and so that the teachers of them were accursed and so to be separated from rebuked withstood censured yea cut off as troublers of the Church Gal. 5. 4. These to whom the Spirit of God giveth the title due to false teachers are punishable as false teachers and heretickes though in a lesse degree But the Holy Ghost giveth the title due to false teachers to such as erre not in fundamentalls ergo the assumption is made good by Tit. 1. 13 14. the Apostle willeth them to be rebuked as not sound in the faith as those that turne others from the truth in giving 〈◊〉 to Jewish fables and commandements of men to fables and needlesse Genealogies and vaine janglings and strivings about the Law that were unprofitable and vaine now these questions about Genealogies and the Law opinions on either sides being vaine and unprofitable and not edifying in the faith could not be fundamentall errours of themselves and inconsistent with saving grace and salvation but hay and stubble builded upon the foundation yet consider what the Holy Ghost saith of them Tit. 1. 10. For there are many unruly and vaine talkers and deceivers especially they of the circumcision 11. whose mouth must be stopped who subvert whole houses teaching things they ought not 13. Rebuke them sharpely that they may be sound in the faith and to soundnesse in the faith he opposeth v. 14. giving heed unto Jewish fables and commandements of men that turne from the truth 1 Tim. 6. 3. If any man teach otherwise then I have taught now Pauls doctrine of widows of elders and not sudden accusing them his charge to Timothy not to drinke water but a little wine were not fundamentalls the ignorance whereof excludeth men from salvation If any man consent not to the wholesome words even the words of the Lord Jesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlinesse 4. He is proud knowing nothing as be ought doting about questions and strife of words whereof commeth envy strife railing evill surmisings 5. Perverse disputing of men of corrupt mindes and destitute of the truth supposing that gaine is godlinesse from such turne away then doting about questions strife of words besides not consenting to the words of Christ and doctrine of godlines is disputing of men of corrupt minds from which we are to turn away As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when I went into Mâ—cedonia that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrin 4. Neither give heed to fables and endlesse Genealogies which minister questions rather then edifying which is in faith then to preach fables and endlesse Genealogies which are not fundamentall errors are yet another doctrine then the Apostles taught and those that so teach are to be charged to teach no such thing and so under two or three witnesses if they wilfully continue therein to be accused and censured yea and we are to avoid them and not to receive them in our houses nor bid them God speed and so non-fundamentalls as questions of Genealogies come in under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of teaching 〈◊〉 doctrine Now sure questioâ—s of Genealogies are but the hay stubble that are builded on the foundation which shal suffer burning when the teacher holding the foundation Christ shal be saved yea such as teach circumcision though with Chriâ—t then must teach another Gospel though not as necessary to justification as Peter and Barnabas compelled the Gentiles to be circumcised though they believed that circumcision was not necessary to salvation And it should be hard to assert the believing of the day of Christ to be at hand since the believing of it was an article of faith the time when or how soon in the believing Thessalonians though they were mis-led by some false teachers is nothing so fundamentall as that an errour touching that time must be inconsistent with saving faith for the Apostles said These were the last dayes and Christ had told the day and hour was known to no man no not to the Angels yet Paul insinuates as much as they did shake the faith of the Thessalâ—nians who made them believe it was at hand 2. Thess 2. 2. Wee beseech you brethren by the comming of the Lord Jesus that ye be not soon shaken in mind or be troubled neither by spirit nor by word nor by letter as from us as that the day of Christ is at hand Yea 5. We beleeve with certainty of faith many things which are not fundamentals as 2 Pet. 3. 8. But beloved be not ignorant of this one thing that one day is with the Lord as a thousand yeares and a thousand yeares as one day How many suppose we are in glory that dyed ignorant of this and had not faith or any certainty of faith of this point that time 〈◊〉 with God no coexistence of a duration long and 〈◊〉 Yet Peter proposeth it to bee beleeved with certainâ—y of faith and how many poynts of sacred history doth the 〈◊〉 Ghost tell us Heb. 11. of Caine and Abels sacrificing 〈◊〉 Abraham sojourning in a strange Country of Sarabs 〈◊〉 a child in her old age of Isaacks blessing of Jacob and Josephs worshipping leaning on the end of a staffe Moses being hid three months the falling of the Wals of Jerichâ— which we beleeve by certainty of divine faith that are not fundamentals Yea and if we beleeve not whatever Paul and the rest of the Apostles have written and what Moses and the Prophets have said we must take them to be false witnesses in saying preaching writing what is not true as Paul 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 15. 15. and the Apostles sayth Act. 5. 32. And we are his 〈◊〉 of these things and so is also the Holy Ghost Now 〈◊〉 things referre not onely to Christs death and resurrection but to poynts not fundamentall as namely who were the Instruments of his death even the high-Priest Pharisees and cheife-Priests ver 30. Whom yee slew and hanged on â— tree Act. 4. 10. Whom yee crucified Act. 2. 36. Whom yee have crucified Now the Apostles and the Holy Ghost were witnesses of the truth of both fundamentals and non-fundamentals of all that Jesus began to doe and teach untill the day 〈◊〉 was taken up to heaven as is cleare Act. 1. 8. Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in Judea and in Samaria and 〈◊〉 the uttermost part of the earth Luke 24. 48. Ye are my witnesses of these things that is ver 44. Of all things that must be fulfilled with were written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and in the Psalmes concerning me then the witnessing of the sacrificed types and particular ceremonies that shadowed out Christ of his being borne in Bethlehem Mic. 2. of his being crucified between two transgressors Esay 53. of his riding 〈◊〉 Jerusalem on an Asse colt Zach. 9. Of his casting out buyers 〈…〉 out of the Temple through his zeale to
the house of God Psal 69. of the betraying of him by Judas and 〈◊〉 historicall things that are not fundamentals yet all thâ—â— were a part of the Apostles and the Holy Ghosts testimony Act. 5. 32. And to be beleeved with divine certiâ—ude of 〈◊〉 faith no lesse then the Articles of fundamentalls that Christ was the sonne of man and died for our sinnes and rose for our righteousnes except we say that the Apostles are false witnesses and make God a lyar in saying that Judas betrayed him not and that Barrabas a Murtherer was not preferred to him 1 Cor 15. 1â— Job 3. 33. 1 Job 5. 10. For if we give God the lye in non-fundamentals and turne non-fundamentals into controversies and conjectures and thinke we must beleeve fundamentals one or two fixedly and peremptorily and lead a good life and so we are saved but not otherwise but as touching non-fundamentalls we may beleeve these with a reserve and a demurre and may beleeve them for a day or an houre and deny them to morrow and again bee carried about with a new wind of doctrine and beleeve the third day and deny them the fourth day beleeve them the fift day and deny them the sixt day and so make a whirly-gigge of our faith and a new faith for a new-moone or for a halfe and a quarter moone as the Independents in their Apology makes this a principle of their faith to beleeve these things so as wee leave roome for a new light to cast a board again at the blowing of the wind of a new phancy of which we have seene more in the Assembly of Divines these four years past then we desire to see in any that professe godlinesse and as the Holland-Arminians say from whom new lights or old darknesses have their rise a faith of a thousand yeares may be the worst of all which say we is most false a false opinion of God and a thousand yeare old lye a gray-haird untruth is the worst of conjectures but faith it neither is nor can be called But the late Independents and the new Libertines of England do only say such a monthly faith is to be tollerated because of the darkenes of our mind in the matters of God which yet is faith not but a conjectural opinion But they say by a command of God we must have no other faith except in some few fundamentals and no man since Adam died except the man Christ ever knew or could determine how few or how many so our faith in fundamentals in that totters for they say these precepts and commands of the Holy Ghost Try the spirits whither they be of God or no. Try al things hold that which is good the example of the noble Bereans who examined Pauls doctrine by the Scriptures doth lay a divine command in them to beleeve non-fundamentals with a reserve Yea they say with the Arminians c. that it is against liberty of prophesying whereas liberty of lying in the name of the Lord is of the devil who hath taken liberty or rather helish licence to lye from the beginning they say it is against our growing in knowlâ—dge and the prayers of the Saints that God would open their eyes to see the wonders of his Law and lead them into all truth and against the prophesies that in the last days the earth shal be filled with the knowledg of the Lord the light of the moon shal be as the light of the sun and the light of the sun as the light of seven days and the day star shal arise in the hearts of many and the spirit shall be powred on all flesh young and old maids and children To all which I say either the Spirit of God moves men to the faith of this there is no Church visible on earth but such as is constituted of beleevers such as those of Corinth and Rome and others were after they were planted and watered by the Apostles or no. If no they have not faith of it and so it is 1. No truth of God to Independents c. for which they can suffer but a meer opinion then they cannot suffer for it in faith and to beleive any truth of God because the Lord so saith is wrought only by the Holy Ghost if it be wrought by the Holy Ghost then it is a truth of God and a divine truth for the Holy Ghost moves no man to beleeve a lye for a truth of God if it be a divine truth then doth not the Holy Ghost will you so to beleeve it for a truth as you must upon a new light beleeve the contrary to morrow For I renew the argument in its full strength touching the faith of the contradicent which you beleeved the last day either the Holy Ghost must move you to beleeve that contradicent as a truth of God or no Iâ— no It is not divine faith you have of it if yea then the faith of the former was the beleeving of a lye so that you must make the Holy Ghost the father of beleeving a lye 2. The object of divine faith a lye 2 This is to teach us to be carried about with every wind of doctrine whereas faith of fundamentals or non-fundamentals is to beleeve a truth because so saith the Lord that cannot lye nor speake untruth but you will men to beleeve those non-fundamental truths so as they may bee as well lyes as divine truths 3. These Precepts Try the Spirits Try all things enjoyne an examination of fundamentalls as well as non-fundamentalls and what reason have Independents to say these Precepts hold in non-fundamentalls onely Mr. John Goodwin with better ground saith they hold in all for must we hold that which is good onely in non-fundamentalls And did not the Bereans try Pauls doctrine by the Scripture in the most and onely necessary fundamentall which Paul preached that Jesus Christ was the Messiah that dyed rose againe Act. 17. 3. and are therefore commended by the Holy Ghost v. 10. 11 above those of Thessalonica and must wee beleeve every Spirit who preach fundamentall truths or fundamentall errours who say Christ is not yet come in the flesh upon trust the contrary of which John expresly enjoyneth 1 Joh. 4. 1 2 3 yea we are rather to try fundamentalls and to walke upon sure and unmoveable principles since an errour here hazardeth our eternall salvation and is of as great concernment as our souls are but errours or mistakes in non-fundamentalls though they bee sinnes yet are consistent with saving faith and the state of salvation 4. Try all things try the spirits must have this sense beleeve what ever God saith be it fundamentall or non-fundamentall not onely after you have searched the Scriptures and sound it agreeable thereunto as the Bereans did but though you finde it consonant to the writings of the Prophets and Apostles yet because you are not infallible nor the Spirit that leads you therein
infallible beleeve it with a reserve say the Independents and with leaving place to a new light so as you must believe it to day to be a truth of God to morrow to be a lye the third day a truth the fourth day a lye and so a circle till your doomsday come so as you must ever beleeve and learne never come to a settlement and establishing in the truth but dye trying dye doubting dye with a trepedation and a reserve and dye and live a Scepticke like the Philosophers that said they knew nothing and I thinke Libertines cannot but be Scepticks and there is more to bee said for the Scepticisme of some then the Libertinisme of others 5. Would these Masters argue formally they must say what ever doctrine we are to try before we receive it that we may uncompelledly receive and beleeve it after tryall that ought to bee tolerated by the Magistrate in doctrine and practice or profession sutable thereunto before men I would assume But whether there be a God and but one God and all fundamentalls or non-fundamentalls be divine truths yea and whether fornication be sin and plurality of wives and community of goods and spoyling of wicked men of their wives and their lands and possessions as the Israelites spoyled the Aegyptians are such truths that we must try before we receive beleeve and accordingly beleeve and practice ergo the Magistrate is to tolerate fornication plurality of wives spoyling of men of their possessions and goods and community of goods but the conclusion is absurd and blasphemous and against the Law of nature for if there be no Magistracy nor violence to bee done to ill-doers under the New Testament neither must we defend our owne lives nor flye nor resist injuries but turne up the other cheeke to him that smites the one and if a man take your cloake give him your coat also according to the sense that Anabaptists put on the words yea and cut off your hands and feet plucke out your eyes if they cause you to offend and shed your owne blood which is the greatest and most unnaturall violence that is 6. The sense of this Try all and hold that which is good must be Try and search the true senses of divine truths and then having tryed and beleeved hold the truth and beleeve it for a day and yeeld to the light of the just contrary to morrow and having found a contrary light try that the third morrow and yeeld to another new and contrary light the third morrow Now the Holy Ghost must command doubting by that meanes and doubting till we lose faith and finde it againe and lose it againe in a circle and if we must try all things and try all spirits the Bereans must try their owne trying and their owne doubtings and beleeving and so into infinite and when they finde Christ to be in Pauls doctrine and that of Moses and the Prophets yet must they try and doubt and beleeve the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and of the Holy Ghost with the Libertines reserve waiting when the Holy Ghost shall give himselfe the lye and say I moved you to beleeve such a truth and such an article of faith the last yeare but now after a more deepe consideration I move you to beleeve the contrary yet so as yee leave roome to my new light 7. The sense also of these Lord enlighten mine eyes that I may know thee with a suller evidence not of Moon-light but of Day-light or as of seven dayes into one bee this Lord open my eyes and increase my knowledge grant that thy holy Spirit may bestow upon my darke soule more Scepticall conjecturall and fluctuating knowledge to know and beleeve things with a reserve and with a leaving of roome to beleeve the contrary to morrow of that which I beleeve to day and the contradicent of that the third day which I shall beleeve to morrow and so till I dye let me Lord have the grace of a circular faith running like the wheels of the wind-mill for the growing knowledge we seeke of God as in a way of growing ever in this life till grace be turned into glory 2 Pet. 3. 18. if our growth of knowledge stand as Libertines say in a circular motion from darknesse to light and backe againe from light to darknesse like the motion of a beast in a horse-mill so as I know and learne and beleeve this topicke truth of faith to day I unknow I unlearn and deny it to morrow as an untruth And againe I take it up the third day as a truth then we seeke in prayer not settled and fixed knowledge and a well-rooted faith of truths to beleeve them without a reserve or a demurre to senâ— way the opinion I have of this non-fundamentall or fundamentall truth as a grosse mistake and to welcome the just contrary opinion as a truth And againe to send it away upon a new light c. now this is but a mocking of God to pray for his Spirit that wee may barter and change opinions with every new Moone for our prayer for new light is not that the Holy Ghost would teach us faith and opinion of truths and falsehoods in a circle but that God 1. Would give the Spirit of revelation to see Gospel truths with a cleare revelation of faith 2. That hee would be pleased to cause that light by which we see the same ancient Gospel-truths shine more fully with a larger measure of heavenly evidence 3. That our light may so grow into the perfect day that we see new deductions consequences and heavenly new fresh conclusions from the former truthe of God But by scepticall faith we pray that God would give us a contrary new light to get a new faith of truths formerly beleeved contradicent to the word of God and to that faith which produced joy yea joy unspeakable and glorious 1 Pet. 1. 7 8. and glorying in tribulation and sweetnesse of peace Rom. 5. 1 2 3. for this not the light of the Moone turned in the light of the Sun or of the Sun as seven dayes in one but light turned in night darkenesse the truth in a lye and the Spirit of truth made the father of lyes 8. The Apostles never bid us know any truth of God with a reserve Libertines biâ—lus the Apostles and the Holy Ghost in them bids us know assuredly that Jesus is Christ the Lord they exhort us to bee rooted and established in the faith Col. 2. to be fully perswaded of all both fundamentalls and the historicalls of the birth life miracles words facts death sufferings and buriall resurrection ascention c. of Christ as Luke exhorteth Theophilus Luke 1. 1 2 3. yea the Apostle clearely Heb. 5. exhorteth to the faith of many points concerning Christ beside the first principles of the Oracles of God that of Catecheticke points fit for babes who have not stomachs to beare stronger food v. 12. 13. 1.
not punishable by man 2. All things that may be controverted is wide Nothing but it is converted except whether there be a God or not and many doubt of that There be even now who deny Jesus Christ God man the necessity of his death his offices the immortallity of the soule the resurrection last judgement a heaven a hell but al to Libertines are uncertaine and the denyall of any point not by the light of reason but by supernaturall revelation such as these articles that God is one in three distinct persons that Christ is God and Man in one person that he dyed to satisfie divine justice that we are saved by his righteousnesse imputed to us by faith c. Is no heresie but may consist with true godlinesse and therefore they give instance in fundamentals which are knowne by the light of nature as that theeves drunkards shall not inherit the Kingdome of God that God is to bee loved above all things now thâ—se are principles of naturall Theology known to heathens so that such godly men to which Libertines would yeeld an indulgence and liberty are good moral honest civil men who beleeve fundamentals known by the light of nature to Christians and Heathens equally for civill Heathens may have the sound faith of al such fundamentals and beleeving morall and naturall fundamentals though they know not Jesus Christ or possibly never heard of him may be saved and not be beholden to Christ knowne as a Saviour so some Libertines tell us not any man is to suffer death though he deny and malitiously oppose all the principles of the Gospell because these are knowne no ways but by supernaturall revelation and the light of faith which commeth from God but I take the ground of this to bee because supernaturall light is above us and not in our power but by this reason Christ should not have rebuked the Pharisees for not beleeving in him nor the Sadduces for denying the resurrection nor should Paul have smitten Eliâ—as with blindnesse for perverting Sergius Paulus from the faith for it was not in their power to know or beleeve otherwise of these Gospel fundamentals that are not beleeved but by supernaturall revelation then they did other Libertines say they are only Hereticks or at least punishable by men who deny fundamentals of Cbristian Religion but are sparing to tell us what fundamentals whether of law and known by the light of nature or of Gospel known onely by supernaturall revellation so that ere they finde the hereticke they must show you the point they deny is fundamental and its possible that is a difficil businesse whether it be fundamental or not if he go for a Sectarie he is a godly man and his godlinesse shal prove the poynt is not fundamental for this is the logick of our time such a people are godly therefore their opinions are against no fundamentall point whereas this is a better consequence such points are fundamentall ergo if men twice or thrice admonished doe yet wilfully goe on to maintaine opinions manifestly contrary they are not godly for the Apostle telâ— us of doctrine according to godlinesse then must the doctrine soundly beleeved make the person godly or argue him to be so but the man let him goe for a Saint cannot make or argue the doctrine to bee the doctrine according to godlinesse if it be not so in it self and we are inclined if the man be of our own tribe and sect to defend his tenets and not to judge them fundamental error 2. We wish much an argument to prove bodily violence or Ecclesiasticall co-action may be used against men erring in points fundamentall but not in non-fundamentals since God delivers his mind as clearly in non-fundamentals if not more clearely as in fundamentals and the authority of the Lord who commands faith is as great in non-fundamentals and our obligation to beleeve no lesse then in the most necessary fundamentals as therefore abstinence from adultery with Bathsheba and murthering of Vriah in David is as necessary necessitate precepts as the whole course of Davids repentance and turning to God yet it is not so necessary necessitate medii for David is a saved Saint though he abstaâ—â—â— not from that adultery and murther but without conversion from the state of sinfull nature to the way of saving grace it is unpossible David can be saved so to abstain from Idolatry and to demolish the high places and to punish those who resort to them is a godly practice yet though 〈◊〉 commit Idolatry with the golden Calfe yea and make the people naked also And Asa though he demolish not the high places all his reigne nor punish any for that Idolatry and did persecute the Seer yet Aaron was the faithfull Priest and the anointed of God and Asa and some other Kings heart were perfect before the Lord though they fell in these sins nor were these fundamentals sinnes in practice inconsistent with saving faith more then errours and teaching of errours in non-fundamentals to the ruine of many souls doth exclude a possibility of being in the state of saving grace but it cannot follow that because teaching and publishing of errours in non-fundamentals is consistent with saving grace that therefore these non-fundamentall sinnes of murther adultery tolerating of Idolatrous high places persecuting of faithfull Prophets making of a golden Calfe and hallowing of it to be adored as the God that brought Israel out of Aegypt are sins not to be tolerated in the truly godly such as Aaron David and Asa for then should they be tolerated in the wicked also for the toleration of such in the godly because they are not fundamental wickednesses inconsistent with saving grace is as destructive and more because of their extream scandalousnesse to all peace and safety of humaine societies and to the duty of the godly Magistrate as these same sins in the wicked upon the same grounds publishing of all errors non-fundamentall the toleration of the high places are as inconsistent with peace destructive and injurious to soules especially in the godly as scandalous to other false teachers as these non-fundamentall sins But say they the reason is not alike in non-fundamentall sinnes that are expresly condemned by all Aarons Idolatry Davids adultery Asaes persecution no man ever defended therefore they cannot bee tolerated by the Magistrate without sin though the acting of these sins may consist with sound faith But most of non-fundamentalls are not clearly determined in the word in regard of our dulnesse and naturall blindnesse and therefore the Magistrate cannot punish the non-fundamentall errours for these which be non-fundamentall errours to some godly and learned are non-fundamentall and seasonable truths to others as godly and learned as they are But to all the godly and learned Aarons Idolatry Davids adultery and murther Asa's tolerating the high places and imprisoning the Seer were sins unjustifiable and by the light of nature such as no godly Magistrate can
Commandement as it is probable it is true and acceptable and worship to God and though it were false worship it is as probable that to punish it is a sacrilegious invading of Gods place as it is an act of justice in the Magistrate 4. If the Magistrate must beleeve as the Libertine doth doth and teacheth him what he will if it were King and Parliament and all the Judges in Britain if they be of the faith of Libertines what conscience have they to take away the â—ead of a father who sacrificeth his onely childe to God upon meere religious principles what warrant have they before the tribunall of God to cut off his head as a peace-breaker rather then to spare his life as a sacrificer and a devout and zealous whether it be blinde zeal or no the Libertine Magistrate hath nothing to do to judge worshipper of God whether or no hath the Magistrate who in that case killeth aâ— innocent man according to his own libertine-conscience greater respect to false peace in a humane society then to true piety and innocent walking with God which forbids him to punish any thing that is onely to the subject he punisheth a meere devout worshipping of God 5. Upon the same ground should not the masse and all the broad worship on earth be tolerated since it hath farre lesse connexion with disturbance of peace then the Anabaptists children-killing worship of God 6. If the formall is ratio the onely formall reason and cause why the Magistrate is to use corporall coersion against none now under the New Testament but is to suffer every man to worship God as he best pleaseth because the worship of the New Testament is more spirituall the Law-giver Christ a meeker Mediator then Moses and there is no warrant now to hinder any man or lay bands and coactive violence upon Christs free subjects with force of sword to restraine them in one worship more then another what reason an Anabaptists offering his son a sacrifice to God should be restrained in his sacrificing more then in other acts of worship is not the man persecuted for his conscience is not this a carnall and no New Testament way of restraining him when he is restrained by the sword is not the onely word of God and no weapons that are carnall the way of rescuing men from all false worship and the onely way 7. Nor can the bloodinesse and cruelty of that worship be a sufficient ground why the Magistrate may restraine the conscience of the devout worshipper for who ought to sit as Lord Judge above the conscience of this father and sentence the worship as destructive to peace or the worshipper as a bloody man his conscience is under the New Testament and the Lord his onely judge But by the light of nature that the father kill the sonne to God 〈◊〉 murther and â—ruelâ—y But I answer if it be gratefull worship to God it is no more cruelty then to burne a beast to God and you are to suppose that a godly Anabaptist hath warrant from God for that worship as well for burning of beasts and offering yearely thousands of bullocks and sheep to God in memory of Christ once already sacrificed for sinners and that there is in it neither cruelty to beasts nor hurt to the Common-wealth that the Magistrate can restraine for though there be no reason at all for the worship ex natura rei if we consider the worship it selfe yet there is such reason to tolerate the worship so as if the Magistrate restraine he tyranniâ—eth over the conscience and a bloody conscience is a conscience as uncapable of violence and as immediately in the New Testament subject to God onely not to the sword as a good conscience then if the sword can straine no conscience as conscience how can it squeeze a conscience wading in bloody son-butchery more then any other conscience 8. If the Magistrates punishing of any for his conscience be a violent compelling of him to sin to worship or to forbeare worship against his conscience how will Libertines cleare Magistracy in the Old Testament from being intrinsecally a sinfull ordinance for the Magistrate in the Old Testament in stoning to death the seducing Prophet and the blasphemer must compell him to sin against his conscience and to professe Jehovah not Baal was the true God whereas the seducer believed in his conscience the contrary since to compell men to sin is intrinsecally sinfull let Libertines answer the query if God ever in Old or New Testament could command sin or if there was ever such a thing heard that a Magistrate might by his office command men to sin or then punish them 9. Let Libertines answer if Arminians extend not liberty of prophesying as farre as mens lusts can carry them in these words But to suffer every man say they to 〈◊〉 publickly in Religion every thing iâ— perilous Why for either that which 〈◊〉 asserteth is true or false if it be true why admit we is not why doe we imprison the Author thereof this injury reflects upon God the Author of truth if it be false the truth shall easily overcome â—â—ar of it self it shall melt like was before the Sunne if ye offer violence 〈◊〉 it yee strip Religion of its glory and furnish oyle to errâ—â—â— Whether is not reason as strong to refute errours fundamentall as non-fundamentall whether if ye offer violence to truth in fundamentalls as well as in non-fundamentalls yee strippe Religion and truth of its glory and furnish oyle to errour They goe on and tell us Wee need not ever bee in learning these that are clearely determined in the word for they are cleare open and of undoubled truths in the Scripture in other points not fundamentall a Christian is ever a disciple and a searcher not that he doth ever doubt and hesitate but because though for the present he neither doubt nor hath cause of doubting yet can he not be sure of these points with such a certitude which is free of all danger of errour and therefore he is often to examine these according to the rule that cannot erre and so it is enough before God that he may be said ever to learne and to come to the knowledge of the truth as far as frailty in this life can permit Answ 1. There is then no stability of faith but in two or three points in which all Papists Latherans Antiâ—â—niâ—arâ—ans Arrians Socinians Libertines Familists Sabellians Nestorians Macedonians Arminians Antinomians Seekers Fâ—thystasts Anabaptists c. agree and make one true Church beleeving what is necessary for salvation and holding the foundation Christ and we have no divine faith of the miracles that Christ wrought that the old world perished with waters which God speakes as clearly in the word as he doth fundamentalls But Libertines should distinguish the formall reason of beleeving truths which breedeth an obligation and the necessity of beleeving for the one onely
