To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
COncerning Tertullians speech, and especially that Branch, to win, that [By the Law of naturall equitie, Men are not to be compelled to any Religion, but permitted to believe or not believe at all] Mr. Cotton answers, that they doe permit the Indians, but it will not therefore be safe to toller▪ te the publicke Worship of Devills or Idolls. The Discusser replied,
that they doe permit the Indians in their Paganish Worship, and* 1.1 therefore were partiall to their Countrymen and others: Mr Cot∣ton answers; that it is not true, that they doe so permit the Indians, what ever they may doe privately: That the Indians submit to the ten Commandements, and that some of their Mini∣sters have preached to them in English, which hath been inter∣preted: That one now preacheth in their owne Language: Further, That they permit strangers in their Worship. And for their Countrymen, for the most part that they worship God with them: They which are distant have Libertie of publike prayer and preaching, by such as themselves choose without distur∣bance.
Concerning the Indians, it is most true, that the Monahigganéucks, Mishawomêucks, Pawtuckséucks, and Cawsum∣séucks (who professe to submit to the English) continue in their publike Paganish Worship of Devills, I say openly and con∣stantly.
Yea but (saith Mr Cotton) they have submitted to the ten Commandements.
I answer; the ten Commandements containe a Renun∣ciation of all salse Gods and Worships, and a Worshipping of the true God, according to his owne Institutions and Appointments, which their practice is as farre from, as Mid-night is from Mid∣day.
2. To put men upon observations of Gods Worship, as Prayer,* 1.2 &c. before the Foundations of Repentance from dead workes (their worshipping of Idolls, &c.) is as farre from the Order of Christ Jesus, and his Christian principles (whereof Repentance from dead workes is the first) as the building of an House or Palace, without the first Groundsell or Foundation laid.
Mr Cotton therefore saith, they preach unto them.
I from my soule wish that all the Lords people in New England were Prophets, yea true Apostolicall Ministers or Preachers, truely furnished with Christs Abilities, and Christs Commission, to goe forth to convert and baptize the Nations, even these Wildest of the Nations of Adams Children: But Con∣version of Nations Mr Cotton sayth (upon Revel. 15.) untill the seaven plagues of the seaven Angells be fullfilled, will not be great.
This Interpretation I acknowledge to be very probable, so far as concernes any great Conversion of the Nations before the downfall of Antichrist, and in the meane season I commend the pious Endeavours of any (professing Ministery or not) to doe good to the Soules of all Men as We have opportunitie. But that any of the Ministers spoken of are furnished with true Apo∣stolicall Commission (Matth. 28.) I see not for these Reasons.
First, The Minister or Ministers, whom Mr Cotton I conceive* 1.3 intends, professe an ordinarie Office in the Church of Christ, which is cleerely distinct, yea and another thing from the of∣fice of an Apostle, or one sent forth to preach and baptize, Ephes. 4. & 1 Cor. 12.
Secondly, Such Churches as are invested with the power of Christ, and so authoriz'd to send forth, are seperate from the World, which many thousands of Gods people (dead and li∣ving) have seene just Reasons to deny those Churches so to be.
Thirdly, Were the Church true, and the Messenger or Apostle rightly sent forth with prayer and fasting, according to Act. 13. yet I believe that none of the Ministers of New England, nor any person in the whole Countrey is able to open the Mysteries of Christ Jesus in any proprietie of their speech or Language, with∣out which proprietie it cannot be imagined that Christ Jesus sent forth his first Apostles or Messengers, and without which no people in the World are long willing to heare of difficult and heavenly matters. That none is so fitted;
First, The Natives themselves affirme, as I could instance in many particulars.
Secondly, The Experience of the Discusser and of many others testifie how hard it is for any man to attaine a little proprietie of their Language in common things (so as to escape Derision amongst them) in many yeares, without abundance of conversing with them, in Eating, travelling and lodging with them, &c. which none of their Ministers (other affaires not permitting) ever could doe.
