A42456:98
An answer to Mr. George Walkers vindication, or rather, fresh accusation wherein he chargeth…
An answer to Mr. George Walkers vindication, or rather, fresh accusation wherein he chargeth Mr. Wotton, besides his former foul aspersions of heresy and blasphemy, with Arianism, Mr. Gataker with Socinianism, Dr. Gouge and Mr. Downham with a false attestation, Dr. Baylie and Mr. Stock with self-condemnation, all the eight ministers employed in the business between himself and Mr. Wotton with partiality and unjust judgement : upon occasion of a relation concerning that business / written by the said Thomas Gataker and by him now again avowed, wherein the said M. Walkers vindication is in many things showed to be an untrue relation.An answer to Mr. George Walkers vindication, or rather, fresh accusation wherein he chargeth Mr. Wotton, besides his former foul aspersions of heresie and blasphemy, with Arianism, Mr. Gataker with Socinianism, Dr. Gouge and Mr. Downham with a fase attestation, Dr. Baylie and Mr. Stock with self-condemnation, all the eight ministers employed in the busines between himself and Mr. Wotton with partiality and unjust judgement : upon occasion of a relation concerning that busines / written by the said Thomas Gataker and by him now again avowed, wherein the said M. Walkers vindication is in many things shewed to be an untrue relation.
London: printed by E.G. for F. Clifton, 1642
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 to take the business, and discuss it a while, as M. Walker here relateth it.
But to take the businesse, and discusse it a while, as M. Walker here relateth it.
First, I refer it to any indifferent mans judgement to determine, whether it were agreeable to equity, for M Walker to require a verdict of his Judges, (as he termeth them) or for them to give it in his behalf, against M. Wotton, upon a bare sight of some positions found as well in M. Wotton, as in Socinus, (supposing it so to be) before M. Wottons defence were either exhibited or heard. And here let me crave leave to show the unreasonableness of such a request, and it be but by one instance. M Walker in his Parallel chargeth this Position upon M. Wotton, as a point of Socinianism, an heretical and blasphemous assertion, that eFaith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for obtaining of justification. Now, it being granted, that the very same words were by M. Walker exhibited, (which yet precisely they are not) as well out of Socinus his works, as out of M. Wottons writings: had it not been, think we, a very discreet part of them whom the business was ⟨p. 34⟩committed unto, to have without more ado, so censured it, as M Walker had charged it, and in so censuring it, to have condemned themselves, (who openly to M. Walkers face *professed, that they had oft taught it) and not themselves alone, but all orthodox Divines (for ought I know) in the whole world; yea the Apostle S. Paul himself to boot too, if some of them may be believed; for Socinians and blasphemous heretics? For I would fain know of M Walker, how this differeth that he so chargeth, from what Pareus saith, and avoweth to be S. Pauls, that fFaith is the condition, under which Christ is given us for a propitiation. Or, not to look out abroad, but to keep our selves at home; I should desire to understand from him, what he thinketh of these passages in some writers of our own; and those men of no mean note neither.