. blasphemy, adultery, &c. Occasionally handled in a controversy between the said public professor T.C. and Doctor Whitgift. Here also by the way is laid down his judgment in the case of divorce, and that the party innocent may marry again.Helpes for discovery of the truth in point of toleration: being the judgment of that eminent scholler Tho. Cartwright, sometimes Divinity-Professor in the University of Cambridge in the reigne of Queen Elizabeth of happy memory, and then a famous non-conformist, for which through the tyranny of the Bishops he suffered exile. Wherein the power and duty of the magistrate in relation to matters of religion is discussed; as also whether the judiciall lawes given by Moses to the Jewes are abrogate by the coming of Christ. More particularly in relation to some sinnes, viz. blasphemy, adultery, &c. Occasionally handled in a controversie betweene the said publike professor T.C. and Doctor Whitgift. Here also by the way is laid downe his judgment in the case of divorce, and that the party innocent may marrie again.
London: printed for Thomas Banks, 1648
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
I conclude therefore that place of Zechariah (against your fond distinction) that the same severity of punishment which was used against false Prophets then, ought to be used now under the Gospel against false Teachers, comparing one person and circumstance with another. As he which hath fallen from God, and gone about to draw others away, to be handled ⟨p. 13⟩according to the Law prescribed in that 13. of Deut. If this be extreme, I am content to be so counted with the holy Ghost. And though in some cases of Idolatry, upon repentance life is given, yet in this case and some other expressed in the Law, as of open and horrible blasphemy of the Name of God; I deny that upon repentance there ought to follow any pardon of death, which the Judicial Law doth require.
I conclude therefore that place of Zachary (against your fond distinction) that the same severity of punishment which was used against false Prophets then, ought to be used now under the Gospell against false Teachers, comparing one person and circumstance with another. As he which hath fallen from God, and gone about to draw others away, to be handled ⟨p. 13⟩according to the Law prescribed in that 13. of Deut. If this be extreme, I am content to be so counted with the holy Ghost. And though in some cases of Idolatry, upon repentance life is given, yet in this case and some other expressed in the Law, as of open and horrible blasphemy of the Name of God; I deny that upon repentance there ought to follow any pardon of death, which the Judiciall Law doth require.
Besides,1 It is an Anabaptisticall tenet to avoid all punishment of sin whatsoever, to maintain that, For whatever offence a man commit, if he show tokens of repentance, he may be delivered from bodily punishment: For what Murderer, what Traitor, &c. which though he be never so unrepentant and obstinate in his sin, hearing that upon repentance there is a way to escape death, will not enforce himself to show all tokens of repentance?