A53737:354
A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux
A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux wherein the principles of the Roman church, as to moderation, unity and truth are examined and sundry important controversies concerning the rule of faith, papal supremacy, the mass, images, &c. discussed / by John Owen.
London: printed for Ph. Stephens, 1664
A Vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat Lux. › Chapter 15
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.
Upon this occasion, you proceed to touch upon somewhat of great importance concerning the Head of the Church, wherein you know a great part of the difference between your self and those whom you oppose to consist. In your passage you mention the use of true Logic, but I fear we shall find that in your Discourse laudatur & alget. I should have been glad to have found you making what use you were able of that which you commend. It would I ⟨p. 375⟩suppose have directed you to have stated plainly and clearly what is it that you assert, and what it is that you oppose, and to have given your Arguments Catascevastical of the one, and Anascevastical of the other; but either you know not that way of procedure, or you considered how little advantage unto your end you were like to obtain thereby. And therefore you make use only of that part of Logic which teacheth the nature and kinds of Sophisms; in particular, that of confounding things which ought to be distinguished. However your Discourse, such as it is, shall be examined, and that by the rules of that Logic which your self commend.
Upon this occasion, you proceed to touch upon somewhat of great importance concerning the Head of the Church, wherein you know a great part of the difference between your self and those whom you oppose to consist. In your passage you mention the use of true Logick, but I fear we shall find that in your Discourse laudatur & alget. I should have been glad to have found you making what use you were able of that which you commend. It would I ⟨p. 375⟩suppose have directed you to have stated plainly and clearly what is it that you assert, and what it is that you oppose, and to have given your Arguments Catasceuastical of the one, and Anasceuastical of the other; but either you know not that way of proceedure, or you considered how little advantage unto your end you were like to obtain thereby. And therefore you make use only of that part of Logick which teacheth the nature and kinds of Sophisms; in particular, that of confounding things which ought to be distinguished. However your Discourse, such as it is, shall be examined, and that by the rules of that Logick which your self commend.