Helps for Discovery of the Truth In Point of TOLERATION: BEING The judgement of that eminent scholar Tho. Cartwright, sometimes Divinity-Professor in the University of Cambridge in the reign of Queen Elizabeth of happy memory, and then a famous Nonconformist, for which through the tyranny of the Bishops he suffered Exile. Wherein the Power and Duty of the Magistrate in relation to matters of Religion is discussed; as also whether the judicial laws given by Moses to the Jews are abrogate by the coming of Christ. More particularly in relation to some sins, viz. Blasphemy, Adultery, &c. Occasionally handled in a controversy between the said public Professor T. C. and Doctor Whitgift. Here also by the way is laid down his judgement in the case of Divorce, and that the party innocent may marry again. LONDON, Printed for Thomas Banks, at the sign of the seal in Westminster Hall. 1648. To the Reader. Christian Reader, FOr understanding this piece of Mr. Cartwright's, thou art to consider, that it is an extract out of a book of his written for a reply to the then Bishop of Canterbury Dr. Whitgift. And finding that he unfolds many truths for the settling of men's judgements in these times, as concerning the force of the judicial laws of Moses given to the Jews, concerning the punishment of blasphemy, adultery, &c. it was judged likely to prove useful to the Church of Christ if it were made more public, the old Book being near worn out of print. The extent and continuance of the Law moral, ceremonial, and judicial, with their several uses, not being well considered, hath been the cause that many errors of late times have been pleaded for. Something of the Law was abrogated by the coming of Christ: this being hinted and taken hold of by the ignorant and unstable, they understand it of the abrogation of all, both ceremonial, judicial and moral, and so open a gap to licentiousness. Thus by confounding what should be distinguished, many absurdities have their rise. There is something moral among the judicials, which will stand against all opposition. There is somewhat in the moral which is abrogate to the believer, as the curse, the condemning power, the irritating nature, &c. Qui bene distinguit, bene docet. I leave the clearing of some of these things to this ensuing extract: The Lord grant us discerning spirits, together with hearts to walk in the light of his truth, when we discern it. Helps for discovery of the Truth, in point of Toleration. MY former Assertion was, That we have a word of God for our direction in all things which we have to do. My reason illustrating this truth was this, That otherwise our estate should be worse than the state of the Jews, who had direction (as is on all hands confessed) out of the Law, even for the least things; And whereat it is the virtue of a good Law, to leave as little undetermined, and without the compass of the Law, as can be, my adversary D. W. imagining that we have no word for divers things, wherein the Jews had particular direction, supposeth a greater perfection ●n the Law given to the Jews, then in that which is left to us. That this is a principal virtue of the Law, may be seen ●nd evidenced thus; First, because conscience that is well ●●nstructed and touched with the fear of God, will seek direction from the light of God's word, even in the smallest actions. Secondly, common reason will urge it, the Masters whereof give this Rule, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, &c. Arist. ad Theod. viz. It greatly behooveth those laws which are well made, as much as can be to determine of all things, and to leave as few things as may be to the discretion of the Judge. I added, That the new Testament is a noble addition to the old, that it maketh the old more manifest, and bringeth greater light; which expression (though D. W. wrangleth withal) is no other than Mr. Calvin useth on 2 Tim. 3. where he calls the Gospel an addition to the Law: Let us therefore now consider, whether in the matter of the judicial Law, that which I have set down be strange and dangerous, as Dr. W. surmiseth. I do not affirm, that the Magistrate is simply bound to the judicial Law of Moses; but that he is bound to the Equity, which I also call the substance and marrow of them, in regard of which equity, I affirm that, ☜ There are certain laws among the judicials, which cannot be changed. Hereof I gave example in the Laws which command, that a stubborn Idolater, Blasphemer, murderer, Incestuous person, and such like should be put to death. For the first point, That the equity of the judicials doth remain, and therefore ought to be a rule to direct all Laws by: Calv. Instit. l. 4 c. 20. Sect. 15. To let pass the authority of Mr Calvin, Mr Beza, and other writers of our time, who have written with any judgement of this matter, Beza de comburendis Haereticis. (who do in plain words affirm, that there is a perpetual equity in them, and that our Laws, though they differ in form, yet ought to retain the reason or ground of them) I say to let that pass, I assert, That all these Laws, moral, ceremonial, and judicial, being the Laws of God, and by his revealed will established, must so far forth remain, as it appeareth not by his will that they are revoked. To bolt out therefore this truth, seeing the altering or revoking of any Law must be by our saviour's coming only, Let us inquire what those Laws are which he put an end unto. This thing may be considered in that division which S. Paul useth, Eph. 2. where he saith that our Saviour Christ came to make peace, first between God and men, and then between men and men; that is to say between the Jews and Gentiles. 