OCR Text |
Show f .. ,, 111 the tirlt Par>graph, faith he, 'lhi1 "'"I tndad an uncle-.e thing,from whi;h .~od : a'luh hit Peop!e: an~ M'. Cotton <onfe]leth, th:H after conuU~tm arry member objltr1ate m theft tmcle.we 1,Uchu ot<ght to be rejefled. l'u't what is this to the Argument ? Againe, In the n~l<t Para!\taph, Vpdn tbe fzmeground, (faith he) tfJal rme objlinate P&fon iJrtgbtiO be rejrUed OUI of Chi.rch-tflatc, updn the fame gr01md, if a greater company or a Cb,.rch were obflinotein juih r;nclear1e touche!, ought every found C/;riflian Churcb ro rejea them, and every j(!wrd member to n:ithdraw from them. But is this any more to the Argument? In the thir'il Paragraph, Fur'ther( faith he) it;., clettre, tbJt if fucb uncleane Touche! obfiinalely maintained, (at M'. Cotton prefe1Jith a..d pra~iJ.eth) be a grou~d o( a rejeUion of a Perfon in a Churoh1fJiefii· onk.ffi, ttu a ground ofrqeUzon whm Juch·Perf•nr are to j oym tmto fhe Chunb • ..Ami if objlinacy in the whole Church after ConviUion be a _ground for fuch a Cb.,rchu nje8io,,quefiionlejje,fuch a Church or 11um· ·ber bfper[onr obfiinate in fuch evillr, cannot congregate, nl!r become • true conflituted Church ofChrifl. Bm tlill th~ Arg~ment Is where it was, not onely unfhalcen, but untouchr. Nmher IS the Text in 2 Cor. 16. any whit at all cleared by thefe difcourfes, to argue them to be no true confiitdted-rnmr· t:hes who live in fuch uncleane touches, without convi<'lioli with? ut ~b~in>cy. Forth~ Te~c fpe~keth nothing of obfifnac;, nor convtchon: but onely tmpheth, that fuch uncleane Touches were found in the Church of Corinth, and yet that did not evacuate tncir Church·ellate. His la.fi Paragraph holdeth forth fome more lhape ~fan :Anfwer, bat u httkfubfiancc. · The greatejl !ff!!:efiion here (faith he') would be whether the Corinthians in their jirj! Confi itmion were fip.rate or no from fuch Ido!J Temple!? And t hi< ~·.~ott on ruitb~r doth 'nor can dwy;A Church· eft at• befng a jiJte ofnJ:Jrrzage u11to Chrijl Je[&; and fo Paul profeffidly faitb, He had efPort[cd them at a ch,fie Vtrgin unto Chrij!, ~ Cor. 1 1. R_eply. J, To put a~y fubfiance into this Anfwer, or any force P"'tlnent to the ca~fe In hand, it mnfi be no great QJeflion, but cl.eare out of Qgefi10n, that thefe Cotinthians in their firfi coniH· tution were cloane,and abfolutely feparate from fiteh IdonsTem-ples : to Mafter Roger Williams. pl~a: and that not onely loc•lly,btjtin their foulealltl judgement, mmde and heart, Utterly cut off from filch uncleane Touches, fo that they both undoubtedly faw the evil! thereof and from thei~ hearts abhorred it, and forfooke it. For ali thef; Atls of coming offin a way of feparation fro111 the Churches of England,he rc quireth from us, as abfolutely necelfuy to enter into a true Church· e!late. Now if he tbink.!!hat ~':Cotton (to ufe hi a words) neither ,Ptb 1UIT can deny, that m tlmr Jirfl cenjlitution they were thU1 Jeparate foom IdollJ Tempk!. I mu(l profcffe, though not to him, yet toal,lthatlove and fcck the Truth without prejudice, that I both can and doe deny it that in their fir~ ~on.llitution, th~y were locally ~p~rate from I~ dolls Temples. It 1~ !tkely enough; or elfe I fuppole the ApoiHe 11,0uld have adruamlhed ' ~hem, thcr~pf in ~heir fi r.fi PJ~ntacion . ~Ut th~t in their mindc;,and judgement, they faw the evill th.er.e-of, aod did in hGrtand,Coule bew~ile it, and c9nf~ffe it b~fore the ' Apofile and their Brethren, and fo en!er inw lqlemne Covenant exprdly agair ft it; this is altogether incredjble to IJle: For would not the Apofil~ then (out of his faithfulndfe) have reproved them as well for thm Apofia, y, as for their Fellowfhip in Idolatry? Would he not as well have rebuked tile pr~varica tion of their Covenant, as their pollucion of their communion with Pagans ? 'Wha.t \bough a Churc~·efiate be a fi<te of l\fard a g~ unto JelilsChrtfi. M•y oat a mamed Spoufe ofChrifi beignurant offwne part of her mar.ri,>gc·dutie.towards.hifl\? Anp w'lattho'lgl:t P ~ul profelfe, He h•d rjpoufed thm: ~ a ch41e Virgin to 7<fU1 Cbrifi ? M.y not be. call them a chafie Vtrgm,who had leencand bewa•lcd their former-worfhip ofldolls, though they neither bewailed nor C-.w the evill of fea lling wi th their neighbomsin !dolls Temples ? ' ·Reply. 2. Though the Exm1iner make it a greJt Qtelli on whe· . ther a Chur<h c•n be true! y confiituted, th~ ~ i n her tirfi confiimtion is not feperate from all uncleane Touch e~, ·fo as both to fce thorn, and come om of then!<, howfoever they may f.d l imo 'fi tch fumes afterwards: yet llooke at it as an ungccund<d dilrinction tonquire more purity to the beinr, of a Church in her lirfl con: ffimtion, then is neceffary to the being of it, after itlis conllituted • . ll)lould thinke the longer a Church hath enjuyed communion With the Lord Jefus Chri!J, the more fr.ee ought to grow both in knowledge |