Selected quad for the lemma: state_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
state_n	great_a	province_n	unite_a	1,718	5	9.9410	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86009	VVholesome severity reconciled with Christian liberty. Or, the true resolution of a present controversie concerning liberty of conscience. Here you have the question stated, the middle way betwixt popish tyrannie and schismatizing liberty approved, and also confirmed from Scripture, and the testimonies of divines, yea of whole churches: the chiefe arguments and exceptions used in The bloudy tenent, The compassionate samaritane, M.S. to A.S. &c. examined. Eight distinctions added for qualifying and clearing the whole matter. And in conclusion a parænetick to the five apologists for choosing accommodation rather then toleration. Imprimatur. Ia. Cranford. Decemb 16. 1644.	Gillespie, George, 1613-1648.	1645 (1645)	Wing G765; Thomason E24_5; ESTC R21730	38,275	48

Courtizans yea besides their certain tribute he doth sometimes impose on them a subsidy of ten thousand crownes extraordinary for some service of the State as Europae speculum pag. 221 222. hath represented to us And whether the States of the united Provinces do not grant tolerations upon the like interests of their own profit I leave it to the judgement of their own consciences The third is the toleration pleaded for here by Mr Williams the compassionate Samaritane c. as if justice equity duty and conscience should make the Magistrate forbear all coercive power in matters of religion All these three I utterly condemn and the former arguments doe strongly militate against them The fourth kinde of toleration arising from necessity which hath no law may well be mourned for as an affliction it cannot be condemned as the Magistrates fault Even a David may have cause to complain that the sons of Zerviah are too strong for him In such cases as these our Divines have given a relief to the conscience of the Christian Magistrate purging him of the guilt of this kind of toleration provided always that he hath endeavoured so farre as he can to extirpate heresies and to establish the true religion only Which hath nothing to doe with that principle now defended that the Magistrate though he may never so easily yet he ought not nor cannot without sin exercise a coercive power in matters of religion The fifth and last is that kind of toleration whereby the Magistrate when it is in the power of his hand to punish and extirpate yet having to doe with such of whom there is good hope either of reducing them by convincing their judgements or of uniting them to the Church by a safe accommodation of differences he granteth them a Supersedeas or though there be no such grounds of hope concerning them yet while he might crush them with the foot of power in Christian pity and moderation he forbeareth so far as may not be destructive to the peace and right government of the Church using his coercive power with such mixture of mercy as createth no mischief to the rest of the Church I speak not only of bearing with those who are weak in the faith Rom. 15. 1. but of sparing even those who have perverred the faith so far as the word of God and rules of Christian moderation would have severity tempered with mercy that is as hath been said so far as is not destructive to the Churches peace nor shaketh the ●oundations of the established form of Church government and no further these last two kinds of toleration are allowed the first three are wholy condemned My second distinction is concerning the punishments inflicted by the Magistrate upon Hereticks They are either exterminative or medicinall Such as blaspheme God or Jesus Christ or who fall away themselves and seduce others to Idolatry ought to be utterly cut off according to the law of God But as for other Hereticks they are to be chastened with medicinall punishments as mulcts imprisonments banishment by which through Gods blessing they may be humbled ashamed and reduced Not that I think the proper end of civill and coercive punishments to be the conversion and salvation of the Delinquent which is the end of Church censures of Excommunication it self but that the right method of proceeding doth require that the Magistrate inflict the smaller punishments first that there may be place for the offenders bringing forth of fruits worthy of repentance and he may be at least reduced to externall order and obedience being perswade● by the terror of civill power which may and doth when blessed of God prove a preparation to free obedience as the needle is to the thread or the law to the Gospell servile fear to filiall fear and that the Magistrate step not up to the highest justice till other punishments have proved ineffectuall which made Constantine punish the Hereticks of his time not with death but with banishment as is manifest by the Proem of the Councell of Nice In such cases it may be said to the Heretick of the Magistrate He is the Minister of God to thee for good more good I am sure then if the golden reins of civill justice should be loosed and he suffered to doe what he list Therefore Augustine likeneth this coercive punishing of Hereticks to Sarah her dealing roughly with Hagar for her good and