adde a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or substract and so vitiate the fountaine sense and omit points change consonants which in the Hebrew and Greek both might quite alter the sense nor can any say Christ and the Apostles being infallible could well cite the Prophets without a mistake though the copies might have been vitiate and corrupt 2. Because the very citing of these Testimonies by Christ and his Apostles made them Scripture and so of infallible authority but our citing of them since both Printers and Translatours are not immediately inspired and we also might erre cannot adopt them into Canonicall and authentick Scripture such as was first written by the immediately inspired Prophets I shall answer that first this objection presumeth that Christ and the Apostles might and did finde errours and mis-printings even in written Scripture which might reduce the Church in after ages to an invincible ignorance in matters of faith and yet they gave no notice to the Church thereof or if there was no errour de facto then for so many hundred yeares yet there are now substantiall errours and so soule that it may be we have no word of God at all amongst us and God hath no Church no beleever on earth but we must all take the word of Printers and Translatours which is meerly the word of man and what is become of all the Martyrs that suffered by the bloudy woman Babel they dyed for meer conjectures and opinions for they had not the first originall copies of Moses and the Prophets yea Stephen the first Martyr who according to all our copies Act. 7. addeth five to Moses his 70 soules that went downe to Egypt in that glorious Sermon that he hath before his death when he sealed the truth with his bloud and dyed gloriously and said Lord Jesus receive my spirit dyed but upon the faith of mens fallible skill in Grammer Printing and writing for he citeth the writings of Moses to his enemies that stoned him according to the copies that they then had who would quickly have controlled him if he had cited false copies and Stephens owne Testimony was contraverted and therefore except we say that Stephen and Christ and the Apostles cited the testimonies of the Prophets as they were then obvious to the eyes and reading of both the people of God and the enemies and that not simply as their owne words which they spake as immediately inspired but as the testimony of the Prophets according to the then written copies we must say they spake not Ingeniously the truth of God for it was against truth candour ingenuity to Christ and the Apostles to say as it is written in your Law Jo. 8. 17. and so often it is written if they would not have the hearers to receive with certainty of faith and full assurance free from all doubting and feare of humaue fallibility that what they cited as written was undoubtedly the same very truth of God and no other which Moses and the Prophets spoke and wrote and if they would not have them to read search and beleeve these same Scriptures and to conceive that they drew arguments in the New Testament to prove and confirme their doctrine from that which was written by Moses and the Prophets in the Old Testament and would not have them to beleeve them onely because New Testament writers immediately inspired had so said 6. If God will have us to try and examine all Spirits all Doctrines by the Scriptures written then are we certainly assured that the books we now have of the Old and New Testament are the very word of God though we cannot by any possibility have the first and originall authentick copies of Moses and the Prophets and Apostles Because 1. God would not bid us try and then leave us no rule to try withall but our owne naturall light which must lead us into darknesse 2. The visible Church should not be guilty of unbeleefe if the written word were not among us or then Christ and his Apostles speaking to us as is cleare Joh. 15. 22. Rom. 10. 14 15. Matth. 11. 21 22. The assumption is cleare by the commended practise of the Bereans who tryed Pauls doctrine by the Scriptures Act. 17. See Rivetus Whitaker Calvin 3. By the command of God 1 Thess 5. 2. 1 Joh. 4. 1. Try all things try the Spirits 7. John would not call those blessed who read and hear Rev. 1. 5. nor would Paul recommend reading to Timothy and continuance in the doctrine of the Scriptures and so extoll the necessity and utility of the Scripture and the indwelling of the word of God in us as he doth 1 Tim. 4. 16. 2 Tim. 14 15 16. Col. 3. 16. nor could the things written by John c. 21. 31. by Moses and the Prophets Luke 16. 29 30 31. be holden forth as sufficient to bring soules to heaven and to cause them eschew hell if it were true that we have no certainty that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the very word of God but such as is made of mens credit and learning 8. Yea and so what God spake immediately to Abraham Moses and the Prophets could not be infallibly and by certainty of faith to them the word of God for if God spake to them in a language intelligible they had no certainty of faith that the words that came from God did signifie thus and thus for sure God by immediate inspiration taught them not Grammar and significations of words and those that read the Law written by Gods finger on two Tables of stone those who heard Moses and the Prophets preach in their Mother-tongue even the Jewes who read the originall first Hebrew copy of Moses and the Prophets must have had no warrant that that was the word of God but the authority of Father Mother and Nurses who first taught them their Mother-tongue for sure the Prophets were not School-masters to teach them Hebrew so by this learning there was never since the world was any certainty of faith but such conjecturall humane and fallible opinions in all the matters of God as is resolved ultimately saith Mr. Goodwin into mens fallible and topicke authority and skill of Grammar and all divine faith is perished out of the earth nay there never could be any divine faith on earth except God by a supernaturall power taught men first Grammar and then to beleeve for which we have no warrant so all our faith must bee dreams And since Mr. Goodwin acknowledgeth a supernaturall power of the Spirit of Grace to beleeve what else doth this Spirit cause us beleeve but lyes or at best phancies resolved into humane credit which may be false for any certainty of knowledge that Libertines allow us Yea confident I am saith Mr. Goodwin that the wisest and most
and Orthodox meaning of the word not sufficient p. 66 Divers pious conferences betwixt us and Lutherans ibid. They hate God and love blasphemies in the consequence who obstinately hold them in the Antecedent p. 68 They may be false Teachers and so punishable who erre not in fundamentals p. 73 Divers things not fundamentaly believed with certainty of faith p. 75 Beleeving of truths revealed of God with a reserve blasphemous and turneth beleevers into Scepticks and Nullifidians p. 77 Beleeving with a reserve against the motion of the Holy Ghost p. 78 Beleeving with a reserve against the stabilitie of faith ibid. Against the trying of all things and spirits inioyned by the Holy Ghost p. 79 Faith with a reserve against our prayers for knowledge and growing therein p. 81 The Holy Ghost bids us not beleeve with a reserve p. 82 To beleeve with a reserve contrary to our doing and suffering for truth and faith p. 83 Two distinctions necessarie touching controverted points p. 85 Some things of their own nature not controversall yet the deductions from them to our blind nature are controversall ibid. Fundamentalls of faith most controversall to our blind nature p 86 Chap. 7. What opinions may be tollerated what not Some far off Errors may be tolerated p. 97 Schisme and actuall gathering of Churches out of Churches cannot be tolerated p. 98 The place Rom. 14. willing us to receive the weak no plea for toleration p. 100 Phil. 3. 15. Let us walke according to the same rule c. nothing for toleration p. 101 Chap. 8. Whether Heresie be a sin or a meer error and innocencie whether an Heretick be an evill doer Libertines make Heresie a meer innocent and unpunishable error of the mind p. 101 Heresie is a sin as wel as Idolatry though we could neither define Heresie nor Idolatry ibid. Heresie proved to be an hainous sin ibid. The Holy Ghost contrary to Libertines supposeth undeniablie that Hereticks are known and so they are not known to God only when he bids us beware of them avoid them bid them not God speed p. 105 Pertinacie may be and is known to men p. 106 Heresie a wicked resisting of the truth and yet not the blasphemie against the Holy Ghost p. 107 Libertines say that an Heretick dying for his Heresie hath no 〈◊〉 Conscience but a spirituall and heavenly end p. 108 The vain glory of the Devils Martyrs who die for Heresie p. 111 Spirituall stupidity and malice both together in Hereticks and Sâ—tâ—â—s Martyrs p. 113 Some ignorance consists with the sin against the Holy Ghost p. 114 Chap. 9. Of Libertie of prophecying of erroneous indictmâ—â—â— of Conscience that it is not our rule Who is an Heretick to Arminians Tit. 3. 10. p. 115 None to Libertines are Hereticks but such as professe a religion which they beleeve with perswasion to be false ibid Liberty of prophesying taken in a threefold sense p. 117 To desire false Prophets to cease out of the Land is no quenching of the Spirit p. 119 Chap. 10. Of indulgence in fundamentall or non-fundamentall errors How the Arminian Libertines doe define an Heretick p. 122 Hereticks to Libertines only such as deny things knowable by the light of nature p. 123 Diversitie of opinions among them ibid. The punishing of men for publishing of fundamentall errors and the indulgence of a Toleration yeelded to them though they teach all Errors in non-fundamentals a vain distinction and hath no groâ—â—â— in Scripture ibid. Some murthers non-fundamentall in David which yet are consistâ—â— with the state of salvation should as well be tolerated assome errors in non-fundamentals by the distinction of Libertines p. 124 Some non-fundamentals clearly in the word revealed not to bee beleeved with a reserve and others non-fundamentals with a reserve p. 126 Queries propounded to Libertines p. 128 Why may not the Magistrate lawfully spare the life of him who 〈◊〉 of a Libertine Conscience meerly sacrificeth his child to God or why should hee punish with the Sword some acts not desâ—â—â—ctive to peace in the Conscience of the punished and not all acts of the same kind p. 128 To compell men to â—oe against their Conscience that is to sin neither in Old or new Testament lawfull Deut. 13. and 17. p. 130 There is the same obligation the same formall reason so saith the Lord of beleeving non-fundamentall revealed and fundamentals and the same necessity of divine command not the same necessitie of means called necessitâ—s medii p. 132 Chap. 11. Of the obliging power of Conscience The State of the Question touching the obligation that Conscience layeth on us p. 134 Ancient bonds of Libertie of Conscience Sect. 2. Chap. 6. p. 26 p. 139 Though the Magistrate punish false Teachers it followeth not that he compells them to sin against their Conscience ibid. Gods way and manner of calling is no ground why the Magistrate should not punish false Teachers p. 141 Ancient bonds of Liberty of Conscience cap. 61 p. 26. p. 142 Who is the selfe-condemned Heretick Tit. 3. 10. ibid. Chap. 12. Arguments against pretended Toleration Toleration hath no warrant in the word p. 145 Toleration inferreth Sceptisme p. 146 Want of infallibility in the new Testament no reason for the toleration in the new Testament p. 148 Toleration is against faith hope comfort in the Scriptures p. 150 Toleration is against the Ministery of the word p. 151 Rulers by the fourth Commandment are to see all under them worship God p. 177 Proposals of the Armie under Sir Thomas Fairfax 12. p. 10. ib. Chap. 13. Magistracie and perpetuall Laws in the Old Testament warrant the civill coercing of false Prophets Rulers as Rulers not as typicall Rulers punished false Teachers with the Sword p. 177 Typicalnesse did not priviledge all the Kings of Judah and Israel to compell the Conscience and punish false Teachers as Libertines say p. 180 How typicalness priviledgeth men to such and such actions how not p. 181 Seducers punished by bodily death p. 182 Punishing of Idolaters and blasphemers of the Law of Nature p. 183 How warres that are extraordinarie in the manner and in some particular acts may be and are in the substance of the acts ordinarie ruler obliging us p. 184 The Law of God warranted by the Law teacheth that false Teachers and Hereticks are to be punished with the sword p. 185 The Law of Deut. 17. 2 3. for punishing of Idolaters p. 187 There was no consulting with the Oracle who should be put to death for his conscience in the Old Testament but an ordinarie pay of trying such evill doers by judiciall proceeding and hearing of witnesses ibid. The end of punishing of false Teachers with the sword is not their conversion to God ministers of the Gospel only labour in that field but the not perverting of souls and disturbing the safetie of humane societies p. 188 Sacrificing of Children to Molech punished with death by Gods Law not as murther but as spirituall whoredome ibid. Chap.
Physitian who can whol broken consciences or the saddest enemie if sick it is like an aking tooth the more you touch it the more it paines you The Conscience of its owne nature is a knowing power of the practicall understanding aâ— therefore no ilicite acts of the foule can be compelled neiâ—â—er can Conscience act being muzled and forced but this 〈…〉 but that men and devills in their conscience 〈…〉 beleeve many things in some 〈◊〉 against their will 〈…〉 out of the naturall efficacie of conscience cannot 〈◊〉 but â—ee must beleeve that there is a God yet where there is a trembling there must be some reluctancie in the will and affections Judaâ— must beleeve his damnation was approuching when he hanged himselfe but against his heart The Balgick Arâ—iâ—iaâ—s who contend for libertie of conscience in all wayes Apol. 95. 〈…〉 say By determinations of Synods violence iâ— not offered to conscience as conscience signifieth a meere internall act of the mind immanent or byding within the mind but as conscience signifieth an act of the mind by which any doth beleeve 〈…〉 oblieged 〈◊〉 teach others which he per 〈◊〉 himselfe to 〈…〉 so the man is compelled by a Synods prescription to dissemble what he beleeveth he ought to professe and which he beleeveth to be false Answ Say that the decision of the Synod be agreeable to the word the Lord layeth on the coaction to all to beleeve and accordingly professe the truth and that by a Synod as Christ saith he that heareth you heareth me so the coaction such as it is must come principally from God instrumentally from the Synod but it floweth from both by accident and through mens abuse who receive not the truth in love but for feare of shame least they should by the godly goe for perverters of soules Act. 15. that they doe hypocritically professe what they ought sincerely to beleeve and professe May we not say many men of corrupt minds beleeved Circumcision to be necessary and yet for feare of the Apostles censure that they should be judged troublers of souls lyars and false teachers as they are judged to bee Act. 15. 24. would dissemble And they are no other wayes by a Synodicall truth compelled to lie and dissemble by shame and falling out of the hearts of the Apostles and of all the godly the one way than the other in that case than in this 〈◊〉 For there be but two wayes of working on the mind to drive men to bee of another opinion one by feare either of shame reproach or censures civill or ecclesiasticall another by meere teaching and instructing Now for the libertie of prophecying that Arminiaâ—s require and so the libertie of Synods let us inquire if it be true libertie 1. They require a full libertie to every man without scruple or feare of danger to declare his mind in Synods and to examine what is controverted Answ It is in some respect commendable that hereticks be candid and ingenuous to declare even what their hereticall judgement and inditement of conscience leades them to beleeve but a full liberty to question in the Synode whether there be a God or no or whether Christ dyed for sinners ought not to be for that is lycense and hereticall lycense a point controverted any may question and these that Act. 15. held necessitie of circumcision might seeke resolution of their arguments and doubts but under pretext of libertie free of feare and danger they have not libertie to sinne that is after they are or may be if wilfulnesse stood not in their way inwardly convinced they have not libertie obstinately to presse sophismes against the truth for this is an undenyable principle libertie to sinne is fleshly lycense not libertie Armin. In controversies of Religion which the Scripture doth not evidently decide what can certainely be determined by the Church which ever and in every thing which it determines is beleeved may erre Answ There is nothing that the Scripture hath left simple and in it selfe controversall Actâ—â— primo the Scripture hath determined of all things conteined in it whether fundamentals or not fundamentals onely in regard of our dulnesse and sinfull blindnesse some things are controverted and therefore the Church may determine from light of the word some thing that was a controversie to the Fathers ignorant of the originall tongues which is now no controversie Yea the fallible Church may determine infallible points This is a principle that Libertines proceed upon that men who are not infallible may erre and therefore can hold forth to others no infallible truth Which is most false for Prophets and Apostles Nathan Samuel David Peter being deserted of the immediately inspiring Spirit did erre as well as the Church and Pastors now deserted of the ordinary Spins can and doe erre For â—â—ll men Prophets and Apostles are 〈◊〉 Rom. 3. yet they may and doe carrie infallible truth to others 〈◊〉 blind man may hold a candle to others 3. By this reason Pastors can preach nothing certaine in fundamentals though faith come by hearing and faith is of a certaine and determinate fixed truth of God more permanent than heaven or earth why because by this reason Pastors in preaching fundamentals are not infallible 4. Nor is this a good reason it is beleeved the Church may erre in Synods ergo it doth erre and determines nothing that is infallible and certaine in Synods no more then this is a good consequence David may sinne in praying ergo he doth sinne in praying a potentia ad actum non valet consequentia Armin. A confession is not a rule of faith it hath not the lowest place in the Church Answ The Covenant written and sealed in Nehemiahs time was a secondarie rule of faith and a rule e'n so farre as it agreed with the Law of Moses for they enter in a curse and an oath to walke in Gods Law not to give their sonnes and daughters in marriage to the Heathen not to buy victuals from the Heathen on the Sabboth to charge themselves to give money to maintain the service of God Nehe. 9. 38. chap. 10. 1 2 3. 29 30. 31 32. Which written Covenant was not Scripture and Act. 15. the decrees of the Synod was not formally Scripture yet to bee observed as a secondary rule For so farre Arminians A Doctor as a Doctor beleeveth not a Doctor beleeveth as a sheepe not as a shepheard and his judgement of matters of faith is not publick but private and common to teachers with every one of the sheepe and there is a like and equall power in shepheard and every one of the flock of beleeving and the sheepe in matters of faith are no more obleiged to stand to the judgement of the shepherd than the teachers to the judgement of the sheepe the teachers have a priviledge of order and honor above the sheepe but no priviledge of Law and power Then the Church though she beleeve
and certainly know that she erreth not in her decisions yea though it fall out she erre not yet ought not to take power to her selfe to command others to beleeve that to be true which she beleeves or to impose silence upon others who cannot in conscience acquiesce to what they command Answ There is some-thing true in this there is a two-fold judgement one saving and Christian common to all by which both shepheard and sheep beleeve and its true of this that the sheepe are no more to stand to the judgement of shepheards thâ—â— the shepheards to the judgement of the sheepe in point of Christian beleeving which sure is common to both shepheard and sheepe for the alone authoritie of God speaking in his word And so the Doctor beleeves not as a Doctor but as a Christian But secondly there is another judgement that is ministeriall officiall and authoritative and this is terminated not on Christian beleeving but supposeth a ministeriall beleeving that what the shepheard teacheth others God revealed to him first and is put forth in a ministeriall and officiall judging either in Synods or in publick Pastorall Sermons and authoritative but ministeriall publishing the will and mind of Christ Mal. 2. 7. They shall seeke the Law from his mouth Heb. 13. 7. 17. That way the people depends upon the Ministeriall judgement of Synods and Pastors but it s most false that Pastors depends on their Ministeriall judgement who are sheepe and that there is a like and equall power in shepheards and sheepe and its false that though the Church beleeves she erres not and doth not erre yet the Church may not command and in Synods Ministerially and with all authoritie rebuke such a pervert soules Act. 15. 22. And that Doctors may not as the Heraulds and Ministers of Christ rebuke men sharply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they may be sound in the faith Tit. 1. 12. For Pastors and Synods teach fundamentals of faith ministerially to the people and by hearing of them is faith begotten in the hearers and they may command exhort rebuke with all long suffering 2. Tim. 4. 1 2. 2 Tim. 2. 14. stop their mouthes Tit. 1. 11. and authoritatively enjoyne them silence Act. 15. 22 23 24 25. Act. 6. 4. Though they cannot by reason of an erroneous conscience or a conscience burnt with an hot iron acquiesce to the determination of a Synod Yea though they bee unruly vaine talkers and deceivers they must be commanded to bee silent Nor must the Church and Angels of the Church of Thyatira Ephesus or Pergamus suffer Jezabell to seduce not â—avening wolves to devoure the flock nor their word to eate as a Caâ—ker For this judgement authoritative as it is in the head of the Church Christ as in the fountaine and onely Law-giver so it is Ministerially onely and by way of office in the Elders as the will and mind of the King is in the inferiour Judge the Ambassadour or Herauld not in the people And the people are obleiged to obey those that are over them in the Lord who watch for their soules as those who must give an account But there is no ground to say the shepheards are obleiged to stand to and obey the ministeriall and officiall judgement of the people and of this it is said he that heareth you Ministers of the Gospel not the people heareth me he that dispiseth you dispiseth mee And this is more then a priviledge of order and honor which one Christian hath above another in regard of eminencie of graces gifts and of wisdome experience and age it is a priviledge of office to speake in the name of the Lord and yet it is inferiour to a priviledge of law because the Lord onely imposeth lawes upon the Conscience for it is a middle judgement lesse then Legislative Supreme and absolute over the Conscience this is in none save onely in the King and head of the Church and is Royall and Princely Yet is it more I say not more excellent it not being saving of it selfe as in beleevers than a priviledge of meere honour and order for though it lay no more bands on the Conscience to obtain faith because it is holden forth by men it having no influence on the Conscience because of men whose word is not the formall object of faith yet hath it an officiall authoritie from Pastours which is not meerely titularie so as they may ministerially and officially command obedience to their judgement as far as it agrees with the mind of Christ no farther and when it is disobeyed may inflict censures which private Christians cannot doe and putteth these who disobey under another guiltinesse then if private Christians did speake the same word to wit not onely in a case of disobedience to the second command but in a state of disobedience to the fift command formally as not honouring father and mother where as to disobey that same word by way of Counsel in the mouth of a brother though it be the breach of the fift command also Yet not in such a manner as when we refuse to heare the messenger of the Lord of Hoasts and his judgement as a messenger of God is publique and bindes as publike to highest obedience to the fift command but as it is a judgement of faith common to the Doctor with other Christians it bindes as the minde of God holding faith in the second Commandment what wee are to believe Armmians The word of God is sufficient for the deciding of controversies its cleare what neede it there of decision if men acquiesce to the decision of God as it lyes in Scripture if the word of God expresse the sense of God or if it have need of interpretation why is there not a free interpretation left to every manâ—â— doe we think that our words are clearer than the word of God we doe a â—â—nithic injury to the word of God if we believe that How much better were it if we would nourish peace and concord leaving interpretations free to every man It is most sure to containe our selves within the speaking of the holy Scripture and the forme of words of the holy Ghost and that no man be troubled who shewes himself willing to containe himself within these Answ Here is a meere fluctuation and Septicism even in fundamentals and the faith of them for all interpretation of Scripture is rejected there is no destinction in fundamentals or no fundamentals for in principles of faith that Christ is God and man and dyed for sinners the Scripture is most plaine and what need then of our interpretation then let Arrians and Secinnians beleeve him to be God man and to die for sinners in their sense the Familists in a contrary sense the Georgians in another contrary sense the Papists in a third the Protestants in a fourth and so as many heads as many faiths every sect and man must have some sense else his faith is non-sense and if
