A26977:672
Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants…Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants…
Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sense [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false devised sense by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...Of the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers in what sence [sic] sound Protestants hold it and of the false divised sence by which libertines subvert the Gospel : with an answer to some common objections, especially of Dr. Thomas Tully whose Justif. Paulina occasioneth the publication of this / by Richard Baxter a compassionate lamenter of the Church's wounds caused by hasty judging ... and by the theological wars which are hereby raised and managed ...
London: printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Robinson, 1675
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.
and quibble him into satisfaction by telling him, that Definitio & definitum sunt idem re. We know and express things narrowly by Names, and largely and distinctly by Definitions: The Definition here, is Explicatio nominis, (as Animal ⟨p. 43⟩rationale, of the name Homo); and both Name and Definition, as they are Verba mentis vel oris, or Verborum significatio, are surely divers from the things named and defined, known and expressed; unless by the Thing you mean only the Knowledge, or Notion of the Thing. Therefore though Cui competit definitio eidem quoque competit definitum, & contra, & quod convenit definitioni convenit definito: Yet say not that Imputed Righteousness in Re, is the same with the Definition, as it is the Definers act. By this time you have helped Men to understand by an Instance, why St. Paul so much warneth Christians to take heed lest any deceive them by vain Philosophy, even by Sophistry, and abused, arbitrary Notions. Remember, Sir, that our Case is of grand Importance; As it is stated in my Direct. 42. which you assaulted; it is [Whether if the Question were of the Object of Predestination, of the nature of the Will's liberty, Divine concourse, and determining way of Grace, of the Definition of Justification, Faith, &c. a few well studied Divines are not here to be preferred before Authority, and the major Vote. Such are my words. I assert, 1. That the Defining of Justification, Faith, &c. is a work of Art. 2. And I have many and many times told the World (which you seem to strike at) that Christians do not differ so much in their Real conceptions of the Matter, as they do in their Definitions. 1. Because Definitions are made up of Ambiguous words, whose Explication they are not agreed in; and almost all Words are ambiguous till explained; and ambiguous Words are not fit to define, or ⟨p. 44⟩be defined, till explained. And, 2. Because both selecting fit terms, and explaining them, and ordering them, are works of Art, in which Men are unequal; and there is as great variety of Intellectual Conceptions, as of Faces. 3. And I have often said, That a Knowledge intuitive, or a Simple apprehension of a thing as Sensate, or an Internal experience, or Reflect act, and a general notion of some things, may prove the truth of Grace, and save Souls, and make us capable of Christian Love and Communion, as being true saving Knowledge. 4.
and quibble him into satisfaction by telling him, that Definitio & definitum sunt idem re. We know and express things narrowly by Names, and largely and distinctly by Definitions: The Definition here, is Explicatio nominis, (as Animal