A27045:487
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.
3. Either Arians, Donatists, Novatians, and such like, were before their defection acquainted with the Roman Sovereignty, or not. If they were not, then it is a sign it was not commonly then received in the Church, and that there were multitudes of Christians that were no Papists: If they were, then why did not the Fathers, 1. Urge them with this as a granted truth, till they ⟨p. 247⟩had renounced it? 2. And then why did they not charge this defection from the Pope upon them, among their heinous crimes? why did they not tell them, that they were subjected to him as soon as they were made Christians; and therefore they should not perfidiously revolt from him? How is it that we find not this point disputed by them on both sides, yea and as copiously as the rest, when it would have ended all?
3. Either Arrians, Donatists, Novatians, and such like, were before their defection acquainted with the Roman Soveraignty, or not. If they were not, then it is a sign it was not commonly then received in the Church, and that there were multitudes of Christians that were no Papists: If they were, then why did not the Fathers, 1. Urge them with this as a granted truth, till they ⟨p. 247⟩had renounced it? 2. And then why did they not charge this defection from the Pope upon them, among their hainous crimes? why did they not tell them, that they were subjected to him as soon as they were made Christians; and therefore they should not perfidiously revolt from him? How is it that we find not this point disputed by them on both sides, yea and as copiously as the rest, when it would have ended all?
And for the Minor, that the Fathers have not thus dealt with Heretics, the whole Books of Tertullian, Nazianzen, Nyssen, Basil, Optatus, Hierom, Augustine, and others are open certain witnesses. They use no such Argument, but fill their Books with others; most imprudently and vainly, if they had known of this, and had believed it. Otherwise the Papists would never have been put to gather up a few impertinent scraps to make a show with.