A27045:253
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.
Your next reason against me, is, because [They cannot be parts of the Catholic Church, unless Arians, and Pelagians, and Donatists be parts] and so Heretics and Schismatics be parts.] Reply 1. You know sure, that your own Divines are not agreed whether Heretics and Schismatics are parts of the Church. And if they were, yet it is not de fide with you, as not determined by the Pope. If it be, then all yours are Heretics that are for the affirmative (Bellarmine nameth you some of them) If it be not, then how can you be sure its true, and so impose it on me, that they are no parts.
Your next reason against me, is, because [They cannot be parts of the Catholike Church, unless Arrians, and Pelagians, and Donatists be parts] and so Hereticks and Schismaticks be parts.] Reply 1. You know sure, that your own Divines are not agreed whether Hereticks and Schismaticks are parts of the Church. And if they were, yet it is not de fide with you, as not determined by the Pope. If it be, then all yours are Hereticks that are for the affirmative (Bellarmine nameth you some of them) If it be not, then how can you be sure its true, and so impose it on me, that they are no parts.
2. Arians are no Christians, as denying ⟨p. 114⟩that which is essential to Christ, and so to Christianity. Pelagianism is a thing that you are not agreed among your selves of the true nature of. Many of the Dominicans and Jansenists think the Jesuits Pelagianize, or Semipelagianize at least. I hope you will not shut them out. Donatists were schismatics, because they divided in the Catholic Church, and not absolutely from it▪ and because they divided from the particular Churches about them that held the most universal external Communion. I think they were still members of the universal Church: but I'll not contend with any that will plead for his uncharitable denial. Its nothing to our case.
2. Arrians are no Christians, as denying ⟨p. 114⟩