1. The ceremonial Law therefore being a Law of enmity (which as a wall held out the Gentiles from joining themselves unto the Jews) was necessary, among other causes, in this respect to be taken away. Secondly, the curse of the Law, for the breach of any of the laws of God, either pertaining to the Jews in times past, or unto us now (being that which maketh the wall between the Lord and us) was, for our reconciliation with his Majesty, necessarily to be removed: whereupon it followeth, First, That the moral Law (as that which hindereth not our reconciliation with God, nor our good agreement with men) is in as full strength as ever it was before the coming of our Saviour Christ: For the curse of the Law besides that, it is in regard of the Elect, rather fulfilled and executed in the person of our Saviour Christ, than abrogated. 2. Besides that also, it hath a necessary use as yet towards the Elect, not only to drive them to the faith which is in Christ Jesus, but also to keep under the remnants of rebellion, even of them which have already believed. And 3. Besides that, the force thereof is daily, and shall be for ever executed upon the wicked. 4. Besides all this, seeing this curse was annexed not only to the breach of the moral Law, but also of the ceremonial and judicial, there is no just cause, why the moral Law should be said to be abrogated. Secondly it followeth hereupon, That those judicial Laws of Moses, which are merely Politck, and without all mixture of Ceremonies, must remain, as those which hinder not the atonement of Jews and Gentiles with God, or of one of them with another. Besides this, It being manifest, that our Saviour Christ came not to dissolve any good Government of commonwealth, he can least of all be thought to come to destroy that which himself had established. Of this Point Dr. W. hath two contrary sentences, one of Musculus, pa. 97. which saith that the judicial Law is abrogate, the other of Beza, which is, That the judicial Law being given to the Jews, is not yet abrogate, so that if they had any estate of commonwealth in the Land of Canaan, they should be constrained to use that form of Government, which was given to them by Moses. Now albeit those laws given unto the Jews for that Land, do not bind the Gentiles in other Lands, forsomuch as the diversity of the dispositions of the people, and state of that Country, gave occasion of some Laws there, which would not have been in other places, yet forasmuch as there is in those Laws a constant and everlasting Equity whereupon they were grounded, 2. And the same perfecter and further from error then the forge of man's reason (which is even in this behalf shrewdly wounded,) is able to devise; It followeth, that even in making politic Laws for the commonwealth, Christian Magistrates ought to propound unto themselves those Laws, and in light of their Equity by a just proportion of circumstances, of person, place, &c. to frame them. Now to prove this truth, That the equity of the judicial Law remaineth, (not as a counsel which men may follow if ☞ they list, and leave at their pleasure, but) as a Law whereto they be bound, 1. Argument. I shall prove by an Argument taken from that of the Apostle in 1 Cor 9 where after he had alleged divers similitudes, fetched from the common use of men, to prove that a Minister of the Gospel ought to be maintained upon the church's charge; Pag. 98. lest it might be objected that these were but human reasons, he citeth one of the judicial Laws, as the eternal Law of God, Deut. 25. 4. Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth &c. Where it is manifest, that he doubteth not to bind the Conscience of the Corinths unto the equity of that Law which was judicial, and so urgeth it ver. 10. Likewise of the finding of the Priests in the service of the Altar, commanded in the Law, he concludeth, That those which preach the Gospel should live of it. And this maintenance of the Priest, albeit in the manner of the provision it was merely ceremonial, yet as it was a reward of their service, due by men (as the punishments also, if they had failed in their duties,) was mere judicial. Whereupon it followeth, that in those judicials, to all the circumstances whereof we are not bound, we are yet bound to the Equity of them. It remaineth to show, that there are certain judicial laws which cannot be changed, as that a Blasphemer, contemptuous and stubborn Idolater, &c. ought to be put to death. They which would have this left at liberty, have nothing to allege to colour their looseness, but the coming of Christ and his passion: but they do not see how this their arguing faultreth divers ways. For, 1. It is a childish error to think, that our Saviour Christ came to exempt men from corporal death, which the Law casteth upon evil doers, when as he came not to deliver from death, which is the parting of the body from the soul, but from that which is the separation both of body and soul from the gracious presence of the Lord. And if it were so, that our Saviour Christ had born in his Body this civil punishment of public offenders, it must thereupon follow, not that it is in the liberty of the Magistrate to put them to de●th, but that he must, will he, nill he, if they repent, keep them alive. For if our Saviour hath answered that justice of God in his Law, whereby he hath commanded that such malefactors should be put to death, Pag. 99 it should be great injustice to require that again in the life of the offender. 