A26977:674
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.
(as it is in words) are as aforesaid, various, mutable, and variously understood and used. §. XV. Pag. 24. Again you are at it, [Whom do you mean by that one rare Person, whose single Judgment is to be preferred in the point of Justification, and to whom]. ⟨p. 46⟩Answ. 1. No one that knoweth not the difference between an Invididuum vagum & determinatum. 2. No one that is of so hard Metal, as in despite of the plainest words, to insinuate to the World, that these words [A few well-studied Judicious Divines] do signify only one; and that these words [One Man of extraordinary understanding and clearness], (is to be preferred before the Rulers and major Vote, in difficult speculations) do signify one individuum determinatum in the World, and that the Speaker is bound to name the Man. No one that thinketh that Pemble, who in his Vind. Grat. hath almost the very same words, said well, and that I who repeat them, am as criminal as you pretend: No one who either knoweth not, that almost all the World (even Papists) agree in this Rule, or that thinketh his judgment fit herein to bear them all down: No one who, when his abuses are brought into the open Sun-shine, will rather accuse the Light than repent. But, pag. 25. After some words to jeer away Conviction, you tell me, [We must have some better account of you, quem quibus, than what you have given us yet. I shall take leave to present our indifferent Readers with a more ingenuous and truer state of the Question, far more suitable both to my plain meaning and the clear purport of your Direction. Let the Case be this: There is One who of late hath raised much dust among us, about the grand Article of Justification; Whether it be by Faith without Works, or by Faith and Works too? All our old Renowned Divines on this side and beyond the Seas are unanimously agreed, that Justification is by Faith alone, i. e. without Works. This one Person ⟨p. 47⟩hath often published his Judgment to the contrary— so that a poor Academical Doctor may very rationally enquire of you, Who in this case is to be preferred? That one, or those many? Answ. There was a Disputant who would undertake to conquer any Adversary: When he was asked, How? He said he would pour out upon him so many and so gross untruths, as should leave him nothing to answer congruously, but a Mentiris;
(as it is in words) are as aforesaid, various, mutable, and variously understood and used. §. XV. Pag. 24. Again you are at it, [Whom do you mean by that one rare Person, whose single Judgment is to be preferred in the point of Justification, and to whom].