A26982:218
Richard Baxter's penitent confession and his necessary vindication in answer to a book called…
Richard Baxter's penitent confession and his necessary vindication in answer to a book called The second part of the mischiefs of separation, written by an unnamed author with a preface to Mr. Cantianus D. Minimis, in answer to his letter which extorted this publication.
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1691
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. But the Accuser confuteth all this by telling us, that it began in King James days between the Regians and the Republicans, between ⟨p. 31⟩Prerogative and Privilege, by a Party that would have persuaded the King, to War for the Palatinate, &c.
§ 5. But the Accuser confuteth all this by telling us, that it began in King James days between the Regians and the Republicans, between ⟨p. 31⟩Prerogative and Priviledge, by a Party that would have perswaded the King, to War for the Palatinate, &c.
And why began he it not in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, who more overtopped Parliaments than King James did? I perceive by this Man, that none must pass for Conformable and Episcopal, that are not of Sibthorp and Mainwaring's Mind, and renounce not Parliamentary Privileges, and give not up Property and Liberty to the mere will of the King called Prerogative. And so all our Parliaments till the Dividing and Tearing Long one, were not of the Church of England: And what then was that Church? Was it a Christian Kingdom, and yet was the Kingdom Representative no part of it? Are none but Leeches, Sangutsugi's, Men of Blood, (that must have all lye and die in Goals among Rogues, that will not Swear, and Subscribe, and Declare and Covenant, and Practise, all that they impose) of the Church of England? What a Reproach is this to such a Church?
And why began he it not in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, who more overtopt Parliaments than King James did? I perceive by this Man, that none must pass for Conformable and Episcopal, that are not of Sibthorp and Mainwaring's Mind, and renounce not Parliamentary Priviledges, and give not up Property and Liberty to the meer will of the King called Prerogative. And so all our Parliaments till the Dividing and Tearing Long one, were not of the Church of England: And what then was that Church? Was it a Christian Kingdom, and yet was the Kingdom Representative no part of it? Are none but Leeches, Sangutsugi's, Men of Blood, (that must have all lye and die in Goals among Rogues, that will not Swear, and Subscribe, and Declare and Covenant, and Practise, all that they impose) of the Church of England? What a Reproach is this to such a Church?