humiliation I conclude connivence and indulgence to Hereticks is a cruell mercy correction is a mercifull severity and a wholesome medicine as well to themselves as to the Church Thirdly we must distinguish betwixt the coercive power of the Magistrare in matters of religion and the abuse of that power when we justifie the power we justifie not the abuse of it and when we condemn the abuse we must not therefore condemn the power Acontius Stratag. Stat. li 3. pag. 147. buildeth much upon this notion let a man imagine that his lot is fallen in those times when the truth is persecuted by authority when the Magistrate justifieth the wicked and condemneth the godly which hath been the more ordinary condition of the Church and then let him accordingly shape the resolution of the question concerning the Magistrates punishing of Hereticks Will not a man think saith he it had been better that Hereticks had not been punished then that upon pretence of coercive power against Hereticks the edge of the Civill sword be turned towards the Preachers and Professors of the truth But notwithstanding of all this truth must be truth and justice must be justice abuse it who will Parliaments and Synods have been many times enemies to the truth and have abused their power in matters of religion must we therefore deny the power of Parliaments and Synods or must we cast off any ordinance of God because of the abuse of it If the thing were indifferent the abuse might take away the use not so when the thing is necessary I adde which is well observed by Calvin when Jeremiah was accused and arraigned as worthy to die his defence is not this You ought not to vindicate religion with the sword nor put any man to death for the cause of conscience but this is it Know ye for a certain that if ye put me to death ye shall surely bring innocent bloud upon your selves and upon this city and upon the inhabitants thereof for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears Jer. 26. 15. Neither did ever the Apostles though often persecuted plead the unlawfulnesse of persecuting men for heresie but they pleaded the goodnesse of their cause and that they were no Hereticks Fourthly I distinguish betwixt bare opinions or speculations and scandalous or pernicious practices as Mr Burton doth in his Vindication of the Independent Churches pag. 70. You must distinguish saith he betwixt mens consciences and their practises The conscience simply considered in it self

I answer further 1. The Text Rom. 13. 4. speaketh generally and we must not distinguish where the Scripture doth not distinguish 2. Those that are in authority are to take such courses and so to rule that we may not onely lead a quiet and peaceable life but further that it be in all godlinesse and honesty 1 Tim. 2. 2. The magistrate is keeper of both Tables and is to punish the violation of the first Table as well as of the second 3. Will any man saith Angustine who is in his right wit say to Kings Doe not care by whom the Church of God in your Kingdome be maintained or opposed it doth not concerne you in your Kingdome who will be religious who sacrilegious to whom notwithstanding it cannot bee said It doth not concerne you in your Kingdome who be chaste who whorish c. Is the soules keeping faith and truth to God a l●ghter matter then that of a woman to a man He confesseth in the same Epistle that he and some other African Divines were sometime of that opinion that the Emperour should not at all punish the Donatists for their heresie or error but such of them only as should be found to commit any riot or breach of peace especially the furious and violent Circumcellions But afterward he confesseth that the Emperour had as good reason to represse their pernicious error as their furious violence A fourth Argument is drawne from the names which the Scripture giveth to Hereticks and Sectaries holding forth the extreame danger of tolerating and letting them alone They are called ravening wolves Matth. 7. 15. and grievous wolves not sparing the flocke Act. 20. 29. theeves and robbers John 10. 8. Their word eateth as a canker 2 Tim. 2. 17. and is as a little leaven leavening the whole lumpe Gal. 5. 9. They are troublers of Israel Act. 15. 24. Gal. 5. 12. Shall the troublers of the State be punished and the troublers of Israel go free Shal Physitians cut off the member that hath a Gangrene in it because it indangereth the whole body and shall the great State physitians suffer the Gangrene to spread in the Church Shall mens bodies goods and purses be so farre cared for that theeves and robbers must not be suffered but justice done upon them and shall those have immunity who steale away soules from Christ and rob us of the pearle of truth Nay shall the poore sheepe be so much looked to that the wolfe must not be spared and shall we suffer the soule-destroying wolves to enter yea abide peaceably among the dear-bought flock of Jesus Christ Other Arguments might be added but let these suffice at this present I come next to answer all the materiall objections which I have either read or heard to my best remembrance alledged against this coercive power of the Magistrate in matters of Religion First the Parable of the Tares is objected Christ will not have the tares to be pluckt up but to grow together with the wheat untill the harvest Mat. 13. 