A27015:49
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
To the reader: To the Literate Romanists that will read this Book.
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.
And can you think it any injury to you if from hence I interpret, not only many of your Historical writings (such as the Image of both Churches, &c.) but also much of the jug•ing that is in England at this day. If you put your selves in the Garb of Quakers, Enthusiasts, Anabaptists, &c. and pretend that you are of their opinions, and deny your selves to be what you are, as long as you think that these lies are pious, and rather honour God, then greatly dishonour him, and rather do good to others, by promoting the Catholic cause, then notably injure them, can any man say, that's of your opinion, that they are against the Law of God? And why call you that a venial sin, which is against no Law, when sin is a transgression of the Law, and where there •s no Law there is no transgression, 1 Joh. 3.4. Rom. 4.15. And why say you •hat veniam meretur, when yet you say that •aenam aeternam non meretur! How can there •e venia sine merito vel debito paenae? What •eed you any pardon of that which was never •eserved by you? And what need you ask forgiveness of these sins, or be beholden to God •or it, if the punishment to be forgiven were ⟨image 17⟩never due? Will you beg the remission of a debt which is no debt? Aquinas makes venial and mortal sin to differ as Reparabile & irreparabile; because from an inward principle the one may be repaired, but the other not without infused supernatural grace. But is it ever the less sin, because it is reparabile? Nay what needs it reparation if it be not a transgression? But what is this Reparation that he speaks of? Is it the remission of the guilt and punishment? No sure: for eternal punishment he saith, it deserveth not; and internal principles do not sure forgive the punishment of sin? Can we forgive our selves? What is it then? Is it the removing of the blot? No: properly peccatum veniale non inducit maculam, as before said? Is it that venial sin is easier conquered and forsaken then mortal? No sure: For Aquinas tells us that a man may live for a little while without venial sin, but not long; but without mortal sin,