A26962:483
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.
V. If it be the Churches after acceptance; then, 1. He was an Usurper before. 2. And what or who is that Accepting Church? Sure they that must make a Pope of no Pope, by after acceptance, should have the antecedent Election: Else Popes must all be first Usurpers, before they are true Popes. But, 1. If it must be the major part of the Christian World, then there is no Pope, because two parts are against him. If it must be one Sect of Christians only like the Papists, that will but think themselves the Church, or better than the rest; who is it that can prove their title to this Choice? And must it be All of them, or but Part? If All, 1. How shall we ever know it? Never such a thing was tried. 2. And then there was no Pope in the 40 or 50 years Schism. If it must be Part, how shall we ever know which part it must be? If the major or the melior, how shall it be ever tried and known in a division? None to this day knoweth who had the major or melior part in many a Schism.
V. If it be the Churches after acceptance; then, 1. He was an Usurper before. 2. And what or who is that Accepting Church? Sure they that must make a Pope of no Pope, by after acceptance, should have the antecedent Election: Else Popes must all be first Usurpers, before they are true Popes. But, 1. If it must be the major part of the Christian World, then there is no Pope, because two parts are against him. If it must be one Sect of Christians only like the Papists, that will but think themselves the Church, or better than the rest; who is it that can prove their title to this Choice? And must it be All of them, or but Part? If All, 1. How shall we ever know it? Never such a thing was tryed. 2. And then there was no Pope in the 40 or 50 years Schism. If it must be Part, how shall we ever know which part it must be? If the major or the melior, how shall it be ever tryed and known in a division? None to this day knoweth who had the major or melior part in many a Schism.
If they say that silent non-opposition is Consent. I Answer, That's a known Falsehood, when most men, even a thousand to one, have neither Call nor Opportunity to signify their dissent effectually; and when no wise men that love their time and peace, will run to Rome by thousands