A26882:174
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.
5. It was your Party that wronged, his Name, by divulging that which you now take for his disgrace.
Pag. 3. It's wisely done not to own the Cause I oppose, and yet not ⟨p. 30⟩let men know whether it be for fear of the Law, or because you are against it.
O that I could have fore-known, that I might have confuted his Arguments without his Name, and displeased no body? I thought you had taken them for his Honour, and not his Disgrace, when so many value them.
Pag. 4. 1. If they are true, they are his Honour: If false, why should I suffer them to do mischief.
2. I named not Mr. Ralphson, till all said he openly owned his Books in Prison. Had you rather all that Worship God in Parish Churches, were persuaded that it is Idolatry, than Mr. Ralphson should be confuted by name? I hope you have better reasons for concealing your own Name; to do mischief un-named, is not worth pleading for.