A27035:482
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. 18. And what if the name of Government or the Keys had been put in, when it is denied in its essential part? I have proved out of Cousins Tables, Zouch, and the Canons and actual Judgment and Practice of the Bishop., that Government or Jurisdiction is denied to them: And instanced in many and most acts in which it doth consist, in my Treatise of Episcopacy. And this being my question, (whether the English frame depose not the ancient Churches (which had every one their own Pastor with the power of the Keys) and so the ancient Offices and Discipline.) I am not now concerned about the General Archiepiscopal Power of the Diocesans.
Sect. 18. And what if the name of Government or the Keys had been put in, when it is denyed in its essential part? I have proved out of Cousins Tables, Zouch, and the Canons and actual Judgment and Practice of the Bishop., that Government or Jurisdiction is denyed to them: And instanced in many and most acts in which it doth consist, in my Treatise of Episcopacy. And this being my question, (whether the English frame depose not the ancient Churches (which had every one their own Pastor with the power of the Keys) and so the ancient Offices and Discipline.) I am not now concerned about the General Archiepiscopal Power of the Diocesans.
Sect. 19. p. 269. He saith (that while the Apostles lived it is probable there were no fixed Bishops, or but few.) Ans. Mark this Reader. 1. If so, then while they lived, there were but twelve or thirteen Bishops in the World, if any. And were then no more Churches that had governing Pastors? 2. Then if it cannot be proved that the Apostles were fixed Bishops, but ambulatory Apostles, there were none in the World in their times. 3. Then the Angels of the seven Churches were Apostles (reprehended by Christ) or mere Presbyters, or of the few excepted Bishops. Why then doth he himself elsewhere argue that there were Bishops then, because these Cities were Metropoles? 4. See what concord is between the chief Doctors of the Church of England. Dr. Hammond saith that it cannot be proved that there were any Presbyters but Bishops in Scripture times: and supposeth the Episcopal Party of his mind. This Dr. saith, (It's probable there were no fixed Bishops, or but few. And so they differ. 1. Of the sense of the Texts that mention Presbyters and Bishops. 2. And about the guidance of the Churches de facto in those times. 3. And if the Apostles were not fixed Bishops of single Churches, they have no Successors