A26898:1191
Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part…
Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part of the government of Christian princes and popes, and a true account of the most troubling controversies and heresies till the Reformation ... / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed by B. Griffin for Thomas Simmons, 1680
Church-History OF BISHOPS And their COUNCILS ABRIDGED, &c. › Chapter 9
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.
§ 88. It's worth the noting as to the credit of Council Records,1 which Binnius there saith, (p. 427.) [If this Council as it now is extant, may without temerity be rejected, all Councils by the same reason may be rejected which Surius hath gathered from the Catholic Libraries.] He confesseth that the rest are no surer than this, and yet that Baronius, Bellarmine, by the generality or number of Historians consent, do confess that there was by this Council a rejection of the Conc. 2d Nicene, which is now here to be found in it.
§ 88. It's worth the noting as to the credit of Council Records,1 which Binnius there saith, (p. 427.) [If this Council as it now is extant, may without temerity be rejected, all Councils by the same reason may be rejected which Surius hath gathered from the Catholick Libraries.] He confesseth that the rest are no surer than this, and yet that Baronius, Bellarmine, by the generality or number of Historians consent, do confess that there was by this Council a rejection of the Conc. 2d Nicene, which is now here to be found in it.
- 1☞
§ 89. The Council at Frankford determined that Christ was not a Servant, Servitute poenali Deo subjectus,1 subject to God by penal Servitude. The present agreement of Christians, taketh this for Socinianism and Heresy: Christ suffered for our sins; his subjection to Poverty, Reproach, the Cross, and many works, (as Fasting, being carried about by Satan, and tempted, Mat. 4. 1. washing his Disciples feet, travelling on foot, being subject to his Mother, and to Princes, paying Tribute, &c.) we suppose were part of his Humiliation. The Holiness and Obedience was good, and no Penalty: But the matter of that Obedience was the Cross and Suffering, which is Malum Naturae. And if this was no punishment (voluntarily accepted by his Sponsion) how was Christ our Surety, bearing our Transgressions? how suffered he for our sins? Is not suffering for sin, even of others, penal? Is not the denial of Christ's penal Service and Suffering, a denial of his Satisfaction and our Redemption? You see how easy it is to find Heresy and Infidelity itself in unskilful words; and yet it's like the Speakers meant better than they spake.