A53704:102
An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches.…
An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches. The first part with an answer to the discourse of the unreasonableness of separation written by Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, Dean of Pauls, and in defence of the vindication of non-conformists from the guilt of schism / by John Owen.An enquiry into the original, nature, institution, power, order and communion of evangelical churches. The first part with an answer to the discourse of the unreasonableness of separation written by Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, Dean of Pauls, and in defence of the vindication of non-conformists from the guilt of schisme / by John Owen.
London: printed by J. Richardson for Nath. Ponder, 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.
We acknowledge this to be our Fundamental Principle. Nor can the Rhetoric or Arguments of any man, affect our Consciences, with a sense of the Guilt of Schism, until one of these things be proved, namely, Either,
We acknowledge this to be our Fundamental Principle. Nor can the Rhetorick or Arguments of any man, affect our Consciences, with a sense of the Guilt of Schism, until one of these things be proved, namely, Either,
First, That the Lord Christ hath given no such Rule, as in the Observance whereof, Peace and Unity may be preserved in his Church; Or,
Secondly, That we refuse a compliance with that Rule, in some one Instance or other, of what therein, he hath himself appointed. Unless one or the other be proved, and that strictly and directly, not pretended so to be, by perpetual Diversions from the things in Question, no vehement Assertions of any of us to be Schismatics, nor Aggravations of the Guilt of Schism, will signify any thing in this Cause.
Secondly, That we refuse a compliance with that Rule, in some one Instance or other, of what therein, he hath himself appointed. Unless one or the other be proved, and that strictly and directly, not pretended so to be, by perpetual Diversions from the things in Question, no vehement Assertions of any of us to be Schismaticks, nor Aggravations of the Guilt of Schisme, will signifie any thing in this Cause.