A41330:702
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.
3. I know nothing but consent that constitutes any man a member of a Church; but that we never gave either to the Priests imposed upon us by a Patron, and a Prelate; nor to the Parochial Church, as you take Parochial.
Wherefore upon Dr. Goodman's definition I argue, where there was no union, there can be no Schism.
But between us and your Church there was no union: Ergo, no Schism; why then doth he charge us with it?
3ly. Suppose we were members, yet still you are to prove there was no cause given for our separation; which though you attempt to do, yet Sir, you must bring other manner of arguments than Rhetorical flourishes, and humane stories to convince us.