2. Again, this opinion is injurious to the death of Christ; for if he were for this cause made manifest in the flesh, that he might destroy sin, which is the work of the devil, 1 Ioh. 3. 8. this imagination of a liberty left to the Magistrate, whether he will put them to death or not, doth make Christ build again that kingdom of sin which he hath destroyed: For, when both in common reason, and by the manifest word of God, the Lord giveth this blessing unto the punishment of such grievous offenders by death, Deut. 19 that others (not only which see, but also) which hear of them, have the bridle of fear put upon them, whereby they are withholden from the like crimes, it must needs follow, that whosoever maketh our Saviour Christ author of this looseness, in not punishing such offenders, maketh him forthwith to lose the bridle whereby others are stayed from throwing themselves down the hill of wickedness which was before committed: And what is, if this be not, to make our Saviour Christ a troubler of commonwealths? Moreover, if our Saviour Christ by his coming loosed these civil punishments, and purchased this grace of his Father for blasphemers, &c. that if they could find favour in the eyes of the Magistrate, they might escape the hands of death, 2 Argument, to prove the judicial Law still in force. which the Law of God adjudgeth them unto: How cometh it to pass, that the Apostles, to whom the Lord committed the publishing of all that pardon which he obtained for us, did never make mention of the slaking of these punishments? If our Saviour Christ had obtained this liberty, it was worthy the preaching; and therefore unless D. W. can show something out of the writings of the Apostles, joe. to warrant this Sanctuary, which he would so fain build to the support of blasphemers, murderers, &c. it followeth, that the Apostles, by his saying, have not answered the trust committed unto them; But if all godly minds do abhor these absurdities, there is no cause why they should like of this corruption of the Doctor, whereupon all these depend. Nay in that the Apostle putteth a sword in the hand of the Magistrate, and in the use of it maketh him a Minister and servant of the vengeance and justice of the Lord against sin: Rom. 13. He striketh through this opinion, which imagineth that our Saviour Christ came to hang the sword of the Lord's justice upon the pleasure and will of man. For the Magistrate being the Lord's Officer, as the sheriff is the Magistrates: It is no more in his choice to withhold the Sword which the Lord hath put in his hand to draw, then in the power of the sheriff, to stay the execution of that judgement, which the Magistrate himself hath lawfully commanded, Now seeing there is a sword in the Magistrates hand, by the doctrine of the Apostles, and that also which the Magistrate must of duty draw; I would gladly know where that necessity of drawing this sword can be found, if it be not in these crimes of Blasphemy, &c. which I have set down? And if he say that Paul, by the sword understandeth all manner of civil punishments, as well by the purse, as by other bodily chastisements which spare the life; I grant it, but by an usual manner of speech which is figurative, and noteth the whole by the part, he rather chose to utter those punishments by the Sword, then either by the whip or purse: whereby he did not only not exclude this necessity of punishing malefactors with death, but laid rather a straighter bond upon the Magistrate to execute those which commit things worthy of death. Hitherto generally of putting those to death, which commit things against the Laws remaining still in force, as they were in times passed established by the blood of the Transgressors: Now I will come to the particular crimes set down, and first for the crime of Adultery. It is to be considered that the crime of Adultery is a breach of the holy and ancient, both institution and solemn Covenant of the Lord, then that it is an injury done unto the innocent party in the most precious possession that can be, pag. 101. in things pertaining to this present life, joined with dishonour cast not only upon the person, but upon all his Children, and in a manner on all those that belong unto him. Thirdly that this fire doth not only wast the family where it is, but maketh a breach into the commonwealth, whilst the right of inheritance, either of Lands or Offices is oftentimes thus translated from the true Inheritors, while the children which are so begotten, having oft times less care and cost bestowed on them in their education, become hurtful Members of the Commonwalth; whereby all may clearly see the perpetual equity of the Law of God in the revengement of this sin by death. And when the Lord addeth this for a reason of putting the Adulterer to death, Lev. 19 that the evil may be taken out of Israel, unto the heap of discommodities before rehearsed for fault of executing this Judgement of death, he threatneth the whole commonwealth with mischief to fall upon it; and the equity of this punishment by death hath so lightsome colours upon it, that it hath upholden itself against the ignorance and injustice of all which have not willingly put out that sparkle which standeth in the discretion of honesty; For even before this candle light of the Law of God was set up, Iob. 31. 