A27058:1006
The true history of councils enlarged and defended against the deceits of a pretended…
The true history of councils enlarged and defended against the deceits of a pretended vindicator of the primitive church, but indeed of the tympanite & tyranny of some prelates many hundred years after Christ, with a detection of the false history of Edward Lord Bishop of Cork and Ross in Ireland ... and a preface abbreviating much of Ludolphus's History of Habassta : written to show their dangerous error, who think that a general council, or college of bishops, is a supreme governor of all the Christian world ... / by Richard Baxter ... ; to which is added by another hand, a defence of a book, entitled, No evidence for diocesan churches ...The true history of councils enlarged and defended against the deceits of a pretended vindicator of the primitive church, but indeed of the tympanite & tyranny of some prelates many hundred years after Christ, with a detection of the false history of Edward Lord Bishop of Corke and Rosse in Ireland ... and a preface abbreviating much of Ludolphus's History of Habassta : written to shew their dangerous errour, who think that a general council, or colledge of bishops, is a supream governour of all the Christian world ... / by Richard Baxter ... ; to which is added by another hand, a defence of a book, entituled, No evidence for diocesan churches ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1682
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.
§ 16. P. 255. He confesseth of one Party what I said, viz. [Of Dioscorus and Flavian, I am apt to believe they were much of the same Opinion as to the point in controversy, and knew it well enough; which was the only cause why Dioscorus with his party of Bishops and Monks, would not endure to come to any Debate of the matter, for fear it would appear that they all agreed, and then there would have been no pretence to condemn Flavian, which was the Design, if not of the Emperor, yet at least of those that governed him.]
§ 16. P. 255. He confesseth of one Party what I said, viz. [Of Dioscorus and Flavian, I am apt to believe they were much of the same Opinion as to the point in controversie, and knew it well enough; which was the only cause why Dioscorus with his party of Bishops and Monks, would not endure to come to any Debate of the matter, for fear it would appear that they all agreed, and then there would have been no pretence to condemn Flavian, which was the Design, if not of the Emperour, yet at least of those that governed him.]
Ans. Fie Dr. will you thus abuse so many Orthodox Bishops? And almost condemn your vindicating Book? And harden me in my Error? But I am much of your mind, and if one of us err, so doth the other.
Ans. Fie Dr. will you thus abuse so many Orthodox Bishops? And almost condemn your vindicating Book? And harden me in my Errour? But I am much of your mind, and if one of us err, so doth the other.
§ 17. And I like his Ingenuity, saying Anatolius confesseth in Council, that Dioscorus was not condemned for Heresy but Tyranny, and no man contradicted him. Ans. Not in answer to those words, but the Accusations of many contradicted him before.