A27046:78
A third defence of the cause of peace proving 1. the need of our…
A third defence of the cause of peace proving 1. the need of our concord, 2. the impossibility of it, on the terms of the present impositions against the accusations and storms of, viz., Mr. John Hinckley, a nameless impleader, a nameless reflector, or Speculum, &c., Mr. John Cheny's second accusation, Mr. Roger L'Strange, justice, &c., the Dialogue between the Pope and a fanatic, J. Varney's fanatic Prophecy / by Richard Baxter.A third defence of the cause of peace proving 1. the need of our concord, 2. the impossibility of it, on the terms of the present impositions against the accusations and storms of, viz., Mr. John Hinckley, a nameless impleader, a nameless reflector, or Speculum, &c., Mr. John Cheny's second accusation, Mr. Roger L'Strange, justice, &c., the Dialogue between the Pope and a fanatic, J. Varney's phanatic Prophesie / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for Jacob Sampson, 1681
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.
You add [And the Power imposing the whole.] Answ. Still all alike; What? will you tell your Hearers, that no Oath or Vow bindeth them, which powerless man imposed: The want of power in the Imposers, proveth indeed that no Power of theirs obliged you to take it. But what if you had taken it to save your life from a Thief, or within your Closet-walls voluntarily, without the command of any Power, doth it not oblige to lawful matters? Bishop Sanderson would have taught you otherwise to resolve that Case. This is a hard way to Conformity.
You add, [What was good in it we were obliged to by a former Covenant.] Answ. And what then? Is that another Doctrine, that Conformists must preach, That [no Vow or Oath obligeth you to any good that you were obliged to before.] Oh dreadful! The Jesuits Morals would abhor such a Doctrine: If there may be new Vows to the same thing, there may be new or additional Obligations to the same thing; else all the following Vows are no Vows. What if the Oath of Allegiance be thrice taken? Doth it oblige only the first time? Then if a man be at Baptism obliged to Christianity, no after Vows at the Lords Supper, or other time, are obligatory. Sir, be not angry with me for telling you, that Non-conformists have somewhat in them, that will not permit them to take these for indifferent things: And that the diminution of your ⟨p. 47⟩glory and mens temptation to separation from you, hath too much occasion and colour from your selves.
You add, [The worst of Heretics maintain some Truths.] Answ. And quid inde? Suppose, so the Covenant hath some good? Our question is not, whether we are bound to the bad, but to the good: And will you say, that I must receive no truth which a Heretic holdeth; or am bound by it to no good, which is contained in a Vow that hath evil with it.