A26982:577
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. I. And indeed, Were (not only Constantius and Valens, but also) Theodosius II. Arcadius, Zeno, Basiliscus, Anastasius, and many such, Heathen Persecutors? And did not the Bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome, Constantinople, and many hundred other Bishops, disobey them, and many by Arms resist them? And is it not as bad to resist Christian Emperors, as Heathens? I think it was not well done.
What Historical Proof can convince this sort of Men?
2. But see what their Obedience amounteth to. Who is to be Judge whether their Rulers be so bad, as that the Bishops and People may disobey them? Must the Rulers themselves be Judges, or every Subject for himself? They dare not answer it without Fraud and Confusion.
But he saith, [If one read the Preamble to the late Acts, you may see that the Cause of making them, was not only the late dreadful Experience that the Nation had of the Confusions caused by the preaching of such Men, but their present Endeavours to reduce us to the like again]