The Bloody Tenant Washed and Made White in the Blood of the Lamb, Part 1 · Chapter 68
CHAP. 68. A Reply to his Chap. 71. Diſcuſsing the Teſtimony of Ierome.
Diſcuſſer.
I Erome (ſaith the Anſwerer) confeſſeth not the Truth, nor advantageth your cauſe: for wee graunt, what he ſaith, That Hereſie muſt be cut off by the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. But this hindereth not, but that being ſo cut downe, if the Hereticke doe ſtill perſiſt in his Hereſie to the ſeduction of others, he may be cut off alſo by the civill Sword, to prevent the perdition of others.
And that to be Jeromes meaning, appeareth by his Note upon that of the Apoſtle (Gal. 5.) A little Leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe. Therefore ſaith he, a ſparke, as ſoone as it appeareth, is to be extinguiſhed, and the Leaven to be removed from the reſt of the dough: Rotten pieces of fleſh are to be cut off, and a ſcabbed Beaſt is to be driven from the ſheepfold: leaſt the whole houſe, body, maſſe of dough, and Flock, be ſet on fire with the ſp…rke, be putrified with the rotten fleſh, ſowred with the Leaven, periſh with the ſcabbed Beaſt.
But to this I Anſwer, 1. He granteth to Tertullian, that Hereſie muſt be cut off with the Sword of the Spirit: yet with all he maintaineth a cutting off by the ſecond Sword, the Sword of the Magiſtrate, and conceiveth that Tertullian, ſo meaneth, becauſe he quoteth that of the Apoſtle, a little Leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe.
Anſ. 2. It is no Argument to proue that Tertullian meant a civill Sword, by alledging, 1 Cor. 5. or Gal. 5. which properly and onelyonly approve a cutting off by the Sword of the Spirit, and purging out of leaven in the Church.
And if Tertullian ſhould ſo meane, as the Anſwerer doth: yet 1. The cutting off of Hereſie by the Sword of the Spirit implyeth an abſolute ſufficiency in the Sword of the Spirit to cut it downe, according to 2 Cor. 10.4.
2. It is cleare to be the meaning of the holy Spirit and of the Apoſtle in the words alledged by him, a little Leaven &c.
Defender.
Reply 1. This Teſtimony of Jerome, which the Authour of the Letter alledgeth againſt perſecution for Conſcience, I might juſtly refuſe to ſpend time about it, till either the Author or the Diſcuſſer doe make it appeare to be the words of Jerome. For though I at firſt gave Anſwer to it, as preſuming the Letter had not forged it: yet now looking into the place of Jerome, whence it is quoted, I finde no ſuch matter. The Letter quoteth it out of Hieroms Proaeme upon the fourth Booke of his Commentaryes upon Jeremy. But peruſing the place, I finde no ſuch words, neither in that Proaeme on his fourth Booke on Jeremy, nor in any other Proaeme of any other of his Bookes on Ieremy which are ſix in all,
Reply. 2. I might here obſerve, (if I ſhould deale with him, as he doth with me, in his Chap. 38) the like failings in the Diſcuſſer, in putting Tertullian fouretimes in this paſſage inſtead of Ierome, whom he hath in hand. When I had once named Titus for Timothy, he obſerveth the haſt, and light attention, and ſleepineſſe of the Anſwerer. But I will not make ſuch an obſervation upon his miſnaming of an Author, which might eaſily ſlip from his pen, or from his Scribe, or from the error of the Printer.
Reply 3. In this he doth me wrong, to pu… upon me that for a Reaſon, which hath no reaſon in it, to wit, that I ſhould conceive, that Te tullian (lerome, he would ſay) meaneth a civill Sword becauſe he quoteth that of the Apoſtle, a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe.
For I gather it, not from his quotation of thoſe words of the Apoſtle (which I eaſily graunt, doe clearly ſpeake of Church cenſure, not of civill cenſure:) But I gather it partly from his expoſition of the parralell words in the ſame Chapter: and partly from the words he uſeth in opening that very Text. The parralell place in the ſame Chap. is ver. 12. I would (ſaith the Apoſtle) they were cut off that trouble you. This cutting off, (or foreign) He expoundeth the cutting off of their virility which no manwill ſay is a Church-Cenſure. I ſpake not here of the true meaning of the Text (which doubtleſſe, ſpeaketh of a Church-Cenſure) but of the true meaning of Ieromes words.
Againe, when Ierome would have the ſpark, aſſoone as it appeareth, to be extinguiſhed, and the leaven to be removed from the reſt of the Dough &c. though it be true (which the Diſcuſſer ſpeaketh) that the Apoſtle intendeth a Church-Cenſure: yet doubtleſſe Ierome aymed at more in thoſe compariſons, even to a civill cenſure alſo. For to theſe compariſons, he immediately ſubjoyneth theſe words, Arius in Alexandriâ una ſcintilla fuit: ſed quia non ſtatim oppreſſa eſt, totum orbem, eius flamma de populata eſt. Arius (ſaith he) was but one ſparkle: yet becauſe he was not ſpeedily executed (or ſuppreſt) his flame depopulated all the world. Where by the extinguiſhing of that ſpark, he doth not meane, by excommunication: for he was not ignorant, that Arius had been ſpeedily excommunicate, once and againe out of the Church of Alexandria; once whiſt he was Deacon, as Sozomene reporteth in Lib. 1. Eccleſiaſt Hiſtoria, Chap. 14. And though afterwards, he got into the Church againe, yet he was againe excommunicated, when he was Preſbyter, and caſt out of his Preſbytery, as Socrates reporteth in his lib. 1. Eccleſiaſt Haſtoria, Cap. 6. of the Greek Edition; Chap. 3. of the latine. So that Hierome complaining, of the great hurt, which the ſparke of Arius did, becauſe he was not timely put out, he did not meane, of putting out of the Church (which was done timely enough, and twice for failing) but becauſe he was not put out either out of the world, or at leaſt, out of the Confines of Neighbour Churches.
