A27045:569
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.
I will now add a Testimony sufficient to silence Papists in this point: and that is, The Determination of the Theological faculty of Paris under their great Seal, against one Johan. de Montesono ordinis Praedic. as you may find it after the rest of the Errors ⟨p. 282⟩rejected by that University, in the end of Lombard, printed at Paris 1557. pag. 426. Their 3. Conclusion is, that [Saint Thom. Aquin. doctrine is not so approved by the Church, as that we must believe that it is in no part of it erroneous de fide (in matter of faith) or heretical. They prove it, because it hath many contradictions, even in matter of faith; and therefore they ought not to believe it not heretical. Here fol. 426, 427. they give six examples of his contradictions: and therefore they conclude, that though he were no Heretic (because not pertinacious) yet they ought not to believe that his doctrine was in no part heretical, or erroneous in the faith. They further argue thus [If we must believe his doctrine not heretical, &c. this should be chiefly, because it is approved by the Church. But there is some doctrine much more approved by the Church then the doctrine of S. Tho. which yet is in some part of it heretical or erroneous in the faith: therefore— The Minor they prove by many examples. The first is of Peters doctrine, Gal. 2. (I own not this by citing it:) The second is of Cyprian. The third of Hierom; and they add, that the same may be said of Augustine, and many more approved Doctors. ⟨p. 283⟩The fourth example is Lombard himself, who they say hath somewhat erroneous in the faith. The fifth is Gratian, who had he pertinaciously adhered to his doctrine, they say, had been a manifest Heretic: And (say they) some say the like of the Ordinary Glosses of the Bible, which yet seem of greater authority then Aquinas. The sixth example is of some not Canonized Saints, as Anselm. Cantuar. Hugo de Sancto Victore, and others, as authentic as S. Thomas.] [And (say they) his Canonization, hindereth not, which some pretend as of great colour—To say that S. Tho. in some part of his doctrine erred in faith, derogates not from his Canonization, nor from the approbation of his Theological doctrine: even as to say this of other Saints and chief Doctors derogateth not from their Canonization or approbation.