A27035:292
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.
Sect. 19. to p. 36, 37. We also hold that whosoever separateth from the Church of England, 1. As having not that Preaching and Sacraments which are of necessity to Salvation. 2. Or as not professing true saving Faith, doth by consequence separate from all Churches in the world; because they have all the same Word, Sacraments, and Christian Faith. And to this Mr. Jacobs Argument is good, p. 38. (though he was the man that answered Downam's Sermon for Bishops, and esteemed one of the first Independents:) And Mr. Balls words to the same purpose, and the second Supposition p. 39. we grant, and think verily that the late Conformists have said more against the truth of the Church of England, than we; yea, that we are the defenders of it against the Brownists and them, Ball, Bradshaw, Gifford, Hildersham, &c. cited by him, defend it as we do, and better than such as Dr. Heylin, Thorndike, Mr. Dodwel, and such others. Did he think any of this concerned me?
Sect. 20. Yes, for p. 74. he saith, [We would blind the Reader by finding out the disparity of some Circumstances; but not one of us can deny that it was their judgment, that the holding separate Congregations for worship, where there was an agreement in Doctrine and the substantials of Religion, was unlawful and schismatical.]
Answ. Its pity so seeing a Dr. should tempt men to be so blind, 1. As to think all the differences which I have named, inconsiderable. 2. And to go on to abuse themselves and others, with the ambiguous word [Separate] no better explained. 3. And to think the other causes before and after named of some sort of Separation, to be insufficient; and I am sorry for the Dr. if this be his own Profession, that he would tell any lie, or commit any other sin, or forsake any other part of Religion, rather than separate to other Assemblies, from a Church that agreed in Doctrine and the substantials of Worship with him. The Presbyterians then are sure of him, if they were but in possession; and it seems in Muscovy he would forsake preaching. But what if the King licensed a preaching Church, would he refuse the use of it for fear of separating from a mere reading Church.