A27058:537
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.
Ans. Thus young men that know not whom they talk of can control the most public matter of fact by their conjectures. Go ask the worthy Master of the Rolls Sir Harbottle Grimston, whose Speeches were then printed: Ask Sir Joh. Maynard His Majesties ⟨p. 83⟩Sergeant at Law who was one of them; or any other of them yet living. Ask them whether they knew themselves and their companions better than you, who it seems knew them not.
Ans. Thus youngmen that know not whom they talk of can controle the most publick matter of fact by their conjectures. Go ask the worthy Master of the Rolls Sir Harbottle Grimston, whose Speeches were then printed: Ask Sir Joh. Maynard His Majesties ⟨p. 83⟩Sergeant at Law who was one of them; or any other of them yet living. Ask them whether they knew themselves and their companions better than you, who it seems knew them not.
But saith he [Were they Episcopals that voted down Episcopacy Root and Branch before the war begun] Ans. 1. Have you proved that they did so? 2. Do you think that a contradiction? 1. They had got a belief that Bishop Laud had got such men into the Seats as were for a Syncretism with the Papists (described by Heylin) and against the Subjects Property and Liberty. And it was the Men and not the Office that offended them. 2. But because they were willing of the favour of the Scots, and those Londoners who were against the Bishops, they pleased them by voting down the present frame, intending to set up a moderate Episcopacy in its stead; Yea long after this when many Learned Divines in the Assembly declared themselves for Episcopacy, but not for Deans, Chancellors, &c. They altered the Covenant so as to describe the present frame only: And when the House of Lords took the Covenant, Mr. Coleman (an Erastian) gave it them openly, declaring, that it was not mere Episcopacy that this Covenant renounced, but only the English described Complicate form. And could they have had such Bishops as Abbot and the old Church of England, they had never gone thus far. 3. And they thought not Episcopacy itself so necessary, (though if moderate the best sort of Governments) as to hazard all for it, which they thought had been in danger. Even in 1640 July 17. They Voted a Diocesan in every County, with Twelve Divines to Govern.