he erre from the sense of the Holy Ghost the Scripture is no Scripture if it be believed in a sense contrary to the Scripture to him who so believes and so his faith is no faith but a vaine night-phancie and seeing the word of God gives us but one faith and one truth and one Gospel if interpretations be left free to every man these Libertines gives us millions of faiths with millions of senses and so no faith at all Secondly They give us two decisions one made by God and another by the Church contrary to Gods that has no rule but every mans private judgement and free phancie as if the decision of controversies made by the Church in Synods which we suppose is not divided from that of Gods were some other thing then the decision of the Holy Ghost speaking in the word and declared by the Church in a ministeriall way and if it be any other than this it is not to be received nor a lawfull decision ministeriall of a Synod but to be rejected Thirdly if there be no need of a decision to expone the word because the word is clear if we wrong the word of God if we think our words are clearer that Gods it is true if we had eyes to see and apprehend the minde of God in his word without an interpretation then all ministerie and proaching of the Gospel is cried downe by this what have any to doe to expone the first principles of the Oracles of God to the Hebrews c. 5 â— or what need they teach exhort preach in season and out of season What needeth the Eunuch a teacher or Cornolius Peter or Saul Ananias to teach them had they not the Scriptures if Timothie the preachers that speake the word of the Lord to the Hebrews Philip Peter Ananias think their words clearer than the word of God they doe a great injurie to the word of God or if they beleeved their words were clearer than the words of Esaiah and the Prophets and they did that which was not necessary if they opened and expounded the Prophets and decided controversies for they should have acquiesced to the decision of God as it lyeth in the Scripture and not have preached but read the Prophets and left it free to the hearers to put on the words of Scripture what interpretation and sense they thought best Fourthly That no Confessions ought to be but in expresse words of Scripture shall free all one and consequently all Churches from obedience to that which Peter commands 1 Pet. 3. 15. Be readie alwayes to give an answere to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with â—â—eeknesse and fear When Stephen Acts 7. and Paul Acts 26. were accused of heresie and speaking against Moses and the semple they made a confession of their faith not in words of Scripture but in deductions and necessary consequences drawne from Scripture and applyed to themselves and these in Nehemiahs time who wrote and sealed or subscrubed a Covenant did not write and seale the expresse Decalogne and ten Commandements 〈◊〉 the words of the Covenant of Grace I will be thy God and the God of thy seed but entered into a curse and into an Oath to walke in Gods Law which was given by Moses the servant of God and to observe and to doe all the Commandements of the Lord our God and his judgements and his statutes and that say they we would not give our daughters to the people of the Land nor take their daughters for our sons and if the people of the Land bring ware or victuals on the Sabbath day to sell that we would not buy it of them Nehemiah c. 10. v. 29 30 31 32 33 34. c. compared with Nehe. c. 9. v. 38. Which words are not a confession nor Covenant in expresse Scripture save that they are historically insetted in the Cannon of the Scripture by the Holy Ghost In which sense the law and decree of Nebuchadnezzar Daniel 6. And of other heathen Kings as Daniell 3. 29. 30. Ezra 1. 2 3. c. 7. 11 12 13 14. c. Are Scriptures but they are not the expresse words of the Law for there is nothing in the expresse Law touching the Sabbath of not buying ware and victual from the heathen of the land that Nehemiah speakes of which warranteth us to enter in the like Covenant and make the like Confession of faith to defend and stand to the Protestant Religion and that Christ was God and man and man in one person and that we shall not buy ware or victuals from the Anabaptist and Familists of England who trample on the Sabbath day though these be not expresse words of Scripture It is true Libertines say men have made Apologies and confessions of faith for their own defence as Steven and Paul but they injoyned not these by authoritie and command as a rule of faith upon others and wrote them not as a fixed standard of the faith of others and that warrants no Church to impose a faith upon others Answ 1. This will prove that as one man accused of heresie may publish a confession of his faith which may cleare his innocencie and the soundnesse of his faith to others and remove the scandall according to that of 1 Pet. 3. 15. And by the same reason Independents Libertines Familists Antinomians Anabaptists and all the Sects of England upon the same ground that the Albigenses went upon should by some Confession and Covenant give an account of their faith and hope with meeknesse and feare And what particular persons are obleiged to doe that Churches when they are slandered as unsound in the faith are oblieged to doe and so I looke at a forme or confession of faith as a necessary Apologie for clearing of the good name of a Church defamed with Heresies and new sects but for the imposing of this Confession upon others these others are either Neighbour-Churches or their own Members As concerning neighbour-Churches they have no Authoritie over them Yet may they declare that Familists who say Christ is not come in the flesh are the Spirit of the Antichrist and for these of their own Church if they goe out from them and separate to an Antichristian side after the example of the Apostles and Elders they may command them to abstaine from such and such hereticall opinions and after they have convicted them as perverters of souls proceed to excommunication against them as refusers to consent to the forme of wholesome words as may be prooved from Math. 18. 15 16 17. c. Rom. 16. 17 1 Thes 2. 13 14 15. And other Scriptures as Reve. 2. 1 2 3. v. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. Now that it is not sufficient that they be put to subscribe a confession of faith in onely scripture words is cleare 1. because the Jews will sweare and seale the old Testament in their own sense but their sense makes the old
decided be true and agreeable to the word of God of necessitie every mans private judgement must goe before otherwise it s an implicite faith Answ That any man should duely and as he ought beleeve and receive the decision of a Synod it must be both true and 〈◊〉 must believe and know that it is true but that it may oblidge him and doth oblidge him whether his conscience be erroneous or no is as true for then this Commandement Thou shalt not kill Honour thy father and thy mother should lay no 〈◊〉 on a man that believes it is service to God to kill the Apostâ—â— as Joh. 16. some doe For no man is exempted from an obligation to obey Gods Law because of his own sinfull and culpable ignorance for we speak not now of invincible ignorance of these things which we are not oblidged to know or believe But if our sinfull and erroneous conscience free us from actuall obligation to be tyed by a Law then our erroneous conscience freeth us from sinning against a Law and â—o from punishment for what ever freeth a man from actuall obligation freeth him also from actuall sinning for all sinne is a doing against a Law-obligation and if so then are none to be led by any rule but their own conscience the written Law and Gospel is not henceforth our rule any more Arminiars The last condition of a Synod is that the subject of a Synodical decision be ever left to a free examination and to a farther free discussion and revise The learned professours of Leyden answer that which is once true and fixed in the word of God is ever true and fixed in the word of God The Arminians reply what is true and fixed in the word of God is â—ver so and ought to remaine so for the word is beyond all danger of erring But what is believed to be fixed and fixed and Ratified in a Synod is not so because it is obnoxious to errour Answ They require that before we come to a Synod where fundamentall truths are Synodically determined we be as a razed table and as cleane paper in which no thing is written and so must we be after a Synod hath determined according to the word of God that is be still Scepticks and believe nothing fixedly and be rooted in no faith nay not in the faith of the fundamentals that are most cleare in the word of God for it is unpossible that we can beleeve the clearest fundamentals as that God created the world and Christ God-Man redeemed it but we must beleeve them by the intervening and intermediation of â—ur own sense or the Churches sense or the sense of some Godly Doctour now because all these senses are fallible and we see Familists put one sense on fundamentals Papists another sense and all private men may doe the like it is not possible that any man can be rooted in any faith at all by this way for all senses are fallible though the scripture giveth clear evident senses yet such is the Hereticall dulnesse of men that reject these infallible senses as false and those others that by their own confession are fallible and so can neither be established by the word nor by the interpretations of men though senses of Scripture rendered by Synods be fallible in the way they come to us because men delivering them may erre yet being agreeable to the word they are in themselves infallible And so the old and new Testament in the way they come to us may be fallible because Printers are not prophets but may miscarry and dreame but it followeth not they are not the infallible word of life in themselves when the Spirit witnesseth to us that God divinitie transforming glory are in these books as a spouse knoweth the hand-writstill lovelinesse of a letter from her husband to be certainly no counterfeit but true though the bearer be a rogue and can deceive Secondly this answer still supposeth that Synods do give senses contrary to the word of God and so we grant they are not onely fallible but false and erroneous and are to be examined of new again in that case but we hold when lawfull Synods convened in the name of Christ doe determine according to the word of God they are to be heard as Ambassadours who in Christs stead teach us and what is once true and ratified in Synods in this manner is ever true and ratified as the reverend professours say and never subject to any further examination and new discussion so as it must be changed and retracted as false For this is to subject the very word of God to retractation and change because a Synod did declare and truely determine it in a Ministeriall way to be the word of God For what Synods determine being the undenyable word of God iâ— intrinsecally infallible and can never become fallible though fallible and sinfull men that are obnoxious to errour and mistakes doe hold it forth Ministerially to others and it is false that we are to believe that what Synods determine according to the word of God we are to believe it is fallible and lyable to errour and may an untruth because they so determine for then when a Synod determines there is but one true God the principle of faith is believed to be subject to Retraction and falshood because a Synod hath determined it to be a truth But the truth is we are to believe truths determined by Synods to be infallible and never againe lyable to retractation or discussion because they are and were in themselves and without any Synodicall determination infallible but not for this formall medium because so saith the Synod but because so saith the Lord It is true new hereticks pretending new light may arise as Math. 24. 24. And call in question all Fundamentalls that are determined that are cleared in former Synods but it follows not but these truths are still in themselves fixed and unmovable as the Pole-star though evil men bring them under a new Synodicall examination as Familists doe now raze the foundations of Christianitie yet Daniel and Christ are Innocent though wicked men accuse them judicially as deceivers nor is it enough that Libertines say it may be the word of God and the infallible word of God which the Synod determineth but it is not so to us we are to believe it with a reserve because we cannot know it so to be But I answer this concludes not onely against a Synodicall determination but against all Scripture and all Propheticall and Apostolicall determinations in the Scripture for that there is one God not three as the Treithits dreame is believed by some to be false by others to be true Yet undenyably it is in it self true that there is but one God nor is it therefore to be believed with a reserve because the Synod hath so determined according to the word of God and this were some answer if we should teach
17. to lay on burdens and decrees Act. 15. 28. c. 16. 1. And that all that heare them believe and receive as true what they speak in the Name of the Lord according to that he thâ—â— heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth me 〈◊〉 that will not hear an Ambassadour as an Ambassadour speaking from his Master and Prince refuseth to hear the Prince that 〈◊〉 him yet we say not that they are to be heard without controversie as they object that is peremptorily absolutely as if their word were the very Oracle of God but they are to be heard but not but after trying and searching and not but conditionally in so farre as they carrie the minde of God along with them so that there may be an appeal to the Scripture place left for examining and trying of their doctrine whether it be so or not Another Libertine saith it is in vaine said Try all things of a Synod may impose for either the tryall relates to a particular judgement to be made and that judgement to a practice to be confirmed or not if not as good not try if I try onely for tryals sake and if when I have tryed I am but where I was to will I must be concluded by others vote and imposition if yea then to what purpose is the imposition for if I approve it the imposition is needlesse if I reject 't is fruitlesse Answ 1. There is no doubt but trying all things 1 Thess 5. relates to judgement and practice nor is it more against the Ministeriall and conditionall imposition of a Synod to you to try then it is against the imposition and commanding power of the Prophets Jeremiah or others or the Apostles Paul Act 17. or John 1 Joh. 4. 1. For Prophets and Apostles impose Scripture as Paul did Act. 17. on the Bereans but conditionally after they finde it agreeable to the Scripture and the Prophets and Apostles conclude by their vote and sentence yet better you trie as not try For this argument is more against the Bereans trying of Paul who had Apostolike power to impose and place the poore Bereans in the place they were in before they tryed and so as good the Bereans not try Pauls doctrine as try it for they are concluded by Pauls vote if they miscarry in their trying and finde though mistakingly and ignorantly as this Gamaliâ—l argueth that Pauls doctrine is contrary to the Scriptures are they not concluded under unbelief in refusing the Gospel and in stumbling at the stone layed on Sion sure they are 2. If you approve Pauls doctrine the imposition or peremptory command of Paul to receive it else he will shake the dust off his feet against you and leave death at your doore the imposition is not needlesse but the commanding power in the Ambassadour of Christ be they one as a single pastour or many as a Synod is not needlesse but usefull and fruitfull and is the power of God and the savour of life in it selfe Should an ignorant man say the Commanding Ministeriall power of the Gospel which saith except ye beleeve ye shall die in your sins needlesse when it bringeth forth fruit Suppose Paul say to Elimas as in effect he did if thou wilt not beleeve and cease to pervert others from beleeving I will smite thee with blindnesse If this imposing had wrought faith in Elimas as by the grace of God it might had this imposing been needlesse the man might as well say because this tree brings forth fruit being digged and branched and pruned therefore digging was needlesse But he supposeth vainly that imposing and commands issuing from Synods under penalties and censures are contrary to trying all things because imposing concludes men under censures though they trie the decrees of Synods to be unjust but the imposing of Synods is conditionall not absolute as Libertines suppose for after Synods impose if beleevers after trying and due examining shall finde that truely and really the decrees are beside or contrary to the word of truth the imposing neither is a just Imposing not any imposing at all For neither Prophet nor Apostle nor Angel from heaven nor Church can lay commands upon men imposing or binding under pain of censures to that which is unsound and false or unjust or wicked and if people shall finde their decrees truly to be so after tryall they have power to reject them And 3. the last part of the Argument if I reject the imposing command of a Synod It is fruitlesse is a poore one like the wit of the Authour For if I reject these imposing commands when just and lawfull they are fruitlesse to me and the favour of death as the despised Gospel is But not simply fruitlesse on Gods part is the argument supposeth except the Authour with Arminians dreame that God intendeth obedience in all lawfull Ordinances but he cometh short of his end in the Reprobate But Ordinances are not fruitlesse to God for they prosper ever in the errand they are sent for Esay 55. 11. 2 Cor. 2. 16. 17. If they render men unexcusable they are not fruitlesse for they cleare the Justice of God 2. They that have Right saith the Authour and power of imposing are Lords of my faith but so are not any men the Apostles themselves assumed it not for by faith ye stand Take away a Christians Judicious faâ—th and you take away his legges his standing under him Answ So doe all the ignorant and heady Libertines in England argue but not one of them had a head ever to prove this consequence For the Apostles had Ministeriall right to impose and command in the name of the Lord under paine of censures yet are not either Prophets or Apostles lords of mens faith but Ministers and mere servants it is just as if you would say such a Justice of peace imposeth that is commandeth you obey such lawes under penalties ergo this justice of peace takes on him to be Soveraigne Prince and King over these whom he thus imposingly commandeth 2. This imposing takes not away judicious beleeving all is a beggerly suiting of the question If imposing were a commanding that wee receive absolutely what they say be it good or ill without examining the argument were concludent as God himself requires Abraham to kill his sonne Abraham was without examination to give absolute obedience and this proveth God to be Lord of the conscience for knowing his word to bee his word wee are not to examine it by the Scripture or Law of nature because if we know who speaks we are not to examine what is spoken But though we know who speaks among Creatures be it a Prophet an Apostle an Angel yet must we examine both who speaks and what is spoken 3. In vaine saith he did the Bereans try the Apostles doctrine and unduelie were they commended if that doctrine were imposed upon them Answer It follows onely in vaine did the Bereans try Pauls
c. What reason in nature can there be to punish the one and not the other for it may with as good colour of reason be said that all the Lawes in the old Testament for drawing of the sword against Sodomites Adulterers and such like were typicall and temporary and are done away now in Christ for Christ will have these converted in as spirituall a way by the onely power of the word of God as the other and no where in any expresse law in the New Testament doth God command to use the bloody sword against them more then against blasphemers And to remove these grosse sins out of Christian societies by the sword is no lesse a carnall and a bodily afflictive way of dealing with their consciences as to deal so with seducers and it s enough to that negative argument that no where it is expressed as a dutie of the Magistrate under the New Testament to use the sword against false teachers nor does our Saviour or the Apostles rebuke the Magistrate for omitting of their dutie in this Yea Paul 1 Cor. 6. 9 10 11. when he shewes that some of the Corinthians abused their body with mankinde were theevâ—s drunkards extortioners he no where saith that it was the Magistrates dutie to take away their head for Sodomie which certainly it was and that by the verie law of nature but he was Gods instrument for their conversion by the power of the word ver 11. and 1 Cor. 4. 15. as he laboured to convert the Galdehians who sometimes worshipped dumb Idols and the Ephesians who worshipped the vaine Idol Diana Act. 19. yea nor is there any New Testament law for taking away the life of a murtherer for that of our Saviours Math. 26. 52. all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword except we say it was so a Judiciall law among the Jews as it was a law of nature Gen. 9. before there was a Common wealth erected among the Jews cannot be called a new Testament law to Peter and John and the disciples who were obliged at that same verie time to keepe the passeover and to be subject to all the Jewish laws CHAP. V. Of Fundamentals A Foundation saith Pareus Iren. c. 9 is that which is in the lowest place of the building to beare up that which is built upon it and without which the building cannot stand That then must be the foundation of faith and salvation which is precisely necessary to be believed by all that are saved Alardas Valek gives us four fundamentals facienda vitanda things to be done and eschewed in the Decalogue 2. credenda to be believed in the Creed 3. roganda to be sought from God in prayer 4. â—surpanda things to be practised as the Sacraments How the repenting thiese knew all these I see not yet a taste of some of them ye may see and with the infused life of God he was ready to believe and doe the rest For the first he knew robberie and violence to be damned in the Decalogue we are justly here and repented 2. for the second he believed in Christ as a King the Son of God and a Saviour Christ was accused that he called himself the Sonne of God and a king when the man saith of Christ this man hath done nothing amisse he believes him to be the Sonne of God and the Saviour who had the keyes of paradice at his girdle 3. he prayes to him Lord remember me when thou comes to thy Kingdome 4. for externall worship or Sacraments it is like he knew little yet he confessed Christ a King when his disciples denyed him and fled and the world persecuted him Cycillus Hyerosolymitian reduceth them to two the knowledge of points of faith 2. the doing of good works Had he added according to the new covenant it were good Calvin saith epist 182. I refuse not the Augustine confession Cui pridem volens libens subscripsi sicut eam Author interpretatus est Yet in the 10. article thereof the substantiall bodie and blood of Christ is said to be really present under the spece of bread and wine Ambrose in cap. 9. Lu. negat Christum qui non omnia qua sunt Christi confitetur It is onely thus farre true the that hath sufficient meanes of believing what the word saith may confesse all truths of Christ and doth not denie Christ but as some doe not all the good they may yet have a saving disposition to it though either they through infirmities leave it undone or through want of oportunitie yet believing are saved So these that want means of knowing and confessing all truths yet have the habit of faith to believe them though they never actually confesse them doe not deny Christ Though Irenem l. 1. c. 3. Tertullian de Virginibus velandis Augusti to 10. de Tempore sar 2. and Russiâ—â—â— in the exposition of the Creed say that which is called the Apostles Creed came from the Apostles yet there is no sufficient ground for us to believe the authentick Authoritie of it Conrad worships while he was yet sound de pausis just it necessariis deserendi papatus par 1. dis 1. the 29. saith of these points that are contained in the Apostles Creed some things are simply necessarie for salvation without which faith and repentance cannot be 2. some not so necessarie yet profitable and of themselves saving 3. other things by consequence and by accident are necessarie not of themselves and separate from the fundamentals the Church of Rome erres in the fundamentals in the doctrine of our Saviour and his offices in the doctrine of merit humane satisfactions indulgences the Scriptures the Church In the 2. they erre about baptisme the Lords supper confirmation unction pennance though of themselves they happily deprive not of life eternall yet because the subject about which the matter is versed is most necessary they are pernicious errors These of the third sort touching creation providence mortification though of themselves they might be called errours simple ignorance yet for the dangerous consequences they are pernicious heresies Mr. John Durie in his Theological consultation maketh three sort of necessary points 1. these without the knowledge of which Christ cannot be known in the covenant of grace nor by faith retained which are comprehended in the paction of the covenant 2. saving points which secretly lurk in these necessirie points yet by just and evident consequence may be deduced there from though they be not in the expresse words of the covenant 3. some things that are profitable the expresse knowledge whereof conduceth to the fuller knowledge and faith of these things necessarie yet are not such but Christ may be believed by simple soules and rested on for salvation without such a precise forme of speaking Augusti de Trinit l. 14. c. 1. It is one thing to know what we are to believe another thing how or with what certaintie we
are to believe Nazianz. Orat. 5. de Theol. perinde ea qua ex Scripturis colliguntur atqui ea qua scribuntur What is in Scripture by consequence is Scripture the ignorance of the Resurrection which was in Scripture to the Sadduces by consequence onely was an ignorance of the Scripture 〈◊〉 22. 29 30 31. and a soul condemning errour It is a question yea no question to die denying the resurrection is to die without saith happily to die ignorant of it having never heard the Gospel is not so high a sinne but who can say such can be saved August serm 30. de verbis Apost Si negent equalem negant filium si negant filium negant Christum si negant Christum negant in carne venisse Origen l. 2. de peccat c. 34. all Christians faith stands in these two that the first Adam destroyed us the second saves us errours about justifying saith and errours touching historicall faith are farre different The foundation is Christ and none but he 2. the gold builded on the foundation is the doctrine of Christ and a created thing yet simply necessary to be believed 3. the hay and stubble that is builded on it must be vanities and fooleries believed yet of themselves such as extinguish not saving faith and love no more then sins of infirmitie are inconsistent with saving faith then both the mans hay and stubble and his sins of infirmitie against the second table may be burnt and the man saved but it follows not the Church and Magistrate should therefore not punish or censure the builders of hay and stubble upon the foundation but should tollerate them for a Godly man as David and Peter may fall in adulterie in treacherous murther and denyall of Christ yet it follows not that the Magistrate should tollerate and not punish murther and adulterie in a Christian societie and that Paul should not sharply rebuke and if need be farther proceed to the censure of the Church if Peter either deny his Lord though out of infirmitie and fear or if he Judaize and looke awry to the Gospel CHAP. VI. Errours in Non-Fundamentals obstinately holden are punishable YEe must beare one anothers infirmities and restore these that fall with the spirit of meeknesse Gal. 6. 1. and yet not tollerate their errours and forbear to admonish and also shaâ—ply rebuke them and if need be the Church and Magistrate may proceed to further censures to excommunication and the use of the sword for justice is not contrary to meeknesse nor one fruit of the Spirit contrarie to another He 〈◊〉 spareth the rod hateth the childe yet should not a father be cruell to his childe nor is his correcting contrarie to fatherly compassion but not correcting is crueltie to and hatred of the childe and the like we are to think of the punishments and censures of the Nurse father of the Church and of the Church There be some things of doubtfull disputations that the weak in knowledge cannot conceive and yet are to be instructed in meeknesse and received as brethren Rom. 14. 1. 2. but if these same weak after sufficient instruction when the Ceremonies of Moses law became deadly and unlawfull as they were then indifferent would needs be circumcised abstain from meats and keep the whole Ceremoniall law whatever should be said on the contrarie and would compell others to be circumcised and pervert the souls of many even after the date of the indifferencie of these things is expired Paul then is so farre from giving place for an hour or betraying Christian libertie Gal. 2. or from bearing with them that he withstandeth them to their faces and wisheth that such as trouble others so were cut off and might bear their judgement Gal. 5. 10. 11. which clearly holdeth forth what ever the meaning of these words be that Paul though these that would teach others they must be circumcised were worthy to bear their judgement and to be punished for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth And it shall be a work of difficultie to prove that to be circumcised was necessary to salvation and these that so taught Act. 15. and Gal. chap. 5. did teach an errour of it self fundamentall and that subverted the faith who ever then would be circumcised fell from Christ Gal. 5. as Paul saith but that was by consequence sure it was not an errour in terminis fundamentall as this Christ is not the Saviour of mankinde onely it was an errour that by consequence subverted the foundation and was a falling from Christ by consequence and a comming again under the debt of the whole law and of salvation by the law which was ever impossible and to say it was necessary to salvation necessitate medij so as all the Galathians who received Christ and the Gospel and would have plucked out their eyes for Paul who died ignorant of this point who ever will now be circumcised is fallen from Christ were eternally damned and dyed out of Christ is a groundlesse saying there was a glorious Church in Galatia before Paul wrote that epistle to them for he wrote it upon occasion of their being seduced who were made believe the necessitie of circumcision and it is clear Paul would not have written that of circumcision if that errour had not been sowen among them by false teachers if therefore such as were made beleive that had not beene bewitched to believe the necessitie of Ceremonies for justification they being in Christ should have been saved by faith though this controversie in terminis had never come to their ears whither are believers justified by faith onely or must they also be circumcised and keep the Law that they may be justified and saved And sure many are now in our dayes which is more glorified who never knew but onely virtually and implicitely that to be circumcised or to keep Jewish dayes is not necessary to justified persons yea sure many in Britaine are saved who never knew this fundamentall truth 2. Act. 15. it is cleare that some taught the brethren except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses ye cannot be saved the contrary truth is no expresse fundamentall truth because a fundamentall truth expressely necessary is so necessary necessitate medij as without the knowledge thereof we cannot be saved Now these teachers knew that the Apostles and Elders and Saints at at Jerusalem were not circumcised so and they knew believing Gentiles were not circumcised at all and yet they knew the Apostles were not damned they knew all children dying before the eight day were not damned they must then hold that Circumcision was onely necessary to salvation by way of precept and the brethren that believed and so if they had dyed in that state had undeniably been saved were ignorant of this and v. 7. there was much disputing among believers yea among the Apostles who were not ignorant of fundamentals and undoubtedly had saving faith long before Math. 16. 17. 18.
