A27035:1028
A second true defence of the mere nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and…A second true defence of the meer nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and…
A second true defence of the mere nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and history of Dr. Edward Stillingfleet ... clearly proving that it is (not sin but) duty 1. not wilfully to commit the many sins of conformity, 2. not sacrilegiously to forsake the preaching of the Gospel, 3. not to cease public worshipping of God, 4. to use needful pastoral helps for salvation ... / written by Richard Baxter ... ; with some notes on Mr. Joseph Glanviles Zealous and impartial Protestant, and Dr. L. Moulins character.A second true defence of the meer nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and history of Dr. Edward Stillingfleet ... clearly proving that it is (not sin but) duty 1. not wilfully to commit the many sins of conformity, 2. not sacrilegiously to forsake the preaching of the Gospel, 3. not to cease publick worshipping of God, 4. to use needful pastoral helps for salvation ... / written by Richard Baxter ... ; with some notes on Mr. Joseph Glanviles Zealous and impartial Protestant, and Dr. L. Moulins character.
London: printed for Nevil Simons, 1681
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.
2. You seem to vindicate the Book called the Friendly Debate, I shall shortly further tell you of somewhat in it to be repented of. And if partiality made not repentance a very difficult work you would have no need herein of a Monitor. But you may think me partial, though I acknowledge your civilities to me: I can show you a Manuscript of one both impartial and truly judicious, even the late Judge Hale, expressing so great dislike of that Debate and the Eccl. Policy, as tending ⟨p. 188⟩to the injury of Religion it self, that he wisheth the Authors would openly profess that they write for themselves, and no more so abusively pretend it is for Religion.
2. You seem to vindicate the Book called the Friendly Debate, I shall shortly further tell you of somewhat in it to be repented of. And if partiality made not repentance a very difficult work you would have no need herein of a Monitor. But you may think me partial, though I acknowledg your civilities to me: I can shew you a Manuscript of one both impartial and truly judicious, even the late Judge Hale, expressing so great dislike of that Debate and the Eccl. Policy, as tending ⟨p. 188⟩to the injury of Religion it self, that he wisheth the Authors would openly profess that they write for themselves, and no more so abusively pretend it is for Religion.
3. You say in this Picture that [If L. du Moulin had that honest zeal in him to which he pretends, he would have handled Mr. Baxter as smartly, &c.
Answ. There may be other reasons than want of honest zeal: But do you not here show that it is the persons more than his act that offended you in his reproof? Could you judge it honest zeal had it been to others? pag. 16.