Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	know_v	speak_v	word_n	9,131	5	4.2861	4	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

yet the stopping of their mouths the dissipating and suppressing of them some other coercive way is not forbidden as Chrysostome noteth upon the place whom Euthymius and Theophylactus doe follow in this allowing of coercive though not capitall punishments Fifthly Calvin Beza and our best Interpreters take the scope and intent of that parable not to be against the immoderate severity of Magistrates but against the immoderate zeal of those who imagine to have the Church rid of all scandalous and wicked persons as wheat without tares corn without chaffe a flock of sheep without goats which hath been the fancy of Novatians Donatists and Anabaptists The parable therefore intimates unto us as Bucerus upon the place expoundeth it that when the Magistrate hath done all his duty in exercising his coercive power yet to the worlds end there will be in the Church a mixture of good and bad So that it is the universall and perfect purging of the Church which is put off to the last judgement not the punishment of particular persons Neither doe the servants in the parable aske whether they should pluck up this or that visible tare but whether they should goe and make the whole field rid of them which field is the generall visible Church sowed with the seed of the Gospel and so much for that argument Another negative argument is this Such a coercive power in matters of religion maketh men hypocrites and seven times more the children of hell Christs Ordinances put upon a whole City or a Nation may more civilize and moralize but never christianize them saith M Williams chap. 82. I answer this argument doth utterly condemn Josiahs Reformation as sinfull for he caused all Judah to stand to the Covenant as we heard before from 2 Chron. 34. 32. yet Iudah became thereby more hypocriticall Treacherous Iudah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart but fainedly saith the Lord speaking of those very days of Iosiah Ier. 3. 6. 10. 2. This argument maketh also against the punishment of adulteries murthers thefts robberies c. for unlesse filthy lust hatred and covetousnesse in the heart be mortified and men convert freely and sincerely the reducing of them to a morall conversation maketh them hypocrites and neerer hell then before 3. There are two sorts of Christs Ordinances some for the communion of Saints others for the conversion of sinners It is far from our thoughts to admit much lesse to compell a whole City or Nation promiscuously to the use of the former But yet converting or reducing ordinances may and ought to put upon all whom they concern The means must be used and mens hearts left to God Object 3. This Doctrine of the Magistrates coercive power maketh many to stumble at the Presbyterian Reformation as a bloudy Reformation as a building of Zion with bloud and Ierusalem with iniquity Mic. 3. 10. Answ 1. We have not so learned Christ we abominate the Popish and Prelaticall tyranny We know that the servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle unto all men apt to teach patient In meeknesse instructing those that oppose themselves if God pera●venture will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth 2 Tim. 2. 24 25. yet he who said so could also say I would they were even ●ut off which trouble you G●l 5. 12. It is my souls desire that the secular coercive power may be put ●orth upon those only who can by no other means be reclaimed who can be no longer spared without a visible rupture in the Church and the manifest danger of seducing and misleading many souls A Presbytery is not so ill a neighbour that no man who hath the least differing opinion may live beside it But 2. this objection doth as much strike against the New England government as against the government of the neighbouring reformed Churches For in New England there hath been severity enough to say no worse used against Hereticks and Schismaticks And here I must appeal the consciences of those who now plead so much for liberty of conscience and toleration in this Kingdome were they able to root out the Presbyterians and their way could find civil authority inclinable to put forth the coercive power against it whether in that case would they not say that the Magistrate may represse it by strong hand if it cannot be otherwise repressed It is not without cause that I put this Quere to them for M. S. pag. 50. a passage before cited doth allow of the Magistrates fighting against a doctrine or way which is indeed superstition heresy or schisme and only pretendeth to be from God when it is indeed from men Also that pamphlet called As you were p. 3. tels us that it was neither Gamal●els meaning nor Mr. Goodwins meaning that every way pretending to be from God must be let alone but that only we are to refrain let alone till we are certain that we are out of danger of fighting against God while we endeavour to