A27045:278
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.
5. Your next instance is, that [the Council of Sardis determined that no Bishop deposed by other neighbouring Bishops, pretending to be heard again, was to have any successor appointed till the case were defined by the Pope: Conc. Sard. cap. 4. cited by Athanas. Apol. 2. pag. 753.] Reply. It seems you are well acquainted with the Council, that know not of what place it was! It was the Council at Sardica, and not at Sardis, that you would mean. Sardis was a City of Lydia, apud Tmolum montem, olim Regio Craesi, inter Thiatiram & Philadelphiam. But this Sardica was a City of Thrace in the confines of the higher Mysia, inter Naissum ⟨p. 136⟩Myssiae & Philippopolim Thraciae. As to the instance, 1. This Council was by Augustine rejected as heretical, though I defend not his opinion. 2. It was of so little note and authority, that it was not known to the Council of Carthage to have the next antecedent Canons (which you would not have omitted if you had read them, its like) in which your writers glory as their chiefest strength; and which Bellarmine thinks Pope Zosimus called, the Nicene Canon: or rather is it not suspicious that this Canon is but forged, when those Carthage Fathers plainly say, In nullo Patrum concilio decretum invenimus; mentioning that antecedent Canon proposed by Hosius, to which this mentioned by you proposed by Gaudentius is but an addition or supplement. And it is not like that all these African Fathers could be ignorant of those Canons of Sardica, when such abundance of African Bishops were at the Council, and that but about 50 years before: you may see in Binnius how hard a strait he is put to, to give any tolerable reason of this, and only saith, that its like some how the Canons were lost: sure Tradition was then grown untrusty. Your Cardinal Cusanus de Concord. Cath. l. 2. c. 25. makes a doubt whether ⟨p. 137⟩the Canon of appeals be indeed a Canon of this Council. 3. But grant it be, yet take these observations, and you shall find small cause of confidence in that Canon.
5. Your next instance is, that [the Council of Sardis determined that no Bishop deposed by other neighbouring Bishops, pretending to be heard again, was to have any successor appointed till the case were defined by the Pope: Conc. Sard. cap. 4. cited by Athanas. Apol. 2. pag. 753.] Reply. It seems you are well acquainted with the Council, that know not of what place it was! It was the Council at Sardica, and not at Sardis, that you would mean. Sardis was a City of Lydia, apud Tmolum montem, olim Regio Craesi, inter Thiatiram & Philadelphiam. But this Sardica was a City of Thrace in the confines of the higher Mysia, inter Naissum