A26882:55
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. I made no doubt but Pulpits and Press would loudly say, these are the Nonconformists Principles: and if I denied it would cite the Doctors Paper and Name.
5. I made no doubt but Pulpits and Press would loudly say, these are the Nonconformists Principles: and if I denyed it would cite the Doctors Paper and Name.
6. I knew divers of his Printed Books have the same Opinion of the unlawfulness of Imposed Forms; what now should I say against such reporters of the Nonconformists Opinions? Must we all bear the Accusation of so many Errors, and be published with Scorn and Contempt to be such, to make us odious to all, rather than one Man should be Confuted.
6. I knew divers of his Printed Books have the same Opinion of the unlawfulness of Imposed Forms; what now should I say against such reporters of the Nonconformists Opinions? Must we all bear the Accusation of so many Errours, and be published with Scorn and Contempt to be such, to make us odious to all, rather than one Man should be Confuted.
I purposed at first to conceal his Name, till I saw that all took notice of it, and none denied it, (and after (I conjecture it is your self) that in the Letter to me affirmed it.) I know that multitudes of Men of Name, Learning, and Power, scorn us as they do the Quakers, as believing them that say [We make all this noise and Schism as a distinct Party, and suffer silencing, and Imprisonment, because we will not Communicate with the Liturgy which the Martyrs owned:] I dare not suffer the Innocent to lie under such a slander for one [or many] Mans Name; we gave them our public Testimony to the contrary, 1660. and 1661. If a few that would not come in then, and be seen among them that pleaded the Cause of the old Nonconformists, have now by our distempers got so many of their mind as that we must be) thought intolerably to wrong them, if we (necessarily) give our reasons against them, and shall pass their Excommunicating Sentence against the Cause of the old Non-Conformists, and yours, I cannot be one that shall betray the Truth and Cause of Catholic Communion by silence at such a time, when the Erroneous expect that their Opinion should be so necessary to our Union, that none must contradict it.