A27035:471
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 7: The Reply to his Third Part: The beginning.
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. 7. p. 262. He accuseth me of [Rage and Bitterness] for saying that [if he will plead for so much Presumption, Profanation of Gods name, Usurpation, Uncharitableness and Schism, as to own their Churches to be new, and devised without Gods Authority, and yet may in his name be imposed on the World, and all Dissenters called Schismatics,] I leave him. And first he feigneth that I charge him with this; which is untrue, unless he will charge himself with it. But why do I put in [If you will so plead.] Ans. Because he accused me for saying the contrary, viz. [that so to devise, and so to impose, is worse, &c. But because I know not why he accused so plain a truth, I said [If you do so.] But he now tells me that he (quoted it to show that I looked on all Churches beyond Parochial, as Churches merely of mans devising,) which is another untruth confessed by himself, who before had this up and cited my own words to the contrary; viz. that I believe the Catholic Church and deny not National associated Churches; nor Archbishops that put not down the particular Churches, Pastors and Discipline: one mistake is his excuse for another. Had he meant as aforesaid, had my words been Rage, or necessary confutation?
Sect. 7. p. 262. He accuseth me of [Rage and Bitterness] for saying that [if he will plead for so much Presumption, Profanation of Gods name, Usurpation, Uncharitableness and Schism, as to own their Churches to be new, and devised without Gods Authority, and yet may in his name be imposed on the World, and all Dissenters called Schismaticks,] I leave him. And first he feigneth that I charge him with this; which is untrue, unless he will charge himself with it. But why do I put in [If you will so plead.] Ans. Because he accused me for saying the contrary, viz. [that so to divise, and so to impose, is worse, &c. But because I know not why he accused so plain a truth, I said [If you do so.] But he now tells me that he (quoted it to shew that I looked on all Churches beyond Parochial, as Churches meerly of mans devising,) which is another untruth confessed by himself, who before had this up and cited my own words to the contrary; viz. that I believe the Catholick Church and deny not National associated Churches; nor Archbishops that put not down the particular Churches, Pastors and Discipline: one mistake is his excuse for another. Had he meant as aforesaid, had my words been Rage, or necessary confutation?