A26911:485
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 32
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. III. I told you by word of Mouth, that your Catholicon of trusting, to the Bishops ⟨p. 128⟩Exposition of the Book (yea, to his silence, so gentle and tractable are you become) is no relief to you for expounding the Assent, Consent. Subscription against the obligation of the Vow, and about Arms, &c. because these are part of the Act of Uniformity; and you say, that Act is no part of the Book. To this you Print your Answer, that you [Have another string to your Bow.] viz. That the Bishop is by Law the Ordinary, to Ordain and take Subscriptions, and may admit Ministers to subscribe these Tests with such Explications, Meanings, and Allowances, as will well stand with the words justly and fairly construed.
Ans. 1. The Bishop is not made the Expounder of the Law, but the Receiver of your Subscription according to the Law.
2. If you will confound Indulgent Connivance, and Conformity, must we do so too? This is Mr. Humphrey's project, And I freely confess to you, That if you can meet with an Indulgent Bishop, it's a fairer way to intromit a Dissenter, than any that you have named in your Book. All words are ambiguous: The sense is the Soul of them. If, e.g. I were commanded to say that [The Scripture is not God's Word,] and I had leave to expound it;