11. not only the godly (as Job) which were in some part reformed of the general blindness, but even those that were not of the Church of God, as Abimelech the King of Gerar, and the very Canaanite (as long as there was any step of equity among them) did see that the filth of this sin was such, Gen. 26. 11. as aught to be washed away with the blood of the offenders. For whereas Isaac feared the assault, both of his life and of the chastity of Rebecka, Gen. 38. 24. the King ordained that whosoever either laid violent hands on him, or had to do with his wife, should die; and in that Judah called for Thamar to be led forth to death in the Land of Canaan, where himself was but a private man, for that she being made sure unto an husband, played the Harlot: he gave to understand, that the Canaanites, who had even then filled a good part of that measure of sin unto the brink, whereof they came afterward did notwithstanding pursue Adulterers unto death. And when the Lord did afterward give testimony to this punishment by the express words of his Law, it is manifest, that the Law which God hath written in the table of the hearts of all men, pronounceth the sentence of death against Adulterers: So that unless men will like giants fight against the light of nature, or say, that our Saviour Christ came to abolish that which in all times and with all Nations (not altogether spoiled of the discretion of honesty and dishonesty) was observed, it followeth, that the punishment of Adultery by death, and consequently much more the punishment of incestuous meetings by death, standeth in as full force now as ever it did before the coming of our Saviour Christ. The exceptions against this Doctrine are of no value, for if this be the truth of God there can be no prerogative against it, unless he can show some higher Court than heaven, and some chief Justice above the Lord. It is not denied, but the punishments by death whereby men have established laws which themselves have for their better commodity devised, may be either mitigated or taken away by those to whom it appertained; neither is the Magistrate by any thing which I have set down bound to mitigate the punishment of thieves. For, their punishment may grow by the circumstance of place, as in Scythia where all things lying open to the spoil, had need to be locked up by the straighter punishment, and sometimes by the disposition of the people lighter handed than others, as if one had to do with the lacedaemonians, or some Nation in whom that sin had taken deeper root. And I will not deny, but even these crimes of murder and Adultery may vary by divers circumstances, and therefore the Magistrate may according to the quantity of the fault appoint the manner of death sharper or milder. But that there is any place, time, or other circumstance, which can lessen these crimes that they should not be worthy of death, upon the reasons before alleged, I utterly deny. An objection answered. It may be objected, that the Law of our Saviour Christ touching divorcement for Adultery, Mat. 5. 32. had been to no purpose, if the Adulterer ought of necessity to be put to death. 1. Answer. First, he that urgeth this may be justly charged with a mistake in bringing in our Saviour Christ there as a maker of laws under the gospel, whereas he made none in those places, but expounded the Law of God, which he had made from the beginning; the other refusals made by the Jews of their wives, were never any laws but Permissions only: and therefore in their abolishment there was no Law of God abrogated. Secondly, 2. Answer. it was necessary to use that exposition, notwithstanding that the punishment of the Law by death remained; Joh. 18. 31. for besides that the Jews being under the Government of the Romans had those civil punishments by death suspended upon the pleasure of their Officers, who were often corrupted: our Saviour Christ foreseeing all things did foresee what looseness would follow in this behalf, and therefore as the office of a good Teacher required, he instructed the conscience, and taught that albeit the Magistrate fail in the execution of the Law, yet that the former yoke being broken, men were at their liberty to enter into a new contract of Marriage with other; whereby he met with the corrupt opinion of those which dream that the knot of Marriage is not cut asunder by Adultery during the life of the parties married. Now for the opinion of Musculus before quoted, at pa. 3. although his manner of speech (in saying that all Moses is abrogated) be hard, yet it will appear that D. W. hath wrested this learned man's words from his meaning, and that he is but a snatcher at syllables; for the meaning of that learned man Musculus was, that these laws are abrogate, as given by Moss, and do notwithstanding remain as they contain a perpetual equity; and that this is his meaning may be proved by comparing him with himself, for in the same title of laws he