till James fully determined the question from the word of God v. 13 14 15 16. then it is most clear that these that erre in other points that are not fundamentals in which all Christians agree may be perverters of souls and so deserve to be rebuked by the Church and punished 3. This opinion of so 〈◊〉 ring all save such as erre in fundamentals though they 〈◊〉 non fundamentals is grounded upon this that the Scripture is evidently plain and clear in fundamentals but in other points 〈◊〉 non-fundamentals the Scripture is dark and in regard of the darknesse and naturall ignorance of our minde which is inâ—â—cible almost we must forbear one another and give and take elbow-roome and latitude of indulgence because the Magistrate and Church are not infallible but both Godly and learned may be on each side so that there should be no peace nor union of hearts in Christian societies but all Churches or earth must disband and be dissolved if each should punish and censure one another for holding contrary tenets But 1. Mr. John Goodwine who contendeth for a Catholicke tolleration of all of any Religion whatsoever whither they erre in fundamentals or non-fundamentals and his words because nnanswerable to me against this distinction I set down I desire it be taken saith he to serious consideration 〈◊〉 or how farre it is meet to punish or censure poor miserable men for not holding or not asserting the truth of these things which they cannot come without much labour and contention of minde yea not without some good degree of some reason and understanding too to judge so much as probable nor at all to come to believe or know them certainly but onely by an immediate and supernaturall work of the Spirit of Godâ— are 〈◊〉 to be punished because God hath not imparted to them his Spirit of grace and supernaturall illumination This learned and sharp witted Divine as any I see of that way confirms me much that tolleration in non-fundamentals and non-tolleration in errours fundamentall is a distinction cannot subsist in the way that Libertines in England now goe for to know or believe supernaturall non-fundamentals as the histories of the miracles of Christ the Prophets and Apostles requires a work of the Spirit of grace and supernaturall illumination is to know or believe fundamentalls why then should men be punished for holding errours in the one and not in the other and the conscience cannot be compelled in the one more then in the other but with favour I desire an answer to these quaeries Quaere 1. Whether men deserve to be pitied and spoken of compassionately as poore miser 〈…〉 which they 〈…〉 work of the Spirit of grace and supernaturall 〈…〉 the false Prophet Deut 13. and Elimaâ— the perverter of the Gospel deserves to be piâ—ied Query 2. Hence whether the sinfull blindnesse of our in 〈◊〉 that makes us because poor and miserable 〈…〉 must not black the spotlesse justice of our Lord who yet punisheth originall mind-blindnesse in thousands of the sons of Adam Query 3. Whether this hinteth not at 〈…〉 power of believing and doing what we can otherwise God cannot deny further grace or punish that naturall impotency of not knowing or not believing Quer. 4. Whether the same query may not be retorted upon the Justice of Gods law Deut. 13. 〈…〉 thus whether is it meeâ— that the just God should command a pooâ—â— miserable seducing Jew who saith Let us go and worship strange Gods since this miserable impostor being a son of sin and wrath by nature cannot come without much labour and contention of mind yea nor without some good degree of reason to judge so much as it is probable nor at all to believe or know certainly that 〈◊〉 noâ— the true God but the God of the Jews onely excluding on the world from saving means of salvation is the onely true God onely to be served and worshipped but onely by an immediate and supernaturall work of the Spirit of God are men either Jews under the Law or Genâ—â—les under the Gospel to be punished and stoned to death because God hath not â—â—parted to them his Spirit of Grace and supernaturall 〈◊〉 Quer. 5. Is it meet to punish David suppose he were no King for adultery and treacherous murther since without a worke of the Spirit of Grace who only effectually 〈…〉 being led into temptation he cannot eschew the 〈◊〉 into adultery and murther are men-adultererâ— and men murtherers to be punished because God hath not imparted â—â—to them his Spirit of grace by whose actuall assistance only they can decline adultery and martherâ— Quer. 6. Whether did even 〈…〉 teach that the Magistrate should punish with the sword poor miserable men because they canot believe 〈◊〉 of faith by the supernaturall illumination of the Spirit whether is 〈◊〉 the question perverted when a Query is made whether the Magistrate is to punish poor men for not understanding not 〈◊〉 not judging not believing supernaturall truths we say the Magistrate or his sword hath nothing to do with the elect and internal acts of the minde of understanding knowing judging or believing but onely with the externall acts of speaking teaching 〈◊〉 â—ishing dangerous and pernitious doctrines to the 〈◊〉 and destraction of the soules of others Quer. 7. Whether the Magistrate does therefore force the conscience of a false teacher because he cannot he dare not keep up doctrines pornicious to the souls of others but publish them because his erroneous and evill conscience judgeth them to be saving and necessary truths when the Magistrate punisheth him more then he forceth the conscience of a murtherer whom he punisheth though this murtherer judged in his conscience that the man be killed did him so crying and oppressive an injury as in the court of God deserved bodily death or when this man murthered his son in a sacrifice to God out of meer conscience Quer. 8. Whether or no this divine who will have 〈◊〉 to be punished for erring in fundamentalls because they believe them not doth not say none that teacheth there is â—â— God that Jesus Christ is a grand impostor and faller 〈◊〉 the truth and saith Sathaâ— is the only God of this world and 〈◊〉 to be served ought to be so much as rebuked for without the immediate and supernaturall worke of the Spirit of God they cannot know or believe these truthe and are men to be rebuked and preached against because God hath not imparted to them his Spirit of grace whether doth not this arguing evict all the Ministery rebukes and exhortation and morall extirpating of heresies by the power of the word Quer. 9. Whether this be not the old argument of 〈◊〉 who argued from liberty of free-will to conclude liberty of conscience and said forcing of free-will if the Magistrate hinder men to be a willing people to Christ is an injury done to conscience and to free-will and to God the Creatâ—â— of the soule and the same
might be objected against the decree of 〈…〉 Quer. 10. Whether on 〈◊〉 are men punished because God 〈◊〉 not bestow the Spirit of grace 〈◊〉 them by which they would flye all evill-doing when they are punished for evill-doing Quer. 11. Whereas this distinct argument presupposeth that the Magistrate should tolerate errors in fundamentalls and in non-fundamentalls because of the difficulty of knowing of fundamentalls must it not follow that men are far rather to be tolerated 〈◊〉 â—â—re in fundamentalls 〈◊〉 such as erre in non-fundamentalls and so the more blasphemous that seducing teachers be as if they deny there is a God and that nature and chante rules all and that Christ was an imposter the Gospel a fable the Scripture a meer 〈◊〉 the more they are to be pitied and 〈◊〉 measure of indulgence and toleration is due to them then to such â—â— are godly and erre but in lesser points that are more easily 〈…〉 concerning usury accidentall killing of our neighbour or the meaning of some places of Scripture or erre in matters touching Church-government or the like Quer. 12. Since also 〈◊〉 lay for a ground that the Magistrate is not infallible in judging of matters of Religion especially that are supernaturall such as the mysteries of the Gospell the incarnation sufferings and death of Christ his satisfaction for sinners c. and Christians are not infallible in either reaching these to others or in believing them for their faith and practise and therefore the Magistrate ought to tolerate all these how then can this Divine talke of a certainty of knowing and teaching and holding of divine trutheâ—â— for by 〈◊〉 principle of toleration that no man hath infallibility in matters of Religion since the Prophets and Apostles fell asleepe there can be no certainty of faith either in ruler or people but all our faith in fundamentalls or non-fundamentalls must be fallible dubious conjectuâ—â—â— And for such as yeeld a toleration in non-fundamentalls but deny it in fundamentals 1. They must quit all arguments used by Libertinâ—â— for toleration from the nature of conscience that it can not be constrained 2. That they 〈◊〉 bee a willing people that follow Christ 3. That 〈◊〉 Lord of the conscience onely 4. That coâ—pulsion 〈◊〉 hypocrites 5. That to know maintaine aâ—d 〈◊〉 truths of the Gospel is not in our power as to kill or 〈◊〉 to kill because acts of the understanding fall not 〈◊〉 dominion of free-will 6. That the preaching of the 〈◊〉 and perswading by Scripture and reason not the sword and strong hand is the way to propagate truth and 〈◊〉 pate heresies 7. That the laws of Moses against false 〈◊〉 were onely typicall and perished with other 〈◊〉 and therefore there is no warrant under the Nâ—â— Testament for punishing hereticks all these and the like 〈◊〉 with equall strength conclude against toleration of such 〈◊〉 erre in non-fundamentalls as well as in fundamentall 〈◊〉 in neither the one not the other is the conscience to â—â—â—strained nor can Magistrates be Lords of the 〈◊〉 fundamentalls more then in non-fundamentalls and 〈◊〉 must be a willing people in fundamentalls as in non-fundamentalls nor can the sword but preaching of the word onely be a means of propagating of non-fundamentalls more then of fundamentalls when then Libertines 〈◊〉 lost all these arguments by reason of this 〈◊〉 which here hath no place their cause must bee weake and leane To determine what is fundamentall what not and the number of fundamentall points and the least measure of knowledge of fundamentals in which the essence of saving faith may consist or the simple want of the knowledge of which fundamentalls is inconsistent 〈◊〉 saving faith in minimo quod non is more then Magistratâ— or Church can well know Sure it borders with one of Gods secrets touching the finall state of salvation or damnation of particular men And it is as sure this is a fundamentall to belieâ—â— that God is that hee is a rewarder of those that seeke hiâ— that there is not a name under Heaven by which men may 〈◊〉 saved but by the Name of Jesus that no man 〈◊〉 come to the Father but by Christ that hee that 〈◊〉 not the wrath of God abideth on him and he is condemned 〈◊〉 then he was condemned and under wrath before even from the wombe Nor is this a good argument of Bellius where Christ is what he doth how he sits at the right hand of God how he is one with the Father many things of the Trinity of God Predestination Angels the state of men after this life are points not so necessary to be known for publicans and harlots who enter into heaven may be ignorant of them and though they were knowne they make not a man better according to that if I had all knowledge if I have not love it is nothing For 1. The exact knowledge of these are not so necessary and that is all that this argument can conclude but the Scripture saith no more that publicans and harlots remaining publicans and harlots enter into the Kingdome of heaven in sensu composito nor when it saith The blinde see the deafe heare the dead are raised the meaning should be blinde and deafe remaining blinde and deafe doe see and heare or the dead remaining dead in their graves and void of life doe live and have life but these that were blinde now see when blindnesse is removed otherwise some may take harlotry into heaven with them and because the word of God is a seed when this is in the heart of a dying harlot Christ came to save sinners and to save me how or what way the Spirit sits upon this egge and warmes it and what births of saving truths the Spirit joyned with the spirit of a dying man brings forth who knowes the repenting thiefe knew Christ to be the Saviour of men and a King who could dispose of heaven but what deductions the Spirit made with in who knows nor is it a truth that the knowledge of any revealed truths of God makes no man the better for it leanes on this ground That 1. The spirituall Law of God commands not a conformity between the understanding power of the soule and the Law to require that the minde conceive apprehend and know God and his will as he reveales himselfe to us which yet is included in the command of loving of God with all the heart with all the soule with all the strength and so with all the minde though that knowledge be directed to no other practice but beliefe 2. It leanes upon another false ground that to believe I speake of an intellectuall assenting to divine truthâ— it being an act of the understanding and a necessary result of knowledge doth not make a man better which yet is most false for beside that it is commanded not to believe a reâ—â—aled truth is a sin and renders men morally ill and worâ—â— now that text that saith 1 Cor. 13.
Though I had all knowledge saith also though I had all faith yea though I gave my goods in the poore and my body to be burnt I am nothing that is I cannot bee saved or any other then a damned hypocrite that tinkles like gold and is but brasse now by this reason to give to the poore to believe omnipotency in miracles should not be commanded of God Davenentius thinkes a Generall confession of the Catholicke Church sufficient and that betweene us and Lutherans there is not required a confession in particulars controverted But it is true Lutherans and we agree in most fundamentalls but a confession in generall fundamentals when expounded and believed practically by each side as it must be must have contrary senses to each side now this way the Jewes and Samaritans both agreed there was one God and that the Messiah should come and that he should tell them all things yet one confession common to both that each might believe and be saved was not possible for Christ saith Johâ—â— The Samaritans worshipped they knew not what but salvation is of the Jewes And should Christians and Jewes agree in one generall confession drawne out of the Old Testament that there is one God that the Messiah is he that dyes for the sinnes of his people that the Decalogue it a perfect rule 〈◊〉 we could not sweare and subscribe that confession for 〈◊〉 expounded by the Jewes it could not be the doctrine of the Old Testament nor any part of the word of God but 〈◊〉 contradictory thereunto as any point of heathen Divinity for fundamentalls to some may be and are untruths to others even this that the Messiah Christ is the Saviour of the world both Iewes and we say but they meane one thing by Messiah we another so we cannot have one faith nor one confession I deny not but these were pious conferences that at Lipse an 1631. in which there were on the one side Matthias Hocus Polycarpus Leiserus Henricus Haffuerus on the other side Joan. Bergius Joan. Crotius Theophilus Nenbergius who went through the Augustine confession and agreed in the truth almost in all At the agreement or concord of Marpurge an 1529. were Luther Melanthon Osiander Brentius Stephanus Agricola who brake not the bond of peace with Zwinglius Bucer Hedion there present At the conference of Wittingberge an 1536. where were present Capito Bucerus Musculus and other grave Divines of higher Germany on the other side Luther Melanthon Pomeranus Cruciger in which Luther said brethren If ye teach and believe that the true body and true blood of the Lord is exhibited in the Supper quod hee perceptâ—o vere fiat and that truely or really there is a receiving thereof we agree as brethren but the truth is there were contrary faiths touching the presence of Christs body and blood in the Sacrament and therefore I humbly conceive all such Generall confessions as must be a coat to cover two contrary faiths is but a daubing of the matter with untempered mortar much dealing like this was in the Councell of Trent in which neither Papist nor Protestant was condemned and yet the truth suffered I speake not this as if each side could exactly know every lith and veine of the controversie for we prophesie but in part but to shew I cannot but abominate truth and falsehood patched up in one confession of faith for if two men should agree in such a bargaine A covenants with B to give him a ship full of spices B promises to give an hundreth thousand pounds for these spices A believes they are metaphoricall spices he gives B believes they are the most reall and excellent spices of Aegypt B promises a hundreth thousand pounds of field stones A expects good reall and true money this were but mutuall jugling of one with another It were another consideration if both sides agreeing in this Generall confession were ignorant and did neither know nor believe any sense that were destructive to the true and sound sense of the Confession for then they might be saved by or in one and the same faith of this General Confession whereas now the contrary senses of this Confession make them now not one Generall but two particular 〈◊〉 and contradictory faiths for the question is whether the side believing the Generall Confession with a sense in the consequence that destroyes the text have any faith at all of this Generall Confession For it is a question to me whether a Turke hath the faith of this point that there is a God since he believes positively so many blasphemous fooleries of this God as the Alcharon suggesteth and whether a Papist as a Papist believes Christ to be the onely one Saviour of sinners since withall he believes so many thousand Gods and true Christs to be at once in sundry places and so many blasphemies against the nature offices and essentiall properties of Christ as the Romish faith teacheth But ye will say it is not charity to say that Papists have not the faith of the one onely Saviour seeing he would dye for that point and for the consequences that there bee many Saviours if the monster of tran-substantiation stand yet he neither knows nor believes the logicall consequence nor the consequent but hates both to wit if the bread bee truely and really the Saviour that dyed on the crosse ergo how many hoasts and consecrated breads there bee there must be as many a thousand ten thousand Christs and Gods yea he would be burnt quick before be deny this truth there is but one onely Saviour the Son of Mary then if yee hang him or 〈◊〉 him for believing transubstantiation since he is otherwise a 〈◊〉 pious and just man ye hang him for the meere ignorance of a poore logicall consequence and for no blasphemy and the like may be said of Familists Antinomians and others who as they say are godly men and cannot see the logicall consequences and absurd blasphemies that you with your wit deduce from their doctrine for their souâ—e hates these blasphemies as much as you Ans I say not for believing tran-substantiation only men are to be hanged the question now is of bodily punishing hanging and burning quick are particular kinds of punishing in which I should be as sparing as another man but the question may draw to this whether the Laws of England Scotland be bloody and unjust that ordains seminary Priests and Jesuits whose trade it is to seduce souls to the whole body of Popery to bee hanged I conceive they are most just Lawes and warranted by Deut. 13. and many other Scriptures and that the King and Parliaments of either Kingdomes serve Christ and kisse the Son in making and executing these Laws 2. I see nothing said against bodily punishing of such as teach transubstantiation to others for the Idolaters and Seducers in the Old Testament believed the same way there is one true God Jehovah that brought them out
of Aegypt Exod. 32. 4 5. Jeroboam who made two Gods and Jehu who was zealous for Jehovah 1 King 13. 6. c. 13. 1 2 3. 2 King 9. 25. 36 37. c. 10. 16. 20 21. and Joram 2 King 5. 7. acknowledged God could kill and make alive and was just in his promises and threatnings yet worshipped the golden calves those who cryed the Temple of the Lord must acknowledge there was but one true God yet they burnt incense to Baal and killed their children to Molech Jer. 7. 4 5 9. 30 31. They that asked of Jehovah the ordinances of their God and fasted to Jehovah Esa 58. 1 2 3 4. yet inflamed themselves under every green tree Esa 57. 5. and slew their children under the clifts of the rocks the heathen knew God and one God who made the heaven and the earth and worshipped him though ignorantly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 1. 20 21. Act. 17. 23. yet denyed and hated this logicall consequence that they had forsaken the Lord Jer. 9. 13 14. or Deut. 32. 18. forgotten the rocke that begat them Ps 78. 11. 41. Ps 107. 12 13. that they forsooke him dayes without number yea they did more then God required to keep God in their minde and not forget him as they said they changed him into the forme of corruptible things to be memorialls of God to them and the Lord said For all this they râ—fuse to know me they have said It is not the Lord yea they would have dyed for it rather then have said there is no God that made heaven and earth And they did erre indeed in a consequence against the light of nature yet the irreligious and wicked stopping of eyes and eares at naturall consequences in matters of Religion is no innocent 〈◊〉 as is cleare Esa 44. 18. They have not knowne nor understood for he hath shut their eyes that they cannot see and their hearts that they cannot understand 19. And none considers in his heart neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say I have but in part of it in the fire yea also I have baked bread upon the coales thereof I have roasted flesh and eaten it and shall I make the residue thereof aâ— abomination shall I fall downe to the flocke of a tree 20. He seedeth on ashes c. Now as Israel said ever the Creator of the ends of the earth is our God the tree is but a likenesse and resemblance of God Esa 18. 18. Esa 46. 5 6 7. so they denyed this consequence ergo a part of your God is burnt in the fire and with the coals of your burnt God you bake bread roast flesh and warme your bodies when you are cold and worship a lye and an abomination as the Papists say we adore very Christ in and under the accidents of the bread even the same God-man Maries Son who dyed on the crosse yet they deny this consequence ergo a part of your God and Saviour is baken in the oven eaten and cast out with the draught and a part thereof even of the same floore and dough is made a God by the Priest and ye say I will bâ—â— downe and worship the residue of that which the baker did bake and roast in the oven and so yee worship a lye and an abomination as the old Idolaters did Esa 44. yet the Papist will deny this consequence that he multiplyes Gods as loaves are multiplyed in an oven because as Esaiah saith he knoweth not he understandeth not God hath shut his eyes certainly that knowledge he denyes to the Idolator is the naturall knowledge of a naturall consequence if ye worship a bit of an ash-tree or a bit of bread ergo the halfe of your God or the quarter thereof is baken in an oven ergo there is a lye and an abomination in your right hand then the deniall of logicall consequences in Religion and the teaching thereof to others may be and is an heresie and punishable by the Magistrate as Deut. 13. and Exod. 32. so Christ rebukes Matth. 22. Saduces as ignorant of the Scripture when they denyed but the consequence or a logicall connexion as God is not the God of the dead but of the living ergo the dead must rise againe and Abraham must live and his body be raised from the dead And 2. the Idolaters who were to dye by the Law of God Exod. 32. Deut. 13. denyed not the true God more then our false teachers doe now We see no reason why none should be false teachers but such onely as deny fundamentals and that pertinaciously though these by Divines be called Heretickes 1. Rom. 16. 17. Paul saith Now I beseech you brethren marke them that cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them then as we are not to distinguish where the Law and the Word of God does not distinguish so we are to count them false teachers who lead in a faction in the Church contrary to any doctrine of truth whether fundamentall or not fundamentall and to avoid them as Seducers 2. Peters errour since he beleeved Christ was come Matth. 16. 17. was not fundamentall but consistent with faith yet Paul withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed and if he had pertinaciously gone on to walke not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel since Paul would not have given place by subjection to such no not for an houre Gal. 2. 11 12 13 14 15. he should have been worthy of more then rebuke yea of higher censure the like we must say of Barnabas and other Jewes who all sinned though in a farre inferiour degree with these who came in privily to spye out the Christian liberty of the Gentiles to bring them into bondage under the Ceremoniall law 3. Gal. 1. 8. Paul saith If we or an Angel from heaven should preach any other Gospel then that which we have preached let him be accursed which place with good warrant our Divines bring against the unwritten traditions of Papists of what kinde soever they be fundamentalls or non-fundamentalls whether they be obtruded as necessary points of salvation or not necessary but accidentalls or arbitrary points yet conducing for the better observing of necessary points for I have proved else-where that Papists esteem their unwritten traditions not necessary points of faith yea many of them to be accidentals serving onely ad mellus esse for order and decency yea and great Doctors of them say neither the Pope nor the Church can devile novum dogma fidei a new article of Faith or a new Sacrament nor can we say that the adding of Romish ceremonialls such as consecrating of Churches baptising of bells signe of the crosse are fundamentall errours and inconsistent with saving faith the text Gal. 1. 8 9. evinceth that they or some other Gospel or doctrine beside that the Galathians had learned for Paul taught the Galathians many points besides fundamentall onely
Because he rebuketh them for being dull of hearing which is opposite to being teachers of the word of truth to others which must insinuate they were to have faith and not conjecturall and fluctuating opinions of the things they were to teach 2. He reproves them for that they had not their senses exercised to discerne good and ill and that they were unskilfull in the words of righteousnesse 3. He exhorteth them chap. 6. 1. to be carried on to perfection beyond the principles of the doctrine of Christ Now to be carried to know all except some fundamentalls and principles with a reserve and a doubting of the truth is not to have the senses exercised to discern good and ill nor to be skilfull in the word of truth nor to goe on to perfection but to stand still as in a horse-mill and be at the same perfection of knowledge in knowing and beleeving all even fundamentalls say some or all non-fundamentalls say other Libertines with a reserve and a resolution to judge them all falsehood and lyes 9. It argues the word of God of obscurity and darknesse as not being able to instruct us in all truths and renders it as a nose of wax in all non-fundamentals histories narrations c. in which notwithstanding the Scripture is as evident plaine simple obvious to the lowest capacities in most points except some few Prophesies as it is in fundamentalls and layes a blasphemous charge on the Holy Ghost as if hee had written the Scriptures upon an intention that we should have no assured and fixed knowledge no faith but a meere probable opinion a conjecturall dubious apprehension of truths with a reserve to beleeve the contrary as if the Lords purpose had beene that we should all be Scepticks and dye doubting and how then can God in justice punish any man for not beleeving and doing the will of our Master and Lord If it bee unpossible even by the light of the Spirit to know his will in whole as some say and in the most part as others say yea it must not be our sinfull darkenesse in that wee cannot beleeve most of the matters of God but with a reserve but it is the will and command of God we doe so and how shall we know the second faith contradictory to the former to be the minde of God and not the first and the third and not the second and the fourth and not the third and so to the end since we are to beleeve all the foure with a reserve and all to our dying day with a reserve for the word is alike dubious now as in Pauls dayes and since the Apostles charge us to beleeve and be comforted in beleeving the truths which they beleeved not as Apostles but as Christians and as fellow-Citizens with us we must say that the Apostles also beleeved with a reserve which is blasphemous 10 All our practises according to fundamentals or non-fundamentals must bee in faith that is with a perswasion that what we doe is according to the revealed will of God otherwise we sin Rom. 14. 23. and are condemned in all we doe But if this faith with a reserve be the rule of our practise we can do nothing in faith but with a resolve upon doubting so what you doe may as possibly be murther idolatry stealing lying as obedience to God yea you must beleeve that what you do to day is lawfull but yet so as to morrowyou must beleeve upon a new light that it is unlawfull and sin yea and this makes the erroneous conscience the rule of your faith and practise for if the holy ghost command you to beleeve such points with the faith of a reserve he must command you to practise according to the present faith that he commands you to have of those truths But the present you have may be the beleife of a lye and a blasphemous untruth and so the ten Commandements should bee a rule to no man But his erroneous conscience if then he beleeve that it is such acceptable worship as God craved of Abraham that you sacrifice your Sonne to God you beleeve it with a reserve and you are to practise it with a reserve and oblieged to practice what you are oblieged to beleeve but you are oblieged to beleeve with a reserve that it is acceptable service to God to sacrifice your child to him for it is a non-fundamentall not clearly determined in the word as least it is contraverted by many that goe for godly people Now if so God shall obliege men to sin and not to sin to doe his revealed wil and not to doe his revealed will in the same commandement which were blasphemous now that we are to practise according to our faith of reserve I prove by the doctrin of Libertines for they teach a man is to suffer death and any torment rather then that he say there bee three persons in one God and two natures and one person in Christ and that Presbyterian Government is lawfull that the Christian Prince is to punish false teachers if he beleeve in his conscience though hee is to beleeve with a reserve and doubt somely that these are truths contrary to the word of God then is his faith with a reserve which may be the faith of a lye his onely oblieging rule of his practise according to the way of Libertines I confesse hee is rather to suffer death then to professe any doctrine contrary to the dictates even of an erroneous conscience because he should choose afflictions rather then sin But when we are commanded faith with a reserve as they say we are commanded to beleeve a lye which is blasphemous and what we are commanded to beleeve by the Lord in his word that must be an oblieging rule to our practice and so must we be oblieged to sin nor can it be said to offer your child to God in a sacrifice is against the light and a cleare Law of nature and a fundamentall errour for in this dispute Libertines arguments are for a toleration of all whether they erre in fundamentalls or non-fundamentalls nor can they determine what is of their owne naturall are controversall and disputable to humane reason and what not for we either speake what are de facto actually controverted in all the Christian world or what be those that in regard of their disproportion to humane reason of their owne nature may be controverted 2. Or we speake of those which are not controversall amongst Christians who acknowledge the Old and New Testament to be the word of God and what are not clearely determined in the word and touching the former there is nothing we know not controverted in the Christian world except that there is a God and that is also controverted two wayes Atheists so farre winke though nature cannot no not in devills and godlesse men run it selfe starke blinde as they deny there is a God out of malice 2. They cavill at all arguments brought to
