A27015:351
The safe religion, or, Three disputations for the reformed catholic religion against popery proving…The safe religion, or, Three disputations for the reformed catholike religion against popery proving…
The safe religion, or, Three disputations for the reformed catholic religion against popery proving that popery is against the Holy Scriptures, the unity of the catholic church, the consent of the ancient doctors, the plainest reason, and common judgment of sense it self / by Richard Baxter.The safe religion, or, Three disputations for the reformed catholike religion against popery proving that popery is against the Holy Scriptures, the unity of the catholike church, the consent of the antient doctors, the plainest reason, and common judgment of sense it self / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed by Abraham Miller for Thomas Underhill, 1657
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.
What notorious impudency is it then in these men to tell us that we are schismatics, & separate from them and ask us, how we dare judge all our forefathers to damnation, and why we will not be of our forefathers Religion? and do not observe how they condemn themselves by all these questions. What more evident then that the Papists have separated from all other Christians in the world? How dare they condemn the far greatest part of Christians on earth to eternal torment? yea and (by plain consequence, though they will not acknowledge it) the whole Church of Christ for many hundred years? were it but one soul that they should presume to censure, they might well bethink them of an answer to Pauls Question. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant? to his own master doth he stand or fall, When Paul wrote that to the Church at Rome, he knew of none then that would justify the judging of all the world, and say, They are my servants, or subjects, and therefore I must judge them. Do the blind Papists think that any sober considerate impartial Christian can be of their mind, and damn the most of Christs Church on earth, merely because they will not be subject to the Pope of Rome. If this Article be so necessary to salvation, Why do not we find it in any ancient ⟨p. 125⟩Creed? Why must we not say [I believe in the Pope of Rome] as well as [I believe in God?] Or if indeed it be the Pope and Romanists that is meant by [the holy Catholic Church] why would not the composers of the Creed tell us so? And why did none of the ancient Churches understand and expound it so? And why did no age add the word [Roman] and call it [the holy Roman Catholic Church.]
What notorious impudency is it then in these men to tell us that we are schismaticks, & separate from them and aske us, how we dare judge all our forefathers to damnation, and why we will not be of our forefathers Religion? and do not observe how they condemne themselves by all these questions. What more evident then that the Papists have separated from all other Christians in the world? How dare they condemne the far greatest part of Christians on earth to eternal torment? yea and (by plain consequence, though they will not acknowledge it) the whole Church of Christ for many hundred years? were it but one soul that they should presume to censure, they might well bethink them of an answer to Pauls Question. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant? to his own master doth he stand or fall, When Paul wrote that to the Church at Rome, he knew of none then that would justifie the judging of all the world, and say, They are my servants, or subjects, and therefore I must judge them. Do the blind Papists think that any sober considerate impartial Christian can be of their mind, and damne the most of Christs Church on earth, meerly because they will not be subject to the Pope of Rome. If this Article be so necessary to salvation, Why do not we find it in any ancient