A41330:301
The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner,…
The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entitled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templars sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal.The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entituled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templers sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal.
London: printed for Tho. Cockerill, 1681
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
So that the stating of the Question cannot be denied. Now let the Reader observe that worthy Mr. Falkner, and tell me which argument of his from Scripture concludes the question.
If it were no more but the first part, I thought it had been only in his power to institute means to a spiritual end, and impose them on his Church, who is able to make a connection between the means and the end. But it seems mens Ceremonies are so clear, bright, and speak so plain (being not dark nor dumb, as they say) that they can teach men, and help them on to their duty, and spiritual ends, without the Spirit of God; or else the Spirit of God must truckle and come down, and make use of their means, because they have appointed them, which I am sure he hates.
If it were no more but the first part, I thought it had been only in his power to institute means to a spiritual end, and impose them on his Church, who is able to make a connexion between the means and the end. But it seems mens Ceremonies are so clear, bright, and speak so plain (being not dark nor dumb, as they say) that they can teach men, and help them on to their duty, and spiritual ends, without the Spirit of God; or else the Spirit of God must truckle and come down, and make use of their means, because they have appointed them, which I am sure he hates.
Do Kings stand upon their Prerogatives? shall any man dare to set his own Image upon Copper to have it pass for a farthing in a Commonwealth? and yet shall men be so bold to set their stamp or institution upon a ceremony, as a means to a spiritual end, impose this upon the Church? What is this but to encroach upon Gods Prerogative? will he not require it?
Do Kings stand upon their Prerogatives? shall any man dare to set his own Image upon Copper to have it pass for a farthing in a Commonwealth? and yet shall men be so bold to set their stamp or institution upon a ceremony, as a means to a spiritual end, impose this upon the Church? What is this but to incroach upon Gods Prerogative? will he not require it?