A86003:116
Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy…
Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemn League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: showing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinburgh. Published by authority.Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemne League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: shewing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinbrugh. Published by authority.
London: printed for Robert Bostocke, 1646
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
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.
Interpretation. It is a truth, and a Scripture truth which I have delivered, and because I see a Scripture truth hath given offence to the Commissioners of Scotland, &c. I am sorry. This must needs be the sense; I am sure this was the sense intended. Maledicis, Maledicis, pag. 18.
Interpretation. It is a truth, and a Scripture truth which I have delivered, and because I see a Scripture truth hath given offence to the Commissioners of Scotland, &c. I am sorry. This must needes be the sence; I am sure this was the sence intended. Maledicis, Maledicis, pag. 18.
Surely if such Orleans Glosses be admitted upon mens Declarations signed with their hands; and if he who hath subscribed himself sorry that he hath given offence in the delivery of such a doctrine, shall be allowed to expound himself thus; that he meant he was sorry others had taken offence at a Scripture truth, ⟨p. 52⟩that is, he was sorry for our fault not for his own: I know not how men shall trust one another's Declarations: or how we can practically as well as doctrinally confute the Jesuitical equivocations and mental reservations. And if this must needs be the sense which now the Reverend Brother gives; and was the sense intended, Why saith he that he did publicly recall that Declaration? He might make a revocation of it, in the sense wherein I understood it: but how could he make a revocation of it, as himself understood it, and as he faith the sense must needs be? Was this his sorrow for our taking offence at a Scripture truth, a sorrow to be sorrowed for? Why did he not rather make a second Declaration the next day, interpreting the former? And whereas he thinks that his Revocation ought to have been mentioned together with his declaration, because the whole truth is to be told as well as the truth, his own heart knows that he himself hath not told the whole truth, for he could tell much more, if he pleased; how he was brought upon the business, and particularly upon that Revocation. Why will he challenge others for not telling the whole truth, when himself doth it not? I should have thought, that this Revocation was neither here nor there, as to the point of scandal, for proof whereof his Declaration was brought: and that as it was not to the business in hand, so it might rather, serve for impairing his credit then for any thing else. But seeing himself thinks it more for his credit, to tell the world of his saying and unsaying, declaring and undeclaring, let him be doing.