A27058:839
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.
§ 8. What would this enemy of railing have had me said more than I did of the Priscillianists? viz. that they were Gnostics and Manichees? Was not that bad Enough. No, I favour them still? And what say I more of the Bishops and the whole cause, than Sulpitius Severus the fullest and most knowing Describer saith? Why doth he not accuse him for the same description? Yea and their Mr. Ri. Hooker who in the Preface to his Eccl. Pol. saith of Ithacius the like? Yea Baronius himself consenteth? Where I say that to the death Martin separated from the synods of these Bishops (I said not from all Bishops in the world) he saith, he renounced only the Communion of Ithacius his Party, and that others did as well as he. Reader, it will be thy folly to take either his word or mine, what an Author saith, when we differ, without looking into the Book it self. Read Sulpitius Severus; I will transcribe some words, lest he say, I mistranslate them.
§ 8. What would this enemy of railing have had me said more than I did of the Priscillianists? viz. that they were Gnosticks and Manichees? Was not that bad Enough. No, I favour them still? And what say I more of the Bishops and the whole cause, than Sulpitius Severus the fullest and most knowing Describer saith? Why doth he not accuse him for the same description? Yea and their Mr. Ri. Hooker who in the Preface to his Eccl. Pol. saith of Ithacius the like? Yea Baronius himself consenteth? Where I say that to the death Martin separated from the synods of these Bishops (I said not from all Bishops in the world) he saith, he renounced only the Communion of Ithacius his Party, and that others did as well as he. Reader, it will be thy folly to take either his word or mine, what an Author saith, when we differ, without looking into the Book it self. Read Sulpitius Severus; I will transcribe some words, lest he say, I mistranslate them.
Priscillianus, familia nobilis, praedives opibus, acer, inquies, facundus, multa lectione eruditus, disserendi & disputandi promptissimus—vigilare multum, famem & sitim far poterat, habendi minime cupidus, utendi parcissimus (Was it a crime to say so much good of him?) But proud of his Learning, set up a Heresy, and two Bishops Instantius and Salvianus joined with him, and made him a Bishop—At Caesar Augusta one Synod was gathered against him. The Story I before recited. Next a Synod at Bordeaux trieth them. Saith Sulpitius [Ac mea