A27045:283
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.
2. But if your words were there to be found, what are they to your purpose? The Pope can punish the Bishop of Antioch: But how? Why by excommunicating him. True, if he deserve it: that is, by pronouncing him unfit for Christian Communion, and requiring his flock, and exhorting all others to avoid him. And thus may another Bishop do: and thus did John by Cyril of Alexandria, though he was himself of the inferior Seat: and ⟨p. 143⟩thus hath the Bishop of Constantinople done by the Bishop of Rome, and so may others.
2. But if your words were there to be found, what are they to your purpose? The Pope can punish the Bishop of Antioch: But how? Why by excommunicating him. True, if he deserve it: that is, by pronouncing him unfit for Christian Communion, and requiring his flock, and exhorting all others to avoid him. And thus may another Bishop do: and thus did Iohn by Cyril of Alexandria, though he was himself of the inferiour Seat: and ⟨p. 143⟩thus hath the Bishop of Constantinople done by the Bishop of Rome, and so may others.
9. Your ninth proof is from the applications that the Arians and Athanasius made to Julius: Ex Athan. ad solit. Epist. Julius in Lit. ad Arian. apud Athan. Apol. 1. p. 753. Theodoret. lib. 2. c. 4. Athan. Apol. 2. Zozom. l. 3. c. 7.] Reply. I marvel you urge such rancid instances, to which you have been so fully and so often answered: I refer you to Blondell de Primatu cap. 25. sect. 14, 15. Whittaker de Roman. Pontif. p. 150. & passim. Dr. Field of the Ch. l. 5. c. 35, &c. Briefly, this may show the vanity of your proof. 1. Sozomen in that place saith, that though he alone wrote for them, yet he wrote in the Name and by the consent of all the Bishops of the West. 2. The advantages of Rome by its reputation and greatness, and the number and quality of the Western Bishops, made their Judgement and Communion valuable to others: Basil before cited tells you on what grounds when Churches disagree, those that are distant are supposed to be impartial, especially when numerous. To which is added, which Basil intimates, that some hope of help from the Secular