overthrow it Now I assume there are some who plead for liberty of conscience who professe that they are certain and fully assured upon demonstrative proofs that the Presbyteriall way is not from God nor according to the mind of Jesus Christ which is hintedtous both in the pamphlet last cited p. 5 6. in ●●EOMAXIA pag. 25. Therefore according to their principles they must allow of the putting forth of the civil coercive power against the Presbyteriall way And if so what a grand imposture is this what a deceiving of the world what a mocking of the Parliament and of the Kingdome to plead generally for liberty of conscience when they intend only liberty to themselves not to others that are opposite to them Which appeareth yet further by the compassionate Samaritane pag. 10. he saith that no man is to be punished or discountenanced by authority for his opinion unlesse it be dangerous to the State pag. 23 24. he discourseth against the opinion of Presbyterians as most dangerous to the State Therefore he would have the Presbyterians discountenanced and punished by authority and intendeth liberty only to the Separatists Anabaptists and the like I have done with three objections but I have three words more to speak with the compassionate Samaritane in answer to his three arguments for liberty of conscience in which though all the strength of his discourse doth lie I hope to make him ashamed of them if he can at all blush His first argument is this Whatsoever a mans reason doth conclude to be true or false to be agreeable or disagreeable to Gods word that same to that man is his opinion or judgement and so man is by his own reason necessitated to be of that mind he is Now where there is a necessity there ought to be no punishment for punishment is the recompence of voluntary actions therefore no man ought to be punished for his judgement Answ 1. The question is not whether a

man ought to be punished for his judgement but whether a man ought to be punished for such professions or practises in religion as are found to be pernicious hurtfull and destructive to the glory of God the truth of the Gospell the Ordinances of Christ the reformation of Religion the peace of the Church I know he will be ready still to set on foot his argument for that a mans judgement and reason doth so necessitate and conclude him that he cannot chuse but professe and practice as he doth Therefore I adde 2. this argument of his striketh against the justice of the Parliament done or to be done upon Malignants for as much as their judgement bindeth them and their reason doth necessitate them to judge and speak and act as they doe 3. It striketh at the very justice of God upon reprobate and unbeleeving men for as much as they cannot receive the things of God 1 Cor. 2. 14. cannot hear the words of Christ Joh. 8. 43. cannot receive the spirit of truth Ioh. 14. 17. But 4. the formall solution is this there is a grosse fallacy in the argument for we must distinguish necessity there is a naturall necessity which takes away the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and a morallnecessity which takes away the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of a mans being of another judgement or way Again there is an absolute necessity and a hypotheticall necessity Now the necessity of a Hereticks judging thus because his reason concludeth him thus is not a morall necessity or obligation upon him as if it were not lawfull to him to judge or doe otherwise nay he ought and is bound by the word of God to judge otherwise and doe otherwise but it is a naturall necessity I meane of sinfull nature and that not simple and absolute neither but hypotheticall only and upon this supposition that he hath not yet opened his eyes to receive more light nor set his heart singly and in the feare of God to seeke more light So that the plaine English of this Samaritan argument is this Though Gods word bindeth a man to such a duty yet if his owne erroneous perverse and corrupt judgement conclude him so farre that his opinion cannot agree with the word of God and himselfe cannot be brought to the practice of that necessary duty such a man ought not to be punished Or as if one should argue thus He that hath borrowed from me a thousand pound hath by his owne fault disabled himselfe to pay it therefore I may not call him to an account for it But let us see whether this Samaritan be happier in his second argument Which is this It 's knowne that the Fathers Generall Councels Nationall Assemblies Synods and Parliaments in their times have beene most grossely mistaken and though the present times be wiser then the former c. yet since there remaines a possibility of error notwithstanding never so great presumptions to the contrary one sort of men are not to compell another since this hazard is run thereby that he who is in an error may be the constrainer of him who is in the truth Answ 1. Farewell Parliaments if this argument hold good The Parliament may fine no man imprison no man