A34675:211
A defence of Mr. John Cotton from the imputation of self contradiction, charged on…A defence of Mr. John Cotton from the imputation of selfe contradiction, charged on…
A defence of Mr. John Cotton from the imputation of self contradiction, charged on him by Mr. Dan. Cawdrey written by himself not long before his death ; whereunto is prefixed, an answer to a late treatise of the said Mr. Cawdrey about the nature of schism, by John Owen ...A defence of Mr. John Cotton from the imputation of selfe contradiction, charged on him by Mr. Dan. Cavvdrey written by himselfe not long before his death ; whereunto is prefixed, an answer to a late treatise of the said Mr. Cavvdrey about the nature of schisme, by John Owen ...
Oxford: printed by H. Hall for T. Robinson, 1658
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.
But this no whit crosseth, what is said in the second Column, That Elders are the first Subjects of ordinary Ministerial Power, and Apostles of Apostolical Power, and Synods, of Synodical Power. A wife may be the first subject of her own Dowry, but yet her Husband is the first Subject Recipient of his wife with her Dowry.
But this no whit crosseth, what is said in the second Columne, That Elders are the first Subjects of ordinary Ministeriall Power, and Apostles of Apostolicall Power, and Synods, of Synodicall Power. A wife may be the first subject of her own Dowry, but yet her Husband is the first Subject Recipient of his wife with her Dowry.
Ans. 3. As for what is said differently by my Brother Hooker in the third Column, as his Person and Gifts and ⟨p. 51⟩Friendship were precious and dear to me whilst he lived: so now that he resteth in Glory, his Name and memory, and labour (saving some very few private Notions) are honourable, and blessed, with me, and I suppose with all that knew him. But in this Logical Notion, I crave leave, not so much to dissent from him (for he herein Dissented from me, who wrote first, rather than I from him) but leave I crave not to Retract what I formerly wrote in the Keys touching this Point, though I should as much suspect mine own judgment, where he Dissenteth from me, as where any man. It is true he taketh the Church of Covenanted Believers to be the first Subject of the power of the keys, which if he mean no more, than that they have all Church-Power either formaliter, or Radicaliter, and Virtualiter, then there is no Difference in our expressions; but if he mean that that they are the first Subject of all Church-Power properly, two or three things Detain me from consenting ⟨p. 52⟩with him herein. 1. That which is the first Subject of any Power Receiveth it immediately without any other Intervening Subject. As fire being the first Subject of Heat, Receiveth not his Heat from any former Subject. But it is evident, That many a Church of Believers, hath not Received Pastoral Gifts, nor it may be any Gifts fit for office, 'till they fetch them from other Churches, and sometimes from some who are not members of any Particular Church at all.