A27058:772
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
The particular Defence of the History of Councils and Schisms. › Chapter 18: Of his Second Chapter.
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.
And Observ. 19. he shows that Novatianus did this against his former Judgment, in Envy and Faction against the Bishop, because he mist of being Bishop himself. A Bishopric was it that provoked him to deny this Pardoning Power in Bishops.
And Observ. 19. he shews that Novatianus did this against his former Judgment, in Envy and Faction against the Bishop, because he mist of being Bishop himself. A Bishoprick was it that provoked him to deny this Pardoning Power in Bishops.
And Albaspineus hath in many antecedent Observations showed, how little, if any thing at all, the Novatians differed else from the Ancient Church in the strictness of their Communion, and avoiding sinners: So that he thus begins his fifth Observation [Incredibilia prope sunt, quae his capitibus dicturi sumus: sed tamen ita vera & certa, & quae cujusque animam summam in admirationem rapiant, Ecclesiam primis temporibus nulla vel levissima labe inquinatam fuisse; quin ita illibatam intactamque ut omni ratione, curâ & solicitudine prospexerit, filii ut sui quam à Baptismo hauserant puritatem eam nulla aspersam vitii alicujus macula & soeditate conservarent. Imo case veritate adhibita ut fugiendum sibi detestandumque peccatum, quovis terror proposito putarent. Non solum autem multa crimina peccataque numerabantur, quorum Authors artificesque absolutionem omnem desperabant, sed & ea quoque quibus ignoscet poenitentiam concedi opertere censuerat, peccata ita ulciscebatur, •ut non nisi semel eis qui ea commisissent, unius poenitentiae copiam faceret Ecclesia, hoc est si post Baptismum lethaliter peccassent. Quod si cum Ecclesia reconciliatus in idem aut aliud mortal peccatum iterum prolaberetur, ita in perpetuum tribus primis saeculis ab Ecclesia repulsam ferebat, ut non nisi poenitentiae & in morte precum quae reliqua erant subsidia expectanda sibi duceret, nulla absolutione data quae in spem veniae illum erigeret.] And he adds, that many that cannot deny his ⟨p. 127⟩proofs, yet will not believe that ever such a Discipline was used.