A44682:65
A letter written out of the country to a person of quality in the…A letter written out of the countrey to a person of quality in the…
A letter written out of the country to a person of quality in the city who took offence at the late sermon of Dr. Stillingfleet, Dean of S. Pauls, before the Lord MayorA letter written out of the countrey to a person of quality in the city who took offence at the late sermon of Dr. Stillingfleet, Dean of S. Pauls, before the Lord Mayor
London : s.n., 1680
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.
1. As to what may be supposed to be ad rem, if you look narrowly you will find, that the principal things alleged by him, that can, under that notion, give support to his Cause, are only affirmed, but not proved. For instance, p. 9. When he tells us, that the Apostle supposed the necessity of one fixed and certain Rule, &c. This ⟨p. 24⟩had been very material to his purpose; if, 1. He had told us, and had proved, the Apostle meant some Rule or other super-added to the Sacred Scriptures: For then he might, it is to be presumed, as easily have let us know what that Rule was, which, most probably, would have ended all our controversy; it being little to be doubted we should all, most readily, have agreed to obey it. Or, 2ly, If he had proved, that, because the Apostle had power to make such a Rule, and oblige the Churches to observe it, that therefore such Church-Guides as they whose cause the Doctor pleads, have an equal power to make other Rules divers from his, containing many new things, which he never enjoined, and to enforce them upon the Church; (though manifestly tending to its destruction rather than edification.) But these things he doth but suppose himself, without colour of proof.
1. As to what may be supposed to be ad rem, if you look narrowly you will find, that the principal things alledged by him, that can, under that notion, give support to his Cause, are only affirmed, but not proved. For instance, p. 9. When he tells us, that the Apostle supposed the necessity of one fixed and certain Rule, &c. This ⟨p. 24⟩had been very material to his purpose; if, 1. He had told us, and had proved, the Apostle meant some Rule or other super-added to the Sacred Scriptures: For then he might, it is to be presumed, as easily have let us know what that Rule was, which, most probably, would have ended all our controversie; it being little to be doubted we should all, most readily, have agreed to obey it. Or, 2ly, If he had proved, that, because the Apostle had power to make such a Rule, and oblige the Churches to observe it, that therefore such Church-Guides as they whose cause the Doctor pleads, have an equal power to make other Rules divers from his, containing many new things, which he never enjoyn'd, and to enforce them upon the Church; (though manifestly tending to its destruction rather than edification.) But these things he doth but suppose himself, without colour of proof.