writeth thus, There are (saith he) that think that Christ did abrogate the punishment prescribed by the Law against Adulterers, when he saith, Neither do I condemn thee, go and sin no more; these be gay fellows, they think not of this, that our Saviour Christ came into the world, not to judge or punish, but to save sinners: and yet in the mean season not to take away the punishments of the Law, given of God his Father by Moses; whereupon he said not simply, thou thoughtest not to be condemned, &c. and so showeth, that if she had been condemned according to the sentence of the Law, that the Lord would not have spoke against it. This our saviour's refusal to condemn this woman taken in Adultery, doth no more cease the punishment due to Adultery, Joh. 8. than his refusing to judge in the division of an inheritance when he was requested, doth countenance anabaptistical community, or doth prove, that Inheritances should not be divided, in both these he refuseth to meddle, as impertinent to that spiritual work he intended] Calvin in his Comment on John, calleth it Popish divinity, that the sentence of our Saviour Christ, Jo. 8. should bring any favour to Adulterers, pag. 107. as touching the civil punishment. As for Mr. Beza, it is known that he proveth that heretics ought by the Law of God to be put to death, See also Bezae confessio Christianae fidei, ca. 5. de Ecclesia sect. 44. whereby it appears that he believes those judicials which give sentence of death against the crimes here set down to be still in as full force as ever they were. Unto which I could add Peter martyr, who hath a long dispute of the necessary observation of this Law against Adulterers, and as I have showed there is none of these crimes but even the Law of nature will teach us, that they ought to receive the reward of death. Dr. W. The Dr. proceeds, and seeks to make one difference between the Law and Gospel, to lie in relation to the severity of the Law and lenity of the Gospel, in respect of temporal punishment. The Answer. T. C. I say that in this very point, a great part of the error of the Manichees doth consist, for they were led to condemn the Justice of God under the old Testament, because of the outward punishments which were exercised partly by the hand of God by judgements from Heaven, and partly by the ministry of men at the commandment of the Law; therefore the favour of Manichism is still hot as ever it was. But since I am entered into the mention of this, the Truth is, that even in these outward punishments, the dispensaton of God under the Law, is divers from that under the Gospel; For under the pedagogy of the Law, as he crowned the obedience of it for the most part with greater abundance of outward blessings, than he doth the obedience of his Saints under the Gospel: so did he with more terrible, more often, and more manifest judgements, revenge the breach of it in that time, than he doth now. And herein indeed is the difference which the Dr. is groping after but cannot hit on it; But that this should bring any diversity in the set and ordinary punishments prescribed by the Law, I for my part cannot understand. The contrary rather I can gather; for even as although the Lord doth not now by outward blessings give so plentiful testimony to the obedience of the gospel, as then of the Law: yet the Magistrate ought to be as diligent to procure the good of the Church as ever he was in the time of the Law: Even so although the Lord by bodily punishments doth not so severely revenge as he did then, yet the Magistrate may not remit any thing therefore of that severity which he was wont to use. Nay more, even as the Magistrate ought so much the more carefully to procure the outward welfare of the Church now, as the Lord withdraweth his hand that way, more now than he did then, even so ought he to keep by so much an harder hand over the punishment of sin now, than he did then, as the Lord more rarely thundereth by his judgements from Heaven, now, than he did in time of the Law. And sruely, if ever there had been any time wherein the Magistrates sword might have rested and rusted in the sheath, the time of the Law of all had been most fittest: when the Lord did so visibly sit in judgement, and himself in proper person hold the Assize. The causes of this diversity between the Law and gospel may be seen in those learned men mentioned, which handle the Point. It is enough for me, so to help the Dr. out, with what he traveled with, that I have showed, that what is by me here laid down is nothing hindered, but greatly helped by this difference which he bringeth between the Law, and the Gospel. Ob. Next, the Dr. finds fault with my interpretation of that place of Zachary, concerning putting to death him that prophesied falsely, zach. 12. his reason is, Because (forsooth) by that means the Parents should have power of death upon their Children; Reas. therefore (saith the Dr.) there must be some other sense sought out, then that which the words do purport. The answer of T. C. Whereunto I answer, That Moses showing what ought to be done against those false Teachers which go about secretly to withdraw from the true worship of God, saith, Deu. 13. 