OCR Text |
Show no Mafler John Cottons .ARfwer , us, when any of them came over to us. If they were publickly re-proached for feparation, it was more then I heard of, till I read it ·- in his Booke. And for any publick punifhmem that s~/,mfuffered -for ir, .l may well fay? it was implicitly,if ar all; for furdy there is .. no Law of the Coontr<y,rhat punifheth fuch an offencr,- it her ex-plicirly, nrimplicitly. Bm fince he is pleafed to conceale it, I fee no . caufe of giving account ofit. Nextly, He takes up from Ale a Confrffion of tWO tn·ings, which he leaveth to me to reconcile: ·l • . Tbat J foy, if"'!! .eproach them for Stperation, it u• Jinne mette to be C•nfured. 2. That Chutchu them• Jilvu maJ be jiparated from, who tolerate thtir members in fucb ca~Jjile§e · reproacbings. Reply. It is true, that I doe not account reproaches, (which are a worke of the flefh) a mecteremedy to healeao error: And therefore the reproacher meete to be delt wit hall, either by private admonition, (if his reproach were private;) or with a publick ad· monition,ifit were publick.But the latter of the two thing« which he faith I confelfe,I am farre from either confeffing it, or beleeving it; ·tO •Wit, That the Chwchesthemfelves may be fip3rated from, fflho tolerate their members in fuch caufeleffi r<proachings. 't . I faid indeed, that a ca,.fokffi r~proach i1 afinne meete to be«njimd: 131(t I foid rvithaU, it is •zot to be cer4ured with fo deep~ a Cenft~rt, tH excommunication, tJPeciaOy of aU the Churclm, and that too, befor~ that il doe appeore, that they dae tulerate their memhm in fuch their cotl[< lt§e reproacbi"ngJ. llut .it may br, he will fay, doth it not imply, th•t ifit doth ap· .peare, that they doe tolerate their members in fi1ch caufetdfe re· pro~che•,rhat then l•hinke they are to be fep•rated from? . A~fw. No verily : Put it in a like c.fc: Suppofe a chil<fe fhould nnfcall and revile his Mothers Sifler, I might fay,itis a f;ult meete -~o be ;orretled, yet not with fo deepe a cqrretlion, as to be dif• mherJted: or that his Mother fho11ld be d'fpoff<lfed of her inheri{ Jnce, before it doe appeare,rhat ll1e doe tolerate her childe in fuch r~vilin gs.. Would fuch a fper.ch inferre, th .<t in Cdfe it did appe.re, ··hiS Mother did tolerate him, that then his Mothrr were to he dif~ I'flffdfeci of her inheritance l The trne meanin~ of my fpeech, was to.' xp•·dTe, tba,t fuch a finl)e, as reproachinJJ: elf a Church for a fio, ,,ought .defer-v~ a C~l\fure : yet not forthwith cxcommunic;tion: • much to Mafttr Roger Williams. much lelfe the Church to be cxcommunicated,whereoffuch an one iu member,md leaf\ of all,before it did appeare,tha. the Church knew of it, or did tolerate it : The k:~pe of my fpeech was, not to •old forth the grievous defect of a reproach , but the groundleffe proceeding unto feparation for a reproach, ~uth ~gainft a member and agJinft the Church that tolerated h1m, Without any fur~ the; convh'lion, or obftinacy, which was the cafe in hand ofM' • Williams. Some body, hefaith, reproached the Church -of S;./em for feparation, fome member of fome Ch?r~R. · Bit~ wh•t mem~er of what Church, he faith not? And yet thts Js.one of the ftumbhng blocks that turned him out of the way of communion with all the Churches in .the Countrey, who (for ought I know) never heard ofit unto this day. Let him now fa~, that mine owne ~onfoffions are fufficient Anfwers to my felfe, auf I granted, that tn cafe the member had been knowne, who fo repro"hedSalem·; and the Church knowne whereof he was a member, That then there were :• lawfoll (eparation from th<·Churcb that doth but tolerate her member m 1 caufele[fe ~eproach,yea and from aU otber Churches too, that h~ld Com•· munion wiJh thJf Church. . For he is not ignorant, more goeth to a li:paration thin fo, un· le!fe he hath forgotten the principles and rudiments of Church· Government• He confelr.th that to be true which{ faid, 1b>at itn not Chirurge' 1 hul Butchery to heale every fore with no otherrmdicim, but with AbfiiJ! ion from the' b.,dy: But yet as if he.cou!d m1ke mine own <Xpref.. lions confutations of my.felfe, he fauh that I have·confelfed (that which indeed is not my confeffioo, .but my colleaion of hiA Argu- · gument;) That Churcbu of godly perfons muft be Jipar..tedfrom.Jor ;,. • ordin,le worldlineffi. If this be a CoJ)tradiaion, it is his, ,and not mh:e, as I l)lewed above; neither doe I own aoy fuch conleffion, as mtnr, wh1ch he fubjoyn eth ; Th.Jt ChurchtJ m•y be fep,srated from , when th<] tolerate their members in their caufelej[e repro~•hes. • It f;emeth, he thinketh1 I neither remember 11_11n~ own woFdr, , nor know any Chucch-Cmfitce, but Excommumca tton. Hc·proceedeth to tell us h.is jt~dgem~nt in fo WJightv a cafe as IXComrnunicJtion or feparauon IS : It u not ( fatth he Jw"1 fore, of i••rmitie or ignorauce, but an Vlcer or G.sngreene of objlirucy , for '?' · ' · whidi •> |