prove that there must bee a God though they be strong enough for the wit of the devill to answer Now for these that are of their owne nature controversall though no truths especially truths revealed and spoken by the God of truth are in themselves controversall or such as can bee opposed yet are there two sorts of truths that are in relation to humane reason controvertable 1. The principles of nature that God is that he is infinit omnipotent just mercifull omniscient c. to be loved served obeyed c. that superiours and parents are to be honoured our neighbour not to bee hurt that wee should doe to others as we would they should doe to us are not of themselves controversall but the practicall conclusions drawne from thence are controversall in regard of our darkenesse as polygamy community of goods all these whether the Saints may rob and spoyle wicked men of their possessions and kill them upon the right and authority of Saintship are of themselves controversall in relation to our nature who acknowledge Scripture to bee the word of God but for supernaturall truths that cannot finde lodging in the sphere or under the shadow of naturall reason such as the doctrine of one God in three persons of the incarnation of two natures in Christ of the imputed righteousnesse of Christ of salvation by beleeving in a crucified Saviour the resurrection of the dead and those that are not knowable but by supernaturall revelation though they be the fundamentalls of the Christian faith yet are they more controversall of themselves then the most part of non-fundamentalls as Joh. Goodwin does rightly observe for nature hath more shadow of reason to cavill and plead against these then any other truths if then no coercive power ought to be used against such as teach errours contrary to the word of God and against fundamentalls because such points are controversall there is farre more warrant to free those from all coercive power who deny all principles of the Christian faith and turne so from the faith that they deny the word of God the bookes of the Old and New Testament to be any thing but phansied fables because they teach things most controversall and so upon the grounds of Libertines one Catholicke toleration is due to all and if any shall turn Jew or Mahometan or Indian or Heathenish in his Religion having been a glistering star in the Firmament of Christianity should pervert the right wayes of the Lord with Elimas the Magistrate hath nothing to doe to punish him though he carry Navies and millions of soules to hell yea nor is he to be rebuked nor declaimed against as a childe of the devill and an enemy to all righteousnesse but with all meeknesse and gentlenesse to be instructed for rebuking of him thus is as unjust since it is not in his power what he thinks or apprehends for truth or what not say Libertines as to command the Sun to shine at midnight CHAP. VII What opinions 〈…〉 BUt are there no far off 〈◊〉 at all to be 〈…〉 not learned men give divers and contrary expositions 〈◊〉 one and the same text of Scripture and hath not the Church suffered errours and erronious 〈◊〉 in godly 〈◊〉 men in all ages even in 〈◊〉 〈…〉 have not implored the sword of the 〈…〉 them though all errours printed and preached hurt the soules of others more or lesse Answ Some errors are about things that God 〈◊〉 indifferent for the time 〈◊〉 opinion and 〈…〉 meateâ— and dayes Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. 〈◊〉 in these God gives an indulgence and bidâ— us so long as the date of indifferency in doreth bea with the 〈…〉 1 Cor. 8. you shall not finde that Paul 〈…〉 with the unlimited practise of dayes and meates 〈…〉 and in all cases as for the case of scandall 〈…〉 the practise to the scandalizing of the weake and calleth it soul-murther and here it in like the Church may suffer sinfull ignorances for â—s the Magistrate is not to publish all externals sinnes of infâ—rmity against the second table â—or then humaine societies must be dissolved and 〈…〉 subsist except there be a reciprocall yeâ—lding to the infirmities of men as they are weake and 〈◊〉 as we must not make a man an offender for a word though it bee a hasty and sinful word even in a family where the Lord of the house hath the power of the 〈◊〉 and proportionally in other societies we would heare Solomon saying Eccles 7. 21 Also take not heed to all words that are spoken least thou leave thy servant curse thee So it would appeare that some lower errours that are farre off without the compasse of the ordinary discerning of man and lye at a distance from the 〈…〉 on as fundametals and Gospell promises lye heard the heart of Christ may bee dispensed with as a conjecturâ— what became of the meate that Christ eats after his resurrection when he was now in the state of immortality and some probable opinions that neither better the holder noâ— much promove or hinder the edification of others are not much to be 〈◊〉 save that 〈…〉 is sinfull and happily may bee tollerated or whether the heavens and 〈◊〉 after the day of judgement shall be 〈…〉 and turned to nothing and be no 〈◊〉 or if 〈◊〉 shal be renewed and delivered from vanity and indeed with new 〈◊〉 to stand 〈◊〉 as lasting and eternall 〈…〉 and witnesses of the glory of God 〈…〉 Christs and the redeemed in heaven in 〈…〉 live in glory to be eternall lectures and testimonies of the glory of the Lord Redeemer and Sanctifier of his people 〈…〉 most probable and the Scripture may 〈◊〉 to say much some other side 2 For diverse expositions of one and 〈…〉 Heavens and new Earth when 〈…〉 of the expositions so farre as is revealed â—o the godly and learned who in this life doe but know and prophesie in part doe neither doubt the fundation 〈…〉 truth that is non-fundamentall we think the opinion of both may be tollerated even though the one of them be in it selfe an errour and that upon the ground that Church and Magistrates both are to tollerate not to punish these infirmities against both tables that are the necessary results of sin originall common to all men as men 〈◊〉 about with them a body of sin And the like I say another the like opinions about matters of religion and especially matters of fact as the virginity of Mary for all her life 3 Such opinions and practise â—â—as make an evident schisme in a Church and set up two distinct Churches of different formes of Government and pretending to different institutions of Christ of which the one must by the nature of their principles labour the destruction of the other cannot be tollerated c. for each pretending their fellow Churches to bee of man and so of the devill though they should both make one true invisible Church agreeing in all
hypocrites and malicious opposers of the wayes of God enemies to and persecuters of the true Prophets sent of God v. 13. and who were these but Scribes Pharisees in whom there was as much malice against Christ and his Disciples as can be in the devill or such as sin against the Holy Ghost as may be seen Matth. 13 14 15. Matth. 12. 31 32. Matth. 15. 1 2 3 7 8 9. And God powred the spirit of slumber on the Jewes Rom. 11. 7. 8. and there was superlative malice in them against the knowne truth Act. 13. 45. 46. and blasphemy Act. 14. 2 3 4 5. and yet these men in evill and as touching litterall knowledge know well what they were doing though they were spiritually blocks See Matth. 2. 4 5 6. Joh. 7. 28. Joh. 3. 2. They privily bring in 2 Pet. 2. damnable heresies they make merchandise of you with faire words then they wanted not devillish wit enough And 1 Tim. 4. 1. They speake lyes out of hypocrisie and the doctrine of Devills forbidding meates and marriage there is wit for these look like singular mortification yet they have a conscience so stupid as it were burnt with a hot iron This also is grosse ignorance in Libertines that they thinke those who sinne against knowledge and conscience and out of malice as those that sin against the Holy Ghost doe not sinne through ignorance also which is most false for the most malicious sin against knowledge hath an interpritative ignorance conâ—oyned with it as the Pharisees who sinned against the Holy Ghost in crucifying Christ some of them as is cleare Joh. 8. 28. Joh. 9. 40 41 and else where yet they sinned ignorantly also for had thy knowne they would not have crucified the Lord of glory 1 Cor. 2. 8. CHAP. IX Of Liberty of prophesying of erroneous inditement of Conscience that it is not our Rule BUt we judge that Hereticks admonished and convinced of their errour doe sinne on the borders at least of the sin against the Holy Ghost in regard they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 selfe condemned as Paul saith Tit. 3. 10. A man that is an hereticke after the first and second admonition reject 11. Knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himselfe Where the Apostle saith an admonished and wrought upon hereticke who is convinced of the truth and yet still resisteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is perverted or subverted desperately perverted like a building throwne downe to the foundation 2. he finneth as condemned of himselfe that is judged and condemned by his owne conscience and so sinneth willfully and with a high measure of light but hee shutteth his eyes against the light and known truth and resisteth it 1 The Hereticke here spoken of Tit. 3. 10. is not the man who moves such questions say they as he knowes to be vaine and light as Arminians say For as Vedelius saith he expresly speakes of an heretick 2 It is a question if any bee called an Hereticke in the word because he moves such questions 1. The Hereticke here is subverted and so turned off the foundation Christ But he that moveth vaine and unprofitable questions can at best but build his hay stubble upon the foundation Christ now such a man may bee builded on the foundation and saved though the fire destroy his worke and so he is not turned off the foundation Yea if he wittingly and willingly move vain and light questions he cannot be saved nor doth that follow for his knowledg of the levity of these questions aggravates his sin but cannot cause to amount to a sin so high as to subvert the mans faith because he may keepe the foundation though he hold these vaine and light opinions for they are not in themselves destructive of the foundation 2. There is no mention nor any hint here of vaine and light questions but of admonished heretickes therefore Eusebius l. 4. c. 13. referres it to those that deny Christs divinity to Marcion and Corinthus and they say John would not stay in the stoves with Cerinthus and Polycarpus his disciple would not speake with Marcion but said I know thee to be the first borne of Sathan 3. It is here to be noted that these Authors also make the conscience though erroneous even in fundamentalls the rule of faith if the person beleeve that he worships God according to the rule of the word and there be some morall honesty in him and so teach there should be a toleration of al hereticks then no man is the heretick but he who professeth points of truth which he believeth to be lyes untruth but so there is not an hereticke in the world but the devill and such as professe a false Religion before men which in their conscience they beleeve to be false But the Apostle saith 1 Tim. 3 1. Now the Spirit speaketh expresly that in the latter times men shall depart from the faith giving beed to seducing spirits Popish Priests and Familists and doctrine of Devills 2. Speaking lyes in hypocrisie having their conscience seared with an hot iron 3. Forbidding to marry and commanding to abstaine from meats Now a seared conscience burnt with an hot iron may and doth teach marriage to be unlawfull to some and doe beleeve it for a truth that Church-men should not intangle themselves with the affaires of this life such as marriage and care of children because Pastors goe a warfare for Jesus Christ yet the text saith they that so teach are seducers who with a seared conscience speake lyes in hypocrisie and so must be hereticks and worse 2. No rule can be falser and more crooked then the conscience for if ye must be obliged to follow conscience because it is conscience or because right or wrong if you must follow conscience because conscience yee must ever follow your conscience though never so wrong for the most erroneous conscience is conscience though the devill should immediately actuate it yet doth not leave off to bee conscience and to be the rule and if so when the conscience of some saith its good service to God to kill the Apostles of our Lord because they preach the Gospel then doe persecuters nothing but what they are in duty bound to doe when they murther the Apostles because they preach the Gospel for to follow the rule which God hath appointed must be a bounden duty And the same must follow if the conscience as evill be the rule for then should men serve God in sacrificing their sonnes to God in community and plurality of wives when ever their conscience should dictate any such thing to be lawfull though in it selfe it be most contrary to the word of God If the conscience as good or as the Arminians seeme to say as principled with morall honesty be our rule then the conscience as conscience is not the rule but as it is ruled by morall honesty this wee cannot say
your authority were infallible as that of the Apostles was the answer would have some colour though the Apostles used not that authority to crush liberty of prophesying but they commend the trying of the Spirits and since our judgement is not infallible reason requires that we should not desire other spirits pious and good to be oppressed and suffocated Answ We reject no Spirit because it agrees not with ours for our Spirit is not the rule as Libertines contend but because it swerves from the oracles of God if any man speake let him speake as the oracles of God let us prophesie according to the proportion of faith 2. This answer saith that no man now in the Christian Church can try all things doctrines and spirits and refuse the evil and deluding spirits hold fast that which is good and beleeve the spirits speaking from God because it is to extinguish the Spirit say our Libertines since we are not infallible Apostles to judge these Spirits for mad phansies that agree not with our Spirit we say its impossible to try all things and hold that which is good but we must judge false spirits to bee false spirits not because they agree not with ours that is the calumny of Libertines but because they swerve from the word of truth though we be not infallible as the Apostles were but this reason supposeth that because of want of Apostolick infallibility we should try all spirits and all doctrines but condemn reject and refuse none as spirits of the devill for that is to extinguish the spirit and pitch and settle our faith upon no doctrine but like Scepticks sail about the coasts of truth all our life and dye in no beliefe at all 3 It is false that the Apostles did not crush your liberty of prophesying for Paul 2 Thess 2. 2. extinguisheth those spirits who would shake the faith of the Thessalonians to make them beleeve that the day of Christ was at hand for he forbids to beleeve them and John extinguisheth the Familistical and Antichristian spirits who denied Câ—rist to be come in the flesh O but say Libertines these false spirits knew what they preached to be lyes and yet preached them as from God and wee stand for no such liberty of prophesying nor such spirits as these Answ This is a conjecture that they beleeved the day of Christ was not near hand and yet preached it was near there is not one shaddow in the text or colour hinteth that way for Familists and Seducers now have not so much to say for their dreams as they had yea they had much to say that made them beleeve that day was near hand since Christ had said these were the last days and the Apostles do writ it that new were the last times and that the end of the world was fallen on them and they preached al they wrote and so it is rather like they beleeved the day of Christ was near and the Antichrist in Jobus time had as much as seducers now have to make them beleeve that Christ was not come in the flesh since the blinded Jewes alleadged all the prophesies of the old Testament as not fulfilled in the son of Mary and sure they had more to make them beleeve it then Gortin Saltmarsh and other Familists whom Libertines I beleeve call a part of the godly party if they speake according to their conscience can alleadge for their new false and fleshly visions they preach and print 4 Though we be not infallible as the Apostles were yet reason will not say we should not desire that pious and good spirits that is those that call themselves so but are lyers to bee extinguished For wee are to pray that God would cause the unclean spirit and the false Prophet Libertines and others to cease out of the land and so faith requires wee should try them by the word and pray and desire they were crushed and extinguished I mean not in their person but as touching their false doctrine But present your selfe say Arminians before the tribunal of Papists and they will condemne you of Heresie and if you alledge the spirit teacheth you they will answer is that the spirit which corrupt and madde reason teacheth you the spirit of the Devill said the spirit of Christ was the spirit of Beelzebub Answ What inferre Libertines hence against us this is to place no more power in Synods but directive Sir if it please you this is Gods will But wee hold lawfull Synods which is not in the Synagogue of Rome or Papist may as wel rebuke exhort and instruct with all Authority as Timothy or any one particular pastor and this is more than the directive and sceptick teaching of one private Libertine teaching with a reserve convincing and condemning another in a Scepticall way But all tends to this Protestant Synods convened in Christs name can say no more but wee teach what our judgement is it may be true it may be false yeeld a Sceptik consent with a reserve to it that is all and why because Protestant Synods convened in the name of Antichrist can peremptorily and tirannically condemn the truth as heresie and say they are infallible and their Synodicall decrees are the very word of God Ergo Protestant Synods may not authoritatively command you in the name of Christ to beleeve and receive their lawfull decrees conditionally after yee finde them agreeable to the word of God there is no consequence here Prelates condemned the truth as heresie and schisme Pharisees condemned Christ as a Samaritan ergo Protestants sound in the faith cannot condemne Popery Familisme and ergo Paul cannot condemne 〈◊〉 as a perverter of the waies of righteousnesse this is as if you would say a robber cannot by law jure condemne a traveller to render his purse ergo a Judge cannot compell this traveller to pay just debt 2 We do not instance from the teaching of the spirit but from the cleare word of God CHAP. X. Of indulgence in fundamentall or non-fundamentall errors BUt say the Arminians the question is of Hereticks not of those who dare deny the things openly decided in the Scripture but of those who call in question those things that are or may be contraverted There was never an Heretick who called in question whether theeves drunkards robbers railers Idolaters shall enter into the Kingdome of heaven or whether God be to beloved above all things he is not a Christian he is not an hereticke but worse than a hereticke who denyes those things that are plain and obvious in scripture But he that layeth a law upon others which he must follow under pain of death imprisonment or banishment in things belonging to liberty of prophecying which are conjoyned with the reverence of God and the scripture trampleth all prophesies under foot Answ 1 This definition of an Hereticke is in quesion there be in England who deny all scriptures as no word of God yet are judged by Libertines
tolerate But I answer if this be a good reason why there is not the like consideration of these sins non-fundamentall and doctrines non-fundamentall because some doctrines non-fundamentall are seasonable truths to some godly and learned and these same are lyes and untruths to others as godly and learned as they then should also divers fundamentall errours bee tolerated as well as non-fundamentall errours which Independents the Masters of this distinction with the Arminians will not say because to some godly and learned Independents this is a fundamentall truth that murther and adultery and robbery are not to be tolerated by the Magistrate that Magistracy is an ordinance of God but to many Anabaptists as godly and learned as they it is not onely no fundamentall truth but a fundamentall errour under our meeke Saviours reigne there ought to bee neither sword nor speare but instead of them plow-shares and pruning hooks and since Libertines will not have godlinesse to be valued by soundnesse in doctrine but by mens spirits of discerning and charity Independents are to repute Familists Socinians Antinomians as godly and learned as themselves Now Independents thinke that Christ God-man came to satisfie the justice of God for our sinnes and that Ordinances are necessary for all in this life yet these and many the like Familists and Socinians judge fundamentall lyes and who have any discerning and have heard Mr. John Goodwin pray and seene his writings which I have done will repute him as godly and learned as any Independent in England so I judge with correction yet he will say the godly and learned Independents in England hold many points to bee fundamentall truths which he reputes to bee fundamentall untruths as namely concerning justification by faith that the Scriptures we now have by the saith whereof we must be saved is the word of God Mr. Joh. Goodwin must say these are fundamentall lyes and many fundamentals in the late Confession of Assâ—mbly I know M. John Goodwin in his writings denyeth to be fundamentall truths 2. It is not enough to say most of the non-fundamentalls are not determined clearely in the word Libertines we 〈◊〉 dispute withall must say not any non-fundamentalls are determined in the word but all fundamentalls are clearly determined else they must belye their distinction which Independents in the Apologeticke Narration make almost a principle of faith though I hope it shall never be one to me that all non-fundamentals are to be beleeved without a reserve and all fundamentalls with a reserve for if many non-fundamentalls are also to bee beleeved without a reserve it would have been service to the Church they had beaten out that Arminian principle a little more and subdivided non-fundamentalls in such as are to bee beleeved with a reserve and a demurre and such as are to be beleeved without a reserve then in some non-fundamenâ—â—llâ— men are not to be tolerated and what be these 2. The distinction should so beare a leg and halt for then some fundamentalls we beleeve without a reserve and no toleration is to bee yeelded in them but the sword and the club must presse faith in these and we are to beleeve but some non-fundamentalls with a reserve not all and indulgence is due to men in some non-fundamentalls not in others but we know our Brethrens frequent arguing Independencie is not fundamentalls ergo our Brethren should tolerate it but we deny this consequence yea Erastianisme in its highest sphere is not fundamentall and yet high Erastianisme is persecution both of Independency and Presbytery doth it follow then it must be tolerated 3. If the Magistrate cannot punish the error in non-fundamentals because in regard of our dulnesse they are not clear in the word so in regard of our dulnesse many fundamentals in the Gospel are as uncleare and that all acknowledge that Aarons Idolatry and Davils adultery and murther are sins unjustifiable and which the Magistrate by the light of nature is not to tolerate and that he is not a Christian who denyes that theeves and Idolaters who shall not enter into heaven and that God is to be loved above all is a great untruth many Anabaptists there were in Bullingers time who taught none but whores and harlots should enter into the Kingdome of God which is cousen Germains to this Againe what is theft is as disputable as in the case of usury and whether the Saints the just and spirituall inheritors of the earth all things are yours saith Paul doe rob and steale if they invade the possessions houses monies and lands of unregenerate and carnall man whether he bee a murtherer who sacrificeth his childe to God in imitation of Abraham are as uncleare in regard of our naturall blindnesse as most of the non-fundamentalls and Anabaptists that are godly and learned have as much to say from Scripture for denying of fundamentals as in many in non-fundamentals can plead why their tenets are true and though erroneous yet not punishable and they should upon the same ground have a toleration for murtherers robbers theeves that flow from meere conscience and religious grounds and though these practises bee destructive to peace yet with what conscience can the Magistrate punish them as destructive to peace when it is not clearely determined in the word of God that they are destructive to true humaine peace For if they be lawfull and some of them acts of worship as the actors are in conscience perswaded they are they cannot be destructive to peace yea to punish them is tyranny over the conscience say Libertines Now I propose these Queries and desire Libertines to answer them 1. Should not the Magistrate punish no thefts no robbery no murther but such as are thefts robberies and murthers undeniably and uncontroversally to the conscience of all that are members of that society whether Anabaptists or others 2. Should the Magistrate abstaine from punishing of that which is false worship for example sacrificing of a childe to God for feare he domineere over the conscience of a Christian and so transgresse his sphere and sit down in Gods roome which is really murther and shedding of innocent blood though it be not so to the man-slayer but acceptable service to God and yet punish the same false worship as murther and destructive to peace whereas to the actors consience whom he desires to favour it is not murther and not destructive to peace does he not really and by his office as great violence and exerciseth no lesse a domineering power over the mans conscience then if hee should punish this as false worship 3. Will or can notionall or mentall consideration licence the Magistrate to domineere over mens consciences and exercise soule-tyranny and invade the Throne of God over the conscience when it is upon the same reasons and arguments of Scripture as probable that the taking away of a fathers head for sacrificing his son to God is not destructive to peace nor any breach of the sixt
