A57258:9
Dr. Reignolds his letter to that worthy councillor, Sir Francis Knolls concerning some passages…Dr. Reignolds his letter to that worthy councellor, Sir Francis Knolles concerning some passages…
Dr. Reignolds his letter to that worthy councillor, Sir Francis Knolls concerning some passages in Dr. Bancrofts sermon at Pauls Cross, Feb. 9. 1588. in the Parliament time. As also A question resolved by a learned doctor, whether the angels of the seven churches, Revel. 2, & 3. make for Episcopal præ-eminence Jure Divino.Dr. Reignolds his letter to that worthy councellor, Sir Francis Knolles concerning some passages in Dr. Bancrofts sermon at Pavles Crosse, Feb. 9. 1588. in the Parliament time. As also A qvestion resolved by a learned doctor, whether the angels of the seaven churches, Revel. 2, & 3. make for Episcopall præ-eminence Jure Divino.
London: printed by W.I. dwelling, 1641London: printed by W.I. dweling, 1641
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.
Touching Martin, if any man behave himself otherwise then in discretion and charity he ought, let the blame be laid where the fault is, I defend him not; but if by the way, he utter a truth, mingled with whatsoever else, it is not reason that that, which is of God, should be condemned for that which is of man; no more then the doctrine of the resurrection should be reproved becausee it was maintained and held by the Pharisees. Wherefore removing the odious name of Martin, from that which in sincerity and love is to be dealt with, it appeareth, by the aforesaid words of D. Bancroft, that he avoucheth the Superiority which Bishops have over the Clergy to be of Gods own ordinance; for he improveth the impugners of it, as holding with Aerius, that there is no difference by the word of God betwixt a Priest, and a Bishop, which he could not do with reason, unless he himself proved the Bishops superiority, as established by Gods word: and he addeth, that their opinion, who gain say it is Heresy, whereof it ensueth he think it contrary to Gods word; sith Heresy ⟨p. 3⟩is an error repugnant to the truth of the word of God, as (according tof the Scriptures) our own Churchg doth teach us.
Touching Martine, if any man behave himselfe otherwise then in discretion and charitie he ought, let the blame be laid where the fault is, I defend him not; but if by the way, he utter a truth, mingled with whatsoever else, it is not reason that that, which is of God, should be condemned for that which is of man; no more then the doctrine of the resurection should be reproved becausee it was maintained and held by the Pharises. Wherefore removing the odious name of Martin, from that which in sincerety and loue is to be dealt with, it appeareth, by the aforesard words of D. Bancroft, that he avoucheth the Superiorety which Bishops haue over the Clergie to be of Gods owne ordinance; for he improveth the impugners of it, as holding with Aerius, that there is no difference by the word of God betwixt a Prest, and a Bishop, which he could not doe with reason, unlesse he himselfe proved the Bishops supreriorety, as established by Gods word: and he addeth, that their opinion, who gaine say it is Heresie, whereof it insueth he thinke it contrary to Gods word; sith Heresy