A26865:427
An apology for the nonconformists ministry containing I. the reasons of their preaching, II.…
An apology for the nonconformists ministry containing I. the reasons of their preaching, II. an answer to the accusations urged as reasons for the silencing of about 2000 by Bishop Morley ..., III. reasons proving it the duty and interest of the bishops and conformists to endeavour earnestly their restoration : with a postscript upon oral debates with Mr. H. Dodwell, against his reasons for their silence ... : written in 1668 and 1669, for the most of it, and now published as an addition to the defence against Dr. Stillingfleet, and as an account to the silencers of the reasons of our practice / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for T. Parkhurst and D. Newman, 1681
AN APOLOGY FOR THE SILENCED MINISTERS, Especially for their not cea… › Part › Objection 15
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.
5. The Kings Majesty, when he published his Declaration about Ecclesiastical affairs, did not take those changes there made to be so dangerous: Nor did the Commons in Parliament, who gave him thanks for that Declaration. We may know then by that much, whence the noise of danger cometh.
6. If a needless Subscription or a Ceremony have burdened so many and considerable Subjects an hundred years and more; and if the calamitous attempts of change, that have been made unlawfully in the Land, have been occasioned by mens differences about those things, and if they are still the burden of so many as are now against Conformity: Let impartial persons then be judges, whether the removing of those troublesome unnecessary burdens, were not the likest means imaginable to prevent any more ill attempts of change?
7. Is there any thing in the world, that you think unlawful? No doubt there is. Suppose that one thing were by a Law imposed on you: would you think that a change of that Law would ⟨p. 110⟩be a dangerous thing? and would you exclaim against it as now you do?