A27015:535
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.
The second Text which he cites to this use, is Mat. 16. [On this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it] A double argument he would fetch from hence. One from the Name Rock, the other from the nature of a Foundation, which both imply firmness. Ans. 1. Note that here is in the Text not one word of the Pope, of the Church of Rome more then any other, or of infallibility. 2. How doth he prove, that by the Rock is not meant Peters Faith, or that Doctrine which he confessed but Peter himself? 3 If he had proved it, are not all the Prophets and Apostles as ⟨p. 218⟩well as Peter called the foundation? Eph. 2.20. So that here is no more promised to him, then what was elsewhere promised and given to the rest: Only his present confession, occasioned the promise to be made expressly and particular at that time to him. 4. As the rest of the Apostles were the Foundation on which we are built, and yet their successors are not so: So though Peter were the Foundation, it followeth not that all or any of his successors are so.
The second Text which he cites to this use, is Mat. 16. [On this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it] A double argument he would fetch from hence. One from the Name Rocke, the other from the nature of a Foundation, which both imply firmeness. Ans. 1. Note that here is in the Text not one word of the Pope, of the Church of Rome more then any other, or of infallibility. 2. How doth he prove, that by the Rocke is not meant Peters Faith, or that Doctrine which he confessed but Peter himself? 3 If he had proved it, are not all the Prophets and Apostles as ⟨p. 218⟩well as Peter called the foundation? Eph. 2.20. So that here is no more promised to him, then what was elswhere promised and given to the rest: Onely his present confession, occasioned the promise to be made expresly and particular at that time to him. 4. As the rest of the Apostles were the Foundation on which we are built, and yet their successors are not so: So though Peter were the Foundation, it followeth not that all or any of his successors are so.