A86009:68
Wholesome severity reconciled with Christian liberty. Or, the true resolution of a present controversy…VVholesome severity reconciled with Christian liberty. Or, the true resolution of a present controversie…
Wholesome severity reconciled with Christian liberty. Or, the true resolution of a present controversy concerning liberty of conscience. Here you have the question stated, the middle way betwixt popish tyranny and schismatizing liberty approved, and also confirmed from Scripture, and the testimonies of divines, yea of whole churches: the chief arguments and exceptions used in The bloody tenet, The compassionate Samaritan, M.S. to A.S. &c. examined. Eight distinctions added for qualifying and clearing the whole matter. And in conclusion a parænetick to the five apologists for choosing accommodation rather then toleration. Imprimatur. Ja. Cranford. Decemb 16. 1644.VVholesome severity reconciled with Christian liberty. Or, the true resolution of a present controversie concerning liberty of conscience. Here you have the question stated, the middle way betwixt popish tyrannie and schismatizing liberty approved, and also confirmed from Scripture, and the testimonies of divines, yea of whole churches: the chiefe arguments and exceptions used in The bloudy tenent, The compassionate samaritane, M.S. to A.S. &c. examined. Eight distinctions added for qualifying and clearing the whole matter. And in conclusion a parænetick to the five apologists for choosing accommodation rather then toleration. Imprimatur. Ia. Cranford. Decemb 16. 1644.
London: printed for Christopher Meredith, 1645
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.
The next thing comes in my way, is an argument brought for liberty of conscience, from Gamaliel's speech in favour of the Apostles, Act. 5. 38, 39. Refrain from these men & let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought. But if it be of God ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God. The strength of his argumentation did lie in this Dilemma; this doctrine or way is either of men, or of God. If it be of men, you shall not need to repress it, for it will come to nought of it self, which he proves by two Historical instances of Judas and Theudas. If it be of God, it is in vain to strive against it, for it must prevail, and the counsel of heaven must stand. Therefore be what it will be, there is no danger to let it alone. But on the other side, if ye go about to repress it ye run the hazard both of fighting against God, and of provoking the displeasure as well of the Romans who have not permitted ⟨p. 26⟩unto you the liberty of capital punishments, as of the people of the Jews who magnify these men and their way. This is the whole substance, sense, and scope of that speech of Gamaliel in the Council. Hence did some argue for a toleration to Servetus and other Heretics. And though this their way was then discovered to be their folly, yet their posterity approve their sayings. The same argument is used in that pamphlet called Liberty of Conscience, p. 34, 35. Upon the same foundation doth M Goodwin build in his [Greek or Hebrew], and the Paraenetic for Christian liberty, pag. 2. and 11. supposing the credit and authority of Gamaliel's speech, for matter of truth to be one and the same with other scriptures, and that there is nothing in all that speech but what is fully consonant with the word of God, unquestionably so acknowledged. So Mr Goodwin affirmeth, p. 10. and after him one P. P. which is by interpretation, Poor Pamphleteer, falls in the same ditch; he might well call it As you were, for he makes that party to be never a jot more in the right. First of all he will contend with us that Protestant Interpreters do commend Gamaliel's speech,1 and justify M Goodwins Doctrine. Sure I am, Calvin takes Gamaliel to be a godless Politician, and a Neutralist, and his speech to have a great error in it. So saith Pelargus upon the place.