29. 30. In this argument Mr. Williams in his Bloudy Tenent putteth a great deale of confidence But I am as confident to discover the strength of it to be lesse then nothing For first he taketh the tares to be meant neither of hypocrites in the Church whether discovered or undiscovered nor yet of those who are scandalous offenders in their life and conversation but only of Antichristian Idolaters and false worshippers which is a most false interpretation Christ himselfe expoundeth it generally vers. 38. The good seed are the children of the Kingdome but the tares are the children of the wicked one And vers. 41. the tares are expounded to be all that offend and which doe iniquity This being the cleare meaning it will follow undeniably that if the Magistrate must spare those who are meant by tares in the Parable then he must spare and let alone all scandalous offenders murtherers adulterers drunkards theeves c. when any such are discovered in the visible Church But this cannot be the meaning of the tares in the Parable saith Mr. Williams chap. 24. that wicked livers opposite to the children of God should be understood For then saith he when Christ saith Let the tares alone he should contradict other ordinances for the punishment of evill doers by the Magistrate But this is a base begging of the question for he well knew that those against whom he disputes hold that his exposition of the Parable contradicteth the ordinance of God for punishing Idolaters and Hereticks the question being whether this be not an ordinance as well as the punishment of scandalous livers Besides if the tares be Antichristian Idolaters and they must not be pluckt up but suffered to grow till the harvest as he expoundeth this contradicteth other Scriptures which say that the sword must be drawne against Antichristian idolaters and they thereby cut off Revel. 13. 10. and 17. 16. But I proceed to a second answer If by tares I should suppose only to be meant Idolaters Hereticks and false worshippers which is a glosse contrary to the text as I have demonstrate yet their argument will not conclude the forbearing or sparing of such except onely in such cases and so farre as the true worshippers of God cannot be certainly and infallibly dignosced from the false worshippers as the wheat from the tares as Jehu would not destroy the worshippers of Baal till he was sure that none of the servants of the Lord were among them 2 King 10. 23. The reason why the tares are not to be pluckt up is lest while ye gather up the tares ye root up also the wheat with them vers. 29. Now when a man is sure that he plucks up nothing but tares or rather thornes without the least danger to the wheat how doth the Parable strike against his so doing If M. S. will not beleeve me let him beleeve himselfe pag. 50. For my part saith he when the Civill Magistrate shall be farre enough out of this danger of fighting against God I have nothing to say against his fighting with superstition heresie schisme c. Thirdly what if I shape yet another answer to the argument out of Mr. Williams owne words chap. 27. I acknowledge saith he this command Let them alone was expresly spoken to the messengers or ministers of the Gospel who have not civill power or authority in their hand and therefore not to the civill Magistrate King or Governour Now therefore what a blockish argument is it to reason from this Parable against the coercive power of the magistrate in matters of religion If there must be a forbearance of any severity we must forbeare Church censures and excommunication a way of rooting out the tares which Mr. Williams himselfe justifieth as much as we doe Fourthly and if the utter extirpation and plucking up of Hereticks by capitall punishments should be understood to be forbidden in the parable as it is not

errors Yea Beza de Haereticis à Magistratu puniendis citeth and approveth Calvins judgement condemning Gamaliel for Neutrality and his speech of error These learned Divines have so well opened and cleared the point that there is no place left for what the Poore Pampleter hath said yet two things more I must take notice of in him He saith it was not for any fear of the Jews or Romanes that Gamaliel gave this advice Not for fear of the people of the Jews for that would be but at the Apostles apprehension not execution What non-sense is here the people were angry at laying hands on the Apostles but there was no fear of their wrath if the Apostles should be killed Not for fear of the Romanes wrath which saith he they often regarded not as Acts 23. 