A27015:64
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.
To conclude, concerning these following Disputations, I need not tell you, that they are none of the elaborate writings of any champion of the Protestant cause, challenging your Answer: but a few hasty (yet considered) lines, delivered in a monthly meeting of a few Country Ministers, for mutual edification, by one that never pretended to much skill or will for such Disputes. If any of you have a mind to try your strength, we boldly challenge you to do it on those mentioned by me in the end: to whom let me add Dr. Craken•horpe, especially against Spalatens▪ and Dallaeus on several particular subjects, as de Paenis & sa•i•fact de Imaginitus, de I•juniis and the rest. I pretend not in so small room to handle the particular differences between you and us, but to give my general reasons against you▪ and to choose out one particular about our foundation and yours. For I had read in Costerus Enchir. c. de sum. Pont. p. 151.152. That No men Petrae plus includat quam fundamentum▪ fundamenta quippe edificium sustinent, Petra aut•m s•u Rupes ipsa fundamenta, & Apostoli ally fundamenta dicuntur. Petrus vero ut Rupes solidissima, etiam fundamenta ipsa continet, & • in errors & vitia labantur detinet authoritat• ⟨image 25⟩pastorali.] And Skulkenius saith Apol. pro Bell▪ c. 6. p. 255. Pontificia potestas est veiut cardo, fundamentum (& ut uno verbo omnia complectar) summa fidei Christianae.
To conclude, concerning these following Disputations, I need not tell you, that they are none of the elaborate writings of any champion of the Protestant cause, challenging your Answer: but a few hasty (yet considered) lines, delivered in a monthly meeting of a few Country Ministers, for mutual edification, by one that never pretended to much skill or will for such Disputes. If any of you have a mind to try your strength, we boldy challenge you to do it on those mentioned by me in the end: to whom let me add Dr. Crakenhorpe, especially against Spalatens and Dallaeus on several particular subjects, as de Paenis & saifact de Imaginitus, de Ijuniis and the rest. I pretend not in so small room to handle the particular differences between you and us, but to give my general reasons against you and to choose out one particular about our foundation and yours. For I had read in Costerus Enchir. c. de sum. Pont. p. 151.152. That No men Petrae plus includat quam fundamentum fundamenta quippe edificium sustinent, Petra autm su Rupes ipsa fundamenta, & Apostoli ali fundamenta dicuntur. Petrus vero ut Rupes solidissima, etiam fundamenta ipsa continet, & in errores & vitia labantur detinet authoritat