Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	according_a	judge_v	see_v	2,008	5	3.5601	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B06542	A brief, and plain apology written by John Wheelwright: wherein he doth vindicate himself, from al [sic] those errors, heresies, and flagitious crimes, layed to his charge by Mr. Thomas Weld, in his short story, and further fastened upon him, by Mr. Samuel Rutherford in his survey of antinomianisme. Wherein free grace is maintained in three propositions, and four thesis [sic] ...	Wheelwright, John, 1594-1679.	1658 (1658)	Wing W1604; ESTC R186427	40,565	36

a special Faith or order of evidencing were under a covenant of Works I was not so censorious I doubt not but many of your judgment who are truly gracious having an internal principle of true faith byassing their spirits another way than they discern The persons so judged by me were such as walked and only walked according to that judgement which I condemend not only Theoretically but Practically But seeing by this Doctrine you understand that Heretical Blasphemous Doctrine contained in the three former parts of your Accusation which you have fathered upon me fallaciously without any just cause it is a double injury and this member of your charge must needs vanish away with the rest of your devised calumnies putting a corrupt sense upon certain expressions in the Notes of my Sermon contrary to all rules of interpretation divine and humane This ground-work being thus secretly laid in the conclusion I am censured by the major-part of the Court to banishment as guilty of those two crimes Contempt of Authority and Sedition That I was justly condemned and censured by the court is that which you in your short story endeavour to prove but by what evidence of reason and force of arguments falls now into consideration to be examined and discussed 1. First You go about to prove that I was guilty of Contempt of Authority because say you I did not study Truth and Peace which Authority required Contempt is an act of the mind whereby we little or not at all regard a thing Contempt of Authority is when a man doth willingly refuse to submit to the promulgated just Laws or lawful known commands of Magistrates as such and hereupon proceeds to do something contrary to those laws and commands I know no law or command prohibiting me to Preach what I delivered Neither do I see how any such law could be just and it will be a difficult thing for you to prove That I acted from obstinacy of Will and such a defect of the Mind I have already proved the truth of my Doctrine and that I endeavoured to bring my Heaters to consent to that Doctrine cannot be denied so that herein I studied truth and peace Peradventure some Magistrates and Elders intended that I should not Preach against gracious qualifications before union and the first evidencing of Works but rather to have cryed down the contrary Doctrine as Antinomianisme and Familism and because I did not Preach according to their Minds this is looked at as contempt of Authority If to preach true Doctrine and unite men in the truth contrary to the intent of some Magistrates and Elders be contempt of Authority surely the Prophets Christ and his Apostles were notorious delinquents and guilty of this crime You speak of other contemptuous carriages but instance in no particulars I came one day tardy to the Court of which you tell all the world but that was from mis-information not out of any contempt I used some expressions of an acquitting glorying conscience when I suffered such shame in your Assemblies and did dispise that shame and so did he who was free enough from contempt of Authority endure the Cross despising the shame 2. In the second place you undertake to make it good That I was guilty of Sedition by these Arguments 1. First say you I inflamed the minds of men one against another caused divisions made breaches All this was accidental The word of God is a fire a sword and hammer to inflame divide break in pieces If simply to make divisions were Sedition it would more strongly conclude against Christ than Barrabas Your Arguments taken from Ethnick partial descriptions of Sedition are of no force against Christians Sedition is a dividing civil Societies as they are combin'd together in an unity of justice and common utility My Division was not Civil but Spiritual I did not go about to divide in that which was just and profitable but in that Errour of gracious Qualifications before Union and Works first Evidencing Paul was accused by Tertullus the Orator for a pestilent fellow and a mover of Sedition upon the like ground 2. Secondly You Object That I laid most of the Magistrates and Elders under a Covenant of Works To lay men under a covenant of Works simply in it self is not any transgression Political Moral or Evangelical The Syllogisme which concluded the Elders under that covenant was this They who walk in that way described by me to be a Covenant of Works are under that Covenant But the Elders Walk in that way described by me to be a Covenant of Works Therefore the Elders are under that Covenant Upon much questioning in the Court the major was made by me upon a question put by the Court to the Elders the minor was brought into Court in writing by them The Conclusion was made by the Court My Proposition was conditional or equipollent thereunto and conditionalis prepositio nihil ponit in esse seu nihil certe affirmat The Elders assumption made it absolute The Argument by which I described a man under a covenant of Works were the internal motions of his spirit known only to God and his own conscience and the Argument sub unâ utrâque is not à pari In a word I did not so much as in my thoughts conclude the Magistrates and Elders or any one of them or any other person absolutely to be under that covenant This conclusion The Magistrate and Elders are under a covenant of Works cannot be deduced from any thing delivered by me without the Elders Assumption in which I had no hand This was the Courts frequent and main Objection against me That I laid them and the Elders under a Covenant of Works I desired to know of them in what line or page protesting that I neither expressed nor intended any such thing Far be it from me to take Gods Office out of his hand who is the searcher of the heart and the tryer of the reins of all men If the Elders Assumption and the Courts Conclusion be removed there remains nothing for me to suffer for but only my Proposition which it seems did pungere and cut deep If it cannot be proved out of my Sermon that I said the Magistrates Elders and most of the Country were under a Covenant of Works c. I am innocent 3. Thirdly You Reason from the Seditious Effects of my Sermon I do not know any following Seditious practises But if there were any such they are not to be called Effects but Events That is put for a cause which is no cause I do not see any innate force in my Sermon to produce any Effects but these 1. To draw the Hearers from your Tenants about Faiths grounds both in judgement and practise 2. To Unite them in that judgement and practise which I apprehended to be evangelical 3. To contend by Arguments and sufferings with such as did profess themselves to be legal persecuting them for the Truth herein in case