the conscience of others the Church the learned and godly say for we make not the word of the Church the formal object of our faith but thus saith the Lord onely because the Church is but a company of men and so our faith should depend upon men even though holy and speaking ingenuously what their conscience dictates as true which is absurd ergo by the same reason what one mans conscience our owne or others say is not the formall object of our faith and practises for so also our faith should depend on man not on God And we say the conscience at its best is but Regula Regulata not Regula Regulans nor ought it to have the throne of God for God is only Regula Regulans If it were a rule it is to bee ruled by God and his word yea as we are to try all things and not beleeve with a blind faith what others say or their conscience proposeth to themselves and us as truth for then we make a Pope of the consciences of men under the notion of teachers and Church so we are not to be ruled without trying and absolutly by our owne conscience but to try its dictates by the word of God otherwise wee make a Pope and a God of our owne conscience Some say as a right informed conscience obliegeth to doe what it dictates so an erroneous conscience obliegeth to do according to its prescript Durandus and others saith â—gat non obligat it bindeth that yee cannot doe against it which some call negative obligation but non obligat it obliegeth not as a divine rule which is positive obligation Tannerus saith A Conscience that invincibly erreth both bindeth that we cannot doe against it and obliegeth that we should not follow it Which hath truth in the matter of fact a Judge invincibly ignorant of an accused mans innocency when two or three witnesses doe sweare hee is guilty doth lawfully condemne the innocent man having used all 〈◊〉 diligence to finde out the truth and not being 〈◊〉 to find it but this is rather error or ignorance of the fact than an erronious conscience for hee proceeds according to the law with a well-informed conscience following what the law saith by the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every thing be established The erroneous conscience so long as it remaineth by the law of nature layeth on an obligation on a man not to doe against it Rom. 14. 14. To 〈…〉 the esteemeth any thing to be uncleane to him it is uncleane vers 23. He that doubteth is damned if he eat because he eateth not of faith for whatsoever is not of faith is sinne So Ambrose our opinion layeth a law upon us Gammacheus saith it is a vain distinction of binding and oblieging Inter ligationem obligationem And that we are oblieged to follow an erroneous consciencesse long as it continueth erroneous because here saith hee 〈◊〉 dispute not concerning that which is good but that which is commanded But if the conscience dictate that something is to be commanded and to bee done under paine of sinne and yet we doe iâ— not we resist conscience and so we sin because the obligation is no mere 〈◊〉 good onely but rather to that which is commanded The Jesuite Mâ—lderus saith the same Contientiam erroneam ligare obligâ—re because an object materially considered is such an object by 〈◊〉 but it is an object per se kindly when it is proposed by practicall â—â—â—son for what is not of faith is sinne Gal. 5. 3. I testifie to 〈◊〉 one that is circumcised that hee is debter to doe the whole law Answ There can be no reason why conscience because conscience or because wicked more obliegeth then why Will because wicked will should obliege since in every wicked conscience actually drawing men to ill of either heresie or practise there is something of wicked Will and though there were nothing of will or of the affections in an erroneous conscience yet since conscience as a knowing faculty is under the law of God an erroneous conscience must bee a transgressing conscience and it is a contradiction that a faculty sinning should obliege to obedience to the law of God in the same consideration because it sinneth But these Schoole-â—â—â—ties doe not obliege us wee shall bee unwilling in any tearmes to say that God or which is all one the law of nature layeth on us an obligation to that which is sinfull or 〈◊〉 if any thinke he is oblieged to be circumcised sure he must thinke himselfe oblieged to eate the passeover also and to keepe the whole Ceremoniall law but that the law of nature obliegeth him either so to thinke and erroneously beleeve and practise the whole Ceremoniall Law is another thing It is true a doubting conscience that thinks hee is oblieged by the law to abstaine from eating swines flesh is either oblieged to eate swines flesh or not to eate for to eate or not eate are opposed by way of contradiction but there is no apparent contradiction but admiteth of some qualification and modification set the contradiction in an evangelicall sence as you must and then it shall be there be none in the visible Church but he must either eate in faith or not eate in faith he must either bee circumcised in faith and in a certaine perswasion that circumcision is acceptable to God or hee must not bee circumcised in faith c. For both the Law and Gospell obliege to the action and to all the manner way and requisite circumstances of the action to wit that it be done in faith sincerely for God in a due manner c. Now so wee say hee is neither to eate simply nor not to eate simply but either to eate in faith or to abstaine from eating in faith and without an erring and doubting conscience and we are not to do upon a supposition that the conscience stand erroneous nor hath the erroneous conscience any warrant at all nor commission from the Sovereigne Lord of conscience to command you to beleeve you must be circumcised or upon the supposall of that faith to obliege you to be circumcised more then any earthly judge hath a warrant from God to command murther or robery nor is it a law of nature or of God that you must do absolutely and without trying what an erroneous conscience indites you to do under paine of sin nor is it a sin to resist an eroneous conscience by not doing or suspending the action more then it is a sin not to obey an earthly Judge when he commandeth beside and contrary to the law of the supreame Law-giver No wonder they make a Pope of conscience who make the conscience of the Pope the supream court that obliegeth all men on earth The reason of this errour is Papists and Libertines joyn with them in this dreame hat as God doth command unerringly indeclinably so hte hath communicated to Popes and Heraulds and to every lawful 〈◊〉
doe the like and others the like till Religions bee multiplyed and this wee must say except it be affirmed that under the New Testament The corruption of our nature is not so great through neglect of Magistracy to doe what seemes good in our owne eyes under the New Testament and to runne a whoring from God to other high places as they did and if so neither should there be a Magistracy under the New Testament to restraine us in wayes of conversation touching the second Table to wit to hedge men in from robbing and stealing from incestuous Marriages and Polygamie upon meere conscience for if the Saints be the onely â—ust owners of the earth as many now hold it is no more punishable by the Ruler as robbery that a Saint take the Oxe Asse Monies Possessions of his neighbour who is a carnall and wicked man then that he take of his owne goods for his use when he is naked and starving which by the Law of nature hee ought to use before hee famishâ— and incestuous Maâ—riages are to some consciences as unpunishable now as when Cain and Abel married their owne sisters and if conscience ought not to bee forced in one thing neither can violence bee offered to it in any thing that unfainedly pretends to conscience Argument III. THAT indulgence and forbearance of all from the Ruler which layes an undeniable ground for Scepticisme Fluctuation and doubting in matters of Religion is not of God But such is toleration of sundry Religions ergo The major is thus proved True Religion suggesteth an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a perfect understanding Luke 1. 3. knowledge and perswasion of faith Rom. 14. 14. 23. faith by many infallible tokens Act. 1. 3. Full perswasion Rom. 8. 39. 2 Tim. 1. 12. 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. All riches of the full assurance of understanding Col. 2. 2. The assumption I thus prove Because the Libertines say that speciall and principall ground of no indulgence to false Prophets under the Old Testament was because the Prophets were infallible God himself who onely knows the heart designed the false teacher and the blasphemer by immediate resolution from his owne oracle and made it out of question whether that was heresie or no and whether presumptuously against the light of conscience the man held professed and taught others so to doe and beleeve as he did So Arminian Libertines So Minus Celsus So Vaticanus So Jo. Goodwin and the English Libertines But now since the Prophets and Apostles fell asleepe no Magistrate no Synod is infallible all men are apt to deceive and be deceived for whether in fundamentals or non-fundamentalls none now can challenge Propheticall or Apostolicke infallibility the Synod condemning Socinians Familists as heretickes are not infallible but may as rather be the heretickes as those whom they condemne for they have not monopolized the Holy Spirit to them-themselves so say they wee have no immediate Oracle to determine heresie and what we beleeve in all except some few fundamentalls wee are to beleeve with a reserve leaving roome to a new contrary light say the Independents yea but it holdeth in beleeving fundamentalls as well as non-fundamentalls for in neither have wee Propheticall infallibility and immediate Oracles and Scripture shewes wee have as great darknesse blindnesse of minde naturall fluctuation to beleeve nothing in supernaturall fundamentalls in the Gospell as in non-fundamentalls but with trepidation and doubting of minde wee no more having monopolized the Spirit to us then Sectaries nor Sectaries more then we in the one then in the other in fundamentalls then in non-fundamentalls what ever wee beleeve upon this principle of Reciprocall Toleration both wee and Sectaries are to beleeve with a speciall reserve to change that faith with the next new Moone when contrary new light shall appeare so are wee taught to have faith of nothing but to bee tossed to and fro and to bee carried about with every wind of doctrine with wavering not rooted nor established nor fully perswaded of any thing contrary to Ephes 4. 14. Hebrewes 3. 19. Coloss 2. 2. 7. Roman 14. 2â— 2 Timoth. 1. 12. And this destroyes faith and makes it a meere conjecture and an unsettled opinion with a fluctuation of minde to waite the tyde of a new contrary light and send this old faith away and admit of another yet so as to lodge that new one with a moveable reserve and so must we live and dye doubting and meere nullifidians Argument IV. THat which destroyeth all our hope comfort of the Scriptures zeale constancy and rejoycing in suffering for the truth for Christ and the Gospel is not to be held nor is it from God But toleration of sundry Religions is such ergo The Proposition is cleare for the places of Scriptures placing these Christian graces in beleevers as Heb. 5. 19 20. 1 Pet. 1. 3. 1 Thess 5. 8. Rom. 15. 4. 5. Rom. 12. 11. Rom. 5. 1 2 3. Eph. 3. 1. Phil. 1. 12 13. Heb. 10. 33 34. Matth. 19. 29 30. Now Toleration layes this ground as a principle Men are not to be troubled for their conscience because they beleeve hold publish and reach what they do right or wrong according to their conscience be it erroneous or not erroneous and their zeale hope perswasion comfort carrieth them to undergoe the reproaches of Heretickes Seducers false Prophets imprisonment torture death burning quicke rather then they would sinne against knowne truth and offend against a conscience though erroneous yet because the sufferers are not infallible and it may be a lye they beleeve publish and suffer for their hope may be grounded on a lye their comfort not bottomed on the Scripture and so false hope and comfort their rejoycing in sufferings and undergoing torture and violent death but fleeting and counterfeit joy their zeale without knowledge a bastard zeale having nothing to doe with the word and Gospel-promises but in the bottome as contrary to them as light is to darknesse for what any Saint or Professour beleeves and publishes hee is to beleeve and publish and dye in it and for it with a faith that the contrary may bee a truth of God and so to bee tolerated and borne with now the hope of the hypocriâ—e is therefore compared to the spiders web to a broken tree to a blasted olive tree his joy to a night vision a dreame the cracking of thornes under a pot because both hope and joy and all his comfort is grounded on an erroneous conscience a lye an imagination not on the word of God Now so is the joy comfort and hope of all Religions which Libertines contend must be tolerated they confesse they may bee truths they may bee lyes yet if they bee punished for them they suffer persecution for righteousnesse for Christ for truth Argument V. THAT which taketh away all wayes of removing Heresies under the New Testament both by the Sword and refuting of gaine-sayers by the word all rebuking all
Asa was free of compelling men to hypocrasy When therefore Peter strucke Annanias and Saphira with death and Paul Elimas with blindnesse and delivered Himeneus and Alexander to Sathan and when the Apostles sharply rebuked and upbraided the Cretians those who are called dogs evill-workers enemies to the crosse of Christ such as serve their belly not the Lord Jesus it is as pertinent and necessary a query whether or no Peter compelled others who saw Annanias punished to death Paul constrained others who saw the terrible wrath of God on Hymeneus to dissemble and to doe and professe against the judgement of an erronious conscience and lay all their goods downe at the Apostles feete against their conscience which yet beleeved they were against the law of nature defrauding their owne children and to professe the faith and not inword blaspheme and say there is no resurrection no Christ no heaven after this life as Familists now say for feare that Paul deliver them to Sathan And wee know professours are much affraid to goe for dogges and belly-Gods in the account of such eminent Godly men as the Apostle Paul and others and therefore will cover themselves and professe the contrary if therefore censures and rebukes from the eminently Godly doe create varnished hypocrits and it is not the sin of Godly rebukers and if punishments may and doth constraine many to say and doe and unsay and counterdoe in matters of Religion in judgeing according to conscience in highest judicatures and contrary to that same conscience the next day this which is objected against coercive power in matters of conscience that it creates hypocrites and straines men to doe against their judgement and so to sinne is all accidentall to the nature of coercive and bodily restraining power And because many keep their hands from blood and violence and that out of deep hypocrisie since they lodge in their breast bloody hearts onely for feare of the Princes sword yet both the Prince and his sword is innocent of that hypocrisie Then as coercive power is falsly charged with any kindly begetting of hypocrites in the duties of the second Table so is it as harmelesse in matters of Religion respecting the first Table nor did the Lord in the Old Testament create hypocrits by straining mens consciences by bloody Lawes A third Answer stands thus those lawes were made of old against false teachers Because the Jewes had the opportunity of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself and except the Iudge had been desperately wicked and despised the glorious ordinance of the Oracle of God they could not doe unjustice God being always at hand to declare unto them what kinde of blasphemer and what kind of Idolater it was that he intended by his law should be put to death Men are now fallible and the learnedest cannot tell whaâ—â—blasphemy or idolatry it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law So Jo. Goodwin Answ If there was such immediate consultation to make short worke of blood to the Judge we desire law or instance of the Priest or Prophets consulting with the mouth of God touching the Prophet whether true or false but none can be produced sometimes the Prophets by miracles cleared their calling another way we fâ—nd not 1 This is against appeales that are cleare Deut. 17. In all matters of controversie when in the highest Court where a mans head whether hee be a false Prophet or any other was at the stake the Judges v. 11. were to judge according to the sentence of the law and they proceed upon witnesse Deut. 17. 6. God should by this declare law proof and witnesses uselesse for the Lord from Heaven condemnes the man 2 Jeremiah and all the Prophets that were killed and stoned never sought the benefit of the law nor said give us a â—ury from heaven an oracle for to take away our head the Prophets never accuse Kings or Judges in persecuting the Prophets that they consulted not the oracle ere they rejected the Prophet 3 This had been a well settled law to try all Prophets who speake from God and who speake the visions of their owne head all should have passed the grand Jury of an immediate oracle from heaven and by this there should not have been a false Prophet in all Judea but the Judge might have discovered him but God never gives this character of an Idolater Blasphemer or a false Prophet The Oracle of Vrim hath blacked him as an impostor But divers other characters the Lord gave As 1. If hee speake not according to the Law 2. If the good he foretel never comes to passe 3. If hee â—eale the wound with smooth words 4. If he strengthen the armes of the wicked When as yet God had made no standing law he was consulted and God gave sentence against the man that had broken the Sabbath and that blasphemed but their consulting with God presupposeth by the law of nature the Magistrate should punish such therefore the puâ—â—ing him in ward was a punishment only they would have the mind of God touching the manner of his punishment but sure this was not the ordinary and standing law 4 There were others as difficill and intricate controversieâ— of murther adultery treason as Deut. 17. 8. Between blood and blood plea and plea stroake and stroake By this reason Anabaptists have a better ground to say there should be no Christian Magistrate under the New Testament nor any use of the sword nor sheding of blood at all because the Jeâ—es under the Old Testament had the opportunity of immediate consulting with the mouth of God himselfe we are fallible men and the learnedest can no more tell what murther what incest or adultery was condemned in the law of God for heart-hatred which is seen to God only doth essentially constitute murther punishable by the Judge Deut. 19 11 12 13. chap. 4. 44. chap. 19. 4â— then they can define what blasphemy or idolatry it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law for we are to be as wary to take a mans life and blood now under the New Testament for murther and treason and sorcery as they were under the old in stoning blasphemers and we are no more infallible in the one then they were in the other Yea it strongly concludes that wars are as unlawfull under the New Testament as under the old for under the old they consulted the mouth of God before they went to battle we have no immediate oracles to consult yea when we are ingaged wee are neither to pursue the enemy nor to forbear because we have not the immediatly inspired Prophets Micah Jeremiah as they had wee may not make a Covenant with neighbouring Kingdomes the Scotish Army have no oracle to shew them whither they shall remove out of England for that will be the safety of the cause of all the godly Presbyterians who are now persecuted for the Covenant of God and a carying on
and conjectures for it may be say Libertines that all those whom wee refute as hereticks be sound in the faith and we not they the hereticks and those whom we refute are as much oblieged in faith to refute us as we to refute them So I see not how Libertines can use so much as morall compelling of Hereticks For 1. They cannot compell them with the sword to forsake their heresies because the sword bearer being fallible knoweth them not to be heresies they may be necessary truths for him Ergo because the Pastor is no more infallible then the Magistrate the Pastor with certainty of faith cannot say thus saith the Lord. Jezabel is a false Prophetesse Hymaeneus and Phyletus depart from the faith for Jezabel Hemaeneus and Philetus may be sound in the faith and this Pastor who refuteth them the false heretick for there is no peremptory and imposing decision of any of these till the last judgement since now the infallible Prophets and Apostles are dead 2. Upon this ground yee cannot eschew any as a heretick after twise admonishing him of his hereâ—ie for ye have no faith nor divine certainty it is an heresie that he holdeth it mâ—y be you who admonish him are the heretick only upon opinion you admonish him 3 You cannot rebuke any Heretick sharpely that hee may be sound in the faith for you are not infallible in the bestowing of the lashings of your tongue on a heretick more then the Magistrate in beating him with the sword and your rebuking of him may be heretical and unjust and he the man sound in the saith 4. Upon the same ground you cannot admonish and instruct him in faith Nor 5. Call the opinion of the Magistrates coercing of men with the sword for their conscience a bloody tenet and persecution of the Saints Nor 6. Can you in faith refuse him lodging in your house and all your 7. Saying in the pulpit such a way of Familisme is a way of heresie is not resolved in thus saith the Lord by such a preacher but such a preacher so thinketh possibly phancies that the Lord sayth such a way is heresie And by the same reason what ever pastors preach especially except it be two or three fundamentalls which all Christians Papists Socinians Lutherans Protestants Familists Arminians Seekers c. Is but the dictates of their own conscience and so they preach so they beleeve and so they professe not because God so saith but because their conscience so dictates to them And here is the Libertines Creed Me thinks Christ died for sinners the dead shall be raised c. And so Libertines are very Papists in this and resolve our faith into the testimony of men the conjectures of the conscience So he goes on Hee expounds uniformity and nearest conjunction to be absolute conjunction and identitie If we be agreed of the same Church Officers with the reformed Churches and have cast out the old Vsurpers cashiered the Common-prayer booke Ceremonies Alters Crucifixes all which we have don by the Covenant do we not save our Covenant though we cast not our Churches into such Classicall provinciall or nationall formes Answ Nor do we plead for absolute identitie in doctrine and worship but indeavour it we ought But how I pray you doth the Magistrate for that I had almost forgot send Ministers to rebuke exhort and reclaime men from their errors but not compel gainesayers The Magistrate I am sure sent not Paul and Barnabas it was not so from the begining in the Apostilick Church there were no Parliament-Ministers But it may be the Authour meanes a politicall civill sending of Ministers to extirpate heresies But be it so all Magistraticall sending of Magistrates is a commanding of them by the sword in a compulsive way that they goe preach against Familisme Socinianisme Arrianisme But if so good Sir remember your selfe the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth not request and morally by the power of the word for he hath not any such spirituall armour I conceive for his warfare intreat and say good Pastors I beseech you go preach against Del Randal Saltmarsh and other Familists and extirpate their heresies private men so send Pastors but as a Magistrate he must say I command you goe preach against these heresies under the paine of bearing the vengeance of my sword now if the Pastors reply Good Master Judge we cannot doe that for we think Familisme a new glorious discovery of spirit and Mr. Saltmarsh hath beaten out of the Scriptures new sparkles of glory and flowings of free grace Familisme is no heresie If the Magistrate notwithstanding by his place and calling send these and command them to goe and extirpate Familisme doth he not compell the consciences of these pastors he sends what doe ye then talke of no compelling for what ever the Magistrate by his place doth command which is lawfull if Ministers or any other refuse to obey he may use the sword against them Ye cannot say if it be a matter of conscience he cannot compell them to doe it by his place then say I by his place hee cannot command them neither Beside that this answer is directly against the words of the Covenant if every man in like manner Art 2. Be to endeavour the extirpation of Popery Prelacy Heresie and Schisme in his severall places and calings as the Author saith this referres to the whole obligation of each person respectively Then is the Magistrate according to his place and calling which is to beare the sword to compell with the sword the extirpation of Popery Prelacy Heresie and Schisme and what hath the Author gained by this glosse which I conceive is the true glosse except he mean the Magistrate as the Magistrate should lay aside his sword and fall to prayers requests obtestations that hereticks would lay aside their errours and preach sound doctrine but now he doth so pray and request not according to his place as a Magistrate but according to his vocation as a Saint and a Christian which yet crosses the Covenant and makes the Parliament not as the supream Court of Judges to take the Covenant but as so many private Christians 2 If so the Judges are not in their respective places to take the Covenant nor endeavour the extirpation of heresie because that is against the word of God but then by what authority or calling did the Parliament cast out old Vsurpers the Prelates casheire the Service booke Ceremonies Alters and Crucifixes Either as a Parliament and so by the sword is not here yet the Prelates conscience squeezed to the blood is not here highest violence done to the consciences of high alter men and adorers of crucifixes Why to them more then to Familiâ—s But if this was done by requeâ—â— and wordâ— of butter and oyl from the Parliament and Committee-men then are Ordinances of Parliament but meer requests to the Subjects But it is protestatio conâ—raria facto He addeth if these words we shall
from the Oracle How beleeved they then some lying Priests who persecuted the Prophets of God 3 Query Was the Priest infallible in discerning the Oracle and relating the mind of God to the people How then did they say he is worthy to dye How did Caiaphas say What need we any more witnesse We have heard himself blaspheme 4 Were not the Priests Deut. 17. ver 11. To Judge according to the sentence of the Law of God delivered to Moses Was this an immediate Oracle of infallibility such as Bellarmin Becanus Gretsorus Valentia Corn. a lapide ascribe to their Appollo at Rome I thinke Mr. Goodwin cannot say that If he doe I know what to answer to the Papists in that If it was the law and the testimony as I conceive it was had not all the people that were to stone the seducing Prophet their way of judging the false Prophet If they must not follow him after other Gods and if they must be actors in stoning him And was not this fallible as well as ours under the new Testament and therefore because we are not infallible judging in the heart-Heretick we must not draw the Sword against him and I say nor can we draw the Sword of the Spirit against any such for in the using of the Sword of the Spirit in teaching refuting or arguing against Hereticks we are not infallible If this way of Peoples judging and not listening to the suggestions of a false Prophet was infallible how erred they and slew the true Prophets and stoned them that were sent Matth. 23. 27. As well as we may And why may not we notwithstanding of our fallibility and actuall erring judge and drive away by the sword devourers of the flock as well as they 6. If God have left no means under the New Testament but exhorting to suppresse the seducer what shall be said of Iohn 2 Epist 10. who forbids to receive a seducer in our house or bid him God speed Sure this is some externall forcing of the conscience if we credit Libertines for rather then some seducer lye in the fields in America in winter he will say he abhors Familianisme though he hate all the sound in the faith Now is not this a greater externall power armed against a Seducer then if the holy Ghost had said If a murtherer a Parricide a Sorcerer a Drunkard come to your house let him not lye in the fields lodge him but give him course cheare and no bed to lye on no fire to warme him yet so much is not said in expresse words for the forcing of the conscience in the New Testament Againe for the second member if to teach what we judge in our conscience to be truth though most erroneous be no sinne but innocency yea if as Minus Celsus said it be a token of a good conscience and innocent feare of God as Libertines say we are to judge no mans heart and that in a matter of salvation no man will be so Devill-like as to go to hell and leade millions of soules with him the way being against his conscience For Ier. Taylor saith It is all one here whether it be a reall truth the Seducer holdeth and teacheth or if he onely apprehend it to be a truth though it be an untruth and he said well according to his way Now if to teach I say what we conceive to be truth though most false be no sinne but innocency then the Magistrate ought not onely not to punish it but reward it and to allow stipends and maintenance to all Seducers to teach what errors they judge saving truths And grant me these three which cannot be denied but by grosse Anabaptists 1. Rom. 13. That the Magistrate is to reward well doing 2. That the workeman is worthy of his wages 1 Tim. 5. 18 19. Matth. 10. 10. And 3 That a preaching Ministry is necessary under the New Testament 1 Cor 1. 16 17 18. 23 24. Rom. 10. 14 15 16. Then must it follow of necessity That the Christian Magistrate should maintaine and pay stipends to all Preachers whether sound and Orthodox or Heterodox and seducing for if he withdraw maintenance as a Magistrate or any other way because he judgeth the Preacher to be unsound and a seducer he taketh upon himselfe to punish a man for his conscience when as he hath no infallibility and he doth so punish and force the conscience of the innocent Pastor and People both For he is obliged to judge that both the sound Pastor and the Seducer follow their conscience and whatever the Doctrine of either be Orthodox or Heterodox he is to judge that both followeth his innocent conscience and in so doing both feareth God and doth well and by his Office he is for the praise and reward of well doers And suppose he judge in his conscience that the Doctrine of the Seducer is error and Heresie yet is he to judge it Heresie with a reserve so as it may be to him the next moneth sound Doctrine and therefore not to judge otherwayes of the Seducer than that he followeth the dictates of his conscience And so as yet he doth not take on him infallibility to judge that the Seducer teacheth against the light of his conscience and therefore is not to punish him but reward him and pay wages to him as to a well doer Yea and whatever Ministers teach since neither they are infallible in teaching the very fundamentals nor the people that heare infallible in judging and neither are to beleeve with the perswasion of faith And all are to be heard as instructors For suppose you believe that Christ is God consubstantiall with the father yet are you to heare Arrius preach and to admit a contrary light If Arrius can make the contrary appeare to your minde and Arrius preacheth according to the light of his mind and there is no reason why you should not be instructed by the Seducer for you are to try his doctrine as well as by the sound teacher for you have no infallible knowledge who is the seducer or who is the sound Teacher by the principles of Libertines The third cannot be said to wit That it is indifferent to drive away people from the true God for it must either be good and praise worthy or evill and so punishable against which we have sufficiently argued Argument 4 What the Magistrate is foreprophecied to be under the New Testament that he must discharge with all the power God hath given him and that perpetually and not by the tie of a judicial and temporary law which binds for a time only But the Magistrate is fore-prophefied Isai 49. 23. and 60. 10. Rev. 21. 26. to be a Nurse-father to the Church under the New Testament to keep and guard both Tables of the Law and to see that Pastors doe their dutie to minister to the Church by his royal power yea when the fountain shall be opened in Davids house that is under the New
