A27045:289
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.
And it is to be noted, that your Author Nicephorus tells you, lib. 13. cap. 31. that Chrysostoms Letters, and his fellow-Bishops also, and the Clergies of Constantinople, were all written both to the Emperor Honorius and to Innocent: And therefore you may see by that on what account it was, and what help they did expect. The Emperor was not to excommunicate, but his Letters might do much.
And it is to be noted, that your Author Nicephorus tells you, lib. 13. cap. 31. that Chrysostomes Letters, and his fellow-Bishops also, and the Clergies of Constantinople, were all written both to the Emperour Honorius and to Innocent: And therefore you may see by that on what account it was, and what help they did expect. The Emperour was not to excommunicate, but his Letters might do much.
Well, but you allege Niceph. l. 13. c. 34. to prove 1. Chrysostoms appeal: But you have better or worse eyes then I, for I can find there no such thing, but a seeking for help as aforesaid. 2. You say [Innocentius nulls his condemnation, and declares him innocent.] Ans. So might another Bishop have declared him: But how far it should ⟨p. 150⟩be regarded, was not in his power. 3. You say he excommunicates Atticus and Theophilus, and 4. Arcadius the Emperor also, and Eudoxia.] Reply. 1. If he did so and did well, another Bishop might as well have done it. Mennas excommunicated Vigilius of Rome. Excommunicating is not always an act of Jurisdiction, but a renouncing of Communion, with a Ministerial binding, which any Pastor on a just occasion may exercise, even on those that are not of his Diocese; examples in Church-history are common. 2. But I would have you answer Dr. Whittakers Reasons, by which he proves that Nicephorus is a fabler in this relation, and that that Epistle is not Innocents which cap. 34. he reciteth, Lib. de pontif. Rom. Contr. 4. Qu. 4. pag. 454, 455. 1. Neither Socrates, Theodoret or Sozomen make any mention of this excommunication, who yet write much of the Case of Chrysostom and Arcadius: And would these men that lived so near that time have all silenced so great and rare a thing, as the excommunication of the Emperor and Empress, which would have made so great a noise and stir, that yet mention Ambrose his censure of Theodosius? 2. This Bull of Innocents, (as Nicephorus would