OCR Text |
Show 98 Mafter'John Cotton~ .Anfwtr ~--------------~· A Chrillian man may more fafel y omit repentance of grc~ter fins if uoknowne, then of leffe finnes knowne. I fuppofe the I{ratlite~ were guiltie of many Idolatries, and fuperfHtions in the dayes of Samuel, ye~ their repentance was chiefly fafrn~d upon their asking of a King, of which they were then principally convinced, 1 Sam. 12. 19. And luch Repentance wast hen accepted of the Lord, and of S3muel, ver, 22, 23. The very truth is,tbe ground anc,l roote of the EXaminers Error in thls caft i~, That he maketh Chord~- Covenant tQ be no better then a Coven'allt of workes : w1tere'as indeed if. 9hurch· Covenant be not a branch of the Covenant of grace, t~yhurchesof Chri!l are not built upon Chrifr. In a Covenant'of workes, all finnes mull qe avoyded: or if not av?yded, yet ~epented of exprdly,and the grearefl ~ones mb~. , But tn E~~~geh~all Repent~nce ,. God d<.zleth not wzt/> Uf after our jinnu, nor rewardeth Uf according to our lniquitieJ, Plal.103 . Io. TheGniceofChriftis not given either to his Church, or to any Chri!lian,upon the perfel:l:ion of our Re· pentance, nor upon our Repentance of our greateft finnes, in the g reateft meafure.But if the heart be truly humbled for any knowne finne, as finne,though the finne knowne be often leffe hainous,tben others unkno~e, yet God accepteth his own worke, and putteth away all finne 111 the acknowledgement of one. Yea in finnes that be knowne, the compunaion of the heart is fometimes more ex· prelfe~ lor the occafidns and inducements of the finne which are leffc hainons; then fo~ t~e _gY~ater fin,nes1 which are m~re grievou1 and dangerous. Solomon tn hrs folemne Repentance in the Booke of Ecclefiajle~, doth more exprefly bewaile his entanglement with lewd ':"om,e~, Ecck[.7.27, 28. then a~l his Idolatrous Temples and wodh~p, whtch ~ece erel:l:ed,and maintained at h~ s Fha.ge. By the· Examtners DoarUJe, Solomon had never been received and refto• red to the Ch.urctl upon that Repemante. ' His lecon~ Anfwer is, 'Ih" though the con'l!;,.ted 'JeweJ did not fee Ql/ tbe leavmzng: of_ the ~h•ri[eu,yet the! mourned for b.,!_lling ofChrijl, ond embr.ced hz'? tn lm W:orfbip, MinifterJ, Governmmt, &c. and tbmupon necef[arzly followeth a withdrawing from the Church Mini· J1ery; and Worfhip oft be falfi Chrift, &c. , 1 ' Reply. This anfwer doth not reach the defence of his caufe to wic, 'fh•t it;, abfolute!J neceffary ttnto Cburch-fel:owfhip, to fee anJ be· waile to Mafter Roger Williams. liiaile, not onely ..Oua/1 whoredomu, but al[o whorijh JPeechtJ, grjlurer, dppiaranm, provoc&tionr. Ye~ here he gran~eth, t':'at the e~mvmed ]ewer did not fee all the luvmzngs of the Pharijees,whzchyt were fuch, as in the end of that Paragraph, he implJeth thry h•d dettined zhcm under a falfe Cbrijl. ' · But whereas he faith, that thty by embracing Chrift, inb;, Worjhip and Minijltry,therenec<JTarily followed a withdrawing from the Church, Minijlery, and worjhip of I he falji Chrijl. [c moy rrucly be Replyed, t. That he will not grant us that liberty, that upon, our embracing ofC~rill in ~is worfhip & Miniftery; there riecelfarily (o!lowetbo~r wtthdrawrng from the Church, Miniflery,and Worfhrp, whe:em we had_ been formerly pollmed in a!)y fort. Is not this to deteme the glonous Truth of ou~ Lord Jefus with refpel% ofPerfons? ,2 •. leis evident by ~he Story, that fome ofthofe members of the Chureh.tif Hiemfalem, who bad been-leavened by thefeaof the Pbarifeu; ihey did neith~r fee -nor ~ewa.il~, nor did come off fr.om fellowfhip with the Pharifees tn thm Mmrflery,and falfe Dofhme, which taught the neceffitie of Circ?mcifion,and of the whole Law of MofeJto .ju!lification and falvauon,Allr 15. l·S· A~ fM th~ confdlion -of finne by the Difciples unto J•hn Bapiijl:,( M.lr,~. )'a'ndby the•Gentiles unw PaH~ ( Aa.,.~.! thoug.h it be not (ai<l; that the one fort confeffcd therr Phanfarcall pollutions nor the other all their Deeds: · Ye~ ( fai~h he) ifbntb the[e confift their notorioU< jinnu, (as M'. COtton confdfeth) why not "'wcll.their netorwur finnes againjl God, !heir Idolalrii1,Juperflitions,worfhip},&c! Surely throughollt the whole ~cripUfe, the 'm>tters nfGod, and hi< worfhip,:.re ftrjl and mojl tmdcr~' handled, &c· . . , · .An[w. It is not true, that the matters of Gods ":Votthip andderctls ~ere, 'a~e alwaye~ ·n1 o fl ttnderly acknowledged throughout the c'onfe!lions of the Saints in Scrif>rurc. Solomm in his Reprn• tance was moft. !paring "f conft!lion of his Idol• trous Templts and worfhips. And the People in §amuel did more 1 epent of a!~ing a Klnf., then of all th<ir other lmne•, and yet then ldulatrres were then fl"f!TcJ.nt, 1 S.1nz.. 1 '2 f,- J.Oj 1 I. .~efi~es, Wfe never rea.de 'of fuel\ deepc Humiliation of DJvid for ·earring !he At ke af<er the ·m~nner ofche Philiflimr,as of his b:.dily adultery with Ba:bp,r!JJb, and mmdcr oiVriab. N n 2 The 99 |