mouth Zach. 13. Lastly Baptist is so charitable of all Saints that are not for liberty of conscience as that he makes it their doom to be cast out as Ishmael and to have no share in Christ or in the Gospel But Baptist if you judge us and be not infallible you take the Lords throne upon you and you judge us before our day which is to you a strong argument against liberty of conscience c. 3. pag. 14. Know ye we are selfe-condemned and saw you Gods secret book and saw our names dashed out of the book of life and that we are inrolled with Ishmalites Take the beam out of your own eye CHAP. XXVII Whether our darknesse and incapacity to beleeve and professe together with the darknesse and obscurity of Scripture be a sufficient ground for Toleration AS Mr. John Goodwin the Lord pardon his perverting of Soules led the way from Arminian principles who teach with Socinians that 1 To know is not in our power which he and they borrowed from Aristotle but wickedly understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 2 Arminians taught that God by an irresistible power works illumination in the minde So opinions not being in our power the Magistrate can have no power over men to coerce them from spreading of heresie Hence Baptist the Bounder the Stormer and other Libertines M. Goodwin speaks for That which is not in our power to doe or not doe and is wrought in us by supernaturall grace and by God onely we are not punishable by the Magistrates sword but to beleeve to repent to be sound in the faith is wrought in us by supernaturall grace and by God onely Baptist heaps together but eighteen Scriptures produced against Pelagians Papists Arminians and his brethren Socinians and old Anabaptists that no man can come to the Son except the Father draw him the naturall man understands not the things of God c. And I am sure he is ignorant of the conclusion for we professe the sword is to be drawn against no man because he repenteth not or beleeveth not c. Hence Baptist spitting out with other Antinomians his venome against us though no matter excepting the sin of it if he wronged not Christ and his truth For when a weak Christian a disciple of Servetus Socinus an Apostate denying the Lord Jesus to have come in the flesh and all the Scriptures to be the word of God tyred of longer imprisonment and death shall say You say well but how shall I prevaile with my selfe to beleeve what you say Thus reply these miserable comforters Yeeld obedience to what is taught you meditate on it often desire to beleeve it and God in time will bring you to beleeve it Then poore Popery why art thou evill spoken of and this is a lie why It is the Spirit that teacheth us to pray Abba Father This is merit and supererogations ground-stone Answ 1. What if a man void of the Spirit cannot pray ergo we should not advise him to pray Is it Popery to advise him so to doe or to pray when he wants the Spirit sure Peter taught no Popery to Simon Magus a man as void of the Spirit as any Socinian or Familist a man in the gall of bitternesse and in the bond of iniquity Act. 8. 22. Repent therefore of this thy wickednesse I conceive this is yeeld obedience to what is taught you and meditate on it and your evill wayes and change your minde and pray God though thou hast no Spirit of Adoption more then a Familist who makes you beleeve hony words or the very Spirit given to his Anointed ones such as they onely if perhaps the thoughts of thine heart may be forgiven thee and whom does the Lord command Ezek. 18. that they would make a new heart I conceive such as were as unable to doe it as to make one haire white or blacke as the Bounder saith and this is our advice not because we thinke they can do it without the Spirit of Christ more than those that move the question Act. 2. 37. What shall we doe to be saved Act. 9. 6. Act. 16. 30. But if unconverted they may be humbled and convinced that they are in a lost condition And I confesse if Antinomians will advise them to beleeve and pray though they have not the Spirit and to pray as they can and beleeve as they can and without any preparative work of the Law or sense or knowledge of sin or sicknesse for Christ immediately and forth with beleeve Christ dyed for thee obstinate Socinian and wrote thy name in the booke of life and beleeve thy election to life Baptist is a miserabâ—e comforter and how he censureth this Its Gods absolute will and pleasure you should beleeve and that you must necessarily beleeve upon perill of damnationâ— which he saith is our Catechisme I understand not except he shew us a conditionall Commandement to beleeve the Gospell and a conditionall election and reprobation suspending Gods decrees on what we are foreseen to doe and except he deny the threatnings in the Gospel which shall finde out an unbeleever Joh. 3. 18. 36. If the man be a weak Christian or a weak beleever when the advice of yeelding obedience praying desiring to beleeve is given him appearingly he would have weak Antinomians and all anointed ones loosed from all precepts rule of obedience and have them under no rule but the immediate impulsion of the Spirit which if it be his mind he should have set it down and must prove a miserable Comforter in so teaching 2. But are we in all these Scriptures that hold forth our impotencie to beleeve to thinke a good thought to doe the works of righteousness mercie truth chastitie sobrietie prescribed in the second Table unable only to conceive sound opinions of God and eschew Hereticall wayes and false Religions Are we not also unable to abstain from murther adulterie c. without the supernatural grace of God Yea all these places shall prove that the Ministerie of men Pastors and Teachers of the word are as unlawfull means of converting soules as the Magistrates Sword to beare down Heresiâ—â— O say they preaching is an Ordinance of Christ and a spiritual means ordained to convert soules the Sword is nothing but a carnall humane device I answer it is an humane device of converting souls to shed the blood of their bodie but it is to beg the question and not to prove it to call it a humane device to punish ill doers and false Teachers who pervert the souls of many 2. I speak to the Argument the only preaching of the word it alone without the Spirit can no more make an hair white or black or draw us to the Son or work repentance in sinâ—â—rs then the sword of the Magistrate can work repentance What can man doe saith the Bounder Is it not God that must give repentance to the acknowledgement of the truth So say I what
not bottomed or resolved upon these fallible meanes But what Arguments have Bellarmine Stapleton Grâ—â—serus Becamâ—s 〈◊〉 Valentia the Councel of Trâ—nt and other Papists to make good that the Church of sound Catholikes who if they could fill their chaire are of more authoritie then Printers or particular men translators of the Scripture for they lead us from the written word as Mr. Goodwin doth and say the Church giveth authoritie to the word of God and resolve our faith upon the Testimonie of the Church saith Tannâ—rus as the infallible rule of faith on the authority of the Church saith Bellarmine quoad explicationem quoad nos in regard of our beleeving on God not simply revealing but so and so revealing saith Stapleton by his Church c. so as we know not that God hath revealed his truth but by and for the infallible proposal of the Church saith Gregorius de Valentia on the authoritie of the first veritie God revealing himselfe as the principle and first cause of faith saith Ioan. de Lugo and Malderus and on the authoritie of the Church as they are men eminent for Miracles as in that which is first beleeved ut in primo creditum and the only infallible rule of faith say Suarez Aegid Connick Lod. Maeratius And. Duvallius Fr. Silvius Lod. Caspensis All which speak fairer for the credit of faith in words then Mr. Iohn Goodwin who raiseth our faith no higher then the English grammer the Printer the learning and authoritie of men 2. We beleive that Christ is God man not for the authoritie of men and so of the rest of the Articles of our faith because Christ saith Iohn 5. 34. Ye sent unto Iohn and he bare witness to the truth v. 34. But I receive not testimony from men on which word Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I need not saith our Saviour the testimonie of men 〈◊〉 I am God but because ye give more heed unto Iohn and beleeve him to be most worthy of all of credit and ye come to him as a Prophet I speak this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who will then receive Mr Goodwins Testimonie who gives us nothing for faith but fluctuation of opinion and some Topick grounds from mens credit learning and authoritie that the Scripture is the Word of God and turnes all our faith into fancie 3. The Scripture resolves our faith on Thus saith the Lord the only authoritie that all the Prophets alledge and Paul 1 Thes 2. 13. For this cause also thanke we God without ceasing because when yea received the word of God which ye heard of us ye received it not as the word of man made of mens credit and learning as Mr. Goodwin saith but as it is in truth the word of God 4. Weak dry and saplesse should be our faith all our patience and consolations of the Scriptures Rom. 15. 4. all our hope on the word of God Ps 119 49 50 52 54 55. all our certainty of faith if it were so as Mr. Goodwin averreth But we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more sure word of Prophesie surer then that which was heard on the Mount for our direction and the establishing of our faith 2 Pet. 1. 19. Joh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures for they bear witnesse of me let them be judge between the Jews and me whether I be the Son of God or no for they beare witnesse of me now if we have no better warrant that the books of the Old and New Testament that we now have to wit the originall of Hebrew and Greek and translations are the word of God then that which is made of the credit of the authority and learning of men then must all our comfort of beleeving be grounded upon this mans and this mans Grammar and skill in Hebrew Greek Latine English aâ—d he is not infallible in any of these And must our lively hope be bottomed on mens credit and learning then for any thing we know on the contrary we have but dreams opinions and at best mans word for the word of God and how is the word of Prophesie a more sure word for these were written and translated prophesies of which Peter speaketh Mr. Goodwin and Libertines who put heaven and Christ and the lively hope of our inheritance to the conjectures of doubting Scepticks could well reply to Peter the word of prophesie cannot be sure for we have no certainty that the Scriptures of the Prophets of the Old and New Testament which we have either Hebrew or Greek copies of are the word of God but undoubtedly Christ appealeth to the Scriptures as to the onely Judge of that controversie between him and the Jewes whether the Son of Mary was the eternall Son of God and the Saviour of the world he supposed the written Scriptures which came through the hands of fallible Printers and Translatours and were copies at the second if not at the twentieth hand from the first copy of Moses and the Prophets and so were written by sinfull men who might have miswritten and corrupted the Scripture yet to be a judge and a rule of faith and fit to determine that controversie and all others and a Judge de facto and actually preserved by a divine hand from errours mistakes and corruptions else Christ might in that appealed to a lying Judge and a corrupt and uncertaine witnesse and though there be errours of number genealogies c. of writing in the Scripture as written or printed yet we hold providence watcheth so over it that in the body of articles of faith and necessary truths we are certaine with the certainty of faith it is that same very word of God having the same speciall operations of enlightning the eyes converting the soule making wise the simple as being lively sharper then a two-edged sword full of divinity life Majesty power simplicity wisdome certainty c. which the Prophets of old and the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles had M. Goodwins argument makes as much against Christ and the Apostles as against us for they could never in all their Sermons and writings so frequently bottome and found the faith on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is written in the Prophets as David saith as Isaiah saith and Hosea as Daniel saith as Moses and Samuel and all the Prophets beare witnesse if they had had no other certainty that the writings of the Prophets that came to their hands was the very word of God but the credit learning and authority of men as Mr. Goodwin saith for sure Christ and the Apostles and Evangelâ—sts had not the authentick and first copies of Moses and the Prophets but only copies written by men who might mistake Printers and Translators not being then more then now immediately inspired Prophets but fallibly men and obnoxious to failings mistakes and ignorance of ancient Hebraismes and force of words and if ye remove an unâ—rring providence who doubts but men might
with humours mis-apprehending colours that are white and seeing them to be red when they are not so And for that way of trying the two missalls they are but doting fools that would chuse either of them for the word of God may judge them both to be corrupt and superstitious and their trying which of the two was best by a miracle was a foolish and phantasticall tempting of God much like Chilingsworths decyding of controversies of Religion by lotry because Scripture Reason Councells Fathers Doctors Tradition are all insufficient which sure is dâ—rogatory to the worth and perfection of Scripture which maketh the simple wise Ps 19. and must shew the man that erreth his errour if he shut not his eyes at light Dr. Taylor saith Covetousnesse is often is cause of heresie Thebulis quia rejectus ab Episcopatu â—ierosolymitano turbare capit Ecclesiam saith Egesippus in Eusebius Tertullian turned Montanist for missing the Bishopricke of Garthage after Aggrippinus and so did Montanus for the same discontent saith Nicephorus Novatuâ— would have been Bishop of Rome Donatus of Carâ—â—age Arriâ—s of Alexandria Aerius of Sebastia Socrates said Asterius did frequent the Conventicles of the Arrians nam Episcopatum nliquem ambiebat Let the errour be never so great if it be not against an arâ—â—cle of the Creed if it be simple and have no confederation with the personall iniquity of the man the opinion is as innocent as the person though perhaps as false as he is ignorant and therefore shall burne though he himselfe escape The man cannot by humane judgement be counted an heretick unlesse his opinion be an open recession from plaine demonstrative authority which must needs be notorious voluntary vincible and criminall or that there be a palpable serving of an end accidentall and extrinsecall to the opiâ—ion but these ends spirituall are hard to be discerned The opinion of Purgatory though false being neither fundamentally false nor practically impious is no heresie Ans 1. I am not so uncharitable of Tertullian as Dr. Taylor for Aerius he maintained no heresie I hope Episcopacy is no article of faith 2. I know no errour in the matters of God speculative but the Lord forbids it in his word If every thing written be written for our instruction fundamentall or non-fundamentall as all the Scripture 〈◊〉 we are under a commandement of God we I say who live in the visible Church are to know all and beleeve all things written be they fundamentall or no for God hath written them all for us Ergo the ignorance of any thing written is a sin and a breach of a command and so 〈…〉 errour Happy are these that know and do Now under doing I comprehend the faith of the Trinity and the most of articles touching Christ which do practically concern me because I sin if I doe not both know and beleeve them else they are written as Aristotles Acroamaticks the ignorance of which in an unletteâ—ed man I suppose is no breach of a divine command and I conceive the ignorance of the Stories in the old and new Testament of Pauls leaving his cloak at Troas is a sin in all within the visible Church for that the Holy Ghost hath written these not for the instruction of one but of all who heare or may heare of them within the visible Church 2. No error except of the Article of the Creed is arraigned as Heresie by the Doctor but he meaneth by error ignorance and mis-beleif both for I hope the Doctors charitis will not send all to hell many godlie there may be who have much ignorance of God who know not or are simply ignorant of some of the twelve Articles of the Creed and of some of the ten Commandements if therefore error here doth include not beleeving as heresie must necessarily doe the pertinacious mis-beleeving and denying of many Stories in the Bible as of the deluge dividing of the red Sea preserving of Ionah alive in the whales belly raising of Lazarus if obstinacie be added must be no lesse Heresie and an open belying of the God of truth then the denying of an Article of the Creed for the authoritie of God who commands us to know the one as well as the other is in both despised when we are ignorant of either 3. It is to beg the Question to say that any Error in the matters written to us in our Lords Testament which so much concerneth both our knowledge and practise can be simple Errors and have no confederation with personall iniquity for it is as much as if not to read our Husbands love-letter from end to end or to cause to read it if it comes to the wives hard were not our sin against our husband Christ whereas to be ignorant of any thing in it and mis-beleeve it is sinfull ignorance and naturall blindness so the Doctor makes sin so innocent as to have no consideration with sin 4. To say the opinion shall burne though himself â—â—cape is to expound the place 1 Cor. 3. 11 12 13 14. most corruptly in a nâ—w glosse of the Doctors own as if hay and stubbâ—â— that is vaine and unprofitable opinions that are builded upon the foundation Christ were not sinful opinions in the matters of God when as they are hay and stubble to be bâ—ent 1. Because they are against a Commandment that every man is to take heed how or what he is to build on the foundation v. 10. but he that builds hay and stubble obeyes not that Commandement but let every one take heed how hee buildeth thereupon 2. Building hay and stubble that is vain and fruitless opinions upon the foundation is privatively opposed to building of gold silver and precious stones vers 12. but that is a work of faith and such a work as shall abide and have a reward v. 14. 3. The work that shall be brought to judgement and made manifest so as it shall be burnt with fire and shall be judged to bee a fruitlesse work must be sin But the building of 〈◊〉 and stubble upon the 〈◊〉 Christ is such a work v. 13 14 15. And that the man himself shall be saved because that by faith he is builded upon the foundation Christ but the work burnt with fire will no more prove that the building of hay is not sin then that Peters jâ—daizing and Davids adulâ—â—ry and murther were not fins because Peter and David are saved for the Apostle there compares the Apostles to builders as before he compared them to 〈◊〉 v. 6 7 8 9. and the preaching of doctrine to a building and he makes Christ the foundation of the building and two sorts of super-structures good doctrine and that is gold and silver and vain and unedifying Toyes added to the doctrine of Christ 〈◊〉 hay and stubble Now he makes the judgement that trieth all doctrine to be fire whether it be the last judgement or fierie afflictions it is no great matter our good doctrine
warrant Christ to offer up himself to God But upon the supposition of Libertines it 's no murther nor is it punishable at al because the father may yea lawfully ought to worship God according to the indictment of his conscience whither the conscience be right or bloody and erroneous and yet he is not punishable for blood-shed by their way for meerly and simply without any malignancy or hatred to the child he beleeves he ought to preferre his maker to his dearest childs life as well as Abraham and the conscience doth naturally and as under no Law simply beleeve it is the like service and worship that Abraham would have gratefully performed unto God if God in reward of that love had not forbidden him againe to kill his Sonne And this answer presupposes also that it is impossible for a father to have such a conscience as may stimulate and command to kill his son and that in the authority and name of God as he erroneously yea and as he invincibly holdeth as Socinians Familists Papists beleeve purgatory merits justification by workes who yet are not to be punished for their conscience according to Libertines Again there is no intrinsecall malignancy in the act of naticide or son-sacrificing but what it hath from the Lords Law forbiding to kill now those that killed their Sons to Molech yea to God as they thought strongly yea invincibly beleeved God commanded them to do him such bodily service as is clear from Jer. 7. 31. Jer. 15. 5. And that this is invincible ignorance I take the word invincible in the Libertines sense Libertines grant for in our condemning son-sacrificing they wil say we are not infallible Yea the understanding being spirituall cannot be restrained saith Dr. Taylor Sect. 13. n. 6. and no man can change his opinion when he will saith he ibid n. 7. and so should not be punished for it and n. 13. there is nothing under God Almighty that hath power over the soule of man so as to command a persuasion If hee be then perswaded that he ought to kill his Son he ought unpunishably so to do Lastly Doctor Taylor yeelds the cause when he saith that certaine known Idolaters may be punished with death or corporall inflictions For there is no Idolatry so grosse that strongly deluded consciences may not be carried invincibly I speake in the Libertine sense out of meer conscience to act Ergo some are justly punishable for their meer conscience and yet are not persecuted for conscience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a man preach treason saith he his opinion doth not excuse If a man preach murther and preach that Christ was an impostor that the Scripture is a fable how can his opinion excuse in a great sin and not all sins CHAP. XXVIII Divers other Arguments for pretended Toleration answered DOctor Taylor objects from the Arminians he that persecutes a disagreeing person doth arm all the world to persecuâ—â— himself if he say he is no Heretick he is as confidently beleeved to be an Heretick as he beleeves his adversarie to be an Heretick if it be said every side must take their venture this is to make the Christian world a shambles Ans 1. Because sound and orthodoxe Magistrates punish Hereticks they doe no more arm Hereticks against them to punish them then they arme murtherers to punish them because no law of Conscience teacheth that a seducer is obliged to publish to others his erroneous opinion touching mansacrificing the unlawfulness of Magistracie under the New Testament Libertie of Conscience Familisme and the 〈◊〉 for then the Law of nature must teach men are obliged in conscience to sin and pervert others 2. They are obliged to beleeve that their Conscience must be a rule to others which two the Law of nature cannot teach since it is the just law of God If yee argue what Hereticks doe unjustly they persecute the sound in the faith and there is reciprocation of persecution amongst false Religions its true the Christian world is a shambles through the corruption of mens nature But if yee argue what Christian Orthodox Magistrates ought to doe they ought to punish only Hereticks and Seducers but they do not justly 〈◊〉 Hereticks and those of false Religions reciprocally against themselves for by this argument those that are just Magistrates and take away the life of Pirates Robbers 〈◊〉 of other Nations doe they therefore justly arme all Pirates and Robbers to take away their Lives I thinke not Obj. 2. Where the Christ or his Messengers charge the Magistrate to establish by his arme of flesh and 〈…〉 worship of God the beast indeed gets the power of the earth Rev. 17. Bloodie Tenent Answ Kisse the Son O Rulers Psal 2. The Kings of the earth shall lick the dust before Christ Psal 72. The Kings shall bring their glory to the new Ierusalem Ergo They shall guard the Law of God from violence 2. The Beast gets the power of Kings to bear down truth but this power of Kings shall burn the whore Rev. 17. 16. and act for Christ and his ordinances 3. Where reads Mr. Williams that Christ and his Messengers are to charge the Magistrate to give libertie to Wolves Boares Lions Foxes Serve your consciences O beasts in wasting the Mountain of the Lords House and in not sparing the flock the Nurse-father grants you libertie to waste the mountain of the Lord. Obj. 3. Artaxerxes knew not the Law of God which he confirmed how then could be judge it 2. In such fits and pangs of a terrifying conscience what lawes have Nebuchadnezzar Cyrus Darius Artaâ—erxes put forth for the Israel of God yet were they not charged with the spirituall crowne of governing the worship of God Answ That was their Error they knew not the Law of God but it was their dutie that they ratified it 2. Those Princes did their dutie as Magistrates in those Laws no matter what Conscience renewed or not renewed put them on to act the duties in the substance of the act were lawfull the corruption of nature they being unrenewed might vitiate the work and put them a working to act lawfully in the duties Saul as King did fight the battels of the Lord and led his people and that lawfully according to the substance of the work but God knowes his motives and end 3. This ignorant man never heares of a Magistraticall act to promote the worship of God in a civill way but he dreames of a spirituall tribunall given to the Magistrate which we abhorre as much as he for the materiall object of the Magistrates power though spirituall rendreth not his power spirituall as the Magistrate punisheth spirituall confederacie with Satan in Magitians and Sorcerers a Witch should not be suffered to live and Sodomie flowing from Gods judiciall delivering men up to a reprobate mind Rom. I. 28. and yet the Mastrates power is not spirituall nor terminated upon the consciences of men Not is this Argument
doe that who onely hath the key of the heart nor could Gospel-arguments that convinced many that the resurrection was not passed convince Hymeneus Phyletus Alexander actu secundo Therefore Paul might not deliver them to Sathan nor is excommunication being a meer punishment an argument to prove that the resurrection is not passed any other way their the sword or banishment both of them are compelling and penall arguments the one spirituall the other corporall but both work co-actively as evills of punishment and privations of comfort neither of them give light to this conclusion The Resurrection is not past for these two have both alike inconsequences logicall The Church will excommunicate you Ergo beleeve not that the Resurrection is past And the Christian Magistrate will punish you Ergo beleeve not that the Resurrection is past There must either be other arguments to sway the conscience to the faith of this That the Resurrection is not past then either sword or excommunication or these cannot worke nor settle the conscience As Christ is risen in his body from the dead Ergo his members that are sleeping in the dust must rise God is the God of Abraham who is dead and buried Ergo Abraham and the dead must rise againe This I observe to prove that those arguments of Libertines at least for the most part that they bring against punishing of false Prophets with the Sword doe also conclude against all Church-censures and excommunication and the truth is we are not warranted to gaine the Jewes the Indians the Papists over-sea to the truth either by the sword or by excommunicating and delivering them to Sathan for we cannot judge those that are without But to returne to all those kinde of Argumentations that Libertines bring against opinions from the nature of opinion faith perswasion which are all internall acts of the minde which neither Church nor Magistrate can punish they are nothing against our conclusion who maintain that publishing and teaching and professing of erroneous and false Doctrines are punishable by the Magistrate for externall acts that come from meer Conscience as the sacrificing of innocent children to God by all the Arguments we hear are not punishable by the Magistrate for sure the Magistrates punishing of unlawful practises coming from meer Conscience do no lesse force the Conscience and domineer over it then when he punisheth erroneous opinions and therefore the Bounder draweth the question to acts and facts externall as he saith the Magistrate 〈◊〉 punish Polythesme and Atheists worshipping of Images and of the breaden God blasphemie for these saith he fight against the light of nature but if you judge only professed opinions against the light of nature not against the Gospel punishable because we may by freewill master professed opinions against nature but we cannot master opinions against the supernaturall truths of the Gospel these require supernaturall grace then good masters why doe you rebuke 〈◊〉 against the Gospel more then you can punish them 〈◊〉 what is of its own nature unrebukeable is unpunishable 〈◊〉 what is unpunishable as being above our nature is unrebukeable and falleth not under exhortation as we cannot exhort rebuke or punish a stone because it descendeth or fire because it ascendeth But the Papist saith nay but they fight not against the light of nature for to adore Christ under the accidents of bread is my conscience and indeed Doctor Taylor saith you must beleeve it is his conscience and reallities and pretences are 〈…〉 here though he contradict himself and in another place say 〈◊〉 some blasphemies are punishable by the Magistrate But Libertines are 〈◊〉 of Babel and almost as many Heads so many sundry opinions Mr. Willams goes one way Mr. Goodwin another the Bounder a third way John Baptist a fourth way Doctor Taylor a fift way The Belgick Arminians a sixt way None of them please Mr. Jeresiah Burroughes nor Mr. Philip Nye yea and Mr. Sadr Simpson is as grosse as any of them so Socinians have a way of their own Anabaptists another way Seekers and Familists as Saltmarsh a far different way Mr. Oliver Cromwell calls all Religions things of the mind Vaticanus tells us si Deum negent si blasphemant si palam de sanct à Christianorum doctrinâ maledicunt quo crimine reus est ipse Castalio si sanctam piorum vitam detestantur eos ego relinquo Magistratibus puniendos non propter religionem quam nullam habent seâ— propter irreligionem But the Bounder and Castalio must be bloodie persecuters by this For 1. What the Magistrate calleth truth and godly doctrine that these men whom the Bounder and Castalio call Atheists judge in their conscience to be Idolatrie and Blasphimie and if yee kill a man because he speakes as he thinketh yee kill him for the truth for it is truth to speak what â—â—â— think for the 15. Psalm pronounceth him blessed who speakes 〈◊〉 what is in his heart But Castalio may read righter if he please and he is blessed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who speaketh truth not falsely from his heart nor doth the Psalmist speak of the doctrine of truth so as he should blesse Mattan and Pashur or any false Prophet or the King of Assyria because he saith No God can deliver out of the hand of that Tyrant but the God of the Assyrians for so I conceive he thinketh when he relates what false experiences he had of that Bastard God but he speaks of truth of facts between man and man Psal 15. in speaking whereof there may be invincible and so excusable error whereas men sin grievously in false apprehensions of Gods truth when as God reveals himself sufficiently to us in his works and word but thus do Libertines leave the first simple apprehensions of the mind because they are naturall not under the stroak of free-will free from all Law and guiltinesse so as the Egyptians sin not in apprehending the Godhead to be a Cow the Persians to be fire or the Sun Israel to be a Calfe the Philistines to be a Fish for certain it is all Idolaters who worship the God that made the Heavens and the earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ignorantly Acts 17. in the creature or in the works of mens hands should have by this way no sinfull nor unlawfull apprehensions of God when shamefully they apprehend the Creator of the world to be a Beast 2. They must be blessed then and speak truth from their heart by the Exposition that Vaticanus putteth upon Psal 15. who say that God is a cow a calf a fish why because their erroneous conscience dictateth so to them But why should they be punished then who blaspheme commit Idolatry for it is the conscience and the meer conscience of Baals Priests to speake of God and worship him as they doe they had rather dye as not doe that which you call Blasphemy and 1. It is not in their will to think what they will
