A41330:776
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.
2ly. You were very cunning, Sir, to pitch upon the warm side of the hedge, thereby to save your selves from persecution, and keep your fat Livings; then cry up obedience to Governors; pity the ⟨p. 88⟩Martyrs had no better Intellects to have taken this course too, and so have saved their stakes!
2ly. You were very cunning, Sir, to pitch upon the warm side of the hedg, thereby to save your selves from persecution, and keep your fat Livings; then cry up obedience to Governours; pity the ⟨p. 88⟩Martyrs had no better Intellects to have taken this course too, and so have saved their stakes!
3. If men would lay by their self-interests, we might sooner pitch upon one way; but so long as he sits at Rome, and the Jews are uncalled, I look but for little of this unity in the Gentile-Churches.
But to the main scope of his Sermon: Had it been to prove the Divine Right of an Episcopus Praeses (or Primus Presbyter, as Ambrose calls a Bishop) with the Presbytery or Ecclesiastical Senate, I should not have been his opposer; but it is an Episcopus Princeps, and that not with, but over the Presbytery, superior in power, which he contends for; how strongly proved, we shall see.
But to the main scope of his Sermon: Had it been to prove the Divine Right of an Episcopus Praeses (or Primus Presbyter, as Ambrose calls a Bishop) with the Presbytery or Ecclesiastical Senate, I should not have been his opposer; but it is an Episcopus Princeps, and that not with, but over the Presbytery, superiour in power, which he contends for; how strongly proved, we shall see.