A26911:313
The defence of the nonconformists plea for peace, or, An account of the matter…
The defence of the nonconformists plea for peace, or, An account of the matter of their nonconformity against Mr. J. Cheney's answer called The conforming nonconformist, and The nonconforming conformist : to which is added the second part in answer to Mr. Cheney's Five undertakings / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for Benjamin Alsop, 1680
A DEFENCE OF THE NON-CONFORMIST'S Plea for Peace, AGAINST Mr. J. CH… › Chapter 26
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.
§ 7. You say, 1. That the Title is no part of an Act of Parliament. 2. Nor any but the Mandatory is part of a Law.
Ans. But you might have known that we will not believe you: Why then should you thus put us off with your bare word? Though the word [Law] (as all words) be equivocally oft used, and taken for the chief part, yet as properly taken, and pertinently to our question, we will yet believe whatever you say, 1. That the prefatory Reasons, and the penal and premiant Sanctions, are parts of the Act and Law. 2. Yea, that the Title is part of the Act, if it be made and prefixed, and promulgate with it by the Legislators.
But I will tell you how you may know: If you openly deprave all the rest of the Law or Book, and some one indict you for it, the Judge may satisfy you better than I can.
But I will tell you how you may know: If you openly deprave all the rest of the Law or Book, and some one indict you for it, the Judge may satisfie you better than I can.
§ 8. But you are never so confident as where you are most overseen. You say, Our strongest reason from the Contents doth most strongly confute it self. This Title is not only part of your proof, but all that I can see. For that which you take for your proof, that [Then the Old Act of Uniformity, and consequently two Books, are consented to, and our Governors speak non-sense] is either