not necessarie necessitate medij The tolleration of all who err in non fundamentals examined M. Iohn Goodwin hagâ—omastix sect 26. pag. 24. Queries proposed to Mr. Joh. Goodwin who asserteth a Catholicke toleration of all Religions upon the ground of weaknesse of free-will and want of grace 〈…〉 Augus 〈◊〉 dicu relinquâ—s liberâ— orbatrio cur enim non in homicidiis in stupris in quibuscunque 〈◊〉 facinoribâ—â— flagiciis libere arbitrio dimittendum to esse proclamas quae tamen omnia justis leg ibâ—â— comprimâ— utilissimuma â—â—ahiberrimuâ— est dedit quidem Deâ—â— homini liberani 〈◊〉 sed nec bonam Infruct â—osam nec malam voluit esse impunitam li. 1. Con. Gaudenti c. 19. secundum est as fallatissimas vanissimâ—sque rationes haberis laxatis atque dimissis humana licentia impuâ—â—sta peâ—cata omnia relinquentur 〈…〉 Most arguments of Libertines infer a Catholicke toleration in non-fundamentals as wel as 〈◊〉 fundamentals What deductions the spirit makes in the soule of an elect knowing but a few fâ—â—dam and going out of this life thou knoweth To know revealed truths of God is a commanded worship of God One Generall Confession of faith without a particular sense containing the true and orthodox meaning of the word not sufficient Divers pious conferences betweene us and Lutherans They hate God and love blasphemies in the consequence who obstinately hold them in the antecedent They may bee false teachers and so punishable who erre not in fundamentals Divine right of Church-government 1 Tim. 1. 3. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20. 1 Tim. 6. 3 4 5. 2 Job 10 11 1 Tim. 1. 3 4. 1 Cor. 3. Act. 2. Act. 11. 1 2 3 4. c. Divers things not fundamentally believed with certainty of faith Rom. in a 〈◊〉 f. 7 fides millinaria potest esse omnium pessima Beleeving of truths revealed of God with a reserve blasphemous and concerning beleevers in Scepticks and 〈◊〉 Beleevâ—ng wâ—th a reserve â—gainst the motion of the Holy Ghost Beleeving with a reserve against the stability of faith Against the trying of all things and spirits injoyned by the Holy Ghost Faith with a reserve against our prayers for knowledge and growing therein The Holy Ghost bids us not beleeve with a reserve To beleeve with a reserve contrary to our doing and suffering for truth in faith Two distinctions necessary touching controverted points Some things of their own nature not controversall yet the deductions from them to our blinde nature are controversall Fundamentalls of faith most controversall to our blinde nature Some far off errors may bee tollerated Schisme and actuall gathering of churches out of churches cannot be tollerated The place Ro. 14. willing us to receive the weake no plea for tolleration The place Philip. 3. 15. Let us walke according to the same rule c. nothing 〈◊〉 tolleration Remonstrant iâ— Apologia p. 40. P. 268. 〈◊〉 tuâ—a heresis 〈…〉 â—rrâ—r qui in merte errantis taâ—â—um lâ—cum habet â—rrer nec objectum nec causa punitionis est error enim merus erraâ—tem non egreditur ergo 〈◊〉 necoerâ—â—ri quidem potest animus hominis imprio humano non 〈…〉 humane 〈…〉 Apo. â—24 â— 28â— Libertiâ—es mâ—ke heresie a meere innocent and unpunishable error of the minde Heresie is a sin as well as Idolatry though we could neither desine heresie nor Idolatry Heresie proved to be an hainous sin Remonstrance Apol. 24. f. 283 Remon Apol. 24. f. 285. Minâ—s Celsus 〈◊〉 heretic coer seâ— â— f. 9 10 11 12. The holy ghost contrary to Libertines supposeth undenâ—â—â—bly that hereticks are knowne and so they are not knowne to God only when 〈◊〉 bâ—ds us beware of them avoid them bid them not God spâ—â—d Pertinacie may be is known to men Libertines openly contradict the holy ghost in that they forbid to judge false teachers to bee grievous wolves Remonst Apol. c. 24. 285 de maâ—iâ—ioso voluâ—tatis actu 〈◊〉 pertinaâ—ia que est formalis ratione hâ—resees 〈◊〉 nisi soâ—us â—oâ—e judicari potest humana omniâ— judicia de mente animoque alterius incerta sunt conjectura fallaces nisi cum quis quod malum esse novit facere vult nemo dedita opera erras aut errare se sibi pâ—rswadet cum de â—terna salute agitur quare fas non est invito alicui tribuere malitiam caritas aliud swades Heresie a wicked resisting of the truth and yet not the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Libertiâ—es say that an hereticke dying for his heresie hath no evill conscience but a spirituall and heavenly end Tundite tundita Anâ—xâ—rchi follem Anaxâ—rchum enim non tundit Celsus ibid. The vain glory and malice of the devills martyrs who dye for heresie Fol. 18. Spirituall stupidity and malice both together in hereticks and Sathans martyrs Some ignorance consists with the sinne against the holy ghost Reâ—â—â—n apol c. 24. 280 281. Ve lelius de Arâ—â—n Arâ—ini P 4. l. 2. c. 4. n. 5 Who is an to Arminians Titus 3. 10. Nevi te esse primo genitum Satauae None to Libertines are hereticks but such as professe a Religion which they with perswasion beleeve to be false Liberty of prophesying taken in a threefold sense The words quench not the spirit vindicated from speaking for liberty of prophesying any thing Remon Apol. c. 24. Fo. 281 282 Spiritum ne extinguite id est spirituales verbi Dei sensus quos quis se habere a Spiritu Dei id est vel per inspirationem suggestionem Spiritus vel anxiliante Spiritu Dei sibi persuadet quo sensu vocem Spiritus videntur ipsi Apostoli aliquando accipere 2 Thes 2. 2. 1. Ioh. 4. 1. Qua quam alio sensu accipi potest Râ—mon Ap 282 To desire false Prophets to cease out of the land is no quenching of the Spirit Remon Apo. 282. Remon 16. How the Arminian Libertines do define an heretick Heretickes to Libertines only such as deny things knowable by the light of nature diversity of opinions among them The punishing of men forpublishing of fundamental errors and the indulgence of a toleration yeelded to them though they teach all errors in non-fundamentals a vain distinction and hath no ground in scripture Some murthers non-fundamentall â—n David which yet are consistent with the state salvation should as wel be tolerated as some errours in non-fundamentals by the distinction of Libertines Some non-fundamentals clearely in the 〈◊〉 revealed not to be beleeved with a reserve and others non-fundamentals with 〈◊〉 Queries propounded to Libertines Why may not the Magistrate lawfully spare the life of him who out of a Libertine conscience meerly sacrificeth his childe to Godâ— or why should â—e punish with the sword some acts not destructive to peace in the conâ—cience of the punished and not aâ— acts of the same kiâ—d To compell men to do against their conscience that is to sin neither in Old or New Test-lawfull Deut 13. Deut. 17. â—pan◠〈◊〉 Apo c. 25. f. 290. There is
ista imponebâ—t superbâ—ae discipliâ—m Augus Petitiano l. 2. c. 83. Noli diccre absit absit â—conscientia nostra ut ad nostram fideÌ„ aliqâ—em compellamus facitis enim ubi potestis ubi autem non facitis non pâ—â—testis sive legum sive 〈◊〉 timore sive resâ—entium muâ—â—tâ—d ne So were Marcis Presbyter Victoriensis and Mareitius Urgensis perâ—ecuted by Donatists Augus Epist 〈◊〉 Carwright 2 Joh 10. on Tit. 3. 10. Amesius de conscien l. 4. c. 4. An haeretici â—nt â— civilâ— Magistratu puniendi q. 6. Re. Râ—primendos esse haereticos abomnibus plit 〈◊〉 Rom 13. 4. 1 Tim. 2. 2. n. 15. Si vero etiam manifeste blasphemisint in illis blasphemus pertinaces ac praefracti pâ—ssint etiam affici supplicio capitali lex enim illa Levit. 24. 15. 16. quamvis non obligit Christianos quatenus est lex quatenus tamen est doctrina a Deop ofecta pertinet ad Christianorum directionem in ejusdem generis causis Joannes Clopenburâ—â—â— in Gangrena Anabaptis Tripaâ— histor l. 12. c. 9. Bullinger l. 1. c. 8. c. 9. Petition of Familâ—â—â— to K James an 1604 They commend King James in counselling Pr. Henry to punish Putitan Non-conformists and plead for liberty to themselves See Survey of the spirituall Antichrist pag. 343. Apolog. Remon Bloudy Tenet c. 11. p. 3. Libertines ought noâ— to suffer death for any truth Mimus Celsus Sect. 2 Fo. 62. Mimus Celsus denieth the coercing of Seducers upon Socinian principles Citech Racco vâ—d proph mu. 1. C. c. 1. Socinus in praelec c. 17. Com in 1 Joh. fo 134. praeâ—er Theol. c 5. f. 6. 7 Ostorodiâ—s Inst Chris Relig. c. 22. c. 23. c. 24. c 25 c. Smalcius de diviâ— C c 5. f. 17. Contra Smigâ—â—c c. 15 f. 136. Volkelius Episcopius dis 17 deâ—esâ—l c 2 Arm deleg Evan com the. 6. Ancient bonds of Liberty Reas 21 22. The Lords patience towards sinners in the old Testament was no argument of not coercing false Prophets in that Oâ—d Testament as the Author of Ancient bonds c. supposeth Acontius de Steatagematis Satanae l. 3. p. 155. 〈…〉 Hope of gaining blasphemers no more ground of sparing their life then hope of gaining Murtherers can be pretended as a ground why they should not be punished Whether to be persecuted for conscience true or false be a proper note of the truâ— Church as Iob. Baptist saith cap. 9. Necessiâ—y of Toleration Quar. 51. See Osterodius Iustit rel c. 5. f. 21. Smalcius praefat reâ—at frant Sociâ— praelect Theol. c. 17. Smalcius refut lib. de satisfact Christi c. 1 lib 1 de offic Christi 7. Jesus Christus est primus ac solus praeco hujus doctrinae ac multo perfectio is quam ea quae ante Christum in populâ— Dâ—i fuit Pâ—liander in concertat Socinian disp 27. thes 35 36 37. Peltiushâ—rmon Socin remonst art 292. art 21. Volkeâ—ius in verbis Christi illis testimoniâ—s inquit Exod. â—1 24. Lev. 24. 20. Deut 19. 21 â—am legis monâ—em fuisse comprobatur ut ultio ac vindicta fuisse permissâ— staâ—uatur modâ— per magistratum non autem proptiâ— authoritate fieret Cui quid em legi Christus sua verba opponens omnem non modo privatam sed etiam publicam vindictam abrogat suisque praecipit ut omnes perpessiones quae alterius maxiâ—â—ae obversione significantur omnemque bonorum jacturam quae pallii dimissione innuâ—tur omnem denique molestiam quae coactione ad unum milliare designatur ita ferant ut similem denuo injuriam subeant potius quam illatâ—m â—ive per se five per magistratum ulciscantur There be no New Commandements of Christ to love our enemies in the New Testament which were not commanded in the Old as Joh. Baptist saith c. 9. They that suffer for heresie and killing their children to Molech by Baptists way so they preserve conscience suffer for well-doing and according to the will of God in the Apostle Peters sense Joh. Baptist Preface to the Reader and c. 11. Necessity of Toleration by Samuel Richardson an 1647. Quer. 54. q. 55. and pag. 20 21. Ancient bounds p. 20 21 22. We judge not that hereticks seeming to be hereticks should be punished but those that are hereticks indeed ought onely to be punished Joh. Baptist condemns Joh. Baptist c. 5. Ancient bounds reas 5. p. 26. Storming of the Antichrist c 5. p. 14. Joh. Goodwin Hâ—giomas Baptist falsely chargeth on us that we teach a man should beleeve whether his conscience say so or not and should doe and pray without the Spirit of Adoption and that for these foregoing merits of congruity God will give us faith which doctine we detest Ancient bounds Preaching of the word without the Spirit is as unable to work faith as the sword and the argument from our impotencle to beleeve is as strong against the one as against the other The sword hath strength against only the outward mâ—n to cause him to abstain from seducing of souls not against the Conscience Argument 17. It s a false principle of toleration None are punishable for heresie because heresie is to God only knowable and to no mortal man Goodwins Sermon Theomachia Acts 5. 34. Saltmarsh Sparkles of glory Preface The Heretick is knowable by the Scriptures Impotency of beleeving being naturall in the Old Testament as in the New it was to the Jews as good a pleâ— against the Lords Law to punish seducers as to us Reasons against 1 forced and unwilling obedience 2 Against forced abstinence from murther particide at al times in the Old and New Testament do contend against Gods Laws of punishing seducing teachers Bloudy Tenet c. 40. p. 65. The Magistrate commandeth the outward man and yet commandeth not sin and carnall repentance How the Magistrate commandeth obedience to the Law of God to wit in reference onely to externall peace and the halfe and outside of obedience and yet not hypocriticall in its kind Del Sermon before the House of Commons p. 5 6. Epistle to the two Daughters of Warwick s 3 4. Del Serm p. 4. 5 Theol. Germa c. 28. 71 72. Rise Reign er 1 2. er 49. Bulliâ—ger adversus Anab. l. 1. c. 1. l. 2. c. 4. Calv Instruct adversus Liber c. 10. p. 442. Towns Assert of grace p. 4 5 6. S a'mâ—rsh Free grace 179 180. Bam. Gortyn Simplicities defence p. 22. 23. Ancientbounds c. 5. reas 3. Because man may abstaine from heresie and seducing upon false grounds to wiâ— the Magistrates commandment and not from conscience it follows no more that the Magistrate hath no power so to command then that the Pastor hath no power so to preach Argument 18. The Libertinisme of Toleration is grounded upon the pretended obscurity of the Scriptures The main pillar and ground of toleration makes the scripture a nose of waxe and puts on it a hundred senses and makes it a rule of faith to all
the false Religions of Jew Papist Indian American who receive the letters of it Mr Iohn Goodwin Hagiomast sect 28. p 38 39 denieth that any now living on earth hath the Scriptures or any ground of faith but that which is made of mens credit and learning Though the meanes of delivering to us Scripture be fallible yet it neither followeth that these meanes are the foundation on which our faith is resolved or that the Scripture it self is not infallible Tannerus disp 1. de fide c. 5. as 1 Bellarm. l. 2. de concil c. 12. Staplâ—ton doctrin princip l. 8. c. 21. ultima resolutio fidei non est in Deum revelantem simpliciter sed in Deum revelantem ut sic id est per ecclesiam c. Val. dis 1. de fide q. 1. p. 1. Sect 10. p. 38. col 1. Card. de Lugo de side spe dis 1 sect 5. n. 56. Malderus de object fidei q. 1. art 1. sect 10. p. 6. Suarez de fid disp 3. de object forma fidei sect 10 pag. 9. dis 9. dub 8. concl 4. Lod. Maratius tom 2. tract de fide dis 17. iect 2. n. 6. Duvilliusde object fidei l. 2. q. 1. litâ—e d. Fr. Silvius Professor Duaceâ—sis m. 22 q. 1. art 1. Lod Casâ—ensis Capucinus Curis Theol. tom post tract 15. dis 1. s 3. Reasons to prove that we have divine certaintie that the Books of the old and New Testament that we now have are the word of God contrary to Mr Goodwins Assertion That we have no warrant so to say but mans credit and authority As Matth. 2. 5. Matth. 4. 4 6 7 10. Matth. 11. 10. Matth. 21. 13. Matth. 26. 24. Mark 14. 21. 27 Mark 1. 2. Luke 2. 23. Luke 4. 4. 8. 10. Luke 7. 27. Luke 19. 46. Joh. 6. 31. 45. Joh. 12. 14. Act. 1. 20. Act. 7 42. Act. 13. 33. Act. 15. 15. Rom. 1. 17. Rom. 2. 24. Rom. 3. 4. 10. Rom. 4. 17. Rom. 8. 37. Rom. 8. 13. Rom. 11. 8. 1 Cor. 1 19. 31. â— Cor. 2. 9. 1 Cor. 3. 19. 2 Cor. 4. 13. 2 Cor. 8. 15. Rom. 12. 19. Rom. 15. 3. 1 Cor. 14. 21. Gal. 3. 10. 13. Gal. 4. 22. 27. Heb. 10. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 16. Luke 24. 14. Rom. 15. 4. 1 Cor. 10. 7. 2 Cor 9. 9. Luke 4. 17. Joh. 2. 17. Rivet to 1. contra tract 1. 46. Whitaker to 2. de authoritate Scrip. l. 3. c. 7. Calvin Comment in Act. 17. Hagiomast Ser. 36. p. 47. Dr. Taylors liberty of prophesying Sect. 4. p. 73 74 75 c. Liberty of Prophesie Sect. 11. p. 171. The knowledge of God is commanded and the minde is under a divine Law as well as the will and the affections The trying of the two Missals of Gregory and Ambrose by a miracle was meer folly Liber of Prophe Sect. 12. p. 185 186. The causes of heresie All ignorance of things revealed in the word though most speculatively are sinfull errours The Place 1 Cor. 3. 11 12 13. expounded and vindicated from the glosses of Adversaries Dr. Taylors mistake of heresie What vinciblenesse must be in heresie Dr. Taylor maketh the opinion of Purgatory no heresie and groundlesly Of errours how they are sinfull in matters revealed in Gods word Liber of Proph Sect. 12. n. 6. Liber of Proph n. 6. N. 7. Simple errours of things revealed in Gods word are condemning sins Ob. 1. Sect. 13. How opinions are judicable and punishable For the Father to kill the son upon a meer religious ground is no murther nor punishable by Libertines way Sect. 13. n. 5. Bloodie Tenet c. 95. p. 145 146. The Magistrates ministry is civill not spirituall Bloodie Tenet 16. 148. The Laws of Artaxerxes Cyrus Darius Nebuchadnezzar ratifying the Law of God by civil punishments were their Magistraticall duties How fear of civill Lawes may work men to soundnesse in the faith Bloodie Tenet page 129. Artaxerxes made lawes by the light of nature to restrain men from Idolatry Bloody Tenet c. 97. p. 152. From punishing of false Teachers it followeth not that the Jewes and all the Idolatrous Heathen should be killed Bloodie Tenet c. 113. p. 107. Bloody Tenet cap. 98. The considerable differences between punishing such as rebell against the first Tables of the law in the old Testament and now in the new and their swearing of a Covenant and ours Obj. 8. Bloody Ten. c. 1â—8 p 197. Circular turnings from Protestanisme to Popery proves nothing against punishing of seducers Obj 9. Bloody Ten. c. 120. p. 202. Dr. Taylor Liber of pro. Sect. 13 n. 10. Ancient bounds c. 6. 1. p. sect 26. The objection of a carnall way by swords as no fit means to suppresse heresie answered The objection from carnall weapons and forcing of conscience and contradictions involved inforcing the elicit â—nâ—ernall acts of will and understanding c. as strong against laws in the old Testament as in the New The Law Deu. 13. Lev. 24 c. was not executed upon such onely is sinned against the light of his conscience and the Law of nature and upon whom the immediate response of the Oracle fell as false Prophets No need of a Law-processe judge witnesses accusers or inquiring in the written Law of God if an immediate oracle from heaven designed the false Prophet in the Old Testament Ecclesiasticall and civill coaction do both worke alike upon understanding and will Ancient bonds c. 2. page 7. Errors against supernaturall truth are not rebukeable because not punishable contra Vaticaâ—us contra libel Calvin â—n 12. Vaticanus coâ— libel calvi ad not So si interficis qua sic loquitur ut sentit intersieis propter veritatem â—am veritas est dicere quae senrits Psal 15. beatum pronunciat eum qui vere dicit quae habet in animo Libertines make all blasphemers all seducing Prophets of Baaâ— priests of Heathen Gods if they speakâ— what a conscience 〈◊〉 with a 〈◊〉 Iron doth 〈◊〉 unto them to be true Prophets and to dwell 〈◊〉 them 〈◊〉 of the Lords House 〈◊〉 15. Bloudy Tenco c. 35. p. 59. In four sundry considerations sins are censured Augus Epis 48 ad Vincen The Magistrate is subject to the just power of the Church and the Church to the just power of the Magistrate neither of them to abused power and the word of God in point of conscience supreme to regulate both How the Jews suffered heathen Idolaters to dwell amongst them Baptist c. 6. p. 3â— 35. Joh. Baptist would have us selfe selfe carefull of being carried 〈◊〉 with false and strange doctrines because we are elected to glory and the chosen cannot fall away then of other abominable sins Joh. Baptist and Libertines teach that liberty of conscience is a way to finde out truth When the holy Ghost forbids us to beleeve false Christs and to receive Antichristian teachers into our houses he bids us also receive them as Saints and beleeve them by the way of Libertines Libertines make the judging of Hereticks to be Hereticks a bold intruding into the Lords caâ—â—net counsell Ancient bounds cap. 6. sect 1. Reas 14. p. 30. Bloodie Tenet Mr. Nicholas Loâ—kâ—er ser 1. Col. 1. preface to the reader Liberâ—ines say God hath deâ—â—red Heresies to be Varietie of judgements in Gods matâ—eâ—s is a grief to Paul and the godly Ministers Gal. 5. 20. 1 Tim. 3. 1 2. 2 Tim. 2. 17. 2 Thes 2. 17. 1 Tim. 6. 5. Rev. 2. 20. Acts 20. 30. Ier. 23. 27 32. Zach. 10. 1. Lam. 2. 14. Necessitie of Toleration 1647. qu. 53. Borrowed from Bloodie Tenet The punishing of heresies investeth not the Magistrate in a headship over the Church The intrinsecal end of the Magistrate or of his office is not the conversion of Souls August lib. 3. cont perm cap. to Quis enim tune in Christum crediderat Imperator qui ei pro pietate contra impietatem leges ferendo servitet quando adhuC illud propheticum esset quare fremueâ—unâ— Gentes c. Libertines make Preaching and commanding to receive and beleeve and professe the Truth a monopolizing of the truth A twofold obligation the word spoken or preached lay on the hearers one objective another ministeriall Private men have not the like warrant to prescribe what Ministers should beleeve and practice as Ministers have to prescribe to private men Argum 19. Libertie of conscience maketh every mans conscience his Bible and multiplies Bibles and sundry words of God and rules of faith All Hereticks are in a safe way of salvation according to the way of Libertines
formall reason of beleeving both fundamâ—ntalls and non-fundamentalls is thus saith the Lord. For we are as much obliged to beleeve non-fundamentalls that are cleare as that there were eight persons saved in the Arke and the old world drowned with waters Sâ—dome burnt with fire as to beleeve fundamentalls that there is no name whereby men may be saved but by the 〈◊〉 of Jesus for the Authority of God speaking in his word and his Command doth equally oblige to both but there is no such necessity so absolute in beleeving non-fundamentalls as in beleeving these without the knowledge whereof wee cannot be saved but it never followeth that errours in non-fundamentalls published and taught to the ruine of the soules of many they having such a strong connexion and influence on the knowledge of fundamentalls are to bee tolerated since our sinning here doth as equally and strongly strike against the authority and expresse command of God at least in most things of that kinde as in points fundamentall and therefore the Magistrate who is to looketo the honour of God as a Christian and peace of societies in all is as much obliged to punish clearly opened non-fundamentall as fundamentall false doctrines CHAP. XI Of the obliging power of Conscience LIbertines bewilder themselves and the Reader both touching an erroneous conscience and the obligation thereof Mr. Williams saith Such a person what ever his doctrine be true or false suffereth persecution for conscience as Daniel was cast into the Lions den and many thousand Christians and the Apostles were persecuted because they durst not cease to preaâ—â— and practise what they beleeved was by God commanded But this is a foule mistake Daniel suffered not for conscience simply because he practised what he beleeved to be truth but because he practised what he truely congrâ—enter Dei voluntati revelatae congruously and agreeably to the revealed will of God he beleeved and the like is to be said of the Apostles not the conveniency and commensurablenesse of their practise and their conscience simply but their beleeving â—all modo such a way made their sufferings to bee sufferings for righteousnesse sake for then must we say that Paul persecuted with the tongue the Corinthians for their conscience 1 Cor. 15. 34. Awake to righteousnesse and sin not I speakeâ— it to your shame for some have not the knowledge of God Those that denyed the resurrection through errour of conscience said the dead shall not rise againe for Paul proves by strong arguments that the dead shall rise and so takes away the errour of their conscience why then puts he shame and reproach on them and names them fooles and void of the knowledge of God and such as beleeved in vaine it was not in their power to correct the errors of their conscience and if they maintained what they beleeved in conscience was true as by Pauls demonstrating the truth to their conscience is evident they were persecuted for righteousnesse if out of meere innocent and faultlesse ignorance they denyed the resurrection Paul should deale more gently with them then upbraid them as fooles and Epiâ—ures who said Let us eat for to morrow we shall dye if they did all beleeve the Resurrection and yet professed the contrary there was no need to take paines as he doth to prove it Saul killed the Gibeonites out of zeale to the children of Israel It is like the blinde ignorant zeale he had thinking the Covenant that Joshua made with them did not oblige the posterity was the cause of his murthering of them yet he suffered not in his sons that were hanged for that blinde zeale as righteous and following the rule of his conscience in that But touching an erring conscience the question is not whether an erroneous conscience doth so tye that we must do nothing on the contrary nor is the question whether the nearest actually obliging rule be conscience the Arminians tell us Though the word of God of it selfe and by it selfe have power to oblige yet it actually obligeth no man except it be understood and so is beleeved to bee understood after we use all possible diligence and prudence for no man is obliged to follow the true sense of the word against his conscience though it be erroneous but we thinke the word of God is both the farrest and nearest and the onely obliging rule and that the dytement of the conscience doth neither binde potentially nor actually but is a meere 〈◊〉 a messenger and an officiall relater of the will and mind to God to us and all the obliging power is from the word 〈◊〉 the messenger of a King and Judge is not the obliging 〈◊〉 that tyes the subject or the Heraulds promulgation of the Law is no obliging rule for promulgation of Heraulds is common both to just and to unjust lawes and certainly unjust lawes from a just Prince lay no band on the conscience or on the man farre lesse can the promulgation as the promulgation lay any bands on the conscience the word of a Messenger and Herauld is at the best but a condition or the approximation of the obliging power to us but all the obliging power is from the King and the Judge It is most false then that these Libertines say that the word doth not actually oblige except it be understood for the understanding information and indycement of conscience doth not adde any actuall obligation to the word that it had not before it onely is a Reporter to carry both the word and the actuall obligation to the man the Herauld promulgating the law addes no obligation actuall or potentiall to the law that it had not before onely it makes an union in distance and neare application and conjunction between the actually obliging law and the understanding knowledge of the person or subject who is obliged to keep the law though it bee true the fire cannot actually burne but as timber is cast to it yet the fire hath from its owne nature both potentiall and actuall burning not from the act of casting the timber in the fire nor is this a concludent reason no man is obliged follow how the true sense of the word against his conscience though erroneous ergo the erroneous conscience doth oblige or ergo actuall obligation to obedience is not from the word but from the conscience no more then this is a good consequence no man is obliged to obey the Law in it selfe iust contrary to the promulgation of an erring and mistaking Herauld ergo the mistaking Heraulds promulgation giveth to the Law actuall obligation over the subject for it onely followeth 〈◊〉 we are not to doe contrary to the actuall indicâ—ment of an erroneous conscience but not obliged to follow the erroneous conscience nor are we obliged to follow what our conscience saith is true and good because or upon this formall reason and ground that the conscience saith so more then we are to beleeve and practise what the Church or