A26865:475
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 23
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.
Ans. 1. By this it further appeareth, how unjustly and partially we are used, and how unnecessary they themselves hold Unity in Doctrine it self to be, in matters which some account so great to the liberty of Preaching the Gospel. For in all the Arminian Controversies, the Conformists differ among themselves as much as we do from any of them, if not more. Nothing more common now in our Pulpits, than for one man to preach up Freewill, and another to preach it down (and neither of them know what Free will is); and for one to preach for absolute Election, perseverance of all Saints, &c. and another to preach the contrary, and show the tendency of these opinions to all wickedness. And yet all these men are suffered to preach, because they all subscribe the same doctrine, though they neither believe nor preach the same: The Articles of the Church of England are subscribed by them all: They Assent and Consent to all the Doctrine of the Church. And indeed, is it because the Articles are not intelligible? or have they contrary meanings to fit the use of every subscriber? Are they hot to one, and cold to another? Or rather, do many of the Subscribers take heed of Tenderness of Conscience, because it is but tenderness of Head, and is more sensible of hurt and smart than a feared Conscience is, or is a word and thing that is grown into disgrace and scorn in our times?
Ans. 1. By this it further appeareth, how unjustly and partially we are used, and how unnecessary they themselves hold Unity in Doctine it self to be, in matters which some account so great to the liberty of Preaching the Gospel. For in all the Arminian Controversies, the Conformists differ among themselves as much as we do from any of them, if not more. Nothing more common now in our Pulpits, than for one man to preach up Freewill, and another to preach it down (and neither of them know what Free will is); and for one to preach for absolute Election, perseverance of all Saints, &c. and another to preach the contrary, and shew the tendency of these opinions to all wickedness. And yet all these men are suffered to preach, because they all subscribe the same doctrine, though they neither believe nor preach the same: The Articles of the Church of England are subscribed by them all: They Assent and Consent to all the Doctrine of the Church. And indeed, is it because the Articles are not intelligible? or have they contrary meanings to fit the use of every subscriber? Are they hot to one, and cold to another? Or rather, do many of the Subscribers take heed of Tenderness of Conscience, because it is but tenderness of Head, and is more sensible of hurt and smart than a feared Conscience is, or is a word and thing that is grown into disgrace and scorn in our times?