A26911:336
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 27
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.
§ 3. Your second Reason is, The calling in the the King's Indulgence, as contrary to Law, showeth it.
§ 3. Your second Reason is, The calling in the the King's Indulgence, as contrary to Law, sheweth it.
Ans. Did they that declared it contrary to Law, declare that men may resist it by Arms?
§ 4. 3. You say, [The Judges at Westminster unanimously agree upon this sense and exposition of the Law, and their common practice no less.]
§ 4. 3. You say, [The Iudges at Westminster unanimously agree upon this sense and exposition of the Law, and their common practice no less.]
Ans. I will give you a Lawyer's Fee if you will prove it. When, and how did they ever declare any such Agreement? What practice is it that you mean? Do they commonly resist unlawfully Commissioned Soldiers by Arms? Or ⟨p. 94⟩