A27045:282
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.
8. Your eighth proof is this [The like is written to the Pope by the Council of Ephesus in the Case of John of Antioch: Concil. Ephes. p. 2. Act. 5.] Reply. 1. The first Council at Ephesus (which no doubt you mean) is in Binnius enough to make a considerable Volume, and divided into six Tomes, and each of those into Chapters, and not into Acts: And if you expect that I should exactly read six Tomes in Folio before I can answer your several sentences or shreds, you will put me on a twelve-months work to answer a few sheets of Paper. If you mean by [p. 3.] [Tom. 2.] and by [Act. 5.] [Cap. 5.] then I must tell you there is not a word of that you say, nor like it. Only there is reference to Celestines and Cyril's Epistles; and Celestine in his Epistle recited Tom. 1. cap. 17. threatens Nestorius, that if he repent not, he will excommunicate him, and they will have no more communion with him, which others did as well as he; but not a word of John Bishop of Antioch there. Nor can I find any such thing in the 4. Tome, where John's cause is handled. Indeed the Notes of your ⟨p. 142⟩Historian divide the Council into Sessions: But in his fifth Session there is nothing of John, but of Nestorius. And in the 4. Sess. John and his Party excommunicate Cyril, Memnon, and theirs. And it was the Council that suspended first, and after excommunicated John. And it is the Emperor to whom he appeals. Indeed your Annotator in Sess. 6. mentions some words of Juvenal's; that he should at least have regarded the Roman Legates, it being the custom that his Church be directed by that: But I see no proof he brings of those words; and it is known, that Cyril of Alexandria did preside, and subscribed before the Roman Legates, even to the several Letters of the Synod, as you may see in Tom. 2. cap. 23. & passim.
8. Your eighth proof is this [The like is written to the Pope by the Council of Ephesus in the Case of Iohn of Antioch: Concil. Ephes. p. 2. Act. 5.] Reply. 1. The first Council at Ephesus (which no doubt you mean) is in Binnius enough to make a considerable Volume, and divided into six Tomes, and each of those into Chapters, and not into Acts: And if you expect that I should exactly read six Tomes in Folio before I can answer your severall sentences or shreds, you will put me on a twelve-moneths work to answer a few sheets of Paper. If you mean by [p. 3.] [Tom. 2.] and by [