A26962:158
Naked popery, or, The naked falsehood of a book called The Catholic naked truth,…Naked popery, or, The naked falshood of a book called The Catholick naked truth,…
Naked popery, or, The naked falsehood of a book called The Catholic naked truth, or, The Puritan convert to apostolical Christianity, written by W.H. opening their fundamental error of unwritten tradition, and their unjust description of the Puritans, the prelatical Protestant, and the papist, and their differences, and better acquainting the ignorant of the same difference, especially what a Puritan and what a papist is / by Richard Baxter ...Naked popery, or, The naked falshood of a book called The Catholick naked truth, or, The Puritan convert to apostolical Christianity, written by W.H. opening their fundamental errour of unwritten tradition, and their unjust description of the Puritans, the prelatical Protestant, and the papist, and their differences, and better acquainting the ignorant of the same difference, especially what a Puritan and what a papist is / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed for N. Simmons, 1677
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.
Ans. This deserveth our wakeful Remarks: I. So your ⟨p. 66⟩sacred Cardinal Bertrand (in Biblioth. Patrum) said, that God had not been wise else, if he had not placed one Supreme, as his Vicar over the World. And so you can tell what God hath done, by your superlative Wit which can tell us what he ought to do. God doth all wisely: But if he had not made an Universal Head of the World under him, he had not done wisely; ergo, he hath made such an Head, &c. This is Historical Logic.
Ans. This desenveth our wakeful Remarks: I. So your ⟨p. 66⟩sacred Cardinal Bertrand (in Biblioth. Patrum) said, that God had not been wise else, if he had not placed one Supreme, as his Vicar over the World. And so you can tell what God hath done, by your superlative Wit which can tell us what he ought to do. God doth all wisely: But if he had not made an Universal Head of the World under him, he had not done wisely; ergo, he hath made such an Head, &c. This is Historical Logick.
II. But is this Monarch the Head in Civil Government, or only in Ecclesiastic? Why is your One Church no more One in answering this Question? Nay why were poor Barclay, Withrington, and such others, whose Writings Goldastus hath preserved, so hardly judged of, for pleading for Kings Supremacy in Civil Government? And if you are of their mind, tell us if you can, why God must not be judged as unreasonable and unwise, if he have not made One Universal Civil Monarch of all the World? I undertake, when you will come to a due trial, to prove, that Civil Government is such as may as well, and far better, be done by Officers and Deputies than the Ecclesiastical Government can: And I pray who is the Universal Monarch? Or who must be he? Or how must he be chosen? I would have our King have no mortal King set over him, at least without a choosing Vote. And shall they meet in a General Council of Kings to choose one? By that time the Place and Time be agreed on, and the Kings have all left their Kingdoms, and be come from the Antipodes, and the Terra Australis incognita, and all other Kingdoms to that Council to choose a Monarch of the World, they will be too old to return home again. Or shall they fight it out, till one have Conquered all the rest? Alas, who shall bear the charge of the Conquest at the Antipodes, and who shall answer for all the Blood?