6, 9 that though it be his Brother, his son, his Daughter, or his Wife, he shall not spare but kill them: tell me now I pray you, doth not Moses mean there truly, and as his words sound, that the false Teacher shall die? If you cannot deny it, than you see that your reason which you here assign is nothing worth, for there also it is commanded to the Father to kill his son. But if you list to learn, Pag. 112. you may perceive that by these words understood simply, there is no power given to one private man to kill another, nor for the parent (as a private man) to kill his children: but this manner of speech is grounded upon the Law of God, Deut. 17. 7. whereby it was provided, that the witness which had accused should throw the first stone against the convicted person; forasmuch therefore, as both Moses and Zachary after Moses, will have the Father accuser of his own Child, if the knowledge of his enticement to Idolatry remain with him alone, therefore also they ascribe the killing of the guilty person unto them, as a thing belonging to the duty of the Accuser. Oh! but your words seem to give suspicion of a difference between the Jews and us, what is that? why that Christian Parents should rather put their children to death, then to be withdrawn by them: so that the Jews have an absolute commandment to put them to death, but the Christians have it under condition, if they cannot otherwise keep still the true Worship of God. But where and in what shop is this difference quoined? For how shall they be sure they shall not be withdrawn by him, unless they procure him to be put to death? And although they were out of the peril of being with-drawn, how are others provided for, whom he may corrupt? And if it were possible that poison which he hath, could not hurt any other, where is the revenge of God's glory which hath been dishonoured by such false teaching? and in the maintenance whereof the zeal of God's children as well under the gospel as under the Law doth consist? I conclude therefore that place of Zachary (against your fond distinction) that the same severity of punishment which was used against false Prophets then, aught to be used now under the gospel against false Teachers, comparing one person and circumstance with another. As he which hath fallen from God, and gone about to draw others away, to be handled according to the Law prescribed in that 13. of Deut. If this be extreme, I am content to be so counted with the holy Ghost. And though in some cases of Idolatry, upon repentance life is given, yet in this case and some other expressed in the Law, as of open and horrible blasphemy of the Name of God; I deny that upon repentance there ought to follow any pardon of death, which the judicial Law doth require. Besides, Pag. 108. It is an anabaptistical tenant to avoid all punishment of sin whatsoever, to maintain that, For whatever offence a man commit, if he show tokens of repentance, he may be delivered from bodily punishment: For what murderer, what Traitor, &c. which though he be never so unrepentant and obstinate in his sin, hearing that upon repentance there is a way to escape death, will not enforce himself to show all tokens of repentance? Let this truth therefore be further enforced by this Argument. Arg. Forasmuch as I have showed out of the new Testament that he who killeth a man, and taketh away his corporal life ought to die, it followeth much more, that he which taketh away the life of the soul should die: and if it be meet to maintain the life of man by the punishment of death, Pag. 117. how should the honour of God, which is more precious than all men's lives, be with smaller punishment established? Therefore to close up this question, I will add this; That the Magistrates which punish murderers and thieves, and Treasons, with other transgressors of the second Table severely, and are loose in punishing the breaches of the first Table, begin at the wrong end, and do all one with those, who to dry up many rivers continually fed by one fountain, begin at the channels where it divideth and parteth itself into many arms: which as it is an endless labour, so is this also which they go about; Arg. for whereas S. Paul teacheth Rom. 1. that God for revenge of the dishonour of his Name, giveth men over to wicked minds, to the committing all kind of filthiness, and of all kind of sins against the second Table, be they never so horrible; and so maketh the breach of the first Table the cause of the breach of the second: It cannot be (let the Magistrate lay as good watch as he can, and aggravate punishments as much as he can,) I say it cannot be but where either the first table is broken, or the breach not duly revenged, but swarms of Treasons, Thefts, murders, Adulteries, Perjuries and such like, must needs break out in those Governments. And therefore as the short and easy way to dry up the channels and Rivers is to stop up the head and fountain of all, so the only remedy of purging the commonwealth of these mischiefs, is to bend the force of sharp and severe punishments especially against Idolaters, Blasphemers, Contemners of true Religion, and of the Service of God. And therefore I conclude, pag. 118. that those which would have the severity of the Law against Idolaters, &c. abated, do at unawares not only thereby utter the small price which they set either of God's glory, or of the salvation of their Brethren, but withal declare themselves enemies to commonwealths, and of all both civil and godly honesty of life. FINIS.