There being no helpes of Art and learning amongst them, I see not how without constant use or a Miracle, any man is able to attaine to any proprietie of speech amongst them, even in common things. And without proprietie (as before) who knowes not how hardly all men (especially Barbarians)
are brought to heare matters of Heaven (so strange and contrary* 1.4 to Nature) yea, even matters of the Earth, except profit and other worldly ends compell them to spell out Mens minds and meaning?
I may truely adde a third, an Instance in the booke of their Conversion, written by Mr Tho: Shepheard, there Mr Eliot (the ablest amongst them in the Indian Speech) pro∣mising an old Indian a suit of Cloths, the man (sayth the rela∣tion) not well understanding Mr Eliots speech, asked another Indian what Mr Eliot said.
Me thinks, the Native not understanding such a com∣mon and wellcome promise of cloths upon Gift, would farre more hardly understand Mr Eliots preaching of the garment of Righteousnesse Christ Jesus, unto which Men mutually turne the deafe Eare, &c.
Neither you (sweet Peace) nor I Expresse thus much to dampe Mr Eliot or any from doing all the good they can, whiles opportunitie lasts in any truely Christian way, but to shew how great that mistake is, that pretends such a true preaching of Christ Jesus to them in their owne Language.
But to proceed, in the next Passage Mr Cotton affirmes their Impartialitie in permitting others as well as the In∣dians.
I answer; it is one thing to connive at a strange Pa∣pist in private devotions on shoare, or in their vessells at Anchor, &c. Another thing to permit Papists, Jewes, Turkes, &c. the free and constant Exercise of their Religion and Worship, in their respective Orders and Assemblies, were such Inhabitants amongst them.
Doubtlesse the bloudie Tenent cannot permit this Li∣bertie, neither to the Papists, Jewes, Turkes, &c. nor to the In∣dians, nor doth their practice toward their Countrymen hould forth a shew of such a freedome or permission.
I wonder why Mr Cotton writes, that the most part of the English worship God with them, and the rest absent have Libertie to choose their Preachers! Since Mr Cotton knowes the Petition and Petitions that have been presented for Libertie of Conscience in New England, and he cannot but also know the Imprisoning and Fining of some of the Petitioners, &c.
It may be Mr Cotton will use the common objection, that some part of their Petition tended to Disturbance in Civill Things.
Some of their Petitions were purely for Libertie of* 1.5 Conscience, which some in Office, both in Church and State fa∣voured, as is reported, if not promoted. If others or some part of them might be judged offensive against Lawes made, yet why then hath not the Libertie of their Conscience (in point of Worship) been granted to them? When they have complai∣ned (amongst other Passages) that they have been forced to stay the baptizing of other Mens children, while their owne might not be admitted, and therefore earnestly sued for Mini∣sters and Congregations after their owne free choice and Consci∣ences, which have ever been denyed to them.
It is said, that their Ministers being consulted with, utterly denied to yeeld to any such Libertie.
They might justly feare, that if such a window were opened (as once Bishop Gardiner spake in another case) that the New English Congregations and Churches would be as thin; as the Presbyterians complained theirs to have been, when the people once began to taste the Freedome and Libertie of their Consciences, from the slaves whip, &c.
In the next Passage, the Discusser having excepted against Mr Cottons distinguishing betweene Members of the Church, and such as have given their names to Christ; Mr Cot∣ton replies; they are not all one, and quotes, Esa. 65. 5, 6.
Let the place be viewed, and that place will be found* 1.6 to speake of no such Difference: It speaks of the Lords promise to Eunuches and Strangers, laying hould on the Lords Covenant, and joyning themselves to the Lord, which I conceive Mr Cot∣ton will not deny to be in a Church way; in which condition the Lord gives the Eunuches a name better then of Sonnes and Daughters.
In the next Passage Mr Cotton upon Tertullians speech, affirmes, that a false Religion will hurt, because the Red Horse followes the White, &c.
