A27035:121
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
AN ANSWER TO Dean STILINGFLEETS, &c. › Chapter 2: Some Animadversions on his Preface.
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.
CHAP. II. Some Animadversions on his Preface.
§ 1. THE impartial searchers after truth, have hitherto thought that a strict method (at least agreeable to natural Logic) is more effectual than confusion or wordy popular harangues: And that the controversy should be very clearly stated before it can be profitably argued: And therefore that first all ambiguity of terms be by due explication removed, that men may not mean several things and not understand each other; and to Define and distinguish where it is needful, and then Affirm or deny, and then effectually prove. But why this worthy person doth far otherwise with us, both before and now, it is more his part than mine to give the reason: I dare not say he cannot; Nor I dare not say, he can, but will not, but all that I can say is that he doth not, and I know not why.
§ 1. THE impartial searchers after truth, have hitherto thought that a strict method (at least agreeable to natural Logick) is more effectual than confusion or wordy popular haranges: And that the controversie should be very cleerly stated before it can be profitably argued: And therefore that first all ambiguity of terms be by due explication removed, that men may not mean several things and not understand each other; and to Define and distinguish where it is needful, and then Affirm or deny, and then effectualy prove. But why this worthy person doth far otherwise with us, both before and now, it is more his part than mine to give the reason: I dare not say he cannot; Nor I dare not say, he can, but will not, but all that I can say is that he doth not, and I know not why.
§ 2. The Preface of his Book called Unreasonableness, &c. Is so much answered already by Mr. Lob, that I will not lose time by doing much to the same again: And there is a posthumous book of Dr. Worsley's called, ⟨p. 12⟩