Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…

Next you repeat some of my words, and then add [All which as it is here held out, is new to me, and I must confess my self in ignorance all over.] Reply: I cannot help that, but I will do towards it what I can, that it may be none of my fault: and therefore will let you know my meaning. And in opening the sense and nature of [Perfection] I cannot give you more of my mind ⟨p. 43⟩in a narrow room, then Schibler hath laid down in Metaph. l. 1. c. 11. Perfectum est cui ad essentiam nihil deest. Scaliger Exercit. 140. p. 470. Omne quod est, sibi est, & bonum, & totum, & perfectum. It is a Metaphysical Transcendental Perfection that I speak of, which hath no contrary in Being; which consisteth in the presence of all things necessary to Being: and that only of an inferior, derived Being, such as the creature is; for we meddle not with the infinite Divine Being or perfection; Nor do we take it in a comparative sense, but in an absolute: this being a Righteousness perfect in its kind, though a more perfect kind accidentally, may be found out: I take it rather nominaliter then participaliter: but still remember that I take it not de perfectione accidentali, sed essentiali. And therefore I still maintain that in several accidental respects our Righteousness is imperfect.

Next you repeat some of my words, and then adde [All which as it is here held out, is new to me, and I must confess my self in ignorance all over.] Reply: I cannot help that, but I will do towards it what I can, that it may be none of my fault: and therefore will let you know my meaning. And in opening the sense and nature of [Perfection] I cannot give you more of my minde ⟨p. 43⟩in a narrow room, then Schibler hath laid down in Metaph. l. 1. c. 11. Perfectum est cui ad essentiam nihil deest. Scaliger Exercit. 140. p. 470. Omne quod est, sibi est, & bonum, & totum, & perfectum. It is a Metaphisical Transcendental Perfection that I speak of, which hath no contrary in Being; which consisteth in the presence of all things necessary to Being: and that only of an inferiour, derived Being, such as the creature is; for we meddle not with the infinite Divine Being or perfection; Nor do we take it in a comparative sense, but in an absolute: this being a Righteousness perfect in its kinde, though a more perfect kinde accidentally, may be found out: I take it rather nominaliter then participaliter: but still remember that I take it not de perfectione accidentali, sed essentiali. And therefore I still maintain that in several accidental respects our Righteousness is imperfect.