A27015:551
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.
5. We grant that the Apostles Miraculous works did sufficiently prove, not some only, but all the Doctrine which they delivered to the Church or any part of it, in the name of Christ and as his: For though they confirmed only those Doctrines which were delivered in execution of their Commission, yet seeing God would not have set to this seal, if they had gone beyond and against their Commission, therefore it also assureth us that they kept close to it. But this proved them not infallible before they received that Commission, nor afterward in any point which they should deliver as their private opinion, which they fathered, not on the Inspiration of the Spirit. The Apostles were not infallible about Christs Death, Resurrection, and Ascension, when they understood them not: The Disciples were not infallible about the Acceptableness of Infants to Christ, when they forbade them to be brought. Thomas was not infallible about Christs Resurrection when he believed it not. Peter was not infallible when he gave Christ that Satanical counsel, for which he was •antum non (almost) excommunicated, Mat 16.22, 23. Even presently after the great promise to him; Nor when he denied that he knew Christ, with curses and oaths; nor when he dissembled and Barnabas with him, Gal. 2.
5. We grant that the Apostles Miraculous works did sufficiently prove, not some onely, but all the Doctrine which they delivered to the Church or any part of it, in the name of Christ and as his: For though they confirmed onely those Doctrines which were delivered in execution of their Commission, yet seeing God would not have set to this seal, if they had gone beyond and against their Commission, therefore it also assureth us that they kept close to it. But this proved them not infallible before they received that Commission, nor afterward in any point which they should deliver as their private opinion, which they fathered, not on the Inspiration of the Spirit. The Apostles were not infallible about Christs Death, Resurrection, and Ascension, when they understood them not: The Disciples were not infallible about the Acceptableness of Infants to Christ, when they forbad them to be brought. Thomas was not infallible about Christs Resurrection when he believed it not. Peter was not infallible when he gave Christ that Satanical councel, for which he was •antum non (almost) excommunicated, Mat 16.22, 23. Even presently after the great promise to him; Nor when he denyed that he knew Christ, with curses and oathes; nor when he dissembled and Barnabas with him,