I answer; Gods Judgements (by Warre, Famine, Pesti∣lence) plaguing false Religions in his time (though after many hundreth yeares patience, as hath form ••ly been opened) is
one thing: and the present hurting or profiting of others, is ano∣ther.
In the next place Mr Cotton takes offence that the Dis∣cusser should insinuate Mr Cotton to have a hand in the Modell of Church Government.
I answer; Mr Cottons words in the End of his An∣swer to the Prisoner, (where he speakes of this Treatise or Mo∣dell, sent to some of the Brethren of Salem) seemed to hould out the probabilitie of it. How ever Mr Cotton subscribeth to the rest of the Elders, (as he here sayth) their words being rightly un∣derstood.
Further, Mr Cotton here affirmes, that the want of a Law for Religion in any State provokes the Wrath of God, as the want of a King in Israel, Judg. 21. 25.* 1.7
This Scripture proves no more, but that the want of a King, Magistrate, Governour, or Civill Officer of Justice, pro∣vokes the Wrath of God, and endangereth the people, against which the Discusser never affirmed, but against their Kingly or Civill Authoritie in spirituall cases, since Christ Jesus abolished that Nationall Church.
But sayth Mr Cotton, the best Good of a Citie is Religi∣on, and therefore there should be a Law for it.
To this I have spoken largely in discussing of that Modell, unto which I know not of any Reply yet made by Himselfe, or any of those worthy men whom he makes the Authours of it.
But further, whereas the Discusser had said that the* 1.8 weedes of the Wildernesse will not hurt the Garden, nor poyson the Body, if not suffred to grow in the Garden, nor taken into the Body, Mr Cotton grants that Christ hath ordained Gardiners for his Garden, and Physick and Physicians for his Body: Yet withall he makes the Civill Officers, to be as Supervisors, Super∣intendents, and consequently, Bishops, Governours, and Heads of the Church or Churches, and over the spirituall Officers of Christ Jesus.
What is this but to establish Henry the 8. a Spirituall Civill Magistrate, and Head of the Church, in the roome of the Pope? Contrary to which I have discoursed in the discussing of the Modell in the bloudie Tenent.
But what thinke you of Mr Cottons interpretation of Tertullians minde, to wit, that Tertullian should meane, that the Christian Religion would not hurt nor disturbe the Romane Civill State?
I conceive it cannot stand, for although it be true* 1.9 that the Christian Religion hurts no Civill State (but infinitly the contrary) yet Mr Cotton will not deny that the Christian Religion (not of it selfe, but through the corruption of the Civill State) may provoke a Civill State many wayes, and therefore Tertullian must meane otherwayes, to wit, every Man must stand or fall in his owne Religion, and the Religion of one man will neither hurt nor save another: Therefore (to end this Passage) Tertullians words may not unfitly be thus appli∣ed: The Religion of the Protestants, if permitted by the Papists, will neither hurt nor profit the Papists: The Religion of the In∣dependents will nether hurt nor profit the Presbyterians, if they permitted it: And the Religion and Worship of other Conscien∣ces in old or New England, will neither hurt nor profit the In∣dependents, where the power of tollerating or not tollerating lies in the hands and power of the Independents.
Touching the Indians of New-England
Worshipping of God and Christ before the foun∣dation of Re∣pentance, is no∣thing but Anti∣christian dis∣order.
Touching prea∣ching to the In∣dians in New-England.
Proprietie of Language ne∣cessary to the true preaching of Christ Jesus to any people.
Conscience to God in Worship a close Prisoner in New-Eng∣land, and no Petitioner could obtaine its Li∣bertie.
Publik•• marri∣age, or giving ones selfe to Christ.
Judges 21. 25 Considered.
Supreame Au∣thoritie in Spi∣ritualls.
Tertullians Speech of one Religion, not hurting or profi∣ting another Considered.