A26911:315
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.
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 ⟨p. 90⟩worse than non-sense, or I understand not sense from non-sense. I have called before for your proof, that [Two Acts are two Common-Prayer-Books] when the latter establisheth the former expressly, as binding only to the New Book! The words are [Be it enacted—That the several good Laws and Statutes of this Realm, which have been formerly made, and are now in force for the Uniformity of Prayer, &c. shall stand in full force and strength, to all intents and purposes whatsoever, for the establishing and confirming of the said Book entitled, &c. herein before mentioned, and shall be applied, practised, and put in use for the punishing of all offences contrary to the said Laws, with relation to the Book aforesaid, and no other.] And they have caused the Act of Elizabeth, to be bound with this Book, as it was with the Old: And doth this infer two Books from two Acts, &c? Alas Brother! that we should trouble and wrong the world at this rate of unadvised confidence. This old Canonical Subscription is also continued; and yet it is here enacted, that it shall mean only this New Book, and no other.
§ 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 Governours speak non-sense] is either