A26859:86
Richard Baxters answer to Dr. Edward Stillingfleet's charge of separation containing, I. some queries…
Richard Baxters answer to Dr. Edward Stillingfleet's charge of separation containing, I. some queries necessary for the understanding of his accusation, II. a reply to his letter which denieth a solution, III. an answer to his printed sermon : humbly tendered, I. to himself, II. to the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and the court of aldermen, III. to the readers of his accusation, the forum where we are accused.Richard Baxters answer to Dr. Edward Stillingfleet's charge of separation containing, I. some queries necessary for the understanding of his accusation, II. a reply to his letter which denyeth a solution, III. an answer to his printed sermon : humbly tendred, I. to himself, II. to the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and the court of aldermen, III. to the readers of his accusation, the forum where we are accused.
London: printed for Nevil Simmons, 1680
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
III. You justify the executing of the Laws upon us, and would have us silenced, and such dissenters not endured
III. You justifie the executing of the Laws upon us, and would have us silenced, and such dissenters not endured
It is our (Conformity, or our) ceasing to preach which you plead for as the Cure.
§. 6. I. As to your supposed ground, 1. You know, it's like that in my first plea for peace, I largely confuted it: And could you think that without any reply your bare saying over the thing confuted, could be any satisfaction, to one of any sense or conscience.
2. You cannot but know that the judgment and practice of the Universal Church in East and West hath been against you, not only for the first 300 years, but for many hundred after. Father Paul Sarpi after cited, in his History of Church Revenues truly testifieth it: I have proved it by many Canons and Histories in my Church History; that he was to be taken as no Bishop that was chosen by Magistrates, Prelates or any, without the Clergies election, and the Peoples election or consent: Christians then took not this to be any part of the Princes trust: but only to countenance the things that furthered Learning and Godliness, and encourage the Clergy and People to choose the best, and to protect and encourage and govern them by the sword when they were chosen. This being past doubt, were the Universal Church Separatists? Is our Consent with the Universal Church, or your singularity from it, liker to Schism or Separation?