27. A place which confuteth himself for when the Jews would have killed Paul Claudius Lysias came with an army and rescued him a danger which we must think the wisdome of Gamaliel the councell could better foresee then that rude and furious multitude which would have killed Paul Next be will not yeeld so much as that Gamaliel did doubt whether the Apostles doctrine were from God or not and that he made it an uncertain case In this Sir you have faced about sure you are not As you were for M Goodwin himself {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} pag. 11. saith that Gamaliel in point of judgement or conscience was still but where he was doubtfull and in suspence with himself about the businesse Well but why hath he now denyed that Gamaliel made it a doubtfull and uncertain case He might saith he and in all likelyhood did thus expresse himself for fear or policy So did Hushai strangely for an honest heart in that case of Davids in his counsell to Absalon 2 Sam. 17. yet Hushai made a round lie even against his knowledge Look about you my Masters know whom ye trust here 's a generation of men pretending to a more perfect and Saint-like reformation then others but yet they think it no fault to lie and dissemble for good ends Nay that 's not all pag. 4. answering to an objection made against those who doe commend and magnifie themselves for greater gifts and graces then other men have He tels us it is no fault for a man not only to compare but preferre himself to another and that on purpose to heighten his own estimation Which how sweetly it agrees with Pauls doctrine Phil. 2. 3. In lowlinesse of mind let each esteem other better then themselves let every sober and moderate spirit judge How now poor Pamphleter is it not enough for you to defend a lying tongue but you will needs defend pride too those are two I am sure of the seven things which are abomination to the Lord Prov. 6. 16 17. And here I leave the poor Pamphleter with this black mark upon him I will not proceed to answer a fool in his foolishnesse lest I be like unto him thus far I have answered lest he be wise in his own eyes Only I adde one thing more in answer to that argument for liberty of conscience from Acts 5. 38 39. Suppose Gamaliels principles to be good and this speech to be of truth and authority which I have proved it is not yet it is not applicable to the toleration of hereticks and sectaries now that case of the Apostles being extraordinary and great miracles wrought by them to the conviction of their most malignant opposites Act. 4. 16. Some it may be will object further from Isa. 11. 9. a place objected in the Paraenetick pag. 3. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountaine And Luke 9. 54. And when his disciples James and John saw this they said Lord wilt thou that we command fire to come downe from heaven and consume them even as Elias did But he turned and rebuked them and said Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of for the Sonne of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them A place objected by Nicolaides Refut tract. de Eccl cap. 4. Answ. That prophecy concerning the Christian Church Isa. 11. 9. is not to be understood generally as the word soundeth for then adulterers murtherers c. are not to be hurt and destroyed by the Christian Magistrate The meaning therefore is that those who have formerly been as Lions Wolves to the poor Lambs of Christ shall either be renewed and changed in their nature or which is more probable shal be so restrained and overawed by the power and providence of God that it shal not be in their power to hurt or destroy any of the Saints for the truth or the Gospels sake {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Neither shall they bee able to destroy any So the Septuagints God shall so preserve and protect his Church that she shall be like a Lamb among Wolves or like a Kid among Leopards or like a Childe putting his hand on the Cockatrice den and yet shall not be hurt nor destroyed thereby And as this prophecie guardeth and protecteth none but those who are in Gods holy Mountaine professors and lovers of the Gospel and the ordinances of Jesus Christ So our Lord Christs rebuke Luke 9. 54 55. striketh not against any just and necessary severity but against a private vindictive spirit and carnall blinde zeale It being the purpose of Christ then most of all other times not to exercise violence as tyrants doe in conquering new dominions but to conquer and subdue soules by his doctrine and miracles with a spirit of meeknesse especially having to doe with the Samaritans or any other who had never yet knowne nor received the Gospel Even those who say most for a coercive power to be put forth against Heretickes and Schismaticks doe not allow of the compelling of Infidels Pagans or Jewes by externall punishments to receive the Gospel But now after all this debate upon the question in hand and after all these arguments for the affirmative and for the negative some will happily desire and expect some further modification and explanation of the matter in certain positive conclusions or distinguishing assertions For whose satisfaction I say First there are five sorts of toleration proceeding from five different principles 1. Of indifferency 2. Of policy 3. Of pretended conscience and equity 4. Of necessity 5. Of charity The first is when the Magistrate is a Nullifidian Neutralist and Adiaphorist esteeming as Gallio did questions of the law and of the Ordinances of Christ to be of words names or things which he careth not for Acts 18. 14 15. The second is when the Magistrate tolerateth hereticks and sectaries for his own profit or some such interest of policy such as maketh the Pope to tolerate the Jews in Italy yea in Rome it self where they have their synagogues circumcision and liturgies because his profit by them is greater then by the very