banish no man they may compell no man to Assessements Taxes Excise Billeting of Souldiers c. And why forsooth because they may not presume of an infallible and unerring spirit but may erre and have erred as well as other men 2 He argueth from the hazard of compulsion it may fall out that he who is in the truth may be constrained and persecuted True it may fall out so and the Lord save us that we never be accessary to the persecuting of any who is in the truth for so it may be againe through mens corruption and abuse of the magistrates power so the best things may be abused But the liberty of conscience which he pleadeth for runs a farre greater hazard even the hazard of not only shaking but overturning truth and peace and religion and ordinances and Church and soules and all To the ruine of all these and to a thousand mischiefes this kinde of liberty prepareth a broad way and openeth a wide doore and it is better as he said to live where nothing is lawfull then where every thing is lawfull 3. It followes not that because Parliaments may not presume of an unerring spirit therefore they cannot be certaine that they are in the truth concerning this or that particular so that they may confidently compell men to it without feare of fighting against God The acknowledgement of a possibility of error and that we know but in part as long as we are in this world may well consist with mens fulnesse of perswasion from the light of Gods word concerning this or that truth to be beleeved or duty to be done I make haste to his third argument To compell me saith he against my conscience is to compell me against what I beleeve to be true and so against my faith now whatsoever is not of faith is sinne to compell me therefore against my conscience is to compell me to doe that which is sinfull And Againe I am counselled by the Apostle to be perswaded in my owne minde of the truth of that way wherein I serve the Lord c. Answ 1. This also shaketh loose Parliamentary authority though the Gentleman who wrote these arguments pretendeth to stand for it as much as any other His argument will conclude if it concludeth at all that the Parliament may not compell Malignants disaffected persons Rebels to any thing which they are not perswaded in their own minds to be right It is against my conscience wil the Antiparliamentary malignant say to contribute to the war to acknowledge this for a Parliament as long as the King doth not acknowledg it to reveal such a design or to confesse this or that plot against the Parliament whē I am examined therefore I shal sin if I do so for whatsoever is not of faith is sinne and the Parliament shall compell me to sinne if they compell me to doe so For though the thing may be in it selfe good yet if it doe not appeare to be so to my conscience the practice thereof in me is sinfull which therefore I ought not to bee compelled unto saith the Samaritan If hee say his argument is only concerning matters of religion I answer Whatever his intention be in offering the argument the very nature and force of the argument it selfe driveth universally against the compelling of a man to any thing whatsoever which is against his owne conscience except be will say that it is a sinne to serve God against my consci●nce but it is no sinne to serve the Parliament against my conscience Saith not the Apostle WHATSOEVER is not of faith is sinne and He that doubteth is damned But 2. when the Apostle saith so he doth not exclude all manner of

doubting as the Casuists well observe but only practicall doubts for a man may have his conscience morally and practically certaine so that he may doe such a thing lawfully and with confidence that he is doing the will of God and yet withall he may be perhaps fluctuating in some speculative doubts concerning that very thing For instance a Christian may come to the Lords Table with so much faith I meane not now the faith of the person which justifieth before God but the faith of that action as maketh his comming lawfull though his thoughts be exercised with some doubts concerning the truth of his repentance and faith A souldier may in faith goe out to warre being assured that what he doth he may doe without sinne but yet he hath happily his owne speculative doubts concerning the nature causes and ends of the warre A man may with freedome and perswasion of minde so farre as concerneth his practice submit to Presbyteriall government who yet perhaps hath not throughly satisfied himselfe concerning the grounds and warrants which it hath from the word of God The Samaritan will reply it may be that he hath no faith at all concerning the practice it selfe and that he may not be compelled to doe any thing against his conscience for that were to compell him to sinne To take off this I adde 3. If the thing be indifferent I confesse no man is to be compelled to it against his conscience for this hath beene the tyranny of Papists and Prelats to compell men against their consciences to certaine rites which themselves