A27015:725
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.
When Stephen the Bishop of Rome determined judicially against rebaptizing Heretics, and excommunicated Firmilianus for not assenting, and wrote to Cyprian about it, what did they do? Did they either submit to the judgement of the Pope as infallible, or obey him as their universal Ruler? No, but Cyprian, Firmilian, with the rest of the Bishops, did unanimously join against the Popes decree.
When Stephen the Bishop of Rome determined judicially against rebaptizing Hereticks, and excommunicated Firmilianus for not assenting, and wrote to Cyprian about it, what did they do? Did they either submit to the judgement of the Pope as infallible, or obey him as their universal Ruler? No, but Cyprian, Firmilian, with the rest of the Bishops, did unanimously joyn against the Popes decree.
I would fain know by what spectacles the Papists ⟨p. 300⟩can read these words of *Cyprian's, to find out their infallibility in them? In his Epist. 74. ad Pempeium, he saith thus [I have sent a Copy of our Brother Stephens letters which when you read you will see his error more and more, who endeavoureth to maintain the cause of Heretics against the Christians, and against the Church of God. For among things which he writeth either proudly or nothing to the purpose, or contrary to himself and ignorantly and unadvisedly, he addeth, &c.] Here mentioning Pope Stephens pleading of Tradition, he saith [Whence is that tradition? Is it from the Authority of the Lord and the Gospel? Comes it from the commands and Epistles of the Apostle? For that we must do those things that are written, God testifieth and propoundeth to Joshua saying, Let not this Book of the Law depart out of thy mouth, &c. If therefore it be contained in the Gospel, Epistles or in the Acts, then let this Divine and holy Tradition be observed. — What obstinacy is this? And what presumption, to prefer Humane Tradition before Divine appointment? and not to consider that God is angry and offended as oft as humane Tradition doth lose or pass by the commands of God. As Isaiah saith, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me: in vain do they worship me, teaching the doctrines and commandments of men: and as the Lord in the Gospel reproveth them, Ye reject the commandments of God to establish your Tradition. So Paul