A27045:114
The successive visibility of the church of which the Protestants are the soundest members…
The successive visibility of the church of which the Protestants are the soundest members I. defended against the opposition of Mr. William Johnson, II. proved by many arguments / by Richard Baxter ; whereunto is added 1. an account of my judgement to Mr. J. how far heretics are or are not in the church, 2. Mr. Js. explication of the most used terms, with my queries thereupon, and his answer and my reply, 3. an appendix about successive ordination, 4. letters between me and T.S., a papist, with a narrative of the success.The successive visibility of the church of which the Protestants are the soundest members I. defended against the opposition of Mr. William Johnson, II. proved by many arguments / by Richard Baxter ; whereunto is added 1. an account of my judgement to Mr. J. how far hereticks are or are not in the church, 2. Mr. Js. explication of the most used terms, with my queries thereupon, and his answer and my reply, 3. an appendix about successive ordination, 4. letters between me and T.S., a papist, with a narrative of the success.
London: printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons, 1660
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.
you say that no man can be saved without your Affirmative [that the Pope is the universal Head and Governor] But we say not that no man can be saved that holdeth not our Negative, [that he is not the Vice-Christ] For one that hath the plague or leprosy may live. Therefore ⟨p. 21⟩it is you that must prove that all the Catholic Church was still of your mind. 3. And it is an Accident, and but an Accident of a smaller corrupted part of the Catholic Church that you would oblige me to prove the Negation of; and therefore it is utterly needless to my proof of a Visible Catholic Church. For I will without it prove to you a successive Visibility of the Catholic Church, from the Visibility of its Essential or Constitutive parts (of which your Pope is none.) I will prove a successive visible Church that hath still professed faith in God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and been united to the Universal Head, and had particular Pastors, some fixed, some unfixed, and held all essential to a Christian. And proving this, I have proved the Church of which I am a member. To prove that England hath been so long a Kingdom, requireth no more but to prove the two Essential parts, King and Subjects, to have so long continued united. It requireth not that I prove that if ever either h••d, or opposed a Vice-King. This is our plain case. If a man have a botch on one of his hands; it is not needful in order to my proving him a man heretofore, that I prove he was born and bred without it: so ⟨p. 22⟩be it I prove that he was born a man, it sufficeth. Nor is it needful that I prove the other hand always to have been free, in order to prove it a member of the body: It sufficeth that I prove it to have been still a hand.
you say that no man can be saved without your Affirmative [that the Pope is the universal Head and Governor] But we say not that no man can be saved that holdeth not our Negative, [that he is not the Vice-Christ] For one that hath the plague or leprosie may live. Therefore ⟨p. 21⟩it is you that must prove that all the Catholike Church was still of your mind. 3. And it is an Accident, and but an Accident of a small•r corrupted part of the Catholike Church that you would oblige me to prove the Negation of; and therefore it is utterly needless to my proof of a Visible Catholike Church. For I will without it prove to you a successive Visibility of the Catholike Church, from the Visibility of its Essential or Constitutive parts (of which your Pope is none.) I will prove a successive visible Church that hath still professed faith in God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and been united to the Universal Head, and had particular Pastors, some fixed, some unfixed, and held all essential to a Christian. And proving this, I have proved the Church of which I am a member. To prove that England hath been so long a Kingdom, requireth no more but to prove the two Essential parts, King and Subjects, to have so long continued united. It requireth not that I prove that if ever either hd, or opposed a Vice-King. This is our plain case. If a man have a botch on one of his hands; it is not needful in order to my proving him a man heretofore, that I prove he was born and bred without it: so