acknowledged to be meerly indifferent setting aside obedience to authority in such things which say they is not indifferent But if the word of God either directly or by necessary consequence make the thing necessary and such as we cannot leave undone without sinne and breach of duty if there be such an obligation from the word then may a man bee compelled to it though against his conscience But then you will say I am brought into a necessity of sinning for if I obey not I refuse a duty if I obey I doe it against my conscience Answ. This necessity is not absolute but hypotheticall is not perse but per accidens so long as a man retaineth the error of his conscience which he ought to cast away You will say againe supposing that my conscience cannot be satisfied nor made of another opinion then now I am of whether in this case and so long as it standeth thus with me may authority compell me to obey against my conscience and so to sinne or whether ought they not rather permit me not to obey because my conscience forbiddeth me Answ. The thing being necessary as hath been said it is pars tutior yea tutissima that a man be compelled to it though it be against his erring and ill informed conscience I know so long as he hath such an erring conscience he cannot but sin in obeying But the sin of not obeying is greater and heavier for this is a sin in the fact it self that a sin in the manner of doing only being not done in faith this is a sin of it selfe that is a sin only by accident this is a sin materially that is a sinne only interpretatively to him because he thinks so this is a sin for the substance that a sin for the circumstance this cannot be made to be no sin for the nature of the duty cannot be altered that may cease to be a sin for the mans conscience may through Gods mercy and blessing upon the means be better informed So that there can be no doubt but this is every way a greater sin then that and consequently more to be avoided And thus I have dispatched the Samaritane who did undertake to pour oyl into the wounds of the Separation Medice cura teipsum The next thing comes in my way is an argument brought for liberty of conscience from Gamaliels speech in favour of the Apostles Act. 5. 38 39. Refrain from these men let them alone for if this counsell or this work be of men it will come to nought But if it be of God ye cannot overthrow it lest haply ye be found even to fight against God The strength of his argumentation did lie in this Dilemma this doctrine or way is either of men or of God If it be of men you shall not need to represse it for it will come to nought of it self which he proves by two Historicall instances of Judas and Theudas If it be of God it is in vain to strive against it for it must prevail and the counsell of heaven must stand Therefore be what it will be there is no danger to let it alone But on the other side if ye goe about to represse it ye runne the hazard both of fighting against God and of provoking the displeasure as well of the Romanes who have not permitted unto you the liberty of capitall punishments as of the people of the Jews who magnifie these men and their way This is the whole substance sense and scope of that speech of Gamaliel in the Councell Hence did some argue for a toleration to Servetus and other Hereticks And though this their way was then discovered to be their folly yet their posterity approve their sayings The same argument is used in that pamphlet called Liberty of Conscience p. 34 35. Upon the same foundation doth M Goodwin build in his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and the Paraenetick for Christian liberty pag. 2. and 11. supposing the credit and authority of Gamaliels speech for matter of truth to be one and the same with other scriptures and that there is nothing in all that speech but what is fully consonant with the word of God unquestionably so acknowledged So Mr Goodwin affirmeth p. 10. and after him one P. P. which is by interpretation Poor Pamphleter fals in the same ditch he might well call it As you were for he makes that party to be never a jot more in the right First of all he will contend with us that Protestant Interpreters doe commend Gamaliels speech and justify M Goodwins Doctrine Sure I am Calvin takes Gamaliel to be a godlesse Polititian and a Neutralist and his speech to have a great error in it So saith Pelargus upon the place But to save me a labour in looking upon other Interpreters because the Poor Pamphleter appealeth first to Piscator and Beza and afterwards to Gualther as Mr Goodwin did before him let him be judged by these and no other P●scator saith plainly that Gamaliels speech was not right while he saith If this counsellor this work be of men it will come to nought his meaning being that therefore they should let it alone Beza thinks Gamaliel spake not from love to the Apostles but from fear of the Romanes Gualther thinks it a most pernicious Tenent which some build upon this place concerning the toleration of heresies and