A86003:15
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.
CHAP. II.
A confutation of that which Master Coleman hath said against Church-government; showing also that his last Reply is not more but less satisfactory then the former, and for the most part is but a tergiversation and fleeing from Arguments brought against him, and from making good his own Assertions and Arguments, concerning the distinction of Civill and Church-government.
A confutation of that which Master Coleman hath said against Church-government; shewing also that his last Reply is not more but lesse satisfactory then the former, and for the most part is but a tergiversation and fleeing from Arguments brought against him, and from making good his own Assertions and Arguments, concerning the distinction of Civill and Church-government.
1. The Reverend Brother said in his Sermon, I could never yet see how two coordinate Governments exempt from superiority and inferiority can be in one State. To overthrow ⟨p. 5⟩this general Thesis, I brought some Instances to the contrary, as the Governments of a General and an Admiral, of a Master and a Father, of a Captain and a Master in a Ship. He being put to his Vindication, replieth, The Commissioner acknowledgeth he did not apply them to the Assembly (I said the General Assembly) and Parliament; yet that was the controversy in hand, Male dicis pag. 5. But by his favour, that was not the controversy, for he was not speaking particularly against the distinction of the Government of the General Assembly, and of the Government of the Parliament (neither had he one syllable to that purpose) but generally against the distinction of Church Government, and Civil Government, and particularly against Excommunication, in all which, he excluded Presbyteries as well as General Assemblies. Wherefore he doth now recede not only from defending his Thesis, but from applying it against the power of Presbyteries. And so far we are agreed.