Say not: yet Paul doubtleſſe ſpake of putting out of the Church. For though that be true: yet now the Queſtion is not of Pauls judgement in this place, but of Hieromes judgement, which the Author of the Letter alledgeth as a witneſſe for himſelfe, and the Diſcuſſer would maintaine it: though Ieromes words will not beare it. It argueth, men are more led by will, then judgement to uphold a cauſe, when the witneſſes which themſelves produce, beare witneſſe againſt them. Neither let any man ſay, That this graunt of his, That Hereſie muſt be cut off with the Sword of the ſpirit, doth imply an abſolute ſufficiency in the Sword of the Spirit to cut it downe, according to 2 Cor 10.4, 5.
For though Spirituall weapons be abſolutely ſufficient to the end for which God hath appointed them (as hath been opened above) to wit, for the conviction, and (if he belong to God) for the converſion of the offender, for the mortifying of his fleſh, & for the ſaying of his ſoule, and for the cleanſing of the Church from the fellowſhip of that guilt: yet if an Hereticke ſtill continue obſtinate, and perſiſt in ſeducing, creepe into Houſes, lead captive ſilly ſoules, and deſtroy the faith of ſome, (it may be, of many) ſuch Gangrenes would be cut off by another Sword, which in the hand of the Magiſtrate is not borne in vaine.
Diſcuſſer.
But the eye of this Anſwerer could never be ſo obſcured, as to run to a Smiths ſhop, for a Sword of Iron, and ſteele, to help the Sword of the Spirit, if the Sunne of righteouſneſſe had once been pleaſed to ſhew him; That a Nationall Church (which elſwhere he profeſſeth againſt) a State-Church, (whether explicite, as in Old England, or implicite, as in New) is not the Inſtitution of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt. The Nationall Typicall-State-Church of the Jewes, neceſſarily called for ſuch weapons: But the particular Churches of Chriſt in all parts of the world, conſiſting of Jewes and Gentiles, is powerfully able to defend it ſelfe, and offend men, and Divells, although the State and Kingdome (wherein the Churches be) had neither carnall Sword, nor Speare, as once it was in the Nationall Church in the Land of Canaan; 1 Sam. 13.
Defender.
I ſhould think mine eye were very obſcure indeed, if I ſhould run to a Smiths ſhop to fetch the Authority of the civill Magiſtrate from thence: or if I ſhould thinke his Authority could not be put forth againſt all evill doers (and amongſt others, againſt Hereticks) without a Sword of Iron or Steele. If their be ſtones in the ſtreets, the Magiſtrate need not fetch a Sword from the Smiths ſhop, nor an Halter from the Ropers, to puniſh an Heretick. A pleaſant wit can play with a feather of every flying Fancy, and yet (which is to be lamented) bring in ſuch light conceits into grave Diſcourſes, and Diſputes about the holy things of God.
But two things let the Diſcuſſer underſtand, 1. That the Lord (through his grace) hath opened mine eye many a yeare agoe, to diſcerne, that a Nationall Church is not the Inſtitution of the Lord Jeſus. And himſelfe confeſſeth, that elſwhere I have profeſt againſt ſuch a Church State: nor will he ever be able to make it good, that the Church in New-England is implicitely any Nationall, or State-Church.
2. Let him underſtand further, that I ſhould thinke mine eye not onelyonly obſcured, but the ſight of it utterly put out; if I ſhould conceive, as he doth, That the Nationall Church State of the Jewes did neceſſarily call for ſuch weapons to puniſh Hereticks, more then the Congregationall State of particular Churches doth call for the ſame, now in the dayes of the New-Teſtament. For was not the Nationall Church of the Iewes as compleately furniſhed with ſpirituall Armour to defend it ſelfe, and to offend men: and Divells, as the particular Churches of the New-Teſtament be? Had they not power to convince falſe Prophets, as Elijah did the Prophets of Baal? Had they not power to ſeperate all evil doers from the fellowſhip of the Congregation? what power have our particular Churches now, which their Nationall Church wanted? or what efficacy is their found in the exerciſe of our power which was wanting to them?
If it be ſaid, Their Nation was an holy Nation, and an uncleane perſon might not live amongſt them:
Anſ. It is true, he might not enter into the Congregation with the reſt of the Iſraelites, to worſhip the Lord: but he was permitted to live in the Common-wealth of Iſrael, men uncercumciſed both in heart, and fleſh.
It is therefore a Sophyſtical imagination of mans Braine, to make a mans ſelfe, or the world believe, that the Nationall. Church-State of the Iewes, required a civill Sword, whereas the particular Church-State of the Goſpel needs no ſuch help.
Why not I pray you? Becauſe particular Churches are powerfully able, by the Sword of the Spirit, to defend themſelves, and to offend men, or Divells?
And was not the Nationall Church of Iſrael as powerfully able, by the ſame Spirit to doe the ſame? Surely it was both ſpoken and meant of the Nationall Church of the Iewes, Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, ſaith the Lord of Hoſtes? Zach. 4.6. And doth not the Diſcuſſer himſelfe obſerve, that time was in the Nationall Church of the Land of Canaan, when there was neither carnall Speare, nor Sword to be found? 1 Sam. 13. And was not then the Nationall Church powerfully able (by the Spirit of God) to defend it ſelfe, and to offend men, and Divells, aſwell as particular Churches now?