A26982:434
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.
Ans. So far were they from this, that they were cast out immediately for Voting the satisfactoriness of the Kings Commissions, and his return to London: And upon their readmission they voted their own dissolution that a free Parliament might be called, and were never for the Engagement, but abhorred it, though the Royalists at their Compositions ordinarily took it (when I wrote against it.)
But he asketh, [Did not some of them provide an Oath of Abjuration, &c.] Ans. We can better tell what Parliaments do, than what [some of them do.] How know I what odd or secret Act of any particular Persons this Man might know of? But I suspect this [some] was some one or more of the excluded Rump. But had he no pretence for this notorious Lie against the Secluded Members? None visible but that which hath filled his Book with falsehood; wrath and blind prejudice, and inconsiderate haste: That which was done by the restored Rump he falsely ⟨p. 60⟩saith was done by the Secluded Members, when it was done before their restoring. But they justified their first War against the Delinquent Army You may find him punctually confuted in Whitlock's Memorials. When things so notoriously false are thus confidently vented, which the public notice of the Kingdom confuteth, what credit doth his Accusation deserve of me and my unknown actions, and my thoughts, whom I suppose he never saw, if the Author be Long of Exeter, as fame reporteth.
But he asketh, [Did not some of them provide an Oath of Abjuration, &c.] Ans. We can better tell what Parliaments do, than what [some of them do.] How know I what odd or secret Act of any particular Persons this Man might know of? But I suspect this [some] was some one or more of the excluded Rump. But had he no pretence for this notorious Lie against the Secluded Members? None visible but that which hath filled his Book with falshood; wrath and blind prejudice, and inconsiderate haste: That which was done by the restored Rump he falsly ⟨p. 60⟩saith was done by the Secluded Members, when it was done before their restoring. But they justified their first War against the Delinquent Army You may find him punctually confuted in Whitlock's Memorials. When things so notoriously false are thus confidently vented, which the publick notice of the Kingdom confuteth, what credit doth his Accusation deserve of me and my unknown actions, and my thoughts, whom I suppose he never saw, if the Author be Long of Exeter, as fame reporteth.