A26882:161
Catholic communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state…Catholick communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state…
Catholic communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state of that communion opened, and the questions discussed, whether there be any displeasure at sin, or repentance for it in Heaven : with a parallel of the case of using a faulty translation of Scripture, and a faulty liturgy.Catholick communion doubly defended by Dr. Owens, vindicator, and Richard Baxter and the state of that communion opened, and the questions discussed, whether there be any displeasure at sin, or repentance for it in Heaven : with a parallel of the case of using a faulty translation of Scripture, and a faulty lyturgy.
London: printed for Thomas Parkhurst, 1684
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.
This is confused work: The preceptive part of the Law is actus praecipientis, the Commanders Act; The instances before mentioned tell you that this may be obeyed for the Penalty sake, when yet the evil of the Command, or Law, is sinful, and so worse than the Penalty or Obedience, which are not sin: Forgive me for telling you that you should have distinguished the preceptive part of the Law from the matter Commanded by it, and the evil of the Law and Law-maker, from the evil of the Obeyer; and then only have concluded that he that obeyeth a Precept only to avoid the Penalty, professeth the Penalty to be worse then his Act of Obedience. But he doth not make it worse then the Law, or the Lawmakers sin.
This is confused work: The pr•ceptive part of the Law is actus praecipientis, the Commanders Act; The instances before mentioned tell you that this may be obeyed for the Penalty sake, when yet the evil of the Command, or Law, is sinful, and so worse than the Penalty or Obedience, which are not sin: Forgive me for telling you that you should have distinguished the preceptive part of the Law from the matter Commanded by it, and the evil of the Law and Law-maker, from the evil of the Obeyer; and then only have concluded that he that obeyeth a Precept only to avoid the Penalty, professeth the Penalty to be worse then his Act of Obedience. But he doth not make it worse then the Law, or the Lawmakers sin.
If a Law did Command me to appear before a Lay-Civilian, who useth the Keys of the Church, and this on pain of Death, or Imprisonment, I may be moved both by Precept and Penalty to appear, as being better then either refusal, or penalty, and yet not think that the Law or Precept is a less evil in itself, or its ends, to the Law-maker, or the public? (Whether this thought be right or wrong, is nothing to our question) so if I were by Law commanded to join in the Liturgy, on pain of Death, or Imprisonment, or being deprived of all other Church Worship, I may think this Law worse than my sufferings, and yet think my Obedience to it my Duty.
If a Law did Command me to appear before a Lay-Civilian, who useth the Keys of the Church, and this on pain of Death, or Imprisonment, I may be moved both by Precept and Penalty to appear, as being better then either refusal, or penalty, and yet not think that the Law or Precept is a less evil in itself, or its ends, to the Law-maker, or the publick? (Whether this thought be right or wrong, is nothing to our question) so if I were by Law commanded to joyn in the Lyturgy, on pain of Death, or Imprisonment, or being deprived of all other Church Worship, I may think this Law worse than my sufferings, and yet think my Obedience to